50
In addition to the interview data, I collected a type of collage at the start of Interview 2 by
asking participants to draw themselves in a HyFlex course. Immediately after completing their
drawing, participants were asked to interpret what they had just drawn. I used their explanations
of their drawings to corroborate that what they were describing in
these drawings was indeed
germane with their HyFlex experiences as they reported them to me. All participants were
informed of their rights and given an informed consent letter (see Appendix B) to sign prior to
the start of the interviews. After returning the signed informed consent letters, each participant
was explicitly reminded of their right to withdraw from the study at any time.
Although data collection procedures typically involve interviewing
participants who have
experienced the phenomenon, some studies also include other forms of data, such as poems,
observations, and documents (Creswell & Poth, 2018). To provide better context for the HyFlex
learning phenomenon in general, I also collected a few documents, such as syllabi and pertinent
forms or handouts. These types of documents should be helpful to provide nuance and contribute
to some degree to triangulation in the study. These documents should also be useful to help
report more accurately to the reader about the HyFlex ecosystem.
Data Analysis
I used a constructivist grounded theory (Charmaz, 2016) approach for coding and
analyzing the data. A grounded theory approach was well suited to an exploration of student
perceptions because of its appreciation for and attention to the data.
The reliance upon an
intensely inductive approach to data ensured the perceptions and experiences of participants were
valued highly. Glaser and Strauss (1967) emphasized the need for researchers to conduct a study
“without any preconceived theory that dictates, prior to
the research, ‘relevancies’ in concepts
51
and hypotheses” (p. 33). My first task was to avoid applying formal theories before collecting
data and to generate substantive theory from the data itself. A pitfall to be avoided is forcing the
data to fit into preconceived theories. The researcher needs to remain open to the deriving of
hypotheses and observations that might not be consonant with established theories.
The concept of
process in grounded theory is often described as
a characteristic feature of
the method. There is some debate about the significance of process in grounded theory and how
this concept can be defined. Although Glaser (1978) discussed the specific concept of the basic
social process at length, he noted process is a possible, although not necessarily essential,
element of grounded theory. Charmaz (2014), however, argued process is central to grounded
theory and advocated for the use of gerunds (the noun form of a verb) to
emphasize action in the
employ of essential grounded theory methods. Similarly, Saldaña (2011) referenced the concept
of process codes. Emphasizing process during analysis forces the researcher to identify
relationships evident in one’s study arena (Charmaz, 2014). Corbin and Strauss (2008) defined
process as an “ongoing action/interaction/emotion taken in response to situations, or problems”
(p. 96).
