Data collection

Qualitative case studies often use interviews, observation, and documents (Gillham, 2000; Patton, 2002) as sources for data collection. Interviews, often with open-ended questions, can enable the researcher to collect in-depth information about people’s experiences, perceptions, feelings, and knowledge about the problem being investigated (Patton, 2002). Observation can enable the researcher to document or describe the field work or the phenomenon under specific study (Creswell, 2002; Denscombe, 2007). Artefacts, such as official reports, plans and photographs, can give the researcher an insight into the context (Creswell, 2002; Denscombe, 2007).

In this study I chose these three common methods of collecting case study data and added a survey instrument. I chose to use a survey as the first form of data collection, to find out about the teacher’s demographics and ICT use. I followed this with non-participant

observation to observe how the teachers used ICT in their classrooms. This was followed by semi-structured interviews, to give a deeper understanding about the teachers’ views about using ICT in their practice and to clarify any questions that the research might have. I collected artefacts, including school policy documents, throughout this research phase.

90 Table 2 summarizes the data collected for this study. The survey was administered in Term 2/2013, followed by the non-participant observation in Terms 2 and 3/2013, and one semi- structured interview with each of the teachers in term 3/2013.

Table 2

Summary of Data Collection Process

Stage Data Collection

Method

Purpose Time

Stage 1 Survey To collect demographic information about the teachers and their knowledge and use of ICT in the classroom

Term 1/2013

Stage 2 Non-participant observation

To observe how the teachers used ICT in their Languages classrooms.

Term 2 and 3/2013

Stage 3 Semi-structured interview

To gain deeper understanding of the teachers’ views about using ICT in their practice

Term 3/ 2013

Throughout Artefacts To gain insight into documents such as policy documents that inform the teachers’ practice.

Term 2 and 3/ 2013

I discuss each of these data collection measures in further detail in the next section.

Survey.

I chose to use a survey instrument to gather information about the teachers’ knowledge and use of ICT, basing it on the e-potential instrument (DET, 2013). This instrument has been

91 used in schools for a number of years as a professional learning tool for teachers to support their use of ICT in practice. A key section of this instrument asks participants to nominate, from a selected list, the ICT applications that they use in their practice, and the frequency of use. The adapted instrument is included as appendix 5. I added a small section to the start of the survey to find out their age, their teaching qualification and experience.

Non-participant observation.

Observation can help researchers have a greater understanding of the case (Stake, 1995). Furthermore as suggested by Patton (2002), observational data can enable readers to have a greater understanding of the setting and as such the researcher needs to ensure that the data “must be sufficiently descriptive that the reader can understand what occurred and how it occurred” (p. 23).

I chose to use non-participant observation (Creswell, 2002) as a means to observe the two teachers teach in a non-obtrusive way. I developed an Observation Plan, which recorded details of the class I observed including: the grade, the number of students, the purpose of the lesson, the technologies being used, and details of the lesson itself (see appendix 6). I chose to make multiple observations in order to add to the richness of my data and to aid my understanding of each case. The classes I observed are listed in the table below. It is important to note that I observed the Languages lessons of different year levels from both of the schools because Creswell (2002) suggests that multiple observations can provide researchers with the best understanding of the case studies. I intended to observe Susan teaching on five occasions as I had with Kim. However, after two observations Susan indicated that it would be enough on her use of ICT in her Languages classroom.

Table 3

92

Teacher and School

Year level and number of classes observed Total number classes observed Prep 1 2 3 4 5 6 Kim at Delta Primary School 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 5 Susan at Prism Primary School 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2

Semi structured interviews.

According to Creswell (2002), interview is equally popular with observation in data collection in qualitative research. He suggests that there are three basic types of interviews: Structured interviews, Unstructured interviews, and Semi-structured interviews (Creswell, 2002). This study used semi-structured interviews, which consisted of both close-ended and open-ended questions because I thought they would allow my participants to best express their views (Creswell, 2002; Patton, 2002). Thus, semi-structured interviews were conducted with the two Languages teachers to gather information about their individual perceptions and experiences in using ICT in their practice. As well, I thought this would enable me to provide “thick descriptions of experiences” (DiLuzio & Hiller, 2004, p. 6). I conducted one semi-

structured interview with each of the teachers. The interview questions were a reflection of the themes set out in this thesis. In brief, they focused on teachers’ perceptions of the use of ICT in their Languages classrooms and how they integrated them in their practice (see appendix 7 for the interview questions).

93 I gave the interview questions to the teachers prior to the interviews so that they could be prepared for what was going to be discussed. I then organized to conduct the interview at a convenient time with each of the participants to ensure that I did not intrude on their workload. Prior to conducting the interviews, I practiced and checked the equipment I would be using in order to try to prevent any possible technical hiccups or low sound. I conducted the interviews at the respective school site. Each interview took about 30 minutes.

I opened each interview with a general conversation and tried to establish rapport with each participant to keep the interview running smoothly. During the process, I tried to gain trust from the participants (Fontana & Frey, 1994) and kept the interviews flowing. Towards the end of the interviews I asked the participants for confirmation of key points and reminded them that a hard copy would be forthcoming for them to check and to make changes as they saw fit. I then thanked each participant for their contribution and concluded each interview.

My intention was to take notes of the main points of both interviews. However, after the first interview with Susan, I found that it was not sufficient. As a result I decided to tape-record the second interview with Kim. I also took notes of the main points in case of technology failure. Later I transcribed the interview and word processed the field notes.

Artefacts.

I collected artefacts, which I thought could aid the research, throughout the data collection phase. From both sites I collected the schools’ Strategic Plans.