This page is referenced by:

• 1 2022-06-08T21:19:25+00:00 Crystallization as Methodology 20 describes crystallization processes as applied to methodology plain 2023-06-22T17:39:06+00:00

  "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
  (Princess Bride, 1987)

  Through reading, experiences, and an interest in media making, it is conceivable that the word as well as the approach to crystallization is supportive of my research design. From the graphic rendering of this concept, and previously shared in the literature review section on crystallization, my rationale included finding a balance between depth and breadth in the process and products from this research, creatively crafting flexible amalgamations with data gatherings and generated analyses, and iteratively processing the codes and findings while managing the complexity of the interpretations in order to enhance sensemaking (Ellingson, 2014; Richardson, 2003; Guba & Lincoln, 2005).
            Crystallization can “build thick and rich descriptions through multiple forms, genres and modes to embed the researcher in a reflexive process allowing them to apply their craft” (Stewart et al., 2017, p. 3). In this way, as I crafted the research design, my research reflexively crafted me as a researcher. Ellingson (2014) advocated for crystallization as a creative, flexible amalgamation of everyday stories rather than a specific set of strategies.
  
            I selected a crystallization framework for multiple reasons. First, crystallization created knowledge about a phenomenon through a process of generation to reveal and deepen complex interpretations (Ellingson, 2014). Because teaching practices are relational, and the application of MDL to those practices particularly within OEPr are mediated through technologies, these relational moments can be seen, heard, felt, shared, analyzed and categorized in multiple, nuanced ways across a variety of digital artifacts. Crystallization revealed these multiple facets of the lived experiences of TEds in FoE.
  
            Second, a crystallization framework applied various analysis strategies to generate understanding from a multiplicity of moments along a qualitative continuum (Ellingson, 2014). By applying crystallization to the P-IP methodology, I opened avenues to make sense of the data entanglements (Ellingson & Sotirin, 2020) that were found in the MDL and OEPr stories shared by TEds. My research included variations of typology, visualizations, and pattern making to reveal rich descriptions of the data moments.
  
            Third, the multiple variations of texts and representations created within this research work depended on “segmenting, weaving, blending, or otherwise drawing upon two or more genres or ways of expressing findings” (Ellingson, 2014, p. 445). It was through the many media making productions of both the participants and myself as the researcher, that the stories of lived experiences with MDL and OEPr were revealed.
  
            Fourth, crystallization required reflexivity throughout the process of design, data gathering, and representation generated from the findings and analysis (Ellingson, 2014). Within the P-IP methodology this reflexivity helped me critically examine the non-neutrality of technologies as it simultaneously amplified and reduced (Kennedy, 2016) the mediations within the OEPr of TEds.
  
            Fifth, crystallization suited P-IP methodologies as it “embraces, reveals, and even celebrates knowledge as inevitably situated, partial, constructed, multiple, and embodied” (Ellingson, 2014, p. 446). Like P-IP methodologies, crystallization had no pathway or formal structure but followed an emerging design that was both integrative and dendritic (Ellingson, 2009) while the data entanglements (Ellingson & Sotirin, 2020) were woven, patched, layered, blended, dispersed, and disparate.
  
            To be true to the orientation of wonder that was an essential methodological aspect of P-IP inquiry, I infused crystallization strategies when engaging with data while iteratively applied coding strategies (Saldaña, 2016) to the lived-experience stories, images, and media shared by the participants. I remained attentive to the “sudden realization of the unsuspected enigmatic nature of ordinary reality” (Van Manen, 2014, p. 360). I tempered my research design decisions by the fact that crystallization may be a challenging methodology requiring sustained commitments of time and energy (Ellingson, 2014). It was the creativity within the iterative readings and renderings that provides an exciting framework for this research design (see image above).