This page is referenced by:

• 1 2022-06-08T21:19:25+00:00 Crystallization as Methodology 24 describes crystallization processes as applied to methodology plain 2023-10-02T13:30:43+00:00 Through reading, experiences, and an interest in media making, I perceived that the concept, as well as the approach to crystallization, was 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 in order to manage the complexity of the interpretations and 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) with data entanglements (Ellingson & Sotirin, 2020) that 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).
  
   
• 1 2023-06-25T19:49:57+00:00 Contribution to research 4 conclusion section outlining how this research contributes to qualitative research plain 2023-08-14T16:55:09+00:00

  Contribution to qualitative research in education

  This dissertation contributes to qualitative research in education in its unique application of P-IP and crystallization epistemologies and methodologies (see Figure 1; see Figure 13) as well as the application of the ALT-DISS multimodal format using Scalar software. This contributes to capacity development and provides a model for other researchers (Scott, 2014; Tran, 2019) not only to education researchers focusing on teacher education, but to qualitative research and multimodal dissertation applications in other fields of endeavour or other educational research inquiries. In this way, I contribute to the diversity of approaches that are opportunities to unsettle understandings of what P-IP, crystallization inquiry, and multimodal dissertations are or can become (Ellingson, 2014; Tran, 2019; Vagle et al., 2021).
  
            This research contributes to capacity development and adds value to inquiry by/for people, aiding transformation and collaboration (Scott, 2014). Through the open approaches found in OEPr, this dissertation has been created and shared through an open, public-facing portal, where private and critical feedback is part of the process. Additionally, transformation and collaboration is evident in the many contributions to scholarly works in qualitative research in education that have been emerged from this doctoral inquiry. These include multiple peer reviewed publications and chapters focusing on digital literacy policy and practice across Canada (DeWaard & Hoechsmann, 2021), digital literacies in faculties of education in Canada (DeWaard, 2022), cross-cultural mentoring in professional learning (DeWaard & Chavhan, 2022), online course design (van Barneveld & DeWaard, 2021), assessment practices (DeWaard & Roberts, 2021), intentionally equitable hospitality (Bali et al., 2019), intentional open learning design (Roberts et al., 2023), and educommunication (DeWaard, In Press). Additional scholarly works include book reviews (DeWaard, 2021; DeWaard, 2020), research reviews (Farrow et al., 2021; Weller et al., 2023), and conference presentations. These contributions, in turn, have reciprocally shaped this dissertation.