Evaluación Económica

While designing the construction and collection of data complex structures started surfacing. They were intertwined together as different fibers weaving a material of a certain style. Notions, concepts and keywords emerged during the process supplying the framework for the research.

To study my students’ perceptions and behaviour I collected data via different methods. The methods were my tools to define and interpret the social phenomena in my class. I used multiple data collection methods because evidence became more comprehensive when it was collected from different methods. As Sieber (1973) argues, issues that one method exposes can be answered by another method. In short, I did not decide the design of this research from a quantitative, qualitative or mixed methods paradigm, an either-or approach, but rather a continual of options (Tashakkori and Teddie, 2010). It was research with an ‘evolutionary process’ (Gorand, 2004:12) trying ‘to identify the most productive areas of inquiry and to determine the most effective means for investigating them’ (Hammersley, 2005:144).

In essence, I chose a method according to its suitability to the research demands at a given point. Choosing a method was dictated by ‘the naturalistic conditions and multiple layers of classroom life’ (Klehr, 2012:123). In fact, the ongoing process of action-and- reflection genuinely directed the decision of which method was most appropriate to use at a given time. And, it also pointed at which method was most suitable to follow after that.

Being able to reach the level of themes conceptually after the analysis of the evidence (see p. 230, 233, 238, 242) I expected to have a clearer perspective of my research

149

questions (Table2). Stating an overarching research question at the beginning of the study was like setting the goals for the study (Agee, 2009). As the data analysis developed, however, the research question seemed to take form and narrowed to specific concepts that were connected to it.

Table 2 Themes and concepts relating to the Research Questions

Themes Research Question Relevant conceptual

constructs

Theme 1: Technology in relation to learning

Theme 2: Potential of educational online use

‘How can I modify my teaching practice to become personalised in a well- designed way? What do I need to transform?’

Personalised learning, ICT in education,

Personalised learning and ICT

Theme 3: Collaboration and Communication skills in the online intervention

Theme 4: Access and accessibility in the online intervention

Theme 5: Constraints and enablers in the online intervention

‘How can I use ICT practices to sustain a well-formed personalisation scheme in learning? How much and how well can ICT practices do it?’

Personalised learning and ICT

Collaboration and Communication,

ICT and the social capital, ICT constraints,

ICT and play, ICT and age, Diffusion of change

More specifically, I understood personalising learning with the use of ICT to relate to the initial theoretical framework (see p. 52-54) suggesting techniques in practice (see p. 60). However, my aims (see p. 62) helped to define the concept more clearly since they clarified the nucleus elements (see also p.62-64) and explained how they functioned in a model of personalised learning. In this sense, I can not say that my final theoretical understanding converged or diverged from the initial theory but rather that the final version evolved from and elaborated on the initial. The core elements I saw were the following:

 Personal: the approach focused on every student so that all students could be

150

education of a student, e.g. teacher, parents, school teacher community, heads and leaders, and in this sense, it engaged every individual personally,

 Learning: the ‘learning of the student’ regarded the student to be at the centre of the

process of knowledge; the students were empowered to make choices concerning process of learning, and to voice their views and feelings. This did not mean that power was divided between the teacher and the student with each side taking a part, but rather empowered the teacher and the student to be partners in learning: each side being helpful to the other when in need.

 Teaching: the teacher controlled the content and the aims of learning, provided a

clear and consistent structure in every classroom or online session, offered learning tasks with explicit goals, and opportunities for formative assessment and students’ self- assessment. His/her pedagogy demonstrated that he/she assumed knowledge to be ‘tentative, contestable and revisable’ (Campbell et al., 2007:150); to do so, he/she supported the active engagement of students in the co-production of learning either in the classroom or online.

 Collaborative: activity was collective; knowledge was co-producedsociallyamong

students and teacher through reasoning and argumentation. The sharing of knowledge was the ethos that all sides coming into a learning circumstance were to be committed to.

 Network-connection: social activity in learning became effective when participants

connected and formed networks (in the classroom and online) in order to build, spread and communicate knowledge. As it appears that there is not a ‘best’ model for

personalised learning but rather flexible alternatives, access to various learning spaces suggested a continuous ICT use.

151

Being able to understand better the conceptual constructs of personalisation and ICT use helped me to shape my theory, and inspired me to explore certain topics even further as the inquiry process unfolded. That seemed to raise more questions setting the ground for an ongoing research process, especially around the relation of learning with technology. Particularly about (see also pp. 267-271, 286-289):

Curriculum and pedagogy (in terms of learning opportunities; flexibility in learning;

classroom versus online learning; formal amd informal learning with ICT; training about why-to-use next to how-to-use ICT),

Information and communication processes (in terms of a seamless connection of school

with home; new communication channels and their enablers and constraints; enhancement of the social capital; the diminishment of time and space limitations in online use; online intention and its determinants),

The student and his/her online learning (in terms of collaborative work and learning

preferences; alternative forms and spaces for learning that young people use but school may partially explore; young age in technology.

By exploring the above areas I was able to answer to my research questions in a more complete and holistic way. Thus, I concluded that (see p.297-298) for a leaning

experience such as online learning, there should be a learning methodology that prepares for it; ICT should be used as a pedagogic instrument; and personalised

learning necessarily involved ICT use to enable a continuous flow of learning from class to home and backwards.

152