Sequential design rationale

 

Title: Developing a Sequential Mixed Methods Inquiry into Teacher Readiness and Pedagogical Integration of Digital Accessibility Awareness at Upper Key Stage 2

A sequential mixed methods designprovides a robust framework for exploring the multifaceted and context-dependent nature of educational phenomena, especially those involving emerging curricular topics such as digital accessibility awareness. In such designs, research phases are deliberately ordered so that one form of data collection and analysis (typically quantitative or qualitative) informs and deepens the subsequent phase (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018). This approach is particularly well suited to questions concerning teacher readiness, pedagogical integration, and learner response, as these require both broad patterns and deep, contextualised insights to be understood holistically.

In the context of the proposed inquiry, an initial quantitative and qualitative surveycould be used to assess the overall level of teacher readiness to teach digital accessibility awareness, as well as to surface prevailing beliefs, concerns, and contextual constraints. This first phase functions as both an exploratory and diagnostic tool (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2010), enabling the identification of key themes such as time pressures, lack of training, or perceived learner disinterest—issues that have been reported in related studies of curriculum innovation and teacher professional learning (Opfer & Pedder, 2011; Kennedy, 2016).

Building on this foundation, the second phase—focus groups or collaborative design discussions with teachers—can be strategically designed to address the specific gaps or tensions identified in the survey. For example, if survey responses indicate that teachers see limited opportunities to integrate digital accessibility into the current curriculum, the focus group can be used to co-construct potential points of curricular integration and to explore what forms of professional support or resources would be necessary to make this feasible (Borko, 2004; Penuel et al., 2007). This phase is thus both responsive and generative, deepening the understanding of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK)(Shulman, 1987) and examining how teachers conceptualise the alignment between content, pedagogy, and learner needs (Park & Oliver, 2008).

The final phase—classroom-based lesson observations followed by semi-structured interviews—can then provide real-time, practice-based data on how digital accessibility awareness is enacted pedagogically, how learners respond, and how teachers interpret those responses. These interviews, grounded in specific teaching episodes and informed by learner feedback, allow for an analysis of how teachers reflectively adapt their pedagogical practices, thereby making visible the ongoing development of their PCK (Loughran, 2006; van Driel, Verloop, & de Vos, 1998). Furthermore, the observations and interviews offer critical insight into the contextual variables—such as school ethos, classroom dynamics, and assessment demands—that mediate implementation.

Crucially, the sequential nature of this design enables a recursive research logic, whereby findings from one stage not only inform the next, but also prompt re-evaluation of earlier assumptions or strategies (Ivankova, Creswell, & Stick, 2006). For instance, the interpretive depth gained through teacher interviews can illuminate unexpected learner responses that challenge the assumptions of earlier survey items or focus group proposals. This allows the inquiry to remain adaptive, context-sensitive, and theory-building—key strengths of pragmatic mixed methods approaches (Morgan, 2007).

In sum, by organising the inquiry as a sequential mixed methods study—moving from broad diagnostic data to collaborative design and culminating in in-situ pedagogical evaluation—researchers can generate a richly layered account of how digital accessibility awareness can be pedagogically integrated into the upper Key Stage 2 curriculum. Such an approach supports both practical curriculum development and theoretical insight into how teachers mobilise and develop pedagogical content knowledge in response to novel, values-driven content domains.

References

Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033008003

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.

Ivankova, N. V., Creswell, J. W., & Stick, S. L. (2006). Using mixed‐methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field Methods, 18(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05282260

Kennedy, A. (2016). How does professional learning translate into practice? Professional Development in Education, 42(4), 486–500. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2015.1017767

Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: Understanding teaching and learning about teaching. Routledge.

Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/2345678906292462

Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311413609

Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9049-6

Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, D. J. (2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921–958. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207308221

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed.). Sage.

van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673–695. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199808)35:6<673::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-J

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lit review sequence

  Sections : Background and context (set the scene/ rationale) Social model of disability The legal context for digital accessibility Conceptual perspectives for defining digital accessibility  The problem- the lack of accessible content causing barriers - the wider lack of knowledge AND  need for teaching about DA awareness (social responsibility and for social model to work) The teaching of digital accessibility   Not formally on the curriculum  Where is digital accessibility currently taught/how (uni and workplace) - then the gaps of knowledge prior to uni and the workplace - yet all are using and creating digital content already. Best approach found was to integrate it across the curriculum and reinforce - needs to be taught earlier in schools and then built upon - no papers in school apart from 2 The need for the primary education context and why upper KS2 - establishing the earliest opportunity to introduce and explore the topic to then build upon Cross re...
Read more

Teach Access Repository and Facebook research link

Image
 #Educators, do your students know what assistive technology means? From tactile maps to screen readers, #AssistiveTechnology includes a number of devices that enable and foster the inclusion of people with disabilities. The Teach Access Curriculum Repository (TACR) has various resources designed to build out your courses and introduce your students to these types of technologies.  Go to the TACR (https://lnkd.in/gWMxzk2e) and check out the presentation slide deck on assistive technology and the assignment for using a screen reader, under the Psychology section.    #BackToSchool #Accessibility #Inclusion #ScreenReader #AssistiveDevices #Psychology #Disability #Disabilities #A11y https://teachaccess.org/curriculum-repository/ Facebook research post: PhD Thesis Writing Process: A Systematic Approach—How to Write Your Introduction To download complete article, use the link: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED590321.pdf https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED590321.pdf?f...
Read more

Notes from original proposal

Text taken from original proposal to unpack/expand: The barriers and ‘unlearning’ highlighted during SCULPT were potentially framed by prior complex  beliefs and understandings and ‘unlearning’ or ‘retrofitting’ skills (Youngblood, 2010). As Gu (2010, p.340) explains “a large part of human and professional knowledge can hardly retain its original meaning when it is divorced from the contexts in which it was constructed and produced.” This made me consider that these skills should potentially be taught at the point these original meanings are constructed and that happens at a much younger age. To understand when it would be appropriate to introduce the basics of awareness and skills in school, I considered the age when young people develop digital skills (Department for Education, 2013) as well as an understanding of what it means to be disabled and children’s perceptions for those with disabilities (Boer et al, 2012).  In a literature review Babik & Gardner (2021) found th...
Read more