Purpose Statement & Research Questions

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this concurrent convergent mixed methods auto-ethnography is to examine how my lived experiences with technology across my academic and professional development have shaped my current mathematics teaching practices, particularly my commitment to equity and access in mathematics education. My definition of mixed methods research is: Mixed methods research is the systematic integration of qualitative and quantitative methods at the level of research questions, data collection, and analysis, wherein quantitative approaches describe what is occurring and qualitative approaches explain why. Like a complex mathematical function that requires both its algebraic form and plotted values to reveal its full behavior across contexts, MMR methods generate comprehensive understanding that neither could achieve independently. In a convergent design, qualitative and quantitative data are collected concurrently, analyzed separately, and then merged (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018). The reason for collecting both quantitative and qualitative data is to leverage the complementarity of the two forms of data, allowing documented patterns in my technology experiences to work alongside narrative accounts of critical moments to produce a more complete understanding of my development as an educator than would be obtained by either type of data separately.

The quantitative correlational strand will use constant comparative analysis of artifact patterns to examine documented patterns in my technology experiences across my academic and professional development and how these relate to observable shifts in my mathematics teaching practices. Data sources will include my auto-ethnography tracker, written artifacts, projects from courses throughout my undergraduate and graduate career, and childhood artifacts when available. These materials will be analyzed to identify patterns in technology interaction types, frequency, and contexts, alongside metrics of student engagement and performance drawn from my teaching practice. The quantitative data will be analyzed using constant comparative analysis (Charmaz, 2014; Glaser & Strauss, 1967), applying grounded theory tools, procedures, and methodological frameworks to bring systematic rigor to the identification and documentation of patterns across artifacts.

The qualitative auto-ethnographic strand will concurrently collect self-interview data alongside the same artifact sources used in the quantitative strand—the auto-ethnography tracker, written artifacts, course projects, and childhood materials—to explore the critical incidents in my technology experiences that have fundamentally influenced my pedagogical philosophy and classroom practices (Ellis, Adams, & Bochner, 2011). Data collection will occur continuously throughout my engagement with this research, taking place at my home and wherever I choose to work on this project. The qualitative data will be analyzed using descriptive thematic analysis with pattern coding techniques (Saldaña, 2021) to identify recurring themes around the meaning I make of pivotal moments in my technology journey and how critical incidents have shaped my commitment to serving students who have been underserved by traditional mathematics instruction.

The quantitative and qualitative strands will be integrated through side-by-side joint displays of the quantitative patterns and qualitative themes (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018; Guetterman, Fetters, & Creswell, 2015), as well as through narrative weaving that illuminates the complementary insights emerging from both forms of data. This integration will reveal the extent to which documented patterns in my technology experiences complement and expand upon narrative accounts of critical moments in my development as an educator focused on equity and access in mathematics, ultimately yielding a holistic understanding of how technology has shaped my teaching identity and practice.

Research Questions

Quantitative (Correlational)

How do documented patterns in my technology experiences across my academic and professional development relate to observable shifts in my mathematics teaching practices?

Qualitative (Auto-ethnography)

Central Research Question: What critical incidents in my technology experiences have fundamentally influenced my pedagogical philosophy and classroom practices?

Sub-Questions:

1. How do I make meaning of the pivotal moments in my technology journey that shaped my transition from mathematics learner to mathematics educator?
2. In what ways have critical incidents in my relationship with technology informed my commitment to serving students who have been underserved by traditional mathematics instruction?

Mixed Methods (Integration)

To what extent do documented patterns in my technology experiences complement and expand upon narrative accounts of critical moments in my development as an educator focused on equity and access in mathematics?