Dulescu (2013) employed open-ended questionnaires. Like that of my PhD reflective interview time schedules, he used interview, as supportive data, which are collected before, during and after the implementation of certain course materials. Donnell and Harper (2005) used classroom notes and summaries of each seminar session, student teacher journals, teachers’ comments, exam/assignment responses and feedbacks as data collection techniques; however Moore-Russo and Wilsey (2013) didn’t mention how they were able to collect thesis data. Unlike the other two, Dulescu (2013) attempted to show some data quality procedures, calculating an inter-reliability test to see the consistency of data collection and interpretation practices with the help of
…show more content…
Dinkelman (2000) and Erginel (2006) announced qualitative case study as their design though Zhu (2011) did not mention any thing about design. Both Dinkelman (2000) and Erginel (2006) tried to justify that this design yields an in-depth analysis of a limited number of subjects in their natural setting. To explore the development of critical reflection in secondary school student teachers, Dinkelman (2000), of the twelve student teachers who were volunteered from the total of fourteen, selected only three participants via randomization in order to do in-depth and holistic inquiry, the main features of qualitative case study. On the other hand, Zhu (2011) in his study, attempted to explore about student teachers’ ‘on’ and ‘in’ action reflection during practicum, selected twelve volunteer graduating class student teachers and their instructor in a physical and sport science teacher education program purposively by taking their practicum performances and experiences into account. In her PhD dissertation entitled “Developing Reflective Teachers: A Study on Perception and Improvement of Reflection in Pre-service Teacher Education”, Erginel (2006) took the whole student teachers in a class (around 42 students) as study
Dinkelman (2000) and Erginel (2006) announced qualitative case study as their design though Zhu (2011) did not mention any thing about design. Both Dinkelman (2000) and Erginel (2006) tried to justify that this design yields an in-depth analysis of a limited number of subjects in their natural setting. To explore the development of critical reflection in secondary school student teachers, Dinkelman (2000), of the twelve student teachers who were volunteered from the total of fourteen, selected only three participants via randomization in order to do in-depth and holistic inquiry, the main features of qualitative case study. On the other hand, Zhu (2011) in his study, attempted to explore about student teachers’ ‘on’ and ‘in’ action reflection during practicum, selected twelve volunteer graduating class student teachers and their instructor in a physical and sport science teacher education program purposively by taking their practicum performances and experiences into account. In her PhD dissertation entitled “Developing Reflective Teachers: A Study on Perception and Improvement of Reflection in Pre-service Teacher Education”, Erginel (2006) took the whole student teachers in a class (around 42 students) as study