Posibilidades y limitaciones de la indagación inductiva con métodos mixtos en el análisis de la dinámica de diálogo en una comunidad de práctica profesional on-line
Resumen En la investigación sobre Comunidades de Práctica (CdP) on-line puede haber múltiples enfoques en función de los presupuestos ontológicos y epistemológicas de los investigadores. Cada enfoque presenta fortalezas y debilidades. En este artículo, a partir de la investigación sobre la dinámica de diálogo de una CdP on-line, estudiamos las posibilidades y limitaciones de la utilización de un acercamiento inductivo usando métodos mixtos. A partir de un diseño secuencial exploratorio, se analizan desde diferentes perspectivas los diálogos producidos por la CdP durante dos años. Los resultados de dichos análisis son contrastados en diferentes momentos con entrevistas a los participantes. Los análisis progresivos permiten definir el concepto “zonas de diálogo”, característico de la dinámica de esta CdP. El análisis del proceso metodológico seguido muestra cómo este tipo de diseños ayudan a generar conceptos teóricos, permiten a los participantes comprender sus propias dinámicas, facilitan el estudio diacrónico del fenómeno y aportan visiones más complejas del caso. El soporte digital del intercambio en estas CdP facilita los sucesivos análisis cuantitativos y cualitativos sobre los diálogos. Sin embargo, esta metodología precisa de tiempos prolongados de estudio, una inmersión prolongada en el contexto y una buena relación con los participantes. Por otra parte, los textos on-line no recogen los contextos de producción del discurso ni las transformaciones sufridas por aquellos participantes que no escriben.
- Referencias
- Cómo citar
- Del mismo autor
- Métricas
Adolps, S. (2006). Introducing Electronic Text Analysis. A Practical Guide for Language and Literary Studies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203087701
Ardoino, J. (1991). El análisis multirreferencial. En Sciences de L’education, Sciences Mejeures. Actes de Journees d’etude tenues a l’occasion des 21 ans des sciences de l’education. Issy-les-Moulineaux, EAP (pp. 173-181) (colección de investigación en ciencias de la educación).
Barab, S.; MaKinster, J. G., & Scheckler, R. (2003). Designing System Dualities: Characterizing a Web-Supported Professional Development Community. The Information Society, 19, 237-256. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240309466
Barnes, J. (1954). Class and committees in a Norwegian Islan Parish. Human Relations, 7(1), 39-58. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700102
Bateman, P. J.; Gray, P. H., & Butler, B. S. (2011). The Impact of Community Commitment on Participation in Online Communities. Information Systems Research, 22(4), 841-854. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1090.0265
Blanchard, A.L., Askay, D.A. & Frear K. A. (2011). Sense of Community in Professional Virtual Communities. In Long Shawn (Ed.), Virtual Communities: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications (pp. 1805–1820). Information Science Reference. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61520-979-8.ch009
Bloor, M. (1978). On the Analysis of Observational Data: A Discussion of the Worth and Uses of Inductive Techniques and Respondent Validation. Sociology, 12(3), 545–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/003803857801200307
Britt, V. G., & Paulus, T. (2016). Beyond the four walls of my building: A case study of #edchat as a community of practice. American Journal of Distance Education, 30(1), 48-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2016.1119609
Bruce, B. C., & Easley, J.A. Jr. (2000). Comunidades emergentes de práctica: colaboración y comunicación en la investigación de la acción. Educational Action Research, 8(2), 243-259. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790000200118
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1988). Teoría crítica de la enseñanza. La investigación-acción en la formación del profesorado. RocaMartínez Roca.
Clifford, J., & Marcus (1986). Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Etnography. The University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520946286
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Sage.
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. Sage.
Coffey, A., & Atkinson P. (2003). Encontrar el sentido a los datos cualitativos. Estrategias complementarias de investigación. Universidad de Antioquia.
Cordoba, J., & Robson, W. (2006). Understanding communities of practice to support collaborative research. En E. Coakes (Ed.), Encyclopedia of communities of practice in information and knowledge management (pp. 558564). Idea Group. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-556-6.ch093
Coupland, J. (2003). Small Talk: Social Functions. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 36(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3601_1
Cox, A. (2005). What are communities of practice? A comparative review of four seminal works. Journal of Information Science, 31, 527-540. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551505057016
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design. Chossing Among Five Traditions. Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
Dennen, V. P. (2014). Becoming a blogger: Trajectories, norms, and activities in a community of practice. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 350-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.028
Dennis, B. K. (2014). Understanding Participant Experiences: Reflections of a Novice Research Participant. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 395-410. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691401300121
Denscombe, M. (2008). Communities of practice. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2, 270-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689808316807
Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 415-441. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x
Flick, U. (2012). Introducción a la investigación cualitativa. Morata.
Flowerdew, J. (2018). Critical Discourse Studies and Context. En J. Flowerdew & J. Richardson (Eds.). The Routledge Handbook fo Critical Discourse Studies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315739342
Frantz, J. M., Bezuidenhout, J., Burch, V. C., Mthembu, S., Rowe, M., Tan, C., Van Wyk, J., & Van Heerden, B. (2015). The impact of a faculty development programme for health professions educators in sub-Saharan Africa: An archival study. BMC Medical Education, 15(28). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0320-7
García-Monge, A., Bores-Calle, N. J., & Martínez-Álvarez, L. (2021). Expanded Learning Process in Managing a PE Teachers’ On-Line Community of Practice. Revista Internacional de Medicina y Ciencias de la Actividad Física y el Deporte. En prensa.
García-Monge, A., González-Calvo, G., & Bores-García, D. (2019). ‘I like the idea but…’: the gap in participation in a virtual community of practice for analysing physical education. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 34(3), 257-272. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2018.1505486
Geertz, C. (2009). La interpretación de las culturas. Gedisa.
Giddens, A. (2011). La construcción de la sociedad. Bases para la teoría de la estructuración. Amorrortu.
Glasser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine de Gruyter.
Goffman, E. (1970). Strategic interaction. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Greene, J.C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. Jossey-Bass.
Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (1994). Etnografía. Métodos de investigación. Paidós.
Hefetz, G., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2020). How to communities of practice transform their practices? Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 26, 100410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2020.100410
Holmes, B. (2013). School teachers’ continuous professional development in an online learning community: lessons from a case study of an eTwinning learning Event. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 97-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12015
Huisman, M., & Van Duijn, M. A. J. (2005). Software for social network analysis. In J. Scott, S. Wasserman, & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), Models and methods in social network analysis (pp. 270-316). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811395.013
Ingold, T. (2000). The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. Routledge.
Jiang, H., Wu, Y., Zhang, Y., Wang, S., & Zhang, Y (2017). From social community to spatio-temporal information: A new method for mobile data exploration. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 41, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvlc.2017.05.002
Kalinowski, C., & Matei, S. A. (2011). Goffman Meets Online Dating: Exploring the ‘Virtually’ Socially Produced Self. Journal of Social Informatics, 16, 6-20.
Kelly, N., & Antonio, A. (2016). Teacher peer support in social network sites. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 138-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.02.007
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The Action Research Planner. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-67-2
Kroeber, A. (1935). History and Science in Anthropology. American Anthropologist, 37(4), 539-569. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1935.37.4.02a00020
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355
Lincoln, Y. S. (1995). Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(3), 275-289. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F107780049500100301
Luckin, R., & Weatherby, K. (2012). Online learning communities in context. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 8(4), 440-454. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJWBC.2012.049559
Malinowski, B. (1923). The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages. En C. K. Ogden, & I. A. Richards (Eds.), The Meaning of Meaning (pp. 296-336). K. Paul, Trend, Trubner.
Preece, J., Nonnecke, B., & Andrews, D. (2004). The top five reasons for lurking: improving community experiences for everyone. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(2), 201-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2003.10.015
Radovanovic, D., & Ragnedda, M. (2012). Small talk in the Digital Age: Making Sense of Phatic Post. In 2nd Workshop on Making Sense of Microposts, Lyon (France), 16-20 April. [Conference paper] http://eprints.rclis.org/24377/
Ridings, C. M., & Gefen, D. (2004). Virtual Community Attraction: Why People Hang out Online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(1), JCMC10110, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2004.tb00229.x
Schegloff, E. A. (1997). Whose Text? Whose Context? Discourse & Society, 8(2), 165-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926597008002002
Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analyzing talk, text and interaction. Sage.
Snyman, J. (1993). Conceptions of social inquiry. HSRC.
Sparkes, A.C. (1992). The paradigms debate: An extended review and a celebration of difference. In: A. C. Sparkes (Ed.), Research in Physical Education and Sport Exploring Alternative Visions (pp. 9-60). The Falmer Press.
Sproull, L. (2011). Prosocial Behavior on the Net. Daedalus, 140(4), 140-153. https://doi.org/10.1162/DAED_a_00120
Steward, J. H., Manners, R. A., Wolf, E. R., Padilla, E., Mintz, S. W., & Scheele, R. L. (1956). The people of Puerto Rico: a study in social anthropology. University of Illinois.
Toomey, A. H. (2009). Empowerment and disempowerment in community development practice: eight roles practitioners play. Community Development Journal, 46(2), 181-195. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsp060
Trust, T. (2017). Using cultural historical activity theory to examine how teachers seek and share knowledge in a peer-to-peer professional development network. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 98-113. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2593
Trust, T., & Horrocks, B. (2019). Six Key Elements Identified in an Active and Thriving Blended Community of Practice. TechTrends, 63, 108-115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0265-x
Tseng, F.-C., & Kuo, F.-Y. (2014). A study of social participation and knowledge sharing in the teachers’ online professional community of practice. Computers & Education, 72, 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.005
Turner, S. F., Cardinal, L. B., & Burton, R. M. (2017). Research Design for Mixed Methods: A Triangulation-based Framework and Roadmap. Organizational Research Methods, 20(2), 243-267. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115610808
Vangrieken, K., Meredith, C., Packer, T., & Kyndt, E. (2017). Teacher communities as a context for professional development: A systematic review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 61, 47-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.10.001
Velasco, H., & Díaz de Rada, A. (2004). La lógica de la investigación etnográfica. Trotta.
Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29, 35-57. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148667
Wolcott, H. F. (1990). On seeking –and rejecting-validity in qualitative research. En Elliot W. Eisner and Alan Peshkin (Eds.). Qualitative Inquiry in Education: The Continuing Debate, pp. 121-173. Teachers College Press.
Ardoino, J. (1991). El análisis multirreferencial. En Sciences de L’education, Sciences Mejeures. Actes de Journees d’etude tenues a l’occasion des 21 ans des sciences de l’education. Issy-les-Moulineaux, EAP (pp. 173-181) (colección de investigación en ciencias de la educación).
Barab, S.; MaKinster, J. G., & Scheckler, R. (2003). Designing System Dualities: Characterizing a Web-Supported Professional Development Community. The Information Society, 19, 237-256. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240309466
Barnes, J. (1954). Class and committees in a Norwegian Islan Parish. Human Relations, 7(1), 39-58. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700102
Bateman, P. J.; Gray, P. H., & Butler, B. S. (2011). The Impact of Community Commitment on Participation in Online Communities. Information Systems Research, 22(4), 841-854. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1090.0265
Blanchard, A.L., Askay, D.A. & Frear K. A. (2011). Sense of Community in Professional Virtual Communities. In Long Shawn (Ed.), Virtual Communities: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications (pp. 1805–1820). Information Science Reference. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61520-979-8.ch009
Bloor, M. (1978). On the Analysis of Observational Data: A Discussion of the Worth and Uses of Inductive Techniques and Respondent Validation. Sociology, 12(3), 545–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/003803857801200307
Britt, V. G., & Paulus, T. (2016). Beyond the four walls of my building: A case study of #edchat as a community of practice. American Journal of Distance Education, 30(1), 48-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2016.1119609
Bruce, B. C., & Easley, J.A. Jr. (2000). Comunidades emergentes de práctica: colaboración y comunicación en la investigación de la acción. Educational Action Research, 8(2), 243-259. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790000200118
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1988). Teoría crítica de la enseñanza. La investigación-acción en la formación del profesorado. RocaMartínez Roca.
Clifford, J., & Marcus (1986). Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Etnography. The University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520946286
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Sage.
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. Sage.
Coffey, A., & Atkinson P. (2003). Encontrar el sentido a los datos cualitativos. Estrategias complementarias de investigación. Universidad de Antioquia.
Cordoba, J., & Robson, W. (2006). Understanding communities of practice to support collaborative research. En E. Coakes (Ed.), Encyclopedia of communities of practice in information and knowledge management (pp. 558564). Idea Group. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-556-6.ch093
Coupland, J. (2003). Small Talk: Social Functions. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 36(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3601_1
Cox, A. (2005). What are communities of practice? A comparative review of four seminal works. Journal of Information Science, 31, 527-540. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551505057016
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design. Chossing Among Five Traditions. Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
Dennen, V. P. (2014). Becoming a blogger: Trajectories, norms, and activities in a community of practice. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 350-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.028
Dennis, B. K. (2014). Understanding Participant Experiences: Reflections of a Novice Research Participant. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 395-410. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691401300121
Denscombe, M. (2008). Communities of practice. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2, 270-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689808316807
Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 415-441. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x
Flick, U. (2012). Introducción a la investigación cualitativa. Morata.
Flowerdew, J. (2018). Critical Discourse Studies and Context. En J. Flowerdew & J. Richardson (Eds.). The Routledge Handbook fo Critical Discourse Studies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315739342
Frantz, J. M., Bezuidenhout, J., Burch, V. C., Mthembu, S., Rowe, M., Tan, C., Van Wyk, J., & Van Heerden, B. (2015). The impact of a faculty development programme for health professions educators in sub-Saharan Africa: An archival study. BMC Medical Education, 15(28). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0320-7
García-Monge, A., Bores-Calle, N. J., & Martínez-Álvarez, L. (2021). Expanded Learning Process in Managing a PE Teachers’ On-Line Community of Practice. Revista Internacional de Medicina y Ciencias de la Actividad Física y el Deporte. En prensa.
García-Monge, A., González-Calvo, G., & Bores-García, D. (2019). ‘I like the idea but…’: the gap in participation in a virtual community of practice for analysing physical education. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 34(3), 257-272. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2018.1505486
Geertz, C. (2009). La interpretación de las culturas. Gedisa.
Giddens, A. (2011). La construcción de la sociedad. Bases para la teoría de la estructuración. Amorrortu.
Glasser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine de Gruyter.
Goffman, E. (1970). Strategic interaction. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Greene, J.C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. Jossey-Bass.
Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (1994). Etnografía. Métodos de investigación. Paidós.
Hefetz, G., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2020). How to communities of practice transform their practices? Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 26, 100410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2020.100410
Holmes, B. (2013). School teachers’ continuous professional development in an online learning community: lessons from a case study of an eTwinning learning Event. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 97-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12015
Huisman, M., & Van Duijn, M. A. J. (2005). Software for social network analysis. In J. Scott, S. Wasserman, & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), Models and methods in social network analysis (pp. 270-316). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811395.013
Ingold, T. (2000). The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. Routledge.
Jiang, H., Wu, Y., Zhang, Y., Wang, S., & Zhang, Y (2017). From social community to spatio-temporal information: A new method for mobile data exploration. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 41, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvlc.2017.05.002
Kalinowski, C., & Matei, S. A. (2011). Goffman Meets Online Dating: Exploring the ‘Virtually’ Socially Produced Self. Journal of Social Informatics, 16, 6-20.
Kelly, N., & Antonio, A. (2016). Teacher peer support in social network sites. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 138-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.02.007
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The Action Research Planner. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-67-2
Kroeber, A. (1935). History and Science in Anthropology. American Anthropologist, 37(4), 539-569. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1935.37.4.02a00020
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355
Lincoln, Y. S. (1995). Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(3), 275-289. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F107780049500100301
Luckin, R., & Weatherby, K. (2012). Online learning communities in context. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 8(4), 440-454. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJWBC.2012.049559
Malinowski, B. (1923). The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages. En C. K. Ogden, & I. A. Richards (Eds.), The Meaning of Meaning (pp. 296-336). K. Paul, Trend, Trubner.
Preece, J., Nonnecke, B., & Andrews, D. (2004). The top five reasons for lurking: improving community experiences for everyone. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(2), 201-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2003.10.015
Radovanovic, D., & Ragnedda, M. (2012). Small talk in the Digital Age: Making Sense of Phatic Post. In 2nd Workshop on Making Sense of Microposts, Lyon (France), 16-20 April. [Conference paper] http://eprints.rclis.org/24377/
Ridings, C. M., & Gefen, D. (2004). Virtual Community Attraction: Why People Hang out Online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(1), JCMC10110, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2004.tb00229.x
Schegloff, E. A. (1997). Whose Text? Whose Context? Discourse & Society, 8(2), 165-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926597008002002
Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analyzing talk, text and interaction. Sage.
Snyman, J. (1993). Conceptions of social inquiry. HSRC.
Sparkes, A.C. (1992). The paradigms debate: An extended review and a celebration of difference. In: A. C. Sparkes (Ed.), Research in Physical Education and Sport Exploring Alternative Visions (pp. 9-60). The Falmer Press.
Sproull, L. (2011). Prosocial Behavior on the Net. Daedalus, 140(4), 140-153. https://doi.org/10.1162/DAED_a_00120
Steward, J. H., Manners, R. A., Wolf, E. R., Padilla, E., Mintz, S. W., & Scheele, R. L. (1956). The people of Puerto Rico: a study in social anthropology. University of Illinois.
Toomey, A. H. (2009). Empowerment and disempowerment in community development practice: eight roles practitioners play. Community Development Journal, 46(2), 181-195. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsp060
Trust, T. (2017). Using cultural historical activity theory to examine how teachers seek and share knowledge in a peer-to-peer professional development network. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 98-113. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2593
Trust, T., & Horrocks, B. (2019). Six Key Elements Identified in an Active and Thriving Blended Community of Practice. TechTrends, 63, 108-115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0265-x
Tseng, F.-C., & Kuo, F.-Y. (2014). A study of social participation and knowledge sharing in the teachers’ online professional community of practice. Computers & Education, 72, 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.005
Turner, S. F., Cardinal, L. B., & Burton, R. M. (2017). Research Design for Mixed Methods: A Triangulation-based Framework and Roadmap. Organizational Research Methods, 20(2), 243-267. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115610808
Vangrieken, K., Meredith, C., Packer, T., & Kyndt, E. (2017). Teacher communities as a context for professional development: A systematic review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 61, 47-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.10.001
Velasco, H., & Díaz de Rada, A. (2004). La lógica de la investigación etnográfica. Trotta.
Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29, 35-57. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148667
Wolcott, H. F. (1990). On seeking –and rejecting-validity in qualitative research. En Elliot W. Eisner and Alan Peshkin (Eds.). Qualitative Inquiry in Education: The Continuing Debate, pp. 121-173. Teachers College Press.
García-Monge, A., González-Calvo, G., & Bores-García, D. (2021). Posibilidades y limitaciones de la indagación inductiva con métodos mixtos en el análisis de la dinámica de diálogo en una comunidad de práctica profesional on-line. Education in the Knowledge Society (EKS), 22, e24400. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks.24400
Descargas
Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.
+
−