Kimberly Sheppard 1

Methodological Issues

Citation

Methodology
and Procedures

Research
question

Artifacts
Grant, M. M. (2005).
Project-based
learning in a middle
school: Tracing
abilities through the
artifacts of learning.
Journal of Research
on Technology in
Education, 38(1), 6598. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest
.com/docview/27470
3397?
accountid=15017

Participant Observation
Mettetal, G., Jordan, C., &
Harper, S. (1997). Attitudes
toward a multiple
intelligences curriculum.
The Journal of Educational
Research, 91(2), 115-115.
Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/
docview/204546552?
accountid=15017

Ethnographic
Iflazoglu Saban, A. (2011).
An Evaluation of the
Teaching Activities
Implemented in the
Elementary Science
and Technology
Courses in Terms of
Multiple
Intelligence Theory:
A Sample from
Adana. Educational
Sciences: Theory
And Practice, 11(3),
1641-1649.
Retrieved from
http://www.eric.ed.g
ov/PDFS/EJ936341.
pdf

Qualitative; NonClinical Case Study;

Focus Group;
Artifacts;
Observation;
Interviews
1. In what ways do
learning-artifacts
reflect individual
differences such
as, those abilities
delineated in
multiple
intelligences?
2. In what ways do
learning-artifacts
reflect a learners
knowledge?
3. In what ways
does projectbased learning
allow learners to
tap their

Qualitative; Non-Clinical
Case Study; Interview;
Observation

Qualitative and Quantitative

Study; Non-Clinical Case
Study; Enthnographic
Interview; Questionnaire

What are the attitudes of

teachers, students, and
parents toward Multiple
Intelligences in general,
and toward this curriculum
in particular?

1. What is the distribution

of activities that primary
school teachers, Science
and Technology teachers
use in their classes
according to intelligence
areas?
2. Do these activities vary
according to the grade of
their classes?
3. Do these activities vary
according to teachers
experiences period?
4. What are teachers views
about mind, the theory
of multiple intelligences,
and the class reflections

Kimberly Sheppard 2
Methodological Issues

Addressing the
research
question

individual
differences?
The author restated
and answered each of
question:
1. The multiple
intelligences
recognized and
the abilities
stated by the
students were
both parts of the
project. (It
should be noted
that specific
examples were
given for each
participant.)
2. This question
was participant
specific. Each
used a search
engine to transfer
and rewrite
information into
their computer
based/media
project. The
students all
demonstrated
knowledge on
their subjects but
if a student put
less facts they
would be
possibly marked
lower because
they didnt
provide as much
information.
3. Each participant
made decision
throughout the
unit and

The question was

answered. The teachers
were at first
apprehension about
some of the strategies
used (i.e. flow
room/scheduling) but
overall were positive
after the students test
scores and their selfconfidence increased.
The teachers even
embraced this at the
end.
The students had fun
and were overall
encouraged by the fact
that they were
considered smart in
areas.
The parents had little
knowledge of the
theory and many were
more concerned that the
students were not being
taught the academics.
The overall parent
consensus was only
looked at in the first
year so their later ideas
were not noted.

of the multiple
intelligences theory?
The authors addressed the
question fully. They
triangulated data to get a full
picture for the results. The
results indicate that there is
no single explanation to
account for all the
difficulties students have in
school. Difficulties arise
from areas other than
literacy, family background,
educational career, patterns
of failure, or other patterns
of behavior.

Kimberly Sheppard 3
Methodological Issues

Justification of
methodology

Sampling
procedure

compilation of
their project that
demonstrated not
only their choices
but also their
learning
preferences and
multiple
intelligences.
If the students were
only tested using a
multiple intelligence
test and then a project
that they completed
was analyzed to
determine which
multiple intelligence
that they used, the
participants
perspectives, and indepth reasoning of
the students, would
not have been noted.

You could look just at the

students scores the year
before implementation, the
first, second, and third year
after implementation of
multiple intelligence
strategies within the school
but that would not provide
overall feelings of the
teachers, students, and
parents. Having a
participant observer as the
researcher the school was
more familiar with the
individual and more likely
to provide real feelings
versus just writing down
what they are seeing on a
survey.
61 students from one Observation
8th grade geography
Classes in grades 1 5
teachers combined
were observed.
four classes were
In total, seven classes
offered the
were observed 15 times
opportunity to
each.
participate in the
Interviews
study. The students
A total of 26 teachers
were all given a
from grades 1 through
multiple intelligence
5 were all interviewed
test and from this test
for approximately one
criterion was
hour.
developed that
Six parents were
measured the strength
interviewed in three
of students perceived
separate groups for one
intelligences. If they
hour each.

To determine teachers in
Turkeys use of multiple
intelligences in the
classroom setting, a large
group was surveyed to
determine the use of
multiple intelligences and
from that group; a smaller
group was interviewed to
conclude actual knowledge.
This could have been
reached by using space for
participants to write on the
survey; however, if more
probing was necessary this
could only have been
completed through a
interview.
Through the Quantitative
focus, a larger group of
Turkish teachers are
surveyed. In total, 254
Turkish teachers are
surveyed: one hundred and
two 4th grade, ninety-seven
5th grade, fifty-five 6th, 7th
and 8th grade science and
technology teachers. The
female to male population
was almost equally split with
113 being male and 141
being female. The average
number of years taught
through this group of

Kimberly Sheppard 4
Methodological Issues

Procedure for
implementation

scored a 35 or above
in two areas they
were invited to
participate further.
This left three boys
and two girls.

Observation
The participant
observers acted as
classroom volunteers in
each grade level for
approximately one hour
each time. After their
hour session they
would write down all
notes from their
observations.
They also observed
other formal and
information school
events. In total 50
hours.
Interviews
The interviews were
semi-structured and
were recorded and then
transcribed.

Students were
interviewed
before the unit
began, twice
during the unit,
and once at the
completion of the
unit.
Each semistructured
interview lasted
between 30-45
minutes.
The interviewer
did not mention
multiple
intelligences but
instead asked the
students about
their abilities and
how they affected
their project.
Students were
observed for at
least three times
throughout the
unit for at least
50 minute each
time.
The researcher

129 students were

interviewed small
groups for
approximately 15
minutes each.

teachers was 11 years.

Through the Qualitative
study 20 Turkish teachers
were interviewed. This
smaller group allowed for a
much more intimate
knowledge base. Of these
teachers there were seven 4th
and 5th grade teachers
equally and six 6th, 7th, and
8th grade teachers randomly
selected from the group.

In the Qualitative
portion, interviews
consisted of semistructured interviews of
eight questions usually
taking about 20 minutes
to complete.
The Survey was 79
questions long five
personal questions, 10 to
determine knowledge of
multiple intelligences,
and the rest, 64
questions, to ask the use
of multiple intelligences
in the classroom.

Kimberly Sheppard 5
Methodological Issues

Data analysis
procedure

1.

2.

3.

4.

acted as a
participant
observer
contributing
when asked by
the general
instructor.
An observer
protocol was also
used to notice
multiple
intelligences
strategies that
were used in the
classroom setting.
Students projects
were
photographed as
artifacts.
The artifacts were
then analyzed to
determine which
multiple
intelligences the
students might
have used and if
this was a
strength that
matched one that
that they stated
was high for
them.
All data
collected priori
coded from the
literature review
Next all data
was coded by
demographic
and management
codes.
With a faculty
peer patterns
were observed.
All data was

Used Glesne and

Peshkin approach
(1992).
First each of the three
researchers reviewed
all data from both
interviews and
observations and
surveys to look for
themes.
They then met to
identify connecting

Quantitative
An Independent T-test
was conducted on the
quantitative portion of
the study and the results
were in favor of the
elementary teachers
stating that there was a
significant difference in
the use of multiple
intelligences.
A one-way analysis of

Kimberly Sheppard 6
Methodological Issues
placed in and
observed
through QSR
N6.
5. Participants
were then asked
their opion on
the accuracy of
the information.
6. Teacher/Instruct
ors were last
asked if the
information
about the
students
abilities were
accurate.

Validity/
trustworthiness
issues

The study used a

private day
school that would
allow teachers
longer periods of

themes.
They then reviewed the
data again to find
evidence of these
themes.
They then showed the
themes to the
participant group (1
teacher, 2 parents, 2
students) to validate the
themes.
A few suggestions were
made and then all
themes were agreed
upon.
Triangulation was
looked for throughout
the data, looking for
any weakness. Since
there was a weak
response in the return
of the parent surveys
the data was looked at
against the parent
interviews and the
information matched.

variance was also

conducted in both
logical/mathematical
intelligence and
bodily/kinesthetic
intelligence and in both
cases the teachers that
had taught for more than
21 years showed the
strongest significance.
Qualitative
The teachers remarks
were grouped according
to their answers and a
few are listed below that
were specifically noted.
18 of the teachers stated
that intelligence is
using the learning
strength and problem
solving skills (pg.
1645).
18 teachers also stated
that they learned about
multiple intelligences
through an in-service
school training.
All of the teachers stated
their knowledge of the
multiple intelligences
theory was inadequate.
While the fourth and
fifth grade teachers
noted that they did use
multiple intelligence
strategies in their
classroom, the science
and technology teachers
could not.
This was related to only The results from the
one school and what
quantitative
works well for one
questionnaire did not
school is not a
match the qualitative
prescription for another
interview results. Yet

Kimberly Sheppard 7
Methodological Issues

time for selfpaced instruction

and project-based
learning such as
this.
At the same time
the students were
given choices
within a certain
area and then
allowed to
research
information using
computers. The
use of personal
computers is not
always possible
in a public school
setting.
It was noted that
the interviewer
knew more from
the interview
with the students
about their
projects than the
teachers did so
the use a
chronological
record process
would need to be
in place when
grading the
project.

school.
There were other
curriculum changes at
the school during the
implementation of
multiple intelligences
(i.e. community/family
classroom
environments).

some of these teachers

were in both samples.
The suggestion is that
although all the teachers
had some idea what
multiple intelligences are
and had been through
some training, they were
unable to put the theory
into practice. Therefore,
they were able to do well
on the test but when it
came to actually using
the theory, regurgitating
information was as far as
they were able to go.
Another point is that the
elementary teachers in
the study were more
likely to use the multiple
intelligences but not the
curriculum books and
the upper grades
teachers were more
likely to use the
curriculum in fear of the
students not passing the
test but felt that they did
not have time to use
activities that
incorporated multiple
intelligences.
One limitation
mentioned by the author
is that the teaching
process of the teacher,
their planning process,
application and
evaluation stages, and
their considering which
multiple intelligences to
use were not included in
either the survey or the
interview.

Kimberly Sheppard 8
Methodological Issues
Did author
include
information
about humans
as instruments?

How could
authors write
up be
improved?

Each of the five

participants were
very thoroughly
described and each
project was not only
described but also
displayed for the
reader. You couldnt
necessarily visualize
the student (i.e.
brown hair, blue
eyes) but you could
clearly understand
ethnic background
and the participants
understanding of
their multiple
intelligences. The
teacher was not as
well described nor
was the interviewers.
Overall excellent
study. The questions
and how the study
answered those
questions, as well as,
the participants was
very thorough. It
would have been
helpful however to
hear more
information on how
the interviews were
conducted and exact
questions asked
towards the initial
part of the report
versus the very end
of the study near the
conclusion.

The participant observers

positions were described in
detail so that that the reader
could understand their
position in the community.
The classes used were very
basic in description and
spoke about in the context
of the group and not as
individuals.

Teachers were mentioned in

very general terms. Either
the teachers that were
surveyed or the teachers that
were interviewed. The only
information that was
provided about the teachers
is the number that
participated from each grade
level. The interviewers were
barely described at all.

Concise but also containing

quotes from many involved
and specific examples it
was in an easy to follow
format. All necessary
components, and even
some extra, were present. It
was actually and enjoyable
read.

The study was written in a

concise and easy to follow
format. There was little
information provided on
teachers and it would have
been helpful to know where
the teachers were coming
from. Perhaps even just
direct quotes from the
teachers. Everything felt
very general.
The way that the qualitative
data was analyzed was
glossed over and not
specifically explained.

Kimberly Sheppard 9
Methodological Issues
References:
Grant, M. M. (2005). Project-based learning in a middle school: Tracing abilities through the artifacts of
learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(1), 65-98. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/274703397?accountid=15017
Iflazoglu Saban, A. (2011). An Evaluation of the Teaching Activities Implemented in the Elementary
Science and Technology Courses in Terms of Multiple Intelligence Theory: A Sample from
Adana. Educational Sciences: Theory And Practice, 11(3), 1641-1649. Retrieved from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ936341.pdf
Mettetal, G., Jordan, C., & Harper, S. (1997). Attitudes toward a multiple intelligences curriculum. The
Journal of Educational Research, 91(2), 115-115. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/204546552?accountid=15017