61
for a third interview. All interviews in the study were transcribed verbatim for accuracy. During
each interview, I asked follow-up questions and requests for clarification
took place as part of the
member-checking process. A draft of each participants’ profile vignette was sent to them as an
additional step for member-checking. Participant feedback and suggested corrections were
incorporated into the writing.
I asked participants to voluntarily provide syllabi or other course related documents for
data triangulation. Although not all participants shared documents, a few did. Those documents
were used to confirm stories via triangulation. During Interview 2,
all participants were asked,
“Please draw yourself in the HyFlex classroom that best represents your experience as a student
in a HyFlex course.” I collected the drawings and asked the participants to explain what was
happening in their respective drawings. The purpose of this was to triangulate their verbal
accounts and see if there were any discrepancies between what they
had drawn and how they had
verbally described their experiences in a HyFlex course.
As another measure to ensure study credibility, I relied on written and voice-recorded
data memos to assist me in clarifying my thoughts and to reflect on
the process and my position
in that process. Data memos allowed me to take a bird’s eye-view of my process and to maintain
some distance to look at things more objectively. Committee checks also played a role in
establishing credibility. I met regularly with my dissertation
chair to discuss findings, concerns,
and potential directions. I also presented preliminary findings and methodology updates to the
dissertation committee to obtain feedback about my process. All these measures combined
worked to limit or reduce internal validity threats to the extent possible.
