Mixed Methods Research: Developing a Deeper Understanding of Teacher and Librarian Collaboration

.

CISSL-ILILE Research Symposium“Multiple Faces of Collaboration”

May 17th -18th- 2007Kent State University, Kent Ohio

Patricia Montiel Overall, Ph.D. School of Information Resources and Library

ScienceThe University of Arizona

An IntroductionWhy do I care about the model or mixed methods?

Because it will tell us about how we get to common place about what will improve student outcomes.

Model is the starting point. It provides a road map that you can test later to see if it’s a good map and revise if it isn’t.

Mixed methods provides a clearer picture of what is happening in the real world. Quantitative data give you some numbers to work with.Qualitative data give you an explanation of the numbers.Together they provide a way of triangulating data to confirm findings.

Future studies build on the model and findings to design studies that will provide evidence of the effect of collaboration on student academic achievement.

Teacher and Librarian Collaboration Model

The model above was proposed in 2005, to represent the range of teacher and librarians collaborative T/LC practices. Collaboration is conceptualized in this model as four distinct types of working relationships. Model A: Coordination involves functional activities (e.g. organizing and scheduling) Model B: Cooperation involves joint instruction with responsibilities divided among participants. Model C: Integrated Instruction begins a higher level of planning with shared thinking, planning, and the creation of an integrated lesson delivered by T and L. Model D: Integrated Curriculum is a model where the activities described in Model C occur across grade levels or are expected in the school district.

.

Figure 1. This illustration further develops a proposed model of teacher and librariancollaboration (Montiel-Overall, 2005). The model identifies four facets of teacher and librariancollaboration (T/LC). Previously, these were Models A, B, C, and D. The facets may functionindependently of each other or may work together to improve the teaching and learningenvironment. The arrows illustrate various paths that can be taken by collaborators. Theelongated box behind the circles represents the learning environment. The size of theCircular figures represents the impact that each facet of collaboration has on the learningenvironment. The upward arrow on the far right indicates increased improvement in studentacademic success. The upper box on the far right reflects the result of collaboration:improved connections, improved information literacy, and improved understanding of content.

Sequential Mixed Method Research

Phase One: Quantitative

• Data Collection:Loertscher’s Taxonomy was used to develop a 28 item survey.

TLC Survey was a short survey based on the proposed teacher and librarian collaboration model.

• Data Analysis:

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

was used to identify items that grouped together.

Phase Two: Qualitative

• Data Collection:

Observations Semi-structured interviewsField notes

• Data Analysis:

Themes emerged from multiple readings of transcribed data.

Methods

Quantitative data collected from teachers & librarians at 7 schools.

Two survey distributed to 78 participants.

Qualitative data collected from a purposive sample of 18 teachers and librarians from three school. Participants were nominated by administrators as highly collaborative.

Audio taped semi-structured interviews, observations and field notes were used to collect data.

Results

Phase 1-Quantitative EPA resulted in three factors in

survey 1:• Integrated instruction• Library & librarian as resource• Traditional roles for teacher &

librarianEPA resulted in two factors in

survey 2:• Integrated instruction• Traditional roles for teacher &

librarian

Phase 2-Qualitative

Five themes emerged from qualitative data analysis:

• Theme 1: School culture• Theme 2: Attributes of

collaborators• Theme 3: Communication• Theme 4; Management• Theme 5: Motivation to

collaborate

Discussion

Themes resembled those identified by Mattessich and Monsey (1992) in collaborative practices in service and non-profit organizations and government.

Mixed Methods Study of TLC: Mattessich & Monsey:

School culture Environment

Attributes of collaborators Human resources

Communication Communication

Management Process/structure

Motivation Purpose

See next slide for discussion.

Figure 2. The figure depicts the deep structure of the collaboration process. It begins within an environment where the school culture nurtures and promotes interpersonal relationships. The first box on the left, represents a catalyst within this environment which is a prerequisite of collaboration. In the mixed methods study, the catalyst was the school librarian. However, another member of the school faculty could have been the catalyst of the collaborative process. Prerequisite attributes of the individual include trustworthiness and the ability to develop relationships with individuals from diverse backgrounds and perspectives. The individual is moved into action by some purpose or motivation represented by the second set of boxes from the left. Through communication (the box at the top of the diagram) and management of schedules (represented by the lower box) the process of trying to improve student learning begins. Communication and motivation are requisites of collaboration. At first, the effect on students may be minimal represented by the small box in the middle of the set of boxes on the right. This success generates more motivation to collaborate. The process is repeated and each time the effect on student academic success increases. This in turn generates greater motivation of teachers. The increased motivation which affects students is illustrated by the increasingly larger size of the two middle set of boxes. The box on the far represents a process that has crystallized within the school culture.

References

• Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• Gall, M.D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. (1996). Educational research (6th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

• Mattessich, P. W., & Monsey, B. R. (1992). Collaboration: What makes it work. St. Paul, MN: Wilder Foundation.

• Montiel-Overall, P. (2005). Toward a theory of collaboration for teachers and librarians. School Library Media Research, 8.

• Montiel-Overall, P. (in press). Research on teacher and librarian collaboration: An examination of underlying structures of models to determine clarity, effectiveness, and continued value. Library and Information Science Research.

• Montiel-Overall, P. (n.d.). Teacher and librarian collaboration: A qualitative study. Submitted for publication.

• Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.