Martine van der Pluijm

69 Creating partnerships – a formative evaluation observations took place at schools at least one morning a week, ensuring that each tryout of the design principles was observed and discussed with teachers. We followed teachers’ abilities and schedules, leading to different numbers of participant observations for different schools. Interviews were audiotaped, and video recordings of classroom activities were made. Data collection and analysis We used a variety of data sources to answer the research questions. Table 3.2 gives an overview of our research questions, our data sources, and how we present our results. TABLE 3.2: Overview of research questions, data sources, and results Research question Data sources Results 1. Are teachers able to implement the prototype in their classrooms? Structured observations teachers Participant observations Table of implementation intended teacher behavior Qualitative summary 2. Do teachers perceive the prototype as usable? Interviews teachers Participant observations Table with individual teacher perceptions Qualitative summary 3. Does the prototype contribute to (lower- educated) parental involvement in support of young children’s language development? Structured observations parental involvement Participant observations Percentage parental involvement in classroom and participation/ duration in parent-child activities Qualitative summary 4. How can school teams continue their SFPs in support of children’s language development? Interviews design teams Participant observations Qualitative summary Observations We carried out two types of observations: 1. Structured observations in classrooms, partly by video We observed teachers’ and parents’ enactment before and after the implementation of each of the design principles of the prototype: • Teachers were observed using a coding scheme that followed the intended behavior of the prototype. Based on a revised version of Lusse (2013), we monitored whether teacher behavior followed the five design principles of prototype. We classified teacher adherence as convincing if the teacher integrated at least one aspect of the step, and strong if two or more aspects of a specific step were used. These codes were summarized in a matrix. In addition, details of the intended behavior or adaptations were qualitatively described (McKenney & Reeves, 2012). This process led to a qualitative summary.