9.3 Methodology
To put together the sample of 28 LTEs, lists of literacy teacher educators in Tier 1
(research-intensive) and Tier 2 (teaching-focused) institutions were complied. Some
were invited because they taught literacy methods courses, others because they had
published research in literacy. Initially, invitations to participate were sent to 15
LTEs. This led to“snowball sampling”whereby some LTEs who had accepted the
invitation then suggested a colleague who might be relevant for the study. Punch
( 2014 ) describes“snowball sampling as identifying‘cases of interest from people
who know people who know what cases are information rich” (163). After
reviewing the suggested individuals’faculty profiles on their university websites to
ensure they were teaching literacy they were invited. To make the sample was
consistent only those who had a doctorate were invited. Efforts were made to ensure
a range of experience (e.g. elementary/primary and secondary teaching), and a
gender representation comparable to that in the profession as a whole. Six declined
the invitation to participate for a variety of reasons (e.g. assuming a new admin-
istrative position and so not teaching literacy methods courses). None declined
because of lack of interest. Figure9.2shows the sample included LTEs with a
range of experience both as classroom teachers and university faculty.
Each participant was interviewed three times over the period April 2012 to
March 2015. Each semi-structured interview was approximately 60–90 min in
length. The same questions were asked of all participants but probe questions were
added when necessary. Most of the questions were open-ended in that they sought
more than a yes/no or simple factual answer. Thefirst interview hadfive parts:
background experiences; qualities (in their view) of an effective literacy educator;
identity (e.g. your academic community); turning points in your career (personal
and professional); and research activities. The second interview had four parts:
framework and goals for your literacy course(s); pedagogies used and reasons for
using them; assignments and readings; and how and why your views and practices
have changed over the years. The third interview focused on use of digital tech-
nology and future plans. However, the issue of politics arose in thefirst and second
interviews (even though there were no specific questions on the political context).
In the third interview some questions addressed the political situation. Interviews
were done either face to face or on Skype and were audio-recorded and transcribed.
Much of the methodology was qualitative as defined by Merriam ( 2009 ) and
Punch ( 2014 ). Qualitative inquiry is justified as it provides depth of understanding
and enables exploration of questions that do not on the whole lend themselves to
quantitative inquiry (Merriam 2009 ). It opens the way to gaining entirely unex-
pected ideas and information from participants in addition tofinding out their
opinions on simple pre-set matters. A grounded theory approach was employed, not
beginning with afixed theory but generating theory inductively from the data using
9 You Teach Who You Are Until the Government Comes to Class... 139