The dissertation examples I read kept focused on their question and used methods that were appropriately aligned to answer that question. Considering how entangled so many educational processes are with each other, I felt it was important that the examples did an effective job maintaining focus on their research questions. Relatedly, the selection of their particular method seemed to help them maintain that focus throughout their study. However, one of the things I wanted to do differently was to pair ethnographic methods with social semiotic methods. That way I’ll be able to understand the intentional choices students make via interviews and think-alouds, but can also analyze their final compositions. By doing that, I might be able to pick up on implicit practices or design moves they did without realizing.

The methodologies used to answer these questions regard qualitative research to be “a situated activity that locates the observer in the world…[and] consists of a set of interpretive, material practices that make the world visible” (Denzin & Lincoln, 2007, p. 4). It is through these practices that qualitative researchers attempt to study things in their natural setting in order to interpret phenomena and the meanings people bring to them.

Unlike their quantitative counterpart, qualitative approaches to research are guided by a constructivist epistemology that believes it is impossible to have unmediated access to social reality, truth, and meaning. Instead, qualitative researchers believe knowledge is interpreted and constructed as opposed to found or discovered (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Stake, 2010). Thus, “qualitative research works within the context of human experiences and the way meaning is made out of those experiences” (Bhattacharya, 2017, p. 6). Bhattacharya (2017) claims qualitative researchers use a range of methods to construct knowledge about the human experience, and are primarily focused on either understanding, interrogating, or deconstructing those experiences based on their theoretical commitments and research goals. Through the intersubjectivity afforded by language, “qualitative researchers rely on this human potential…achieved through interpretation of language and other symbolic systems (such as body language or images), to explain human behavior” (Remler & Ryzin, 2015, p. 61). According to Remler and Ryzin (2015) qualitative research is particularly suited to exploring the relationship between important variables and determining possible causes and causal mechanisms underlying human experiences and action.

Based on the affordances offered by qualitative methods, the researcher will employ a case study methodology that “facilitates exploration of a phenomenon within its context using a variety of data sources [to] ensure the issue is not explored through one lens, but rather a variety of lenses which allows for multiple facets of the phenomenon to be revealed and understood” (Baxter & Jack, 2008, p. 544). According to Yazan (2015) there are three common approaches to case study methods in education. Yin (2002), advocates for a more structured and precise process that uses construct validity, internal validity, external validity, and reliability as “yardsticks” to ensure the quality of the researcher’s investigation. This stricter adherence to these aspects of quality control suggests Yin’s positivistic leanings, despite the fact he does not explicitly state his epistemological commitments. Unlike Yin, however, Stake’s conception of case study methods (1995) provides a detailed account of the constructivist and existentialist epistemologies he views as integral to conducting qualitative case studies. Stake’s view of qualitative research positions researchers as interpreters and curators of interpretations that must be rendered into a construction gathered over the course of the study. Merriam’s (1998) framing of case study methods is situated within the broader tradition of qualitative research methods and attempts to more clearly articulate when case study methods are most appropriate to use.

Based on my selected methodology my study will yield interview transcripts, think-aloud transcripts, survey data, and multimodal content to be analyzed. In keeping with best practice of the case study methodology, this will ensure I’m triangulating my data in a way that helps establish better reliability and validity of my findings. Logistically, I’ll be setting aside time to interview my cooperating teacher and student participants. Luckily, I have time built into my schedule where these interviews can take place. I have also spoken to our technology team about software that could be used for the screen recordings and student think alouds. I’ll also be using the UIUC Box platform to ensure my data is being stored in a secure place.

Dissertations I read to support my analysis:

Meng, X. (n.d.). A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies into Practice: A Case Study in One Grade One Literacy Classroom. 102.

Reid, S. F. (n.d.). Multimodality Matters: Exploring Words, Images, and Design Features in a Seventh-Grade English Language Arts Classroom. 314.

Storm, S. (n.d.). Aesthetic Literacies: A Multi-Method Study of Youth Textual Interpretation and Social Justice in a Digital Learning Ecology

Walsh-Moorman, E. A. (n.d.). Multimodal Composing in Support of Disciplinary Literacy: A Search for Context in ELA and History Classrooms