Get documents about "Research Proposal ETAP 778
Document Sample
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
ETAP778 Final Paper (Option 2)
Title of Proposed Study:
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
in an Online Language, Literacy and Technology Course
Written by:
Joy Quah
1
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Contents
1.0 Introduction 3
2.0 Purpose of the Study 4
3.0 Research Questions 4
4.0 Sociocultural Theory and Activity Theory 5
5.0 Review of Literature 6
5.1 Impact of Technology on Teacher Knowledge and Teacher Education Programs 7
5.2 Knowledge Construction in Online Communities of Practice 8
6.0 Methodological Framework 8
6.1 Research Methods 9
6.1.1 Justification for Use of Multiple-Case Study Design 9
6.2 The Research Setting of the Online Class 10
6.3 Sampling Procedure 11
6.4 Data Collection 12
6.4.1 Interviews 13
6.4.2 Group Discussion 14
6.4.3 Student Artifacts 14
6.4.4 Observation of the Online Class 15
6.5 Data Analysis 16
6.5.1 Organizing the Database 16
6.5.2 Conducting Preliminary Data Analysis 17
6.5.3 Developing Codes, Categories and Themes 17
6.5.4 Using Analytic Frameworks 18
6.6 Cross-Case Analysis 19
7.0 Formulating Themes and Writing Up the Case Report 20
8.0 Measures to Establish Trustworthiness 20
9.0 Conclusion 22
References 23
List of Appendices 28
Appendix A: Research Timeline 29
Appendix B: Interview Protocol 30
Appendix C: Map of Research Questions to Protocols 35
Appendix D: Online Class Observation Protocol 37
Appendix E: Data Analysis Frameworks 42
2
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
1.0 Introduction
Online education has grown substantially with nearly thirty percent of higher education
students taking at least one course online (Allen & Seaman, 2010). This shift to online learning has
become so integral to higher education that is has also impacted teacher education courses, which are
increasingly being conducted online (Norton & Hathaway, 2008; Chen, Chen & Tsai, 2009; Saltmarsh &
Sutherland-Smith, 2010; Wang, Chen, & Levy, 2010).
In this proposal, I will present my design of a study focusing on a community of ESL teachers
constructing their understanding about language, literacy and technology in a fully-online, participatory
learning environment. Their learning will be mediated by a variety of embedded activities, tools and
social others. I will examine how the elements of learners and tools interact in order to account for a
holistic understanding of learning which takes place (Benson, Lawler & Whitworth, 2008).
In this paper, I will present my research questions that will guide my study. I will briefly review
the theoretical underpinnings of my study and present research relevant to online teacher education
programs. In my methodology section, I will justify my approaches and methods by supporting them
with scholarly resources.
I plan to use case study methodology for my study because it facilitates understanding of
processes and relationships in natural settings (Yin, 2009). My investigation will be based upon a
phenomenological approach. Phenomenology is a type of research which is aligned to constructivist
approaches which explore individuals’ own ways of making sense of their lives and experiences (Taber,
2010). Phenomenological studies aim to uncover “patterns of meaning, understanding and definitions of
the situation from a range of people. The major focus is on in-depth understanding of the phenomenon
and related issues” (Grbich, 2007, p.9).
3
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
One of the aims of my study is to address a main criticism of phenomenological studies, which is
that they focus almost exclusively on how an individual constructs knowledge without sufficiently taking
into account the activities these experiences are embedded in. Due to the focus on the micro-
experiences and individual action of the participants, phenomenological studies do not fully address
structures that impact participants’ experiences (Grbich, 2007).
2.0 Purpose of the Study
The purposes of this study are:
• To investigate language teachers’ experiences of constructing knowledge in an online setting
• To investigate how teacher education courses are responding to changing teacher needs
impacted by technology
• To examine embedded activities that mediate participants’ online learning experiences
• To examine cultural tools that mediate learning in an online environment
• To examine theoretical constructs related to an activity system
3.0 Research Questions
Activity Theory posits that learning is intrinsically linked to social interaction and the use of
cultural tools (Lund & Rasmussen, 2010). Based on this proposition, and cognizant of issues related to
relevant forms of teacher education courses that address pedagogical use of technology by language
teachers, I have developed the following research questions.
1. How do activities mediate in knowledge construction within an online community of teachers?
2. How do cultural tools mediate knowledge construction within an online community of teachers?
3. What forms of professional development do language teachers find relevant for their needs?
4
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
4.0 Sociocultural Theory and Activity Theory
I propose to use Engeström’s Activity Theory (AT) as an analytic lens to examine student
participation in the embedded instances of activity as applied to online environments (Barab, Barnett &
Yamagata-Lynch, 2002; Benson, Lawler & Whitworth, 2008; Stevenson, 2008; Chen, Chen & Tsai, 2009;
Rasmussen & Ludvigsen, 2009; Choi & Kang, 2010; Nazari, 2010). Activity Theory, also sometimes known
as Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT), is derived from sociocultural theory (Engeström, 1999;
Yamagata-Lynch, 2003; Kaptelinin & Nardi, 2006; Bakhurst, 2009; Rasmussen & Ludvigsen, 2009; Choi &
Kang, 2010). It is a philosophical and multidisciplinary framework which grew from the work of
Vygotsky, Leontiev, and Luria (Yamagata-Lynch, 2003; Kaptelinin & Nardi, 2006; Choi & Kang, 2010).
Activity theory “emphasizes naturalistic settings and offers a way of thinking about links between what
individuals do and why, the resources they draw upon, and the communities in which they are situated,
providing a perspective of the complexity of relationships in which activities are embedded” (Blackler,
1993, pp. 875–876, cited in Hopwood & Stocks, 2008, p.189).
Vygotsky, in what is recognized as the first generation of activity theory, posited that learning is
a semiotic process in which individuals construct meaning while they interact with artifacts and social
others in their environment (Yamagata-Lynch, 2003). The interaction between these artifacts,
individuals, and others contribute to the formation of the individual’s mind and knowledge construction
(Wertsch, 1985, cited in Yamagata-Lynch, 2003). In the second generation of activity theory, Leontiev
extended Vygotsky’s ideas by distinguishing between collective and individual activity (Kang & Gyorke,
2008).
5
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
The preset generation of activity theory, upon which my study is based, is most closely
associated with Engeström’s work. Engeström’s model, which expands on Vygotsky’s basic triangular
model, is described in terms of relationships between six interacting components which include
subjects, objects, tools, rules, division of labor and community (Kaptelinin & Nardi, 2006; Hopwood &
Stocks, 2008). (See Figure 1).
Mediating Cultural Tools:
Pedagogic literature, core concepts of course,
course activities, learning objects (videos, links
to sites, and other course materials)
Subject: Object: Outcomes:
Language teachers in a Online course Enhanced learning
language, literacy and experiences, enhanced
technology course teacher knowledge
Rules: Community: Division of Labor:
Course requirements, Other course participants, Instructor as mentor, ESL teachers
assessment guidelines, instructor as learners
assignment rubrics, instructions
Figure 1. The online class as an activity system (based on Engeström , 1999; Hopwood & Stocks, 2008).
“At the heart of the activity system is interaction between the subject (the person or persons
doing the activity), object (what is worked on, what efforts are expended towards), and mediating tools
(resources, concepts, material artifacts, etc.). In activity theory, objects imply some collective quality”
(Hopwood & Stocks, 2008, p. 189). A central tenet in activity theory is that an activity cannot be
pursued by a single individual in isolation because learning is viewed as a social activity (Kaptelinin &
Nardi, 2006).
5.0 Review of Literature
The themes I will explore in the study are based on online learning, teacher education, social-
construction of knowledge and language teacher knowledge. The literature I will review will therefore
be related to themes mentioned.
6
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
5.1 Impact of Technology on Teacher Knowledge and Teacher Education Programs
Shulman (1987) posited that if teacher knowledge were to be categorized, they would include
content knowledge; general pedagogical knowledge; curriculum knowledge; knowledge of learners and
their characteristics; knowledge of educational contexts; and knowledge of educational purposes,
values, and philosophies. With the advent of emergent technologies, the requirements for teacher
knowledge have been extended (Koehler, Mishra & Yahya, 2007). A framework developed by Koehler et
al (2007) illustrates the new areas of teacher knowledge required for practice resulting from the
emergence of technology (See Figure 2).
Figure 2. Pedagogical technological content knowledge (Koehler, Mishra & Yahya, 2007, p.742).
Requirements for more sophisticated teacher knowledge have, in turn, led to a need for more
appropriate forms of teacher education for language teachers (Freeman, 2004; Jones & Youngs, 2006).
Many different parties agree that “traditional methods of technology training for teachers—mainly
workshops and courses, are ill-suited to produce the deep understanding that can assist teachers in
becoming intelligent users of technology for pedagogy” (Koehler et al, 2007, p.741).
More specifically, in the area of CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning), most of the
teacher training consists of ad-hoc in-service training, conferences and workshops (Wang, Chen & Levy,
2010). Koehler et al (2007) add that “there is more to teacher preparation and faculty development than
7
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
training teachers how to use tools – it requires appreciation of the complex set of interrelationships
between artifacts, users, tools and practices” (p.742).
5.2 Knowledge Construction in Online Communities of Practice
Language teachers need more meaningful experiences in their ongoing professional
development. Koehler et al (2007) add that effective training also needs to incorporate opportunities for
teachers to actively engage in constructing knowledge within a community of peers. According to Avis
(2009), “there are a number of theoretical currents that share Engeström’s interest in socially situated
practice” (p.152). They include Communities of Practice (Lave and Wenger, 1991), and those associated
with technology-supported collaborative learning (Sorensen, Takle & Moser, 2006; Wang, Chen & Levy,
2010. Belonging to a community of practice provides opportunities for teachers to build common
understanding which results in communal artifacts that include shared ideas, tools, activities,
documentation, and procedures (Yamagata-Lynch, 2003, Baran & Calgitay, 2010). Therefore,
establishing communities of practice has become an important focus within teachers’ continuous
professional development (Baran & Calgitay, 2010).
6.0 Methodological Framework
I will use a qualitative multiple-case study approach to examine language teachers’ experience
of learning in an online environment mediated by tools and social others. In this section, I will discuss
case study methodology as well as multiple-case design and justify their use in my research. I will also
describe and justify my proposed research setting, sampling procedure, data collection methods and
data analysis processes. Lastly, I will outline measures I will take to establish trustworthiness in my
study.
8
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
My planned investigation from the proposal to dissertation defense stage will take 10 months.
[Click for Appendix A: Timeline of Process]
6.1 Research Methods
My study aims to provide insight into how participants experience leaning that is mediated by
elements of the activity system, such as cultural tools and social others. Since the theoretical
fundaments of my study are based on activity theory, my research fits well into the qualitative paradigm
because this type of research is grounded in constructivist philosophy (Anthony & Jack, 2009).
Qualitative research focuses on how the complexities of the sociocultural world are experienced,
interpreted, and understood in a particular context at a particular point in time (ibid.).
My study will also be based on qualitative case study methodology because this approach
facilitates the study of a process, program or individual in an in-depth, holistic way that allows for deep
understanding (Merriam, 1998). Merriam adds that case study methodology is used when the focus is
on “process rather than outcomes, in context rather than a specific variable, in discovery rather than
confirmation” (Merriam 1998, p. 19).
6.1.1 Justification for Use of Multiple-Case Study Design
Theory building is an important goal in my study. According to Eisenhardt (1989b, cited in
Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007), “building theory from case studies is a research strategy that involves
using one or more cases to create theoretical constructs, propositions and…midrange theory from case-
based, empirical evidence” (p.25).
The design of this research will be a multiple case study. With multiple case studies, data are
analyzed for insights both within each case and across cases (Merriam, 1998). The use of multiple cases
strengthens the theory building process because the cases serve to replicate, add contrast to, and
extend emerging theory (Yin, 2009). This assertion is supported by Stake (2000), who highlights that
“multiple case study approach can allow for the possibility of stronger interpretation and perhaps better
9
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
theorizing" (p. 437). According to Yin (2009), “multiple case studies are considered more compelling, and
the overall study is therefore regarded as more robust" (p. 46).
6.2 The Research Setting of the Online Class
The setting for my investigation will be an online “Language, Literacy and Technology” course
usually conducted as a 12-week teacher education program at a Northeastern university via the BLS
course management system. The course is offered entirely online as part of a graduate program in
education. The enrollment for the course will be approximately 20 students. The syllabus states that the
course is designed for language professionals and educators concerned with the role digital texts play in
student learning. The syllabus adds that “the course explores the important roles digital texts and their
influence on language and literacy development in native, second, and foreign languages”. Its main aim
“is for each participant to become skilled and conversant in the interworking of language, literacy and
technologies”.
It is impossible to separate the phenomenon being investigated from its context (Merriam,
1998). I chose a case study design to investigate participants’ experiences of this online setting because
“case studies emphasize the rich, real-world context in which the phenomena occur” (Eisenhardt &
Graebner, 2007, p.25). Additionally, context has a very important significance in activity theory (Arnseth,
2008). This online class was selected because it has all the vital elements consistent with the notion of
mediation, where artifacts are embedded in activities which facilitate interaction between learners and
learning objects (Arnseth, 2008).
In order to mediate learning, the instructor has incorporated semiotic and material artifacts in
the form of course readings, videos and links to relevant websites. A variety of collaborative and
individual activities have also been designed around these cultural tools to facilitate learning. Since
collaborative work is emphasized in this course, students will work in teams of five or six to synthesize
readings into presentations which are viewed and responded to by the whole class. In the process of
10
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
preparing these presentations, students will be required to interact with classmates by discussing their
assigned articles, posting their reading syntheses to the message board, and responding to group
members’ postings. Other collaborative activities will include working with a partner in the course to
design and engage in tele-collaborative activities with language students from a foreign university. All
group and individual projects will be published in designated discussions spaces for the class to respond
to.
The various activities carried out in the course will help me investigate the theoretical
proposition that in an activity system, “the individual’s conscious goals are coordinated in regard to and
thereby reshaped and changed by the fact that they pursue these goals within certain social and
material arrangements. Thus, object orientedness points to a higher level of organization than the
individual or group. The object provides the activity with a certain direction but it is also changed by the
activity as such” (Arnseth, 2008, p.292). Since the self is an important construct in activity theory
(Kapeltinin & Nardi, 2006), I will examine Individual assignments which include preparing case studies,
analyzing online instructional conversations, writing reflective journals and producing a final written
synthesis piece.
6.3 Sampling Procedure
The sampling procedure for my multiple-case study will involve selecting 3 graduate students
enrolled in the course. Their selection will be based on purposeful sampling. According to Patton (1990),
purposeful sampling is a method that is typically used in case study methodology to yield the most
information about the phenomena under study. In order to further refine my selection of cases, I will
use theoretical sampling and critical case sampling. In theoretical sampling, cases are selected because
they are particularly suitable for illuminating and extending relationships and logic among constructs”
(Eisenhardt & Graebner , 2007, p.27).
11
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
In order to conduct critical case sampling, I will develop criteria that will allow me to select cases
that are particularly important to the understanding mediated activity, yield the most information and
have the greatest impact on the development of knowledge in this area (Patton, 2001; Teddlie &
Tashakkori, 2009).
The small number of participants I plan to work with is consistent with the characteristics of a
phenomenological study, which focuses on depth rather than generalizability in participants’
experiences (Polit and Beck, 2004). In selecting my participants, I have also used another basic guiding
principle in selecting participants for a phenomenological study. My participants must be able to
articulate what it is like to have lived the experience being investigated (Polit and Beck, 2004; Creswell,
2007).
Part of my critical sampling procedure will also involve seeking out individuals who have had
differing experiences of the course. The emphasis on diversity is consistent with a phenomenological
study (Polit and Beck, 2004). Although “researchers seek participants who have had the targeted
experiences, they also want to explore diversity of individual experiences” (ibid, p.17). The selection of
informants who view the phenomena from diverse perspectives is also a strategy to limit bias
(Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). Yin (2009) emphasizes that multiple cases can also be used to represent
contrasting situations, which strengthens rigor of the study.
6.4 Data Collection
In case study research, multiple methods of data collection and sources of evidence are used to
explore a phenomenon (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007; Anthony & Jack, 2009; Yin 2009; Nazari, 2010).
Due to the use of multiple methods of data collection, “case study is known as a triangulated research
strategy” (Nazari, 2010, p.180 ). Multiple sources of data facilitate the “development of converging lines
of inquiry” which adds to the trustworthiness of a study (Yin, 2009, p. 115).
12
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
In order to establish rigor in my study, I will collect data through a variety of data sources. These
data sources include:
transcripts of interviews [Appendix B: Interview Protocol]
transcripts of group discussions
student artifacts and
field notes of online class observation [Appendix D: Class Observation Protocol]
In order to ensure that there is alignment between my research questions and my protocol
items I have mapped out the items in a table [Appendix C: Mapping Interview Questions to Protocol]
6.4.1Interviews
I will conduct interviews as part of the data collection for my multiple case studies. According to
Eisenhardt & Graebner (2007), “interviews are a highly efficient way to gather rich, empirical data,
especially when the phenomenon of interest is highly episodic and infrequent” (p.28). The qualitative
interview is also a way of finding out how participants feel and think about their world and their
experiences” (Rubin & Rubin, 2005, p. 1).
I will use a semi-structured approach when designing the interview protocol. The advantage of
using a semi-structured interview is that it elicits open-ended responses which allow the participants to
fully express their viewpoints and experiences with as much detailed as possible (Rubin & Rubin, 2005).
Consistent with a semi-structured approach, I will prepare questions as a starting point, but allow the
conversation to flow in directions which are helpful to providing insight (Seidman, 2006). I will ensure
that my questions will be sufficiently flexible to enable me to ask probing questions as a means of
follow-up (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2003; Rubin & Rubin, 2005).
While the semi-structured approach interview provides flexibility, it also has one main
weakness. It is difficult for researchers to extract similar themes or codes from the interview transcripts
as they would with less open-ended responses (Creswell, 2007).
13
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
In order to use the interviews as a theory building strategy, I have formulate questions that elicit
responses which add to the understanding of participants’ social construction of reality and how activity
theory operates in this particular example of an activity system. Part of this strategy will include using
projective techniques during the interview to answer one of my research questions, which is “How do
cultural tools mediate knowledge construction within an online community of teachers? In order to
answer this question, I have integrated the use of prompts in the interview in the form of course
materials, individual written assignments and group products.
6.4.2 Group Discussion
“Activity theory…emphasizes the sociocultural matrix within which individuals develop”
(Kaptelinin & Nardi, p. 11). In order to examine sociocultural processes which contribute to knowledge
building, I will collect data from discussion forum transcripts.
By studying student interaction through online discussions, I plan to trace the development of
knowledge construction in the activity system. The notion of development is a key principle of activity
theory. “Activity theory takes the long view; we cannot understand activity if we do not watch it cycle,
grow, change” (Kaptelinin & Nardi, 2006, p. 11). Through the discussion transcripts, I hope to track the
cycle of growth and change in the process of knowledge construction for the participants in the online
class. Analyzing group discussion transcripts will also enable me to study the “the dialogic nature of
processes of internalization-externalization (which) makes it possible for individuals to transform their
culture through their activity” (Kaptelinin & Nardi, p. 11).
6.4.3 Student Artifacts
Student artifacts will be one of my data sources. These artifacts will include group presentations
in the form of PowerPoint presentations, wikis and other jointly produced products. Within a
sociocultural perspective on learning, the products of students’ contact with tools and people can be
seen as evidence of participation in the social practices of the culture (Alexandersson & Limberg, 2003).
14
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Therefore, the development of material resources can be taken as evidence for the development of
ideas and intellectual knowledge (Säljö, 2000, cited in Erstad, 2002).
Besides group projects, individual projects are an important source of data for my study.
Individual artifacts will include written assignments and reflective journals. In activity theory “the
individual is an important theoretical concept that accounts for interrelated processes of creativity,
resistance, and reflexivity” (Kaptelinin & Nardi, 2006, p.11). Artifacts produced by individuals will allow
me to study knowledge construction processes that take place in their minds. Through artifacts I also
hope to learn more about how individuals in the activity system can “radically restructure cultural
conceptions, transcending culture in unpredictable ways” (Kaptelinin & Nardi, p. 11).
6.4.4 Observation of the Online Class
The online class itself can be understood as a ‘cultural tool’ where students engage with, and
transform ideas and tools in a cultural context (Alexandersson & Limberg, 2003). An important aim of
my case study is to provide insight on how students work on knowledge construction through different
activities in their online learning environment. Therefore, from both sociocultural and
phenomenological perspectives, it is crucial to examine the environment of the online class where the
students’ interact with cultural tools and social others.
I plan to begin field observations in the online class as soon as it commences. I will log onto the
class at least 3 times weekly to take field notes and observe developments. I will also examine mediating
tools in the environment in the form of pedagogical literature, videos and other resources. This is
because in order to study the culture, “it is necessary to grasp the knowledge and ideas built into the
developments of certain tools or artifacts in the learning environment” (Erstad, 2002, p.429).
Furthermore, “artifacts have the potential of being constructive tools for thought if they are integrated
in a learning environment which promotes active student roles in combination with other learning
resources” (Erstad, 2002, p.436).
15
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
6.5 Data Analysis
According to Creswell, “data analysis in qualitative research consists of preparing and organizing
the data…for analysis, then reducing the data into themes through a process of coding and condensing
the codes, and finally representing the data in figures, tables or a discussion” (Creswell, 2007, p.148).
This process is non-linear. Creswell has characterized the process as a spiral, while Grbich (2007) has
termed it as an iterative approach.
Creswell’s data analysis model illustrates the process I intend to undertake in analyzing my data
(See Figure 3)
Figure 3. Process of data analysis (Creswell, 2009)
6.5.1 Organizing the Database
As I progressively collect my data, I plan to organize them into a case study database (Yin, 2003).
According to Creswell (2007, p. 150) “data management is the first loop in the (data analysis) spiral. At
an early stage in the process, researchers organize their data into computer files. Besides organizing
files, he recommends that researchers convert their files to appropriate text units.
I will use a chronological order in filing my data. This is consistent with a key principle of activity
theory, which is the notion of examining development over time in a historical frame (Engestrom, 1999).
16
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
“Activity theory shares the commitment of the cultural-historical school of psychology because of its
commitment to understanding how human activity unfurls...we cannot understand activity if we do not
watch it cycle, grow, change” (Kaptelinin & Nardi, p. 11). Filing the data chronologically will help me to
chart the progression of the participants’ changing views throughout their experience of the course.
6.5.2 Conducting Preliminary Data Analysis
As I file and manage my data, I will conduct preliminary data analysis in order to “remain close
to the data” (Grbich, 2007, p.27), and to get a better sense of the growing database (Creswell, 2009).
Preliminary data analysis is particularly relevant to the iterative approach I plan to follow (Grbich, 2007).
During this stage, I will “undertake the collection and summary of major points gained from interviews,
observations or documents in order to examine what is going on in the text in terms of emergent issues
and also issues that need to be followed up” (Grbich, 2007, p.25). At this stage, I can also begin
formulating some basic categories and accumulating emerging issues into potential themes (Cresswell,
2009; Grbich, 2007). Preliminary data analysis will help me to fill in gaps that complete a holistic view of
my research area (Grbich, 2007).
6.5.3 Developing Codes, Categories and Themes
By the time I have completed the preliminary data analysis and all the data are in, it is likely that
I will have a fairly clear idea what the database contains in terms of issues that are becoming evident
(Grbich, 2007). Following preliminary analysis, I will undertake the more formal processes of thematic
analysis and coding (Grbich, 2007). Creswell (2009) recommends that researchers develop a list of about
12 tentative codes. He advises against exceeding 25 categories. These categories will be further refined
into five or six themes in the end.
I will develop codes based on a combination of pre-determined and emerging codes (Patton,
2009). According to Creswell (2009), “code labels emerge from several sources” (p. 153). He encourages
qualitative researchers to look for code segments that can be used to describe information and develop
17
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
themes. Following Creswell’s recommendations, I plan to classify the categories of codes which
represent:
information that I expect to find before the study
surprising information that I did not expect to find
information that is conceptually interesting or unusual to researchers (and potentially to
participants and audiences)
Additionally, Grbich (2007) suggests that codes and themes may also come from previous
relevant research. However, she cautions that in qualitative research, the data should speak for
themselves initially before any predesigned themes are imposed. Charmaz (2006, p.67, cited in Seaman,
2008) concurs with this view and has advised researchers to not “unwittingly start from their own
preconceptions about what a particular experience means or entails” (p.11).
While I plan to use activity theory to inform my study, Seaman (2008) cautions that “it is
important that the elements of the activity system are used as data sources rather than as pre-given
conceptual categories” (p.67). Besides the literature, my conceptual categories will be drawn from
several frameworks which I will discuss in the next section.
6.5.4 Using Analytic Frameworks [Appendix E: Analytic Frameworks]
My data sources include discussion transcripts, interview transcripts, student artifacts and field
notes from classroom observation. I will analyze these for evidence of knowledge construction through
content analysis (Creswell, 2007). As categories within the data begin to emerge, I will look for patterns
or themes that connect these categories. In order to help me strengthen my theory building process, I
will use several analytic frameworks to help me organize and think about my data.
There are a number of content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous
discussion (Dewever, Schellens, Valcke, & Vankeer, 2006). I will use Gunawardena’s (1997) Interaction
Analysis Model to analyze my group discussion transcripts. It is a well-established content analysis
18
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
framework which is based on five phases of a discussion to determine the amount of knowledge
constructed within a discussion. This framework is appropriate for my study because the theoretical
underpinnings for the instrument are based on social constructivist principles. More specifically, the
framework enables the examination of an activity system because it focuses on the processes of
negotiating meaning and coming to an understanding by discussing and contributing knowledge, thus
resulting in the shared construction of knowledge (Gunawardena, et at, 1997). Since my research
questions focuses on social construction of knowledge, their scheme accurately fits my purpose.
In order to analyze my interview transcripts, classroom observation field notes and student
artifacts for evidence knowledge construction, I will use content analysis frameworks by Koehler et al,
(2007) and Shulman, 1987).
My decision to use established frameworks is based on Rourke and Andersons’ (2003) assertion
that instead of developing new coding schemes, researchers should use schemes that have been
developed and used in previous research. Gall et al (1996, cited Rourke & Anderson, 2003) also support
the assertion that researchers should consider employing a coding system that has been used in
previous research because “using well-defined procedural tools will help (researchers) make inferences
and interpretations that are theoretically and empirically defensible” (p.15). They add that researchers
who use established tools “contribute to the accumulating validity of an existing procedure to compare
their results with a growing catalog of normative data” (p.16).
6.6 Cross-case Analysis
“A qualitative, inductive, multiple case study seeks to build abstractions across cases” (Creswell,
2002, pp. 194-195). This allows the reader to develop an understanding of the case within the larger
context (Creswell, 2002). Since my study is based on a multiple case study approach, the next step of
my data analysis process would be conducting cross-case analysis (Merriam, 1998). In the within-case
analysis, each case is first treated as a comprehensive case in and of itself (Merriam, 1998). For each
19
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
individual case, I will analyze observations, interviews, and documents to develop a description of the
case. The analysis of each case will comprise description and thematic development (Creswell, 2007).
I will use categories and themes that emerge during the within-case analysis and analyze them
across cases to determine "naturalistic generalizations" (Creswell, 2007, p. 163) concerning the field of
the activity system. These naturalistic generalizations across cases will help me address the main
question of my study: What can I learn from these experiences of the teachers in this online class to
inform the field of Activity Theory?
7.0 Formulating Themes and Writing Up the Case Report
After conducting the cross-case analyses, I plan to further reduce the data by identifying
five to seven general themes, as suggested by Creswell (2007) and Grbich (2007). I will discuss my
emergent themes and compare them to literature on activity theory, online teacher development,
teacher knowledge and socially mediated learning within community of practice. I will highlight areas of
convergence and differences (Seidman, 2006). Yin (2009) stresses that the final product of the analysis
should address all evidence, include rival interpretations, highlight the most significant aspects of the
study and utilize the researcher’s prior expert knowledge.
Yin (2009 has proposed several structures which the final report can take. I will probably utilize a
combined chronological and theory building structure. The chronological structure seems to lend itself
well to presenting a historical account of development, which is consistent with activity theory. The
theory-building structure is aligned with my aim of using my case study to contribute to understanding
of how cultural tools and social interaction mediate learning in an online environment.
8.0 Measures to Establish Trustworthiness
In order to lend credibility to the findings of my study, I will incorporate a variety of measures to
establish trustworthiness (Tinkler, 2004).
20
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
The first procedure I will use is "long-term observation" (Merriam, 1998, p. 204). During my
research, I will maintain consistent contact with my participants as they go through the semester. I will
also constantly log-on to the course to observe the developments there. Spending prolong amounts of
time in the field will lend credibility to my perceptions of this experience (Merriam, 1998).
Another important validity procedure I will use is triangulation (Creswell, 2007, Yin, 2009).
Merriam (1998) defines triangulation as "using multiple investigators, multiple sources of data, or
multiple methods to confirm the emerging findings" (p. 204). I will use methodological triangulation
(Creswell & Miller, 2000) by collecting multiple forms of data. I will use the process of triangulation to
identify convergence in the data in order to confirm or disconfirm emerging categories and themes (Yin,
2009). I will also use multiple cases instead of a single case to strengthen my theory-building process
(Yin, 2009; Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007).
Another method I will use to establish creditability is researcher reflexivity (Harrison,
MacGibbon & Morton, 2001; Pillow, 2003, Tinkler, 2004). Since my perceptions of the research process
will play a major part in the findings of the study, I will attend to the idea of subjectivity (Tinkler, 2004).
In order to ensure clear and unbiased representation, I will send my preliminary analysis to my
participants to check for accuracy in portrayal (Harrison, MacGibbon & Morton, 2001; Pillow, 2003). I
will incorporate researcher reflexivity by constantly questioning my own assumptions and maintaining
this awareness when adding contextual data to field notes, observations transcriptions, and interview
transcriptions, and also when writing researcher journal entries (Harrison, MacGibbon & Morton; 2001
Pillow, 2003; Tinkler, 2004).
21
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
9.0 Conclusion
Since my investigation focuses on the social construction of knowledge in an online class for
language teachers, I began my proposal by presenting the theoretical underpinnings upon which this
study is based. I proceeded to provide an overview of case study methodology that will be used to
conduct this study. I then justified my choice of this method, and described data collection, analysis
procedures I intend to use in my investigation. I finally outlined the measures I will take to establish
credibility in my investigation.
22
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
References:
Alexandersson, M. & Limberg, L. (2003). Constructing meaning through information artefacts. New
Review of Information Behaviour Research, 4(1), 17-30. doi:10.1080/14716310310001631417.
Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Class differences: Online education in the United States, 2010. Retrieved
from http://sloanconsortium.org/sites/default/files/class_differences.pdf
Anthony, S., & Jack, S. (2009). Qualitative case study methodology in nursing research: an integrative
review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65(6), 1171-1181. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.04998.x
Arnseth, H. C. (2008). Activity theory and situated learning theory: contrasting views of
Avis, J. (2009). Transformation or transformism: Engestrom's version of activity theory? Educational
Review, 61(2), 151-165. doi:10.1080/00131910902844754.
Barab, S., Barnett, M., & Yamagata-Lynch, L. (2002). Using activity theory to understand the systemic
tensions characterizing a technology-rich introductory astronomy course. Mind, Culture and
Activity, 9(2), 76-107.
Baran, B., & Cagiltay, K. (2010). The dynamics of online communities in the Activity Theory framework.
Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 155-166.
Benson, A., Lawler, C., & Whitworth, A. (2008). Rules, roles and tools: Activity theory and the
comparative study of e-learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(3), 456-467.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00838.x.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. In
Seaman, J. (2008). Adopting a grounded theory approach to cultural-historical research:
Conflicting methodologies or complementary methods? International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 7(1), 1-17.
Chen, Y., Chen, N. & Tsai, C. (2009). The use of online synchronous discussion for web-based
professional development for teachers. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1155-1166.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.05.026.
Choi, H., & Kang, M. (2010). Applying an activity system to online collaborative group work analysis.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(5), 776-795. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
8535.2009.00978.x.
Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. CA:
Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Dewever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., & Vankeer, H. (2006). Content analysis schemes to analyze
transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review. Computers & Education, 46(1),
6-28. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.005.
Eisenhardt, K., & Graebner, M. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges.
Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25-32.
Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström,
Erstad, O. (2002). Norwegian students using digital artifacts in project-based learning. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 427-437.
Freeman, D. (2004). Language, sociocultural theory and L2 teacher education: Examining the technology
of subject matter and the architecture of instruction. In M. Hawkins (Ed.). Language learning
and teacher education: A sociocultural approach. NY: Multilingual Matters.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational Research: An Introduction (7th ed.). Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.
Grbich, C. (2007). An introduction to qualitative data analysis. CA: Sage Publications.
Gunawardena, C., Lowe, C., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global on-line debate and the
development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in
computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 395-429.
Harrison, J., MacGibbon, L. & Morton. M. (2001). Regimes of trustworthiness in qualitative research: The
rigors of reciprocity. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 323-345.
Hopwood, N., & Stocks, C. (2008). Teaching development for doctoral students: What can we learn from
activity theory? International Journal for Academic Development, 13(3), 187-198.
doi:10.1080/13601440802242358.
Jones, C. & Youngs, B. (2006). Teacher preparation for online language instruction. In P. Hubbard and P.
Levy (Eds.). Teacher education in CALL. MA: John Benjamins.
Kang, H. & Gyorke, A. (2008). Rethinking distance learning activities: A comparison of transactional
distance theory and activity theory. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning,
23(3), 203-214. doi:10.1080/02680510802420050 .
Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2006). Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design. MA:
MIT Press.
Knox, S., & Burkard, A. (2009). Qualitative research interviews. Psychotherapy Research, 19(4), 566-575.
doi:10.1080/10503300802702105.
Koehler, M., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design
seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers & Education, 49(3), 740-
762. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.012.
24
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge:
University of Cambridge Press.
Lund, A. & Rasmussen, I. (2010). Tasks 2.0: Education meets social computing and mass collaboration.
In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher
Education International Conference 2010 (pp. 4058-4065). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/34016.
Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative research and case studies applications in education. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publications.
Murphy-Judy, K. & Youngs, B. L. (2006). Technology Standards for teacher education, credentialing and
certification. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (2006). Teacher education in CALL. Philadelphia. John
Benjamins.
Nazari, M. (2010). Design and process of a contextual study of information literacy: An Eisenhardt
approach. Library & Information Science Research, 32(3), 179-191.
doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2010.02.003
Norton, P., & Hathaway, D. (2008). Exploring two teacher education online learning designs: A
classroom of one or many? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(4), 475– 495.
Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ826087.pdf.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications.
Pillow, W. (2003). Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as methodological
power in qualitative research. Qualitative Studies In Education, 16 (2), 175–196.
Polit, D. F. & Beck C. T. (2004). Nursing research: principles and methods. Philadelphia: Lippincott
Williams and Wilkins.
Rasmussen, I. & Ludvigsen, S. (2009). The Hedgehog and the fox: A discussion of the approaches to the
analysis of ICT reforms in teacher education of Larry Cuban and Yrjö Engeström. Mind, Culture
and Activity, 16(1), 83- 104.
Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2003). Validity in quantitative content analysis. Retrieved from
http://cdn.learners.in.th/assets/media/files/000/072/085/original_Validity_in_Quantitative_Co
ntent_Analysis.pdf?1285558703.
Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Säljö, R. (2000) Lärande i Praktiken. Ett Sociokulturelt Perspektiv. In Erstad, O. (2002). Norwegian
students using digital artifacts in project-based learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,
18, 427-437.
25
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Saltmarsh, S. & Sutherland-Smith, W. (2010). S(t)imulating learning: pedagogy, subjectivity and teacher
education in online environments. London Review of Education, 8(1), 15-24.
doi:10.1080/14748460903557613.
Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the
social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational
Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Sorensen, E., Takle, E., & Moser, H. (2006). Knowledge-building quality in online communities of
practice: focusing on learning dialogue1. Studies in Continuing Education, 28(3), 241-257.
doi:10.1080/01580370600947470
Stahl, G. (2006b). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Stake, R. (2000). Case studies. In N. Denzin & E. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stevenson, I. (2008). Tool, tutor, environment or resource: Exploring metaphors for digital technology
and pedagogy using activity theory. Computers & Education, 51(2), 836-853.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.001.
Taber, K. (2010). Paying lip-service to research? The adoption of a constructivist perspective to inform
science teaching in the English curriculum context. Curriculum Journal, 21(1), 25-45.
doi:10.1080/09585170903558299
Teddlie, C. & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative
and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. CA: Sage Publications.
UK: Cambridge University Press.
University Press.
Tinkler, B. (2004). Establishing a conceptual model of community-based research through contrasting
case studies. Retrieved from http://comm-org.wisc.edu/papers2004/tinkler/contents.htm
Wang, Y., Chen, N. & Levy, M. (2010). Teacher training in a synchronous cyber face-to-face
classroom: Characterizing and supporting the online teachers’ learning process. Computer
Assisted Language Learning, 23(4), 277-293. doi:10.1080/09588221.2010.493523.
Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge
Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press. In Yamagata-Lynch, L. (2003). Using activity theory as an analytic lens for examining
technology professional development in schools . Mind, Culture, and Activity, 10(2), 100-119.
26
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Yamagata-Lynch, L. (2003). Using activity theory as an analytic lens for examining technology
educational practice. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 16(3), 289–302. Doi.
10.1080/14681360802346663.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
27
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
List of Appendices
Appendix A
Research Timeline
Appendix B
Interview Protocol
Appendix C
Map of Research questions to protocols
Appendix D
Online Class Observation Protocol
Appendix E
Data Analysis Frameworks
28
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Appendix A
Timeline of Research Process [Back to write-up]
According to Yin (2009), a case study is basically conducted according to the following sequence:
Determine and define the research questions
Select the cases and determine data gathering and analysis techniques
Prepare to collect the data
Collect data in the field
Evaluate and analyze the data
Prepare the report
I have constructed my research timeline based on Yin’s suggested sequence, taking into account logistic
considerations and IRB approval processes.
Processes Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mac Apr May June July
1. Commence planning with X
cooperating course
instructor
2. Prepare research proposal X X
3. Conduct literature search X X X X X
4. Determine data gathering X
and analysis techniques
5. Prepare proposal X X
6. Submit proposal to IRB X X
(including wait time)
7. Select cases X
8. Prepare data collection X X
instruments
9. Refine data collection X
instruments
10. Collect data in the field X X X X X
11. Interviews X
12. Evaluate and analyze the X X X X
data
13. Prepare the report X X X
[Back to write-up]
29
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Appendix B
Interview Protocol [Back to write-up]
Title of study:
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction in an Online Language, Literacy and
Technology Course
Interviewer: _____________________________________
Interviewee
(use pseudonym): _____________________________________
Date of interview: _____________________________________
Place: _____________________________________
Time: _____________________________________
Duration: 60 to 70 minutes
Documents Obtained:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
Instructions for Interviewer:
Below are instructions for the interviewer to follow so that standard procedures are used from one
interview to another.
Resources to bring to the interview for projective technique:
Modules 1 to 7 course readings, videos, weblinks and other resources
Group PPT presentations
Transcripts of group discussions
Individual projects – analysis of instructional conversation, case study of an individual’s digital
text use, final paper (cultural historian whose specialization is early 21st century literacy),
retrospective analyses.
30
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
VIDEO TAPING INSTRUCTIONS
Inform participant that you will be video-recording our conversation.
Assure participants that all comments will remain confidential, and that in the written report all
comments will not contain any reference to individuals.
PREAMBLE/CONSENT FORM INSTRUCTIONS
Hand the participant the consent form. Assure the participant of confidentiality:
I would like to assure you that, only researchers on the project will be privy to the recordings which will
be eventually deleted after they are transcribed. In addition, please sign a form devised to meet my
human subject requirements. Essentially, this document states that: (1) all information will be held
confidential, (2) your participation is voluntary and you may stop at any time if you feel uncomfortable,
and (3) I do not intend to inflict any harm.
Thank you for your agreeing to participate.
I have planned this interview to last no longer than one hour. During this time, I have several questions
that I would like to cover. If time begins to run short, it may be necessary to interrupt you in order to
push ahead and complete this line of questioning.
Introduction
I would like to speak with you today because you have been identified as someone who has a great deal
to share about teaching, online learning, and assessment in this class. My research project as a whole
focuses on the improvement of online teaching and learning activity for in-service teachers, with
particular interest in understanding interaction between different elements in the course. I am also
interested in how teacher education courses help teachers to learn more effectively
My study does not aim to evaluate your techniques or experiences. Rather, I am trying to learn more
about online teaching and learning, hopefully learn more about what is in online environments that help
for in-service language teachers develop knowledge.
Ice breakers
Are there aspects of your teaching that you particularly enjoy?
A. SECTION B: PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE:
What was your basic training in?
What do you do now?
Can you walk me through what you do in your job?
Why did you decide to do your PhD?
Why did you take this particular course?
31
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
SECTION B: EXPERIENCE OF THE COURSE
Course Activities
Can you walk me through some of the activities in the online course?
What worked for you in that course?
What didn’t work for you?
Can you describe you experience of the following activities? What were you learning through them?
• Collaborating with partner on EHU activity (probe)
• Collaborating on the wiki (probe)
• Preparing the group presentation (probe)
• Analyzing instructional conversations (probe)
• Preparing a case study of digital use (probe)
Collaborative Activities
Were collaborative activities a significant or peripheral part of the course?
Can you walk me through some of the collaborative activities? How did you feel about these group
activities? Were there any experiences that were particularly good or particularly difficult? What were
you learning from these collaborative activities?
Group Discussions
Can you walk me through some of the procedures of the discussions? Would you say these discussions
were a significant or peripheral part of the course?
What were the discussions about?
To what extent did these discussions help you learn? What were you learning from these discussions?
Here are some of the discussions that were carried out (list discussions).
What did you learn from (Specify discussion)?
Course Resources
What were some resources used in the course, like course readings, videos, website links, document
templates, etc.?
Can you walk me through some of the ways the resources were used during the course?
Would you say these resources were fundamental or peripheral to the course? To what extent were
these articles helping in your discussions?
To what extent were these articles (specify readings) helping in activity? (Specify activity)
Could the course activities have been conducted without the course readings?
Could the course activities have been conducted without these videos?
Technological Tools
What were some forms of technology you used in the course? To what extent were these tools helpful?
32
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Professional Development:
Can you describe your experiences of different forms of professional development since you began
working as a teacher?
When you enrolled for this course, did you have any particular expectations of what you would like to
learn in the course?
In what way is this course similar or different to your other prior experiences of professional
development?
How have you developed as a result of this course?
Would teachers in schools benefit from attending a course like this one? In what ways would they
benefit?
Would a course like this need to be restructured to better meet teachers’ needs? Can this be conducted
as-is? If not, based on your experience, what suggestions would you have for making this course more
relevant for teachers?
Relevance
Was the course professionally meaningful?
How was it meaningful/not meaningful to you?
Did you consciously or subconsciously apply some of the things you learnt in this course at work?
SECTION C:
Other Insights
Are there any insights, issues or concerns which we have not discussed, but which you think will add to my
understanding of your online learning experience?
SECTION D:
POST INTERVIEW COMMENTS OR LEADS TO FOLLOW UP:
Follow-up Issues Comments
33
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
SECTION E:
DEBRIEFING
Thank you very much for coming this morning (afternoon). I really appreciate your time your time and
effort and your comments have been very helpful.
I would like to remind you that I have taken the following measures to ensure confidentiality:
(1) Your comments will be pooled with group comments; and
(2) I will not place any identifying information on data collection instruments. (Such identifiers include
name, social security number, student identification number, specific birth data, telephone number,
address, etc.)
Again, thank you for participating. (TURN VIDEO-RECORDER OFF.)
Interview adapted from:
http://www.engr.washington.edu/caee/APS_Process_Procedures/Appendix_3-A_APS_Structured_Interview_Protocol_Example_Ext.pdf
[Back to write-up]
34
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Appendix C
Mapping Research Questions to Interview Protocol [Back to write-up]
Research Questions Questions in Interview Protocol
1. How do activities Course Activities
mediate in knowledge Can you walk me through some of the activities in the online course?
construction within an What worked for you in that course?
online community of What didn’t work for you?
teachers?
Can you describe you experience of the following activities? What were you learning
through them?
Collaborating with partner on EHU activity (probe)
Collaborating on the wiki (probe)
Preparing the group presentation (probe)
Analyzing instructional conversations (probe)
Preparing a case study of digital use (probe)
Collaborative Activities
Were collaborative activities a significant or peripheral part of the course?
Can you walk me through some of the collaborative activities? How did you feel about
these group activities? Were there any experiences that were particularly good or
particularly difficult? What were you learning from these collaborative activities?
Group Discussions
Were discussions part of your course activities? Can you walk me through some of the
procedures of the discussions? Would you say these discussions were a significant or
peripheral part of the course?
What were the discussions about?
To what extent did these discussions help you learn? What were you learning from these
discussions?
Here are some of the discussions that were carried out (list discussions).
What did you learn from (Specify discussion)?
2. How do cultural tools Course Resources
mediate in knowledge What were some resources used in the course, like course readings, videos, website links,
construction within an document templates, etc.?
online community of Can you walk me through some of the ways the resources were used during the course?
teachers? Would you say these resources were fundamental or peripheral to the course? To what
extent were these articles helping in your discussions?
To what extent were these articles (specify readings) helping in activity? (specify activity)
Could the course activities have been conducted without the course readings?
Could the course activities have been conducted without these videos?
Technological Tools
What were some forms of technology you used in the course? To what extent were these
tools helpful?
Development:
How have you developed as a result of this course?
35
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Research Questions Questions in Interview Protocol
3. What forms of Can you describe your experiences of different forms of professional development since
professional you began working as a teacher?
development do FL What led you to this course?
teachers find relevant Did you have any particular expectations of what you would like to learn in the course?
to their needs? In what way is this course similar or different to your other prior experiences of
professional development?
Would teachers in schools benefit from attending a course like this one? In what ways
would they benefit?
Would a course like this need to be restructured to better meet teachers’ needs? Can this
be conducted as-is?
If not, based on your experience, what suggestions would you have for making this course
more relevant for teachers?
Relevance
Was the course professionally meaningful?
How was it meaningful/not meaningful to you?
Did you consciously or subconsciously apply some of the things you learnt in this course at
work?
[Back to write-up]
36
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Appendix D
General Online Course Observation Protocol [Back to write-up]
Observer: ____________________________
Course: ____________________________
Session M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7
Date
Purpose of Observation:
This protocol provides a systematic basis for online observation and interpretation to create a
standardized record that promotes greater reliability among different observers.
Another goal of the observation is to improve the researcher’s own understanding of how
activities and tools in the online environment supports student learning.
The observer accesses an online course site not to evaluate, but to create a dialogue about the
theories, best practices and students’ experiences of online teacher development programs.
The instructional design focus of online instruction must be to engage learners purposefully and
strategically in integrated interactions with content, activities, peers, and with the instructor ultimately
facilitating the learning process
(Koszalka, 2001; Koszalka & Bianco, 2001; Marra & Jonassen, 2001).
Observation Format:
The form is a combination of checklist, rating sheet and written analysis.
General Observation: [For first 2 sessions]
1. Course Site Management.
Are course policies for online learning, attendance and participation clearly posted?
Are assignments and due dates presented?
Is the online website organized in a way that is conducive to learning?
Module Observation [For all observation sessions]
2. Instructional Coherence.
Is the lesson under observation coherent in itself, with a clear focus which is clearly presented
and reinforced by the instructor? How?
Does the instructor provide/elicit enough depth and detail to adequately consider the subject?
Is the learning unit part of a coherent learning process? Is the pacing of the learning unit
appropriate to the course and to the students?
Are topics/activities sequenced logically?
What evidence is there that the learning unit fits in with a series of lessons designed to help
students achieve the objectives of the course?
37
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
4. Teaching Strategies.
a. What teaching strategies or premises about
teaching does the instructor rely on?
Activity:
__Individual
__Small group
__Whole class
__Student Presentation
__Teacher Presentation
Primary nature of student activity:
__Passive and receiving
__Producing and creating
How is the subject of the learning unit
related to the course objectives?
How effectively do the instructor’s teaching
strategies help students achieve the course
objectives?
How does the instructor’s presentation of
material, including discussion, questioning,
class and group activities, support learning
objectives?
Is critical thinking emphasized? (Challenging
students to understand complex ideas,
analyze, compare/contrast, evaluate
arguments carefully considering a variety of
perspectives, draw conclusions)
Is there good use of examples/explanation
to clarify points, including those questioned
by students?
Are student questions encouraged?
Is there opportunity for students to interact
together discover, discuss, apply or practice
content points?
38
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Pedagogies
Elements for Observation Comments
Authentic tasks
Do the learning activities involve tasks and
contexts that reflect the way in which the
knowledge will be used in real life settings
Opportunities for collaboration
Does the environment encourage and require
students to collaborate to create products that
could not be produced individually?
Learner-Centred environments
Is there is a focus on activities that provide
degrees of freedom, decision-making reflection
and self-regulation?
Engaging learners
The learning activities challenge learners and
provide some form of encouragement and
motivation to support the engagement
Meaningful assessments
Are authentic and integrated assessment used to
evaluate students’ achievement?
Instructional Resources:
Resources in quality learning materials demonstrate the following”
Accessibility
Are resources organized in ways that make them easily accessed and located?
Are resources separate from learning tasks?
Are organizational strategies intuitive and clear?
Are resources accessible in a non-linear format?
Currency
Is the age of resources appropriate to the subject matter?
Are resources current and based on regular literature reviews by lecturer?
Ares seminal works included, regardless of age?
Are primary resources used?
39
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Richness in Resources
Are a variety of instructional resources used?
Do resources reflect a rich variety of perspectives?
Do resources represent a variety of views (including conflicting views) to allow students the
opportunity to assess the merit of arguments?
Do resources provide for a range of perspectives?
Are different forms of media used to enrich data sources?
Purposeful Use of Media and Tools
Is media suitable used for the purpose intended?
Is a variety of media is used where appropriate?
Are web tools and other course site tools used effectively?
4. Subject Mastery.
Is the subject matter and level of analysis being asked of the students of a degree of difficulty suitable to
the course?
Is the material presented relevant to the purpose of the course?
5. Instructor and Students Interaction
Are interactions between the instructor and students respectful, positive, and educationally productive?
Is it clear that both instructor and students are prepared for the class?
What evidence is there of interest, enthusiasm, and engagement in online activities on the side of the of
the students?
Does the instructor motivate students and encourage student learning in
appropriate ways?
Does the instructor respond appropriately to student behaviors and concerns?
General observations:
Course Documentation
List of Documents Collected: Comments
40
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Protocol Adapted from:
http://www.kbcc.cuny.edu/sub-administration/sub-academic_affairs/Documents/observation_form.pdf
Hosie, P., Schibeci, R., & Backhaus, A. (2005). A framework and checklists for evaluating online learning in higher education.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(5), 539-553. doi:10.1080/02602930500187097
[Back to write-up]
41
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Appendix E
Proposed Data Analysis Frameworks [Back to write-up]
Interaction Analysis Model (Gunawardena et al, 1997)
5 Stages of Knowledge Construction:
1 Sharing and comparing of information
observations, opinions, statements of agreement, examples, clarifications, and identifications of
problems
2 Discovery and exploration of dissonance
Identifying inconsistencies among ideas, concepts, or statements
3 Negotiation of meaning and/or co-construction of knowledge
negotiation, identifications of areas of agreement, and proposing new co-constructions on topics
where conflict exists
4 Testing and modification of proposed synthesis
co-construction - co-constructed statements are tested against existing cognitive schema,
experiences, and literature
5 Agreement and application of newly-constructed meaning
summarizing agreements, applications of new knowledge, and metacognitive statements
revealing new knowledge
Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework (Shulman, 1987)
content knowledge
general pedagogical knowledge
broad principles and strategies of classroom management and organization
curriculum knowledge
grasp of the materials and programs that serve as "tools of the trade" for teachers;
pedagogical content knowledge
content and pedagogy that is uniquely the province of teachers, their own special form of professional
understanding;
knowledge of learners and their characteristics
knowledge of educational contexts
the workings of the group or classroom, the governance and financing of school districts, to the character
of communities and cultures; and
knowledge of educational ends
purposes, and values, and their philosophical and historical grounds.
42
Joy Quah
Engaging Language Teachers in Knowledge Construction
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework (Koehler, Mishra & Yahya, 2007)
Content (C)
is the subject matter that is to be learned/taught. FL/social studies/algebra/computer
science/art history
Technology (T)
includes standard technologies (books, chalk, blackboard) as well as more advanced
technologies (Internet, digital video, multi-modal resources)
Pedagogy (P)
includes the process and practice or methods of teaching, values, techniques, and assessment
strategies
T + C =Technological Content Knowledge (TC)
Understanding technology and content are reciprocally related
T + P = Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TP)
Understanding existence, components and capabilities of various technologies applied in
teaching & learning
T + P + C = Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK)
Understanding the dynamic, transactional relationship between these three knowledge
components
[Back to write-up]
43
