Common use of Research Design Clause in Contracts

Research Design. Since I tried to explore both teachers’ perceptions of teacher autonomy and to find any existing statistical correlations between teacher autonomy and job satisfaction and motivation, I decided to choose mixed methods approach in my study. I analyzed the qualitative and quantitative data separately, and compared the results to each other. This approach is known as convergent parallel mixed methods design (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2013). According to ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (2011, such an approach is considered to be a strong one because (a) words and narratives contribute meaning to numerical data, and numbers add precision to words and narratives; (b) a wider range of research questions can be covered; (c) a more reliable conclusion can be drawn; (d) cross validation of data can provide higher validity; (e) more understanding can be obtained rather than when single method is used; (f) the results have a better capability of being generalized (as cited in ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2013, p.115). The qualitative data was gathered using interviews, the most common data collection method in qualitative research design (Jamshed, 2014). Due to the nature of my study, I used semi-structured interviews with pre-set open-ended questions. Even though it might lead to some discomfort between the interviewer and the respondent, during such interviews audio-recording is usually preferred since handwritten notes are considered “unreliable” and the recording allows the interviewer to focus more on the conversation rather than taking notes (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2014). However, I had no issues with getting permission to record the interviews, and signed consent forms were obtained from each participant. The basis for the questions was taken from a study on ‘scope for decision-making’ by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (1970), who did a study on how teachers in different districts perceived their freedom to make decisions. As for the quantitative part, the data obtained helped me explore whether there are any substantial links between teacher autonomy and job satisfaction and motivation. To collect the data I used a cross-sectional survey. Surveys allow researchers to “generalize from a sample to a population so that inferences can be made about some characteristic, attitude, or behavior of this population” (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2013). In my case, I attempted to make inferences about teacher autonomy and its link to job satisfaction and motivation. There are many ways to administer a survey: via telephone, on paper, personal interviews or mass administration (▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2009 as cited in ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2013). I chose to conduct the survey via online survey platform as it is more efficient and effective in terms of time, cost and involvement of a large population. All the data was then analyzed using SPSS software.

Research Design. This research employed a mixed-methods approach involving quantitative survey and qualitative in-depth interviews. The reason for using a mixed-methods design was to construct a more complete understanding of the phenomenon by exploring the participants' perspectives through different methods (▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2009). In the current research, I implemented an explanatory design starting from the quantitative part in the form of a survey to reach out to a large number of respondents. Since I tried aimed to explore both teachers’ perceptions Teacherslab users' understanding of teacher autonomy and to find any existing statistical correlations between teacher autonomy and job satisfaction and motivationthe teacherpreneurship, I decided wanted to choose mixed methods approach in my study. I analyzed see if there is a common perception of that phenomenon among the qualitative and quantitative data separately, and compared the results to teachers or if their views differ a lot from each other. This That goal was addressed by implementing a quantitative survey. The online survey included subscales that addressed different sides of teacherpreneurship, such as teachers' readiness to engage in teacherpreneurship, stereotypes, compatibility with education values, and others. Almalki (2016) states that within the explanatory design, quantitative findings strengthen the qualitative data as the findings from the online survey were used for developing the qualitative interview questions in order to cover those aspects that were not addressed by the survey. I conducted semi-structured online interviews with the participants selected from the Teacherslab platform. The qualitative part was based on an interpretive approach is known as convergent parallel mixed methods design because the researcher wanted to understand the participants' personal experiences and perceptions of the teacherpreneurship (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2006). According to ▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (2003, 2013as cited in Khan, 2014), the interpretive approach also depends on the researcher's perspective. It was crucial in further data analysis because I used my professional expertise as an educational entrepreneur to explain the study findings clearly and understandably. The qualitative interviews allowed me to deeply discuss teacher-▇▇▇▇▇▇▇' personal experiences about practicing teacherpreneurship, including their attitudes, emotions, and challenges. For example, I asked interviewees why some of them do not consider themselves teacherpreneurs despite the fact that they do demonstrate teacherpreneurial behavior. That discussion required many clarifying questions that an online survey could not address. Moreover, when I asked questions, sometimes I referred to the online survey results to explore how participants' opinions confirmed or contradicted them. The research site was the Online Teacherslab Marketplace (▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇), which has approximately 2500 registered members from Kazakhstan and other CIS countries. The platform was officially launched on September 29, 2020. On the marketplace, users can buy and sell original educational resources by analogy with the well-known ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇ website located in the United States of America. Most of the users of the Teacherslab platform are schoolteachers; however, some of the users also work in kindergartens, colleges, universities, and private education companies and engage in private tutoring. There are two user roles available on the platform, first is a teacher-seller, those who have an account where they can upload their original teaching resources for sale or share them for free, the second role is a teacher-buyer for those users who want to buy paid materials or download free resources from the platform. At the moment when this research was conducted, the number of Kazakhstani users on the platform was approximately 900 people. The target population for this study is educators from the Teacherslab online marketplace user base. The approximate number of users registered on that platform is 2500 people. Since the total number of users was not that big, I decided not to do sampling but invited all users to participate in the first stage of this research which is an online survey. The recruitment letter (see Appendix C) and survey link were emailed to all users of Teacherslab through the corporate email; it was a group email that did not show individual members' identities. Since I am an active member of the Teacherslab, I have access to the group email. I put the email in blind carbon copy (BCC) so that the participants could not see each other's emails ID. These people are teachers and educators directly involved as sellers and buyers in teacherpreneurial activities since 2020, when the project was first started. The response rate was 5.16% of the total number of users; the final sample included 129 people. These people shared valuable insights about the phenomena from both sellers' and buyers' points of view. For the second stage, which consisted of online interviews, I used a purposeful sampling strategy to recruit the three most popular teacher-sellers from the Teacherslab user-base to participate in-depth interviews. Then, I sent them a recruitment letter (see Appendix D). According to ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ (2011, such an approach is considered to be a strong one because (a) words and narratives contribute meaning to numerical data, and numbers add precision to words and narratives; (b) a wider range of research questions can be covered; (c) a more reliable conclusion can be drawn; (d) cross validation of data can provide higher validity; (e) more understanding can be obtained rather than when single method is used; (f) the results have a better capability of being generalized (as cited in ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2013, p.115). The qualitative data was gathered using interviews, the most common data collection method in qualitative research design (Jamshed, 2014). Due to the nature of my study, I used semi-structured interviews with pre-set open-ended questions. Even though it might lead to some discomfort between the interviewer and the respondent, during such interviews audio-recording is usually preferred since handwritten notes are considered “unreliable” and the recording allows the interviewer to focus more on the conversation rather than taking notes (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2014). However, I had no issues with getting permission to record the interviews, and signed consent forms were obtained from each participant. The basis for the questions was taken from a study on ‘scope for decision-making’ by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (1970), who did a study on how teachers in different districts perceived their freedom to make decisions. As for the quantitative part, the data obtained helped me explore whether there are any substantial links between teacher autonomy and job satisfaction and motivation. To collect the data I used a cross-sectional survey. Surveys allow researchers to “generalize from a sample to a population so that inferences can be made about some characteristic, attitude, or behavior of this population” (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2013). In my case, I attempted to make inferences about teacher autonomy and its link to job satisfaction and motivation. There are many ways to administer a survey: via telephone, on paper, personal interviews or mass administration (▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2009 as cited in ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 20132015), purposeful sampling allows inviting participants who are particularly informed or experienced about a research subject. I chose The choice of teacher-sellers is justified by the fact that they have much more teacherpreneurial experience than teacher-buyers do. These sellers were able to conduct share very valuable insights during the survey via online survey platform as it is more efficient and effective interviews. The selection criteria included the number of the approved downloads in terms of timetheir seller account, cost and involvement of a large population. All which was no less than fifty downloads at the moment when the data was collected. In other words, these three participants had the maximum downloads and sales in their accounts. The reason for selecting only three of them was to have in-depth discussions with them about their views and experiences of teacherpreneurship within the limited time available for this study. There were two data collection instruments used during this study: an online survey and online one-to-one interviews. The online survey was chosen as a data collection tool to invite for participation as many Teacherslab users as possible in order to get a broad picture of how teachers and educators perceive teacherpreneurship. In addition, Teacherslab users represented different countries of the CIS region, including Kazakhstan and Russia, so online instruments allowed addressing them all, not depending on their location. Moreover, an online survey did not distract research participants from their daily work routine because it could be taken whenever it was comfortable for them (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2007). Prior to starting the process of data collection, the pilot version of the online survey was distributed among three Teacherslab users. The feedback received from these users was used to make adjustments to online survey questions, their order, and wording. Some of the survey questions were adapted from ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (2018), ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and Archambault (2019) and divided into three main sections: the first section included common questions for all participants such as teacher background; demographics; general understanding of the teacherpreneurship; perceptions, and attitudes; advantages and disadvantages of teacherpreneurship. The second and the third sections were purposefully constructed for sellers and buyers, respectively; these sections mostly focused on the participants' personal experiences and practices of involving in teacherpreneurial activities. The online survey consisted of several closed-ended questions of Likert-type items and a few open-ended questions requiring descriptive answers. Some of the Likert-type items were adopted from the survey developed by ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (2018) to assess survey respondents' personal perceptions and attitudes towards a studied phenomenon. For instance, it is one of the sample Likert-type items from the online survey: "Teacherpreneurship inspires me to introduce unique ideas in my classroom.". Please see Appendix E for the full version of the survey. The semi-structured interviews were chosen as a data collection tool for the second stage of the research. The reason to choose this type of data collection is that it allowed the researcher to directly interact with the participants, analyze their verbal and non-verbal communication, guide the interview and ask probing questions. The interviews were conducted online in one-to-one format by using the Zoom software. The interview outline consisted of four main parts such as background information, general understanding of the teacherpreneurship phenomenon, teacherpreneurial experience, and controversies. The interview participants were asked about their practice of teacherpreneurship, including such questions as “What do you think are the factors that influence customers’ decision to buy/download your teaching resources?” Please see Appendix F for the full version of the interview protocol. The online survey answers were recorded in Qualtrics, and all of the calculations of descriptive statistics were done automatically on this platform. The qualitative interviews were digitally recorded through the Zoom platform, transcribed, and analyzed. The quantitative and qualitative results were translated into English from the Russian language. The study findings were reported in three parts, which addressed one of the research sub- questions. First, the data gathered from the Likert-style questions were illustrated in tables and listed from highest to lowest average rating. Second, the answers from the open-ended questions were grouped and analyzed for similarities and differences, frequency of responses, and repeated patterns and reported in percentages, text, and diagrams according to the research questions. Third, the identified contradictions and similarities between research results were highlighted. Fourth, the quantitative results were complemented by qualitative evidence from the interviews. In other words, the interview transcripts were read, and relevant segments were highlighted and coded. The codes were then analyzed using SPSS softwaregrouped and organized into themes for further interpretation.