Mediating science learning through information and communications technology

ion captures the notion of the distance between the data and the way the findings are presented. Simple presentation of transcripts, for example, imposes no interpretation on the data. Codification of comments, leading to a chi-squared comparison between groups of respondents, gives a finding which is far harder to relate to the raw data. Text supported by comments falls between these extremes. The choice of how synthetic or processed the findings are will be determined by the audience to whom the evaluation will be presented. Time required is closely related to the depth of analysis that a method provides. A superficial reading of transcripts provides few detailed results, but is quick to carry out. Developing a grounded theory will lead to far deeper insights, with associated implications in terms of time (and possible further data collection). Such a quality is clearly of pragmatic concern to practitioners. To illustrate how methods can be compared, Figure 2.4.4 lists some of the options available to a practitioner who has chosen to use an interview to gather data. In this case, choice of methodology could be influenced by the other analyses which are carried out. A reflective narrative would complement a very abstract statistical analysis of test scores, for example, while generating categories would be useful for gaining insight into common problems such as interface design. As with the other comparison tables, the important aspect of this tool is that it enables practitioners to make informed and balanced choices, rather than predetermining one course of action. Although not included here, the final tool kit will also include information on how to apply the selected methods of analysis, pointers to theoretical discussions Evaluating ICT 145 Time required Objectivity Focus Low High Low High Low High