Martine van der Pluijm

71 Creating partnerships – a formative evaluation children’s involvement). Second, we evaluated the successfulness (the perceived contribution of the prototype to successful partnerships that enrich children’s language environment) (Bradley & Reinking, 2010) and teachers’suggestions to further optimize the usability and successfulness of the prototype, including the implementation of the prototype and the possible modifications to the design principles. 2. Semi-structured group interviews with parents after tryouts in seven classrooms (n =83) We asked parents’ perceptions of their relationship with the teacher and the usability of the oral language support for them as parents. We asked specifically about the compatibility, the feasibility of the activities, and their relevance (McKenney & Reeves, 2012). Finally, we asked parents to provide suggestions for optimizing the parent-child activities. 3. Semi-structured group interviews with three design teams Questions were structured using the framework of McKenney & Reeves (2012), exploring the success factors for sustained maintenance of the design. We asked the teams to evaluate the SFPs in support of children’s language development on three themes: 1. Strengths of the design that may contribute to further implementation (i.e., value, transparency of the intervention, compatibility, tolerance of the framework). 2. Additional needs to improve the design or implementation. 3. Suggestions that further support the use of the prototype in school teams (i.e., strategies for implementation and spread), recognizing the immediate context (e.g., capacity, abilities, school policy, teacher beliefs), and broader surrounding environment (e.g., national policies, funding). Analysis All interviews and video recordings were transcribed. We used thematic coding for our qualitative summaries (Braun & Clarke, 2006), recognizing previously defined concepts based on the literature defined in our theoretical framework (e.g., reciprocal relationships adapted activities to lower-educated parents, child initiative). Additional open coding was used for concepts that were found during data collection (Saldaña, 2013) (e.g., stimulating roles, prioritizing language). Data analyses took place continuously by the researcher together with one of the assistants, who coded the data independently. These codes were discussed until there was full agreement. Results were validated with teachers to ascertain that researchers’ interpretations corresponded to teachers’views (Yin, 2018). We compressed our data in overviews, illustrating behavior and perceptions of the individual cases (teachers) or percentages of parental involvement in classrooms. Further analysis took