66 comparative logic, and did not use the data concerning the other six teachers to yield a
detailed description and breadth and depth findings. The steps taken when selecting the three case study teachers are elaborated in the next subsection.
3.3.1.2 Selection principles for case study teachers
In relation to the selection of the case study teachers, reference may first be made to Yin’s 2009 insight that the selection of the candidate cases can be
straightforward due to a the uniqueness of the case; b if the identity of the case has been known from the outset of inquiry, c when the researcher has a special
arrangement with or access to the participant. In other words, the selection of the cases is based on purposeful sampling technique, that is, the subjects are selected because of
some characteristics for very specific need or purpose. Merriam 1998, p. 61 justifies the use of purposeful sampling as follows, “purposeful sampling is based on the
assumption that the investigator wants to discover, understand, and gain insight and therefore must select a sample from which the most can be learned.” Accordingly, the
three teachers were purposefully selected based two considerations. First, the identity of the potential recruits was known and they were regarded as suitable cases with the
most potential to generate useful research data. Reference was made to Bourdieu’s theory 1994 that habitus is structured by one’s past and present circumstances, such as
family background and educational experiences. Hence, the personal histories and educational background of each case study teacher were considered.
In order to maximise the likelihood of finding differences in the pedagogical dispositions of the teachers, the teachers were then selected according to the different
universities where they receive their formal education. Yin 2009 suggests that adequate access to the potential data is needed, whether it is interviewees, review
documents, or field observations. Hence, the second consideration when choosing the three case study teachers related to ease of access. I was able to conduct more follow-up
observations and interviews with the three case study teachers I selected. Therefore, I did not choose the more experience teachers 20 years because I was not able to
conduct additional observations and interviews needed for the study. To avoid conflict of interest or ethical issue of personal obligation, the three case study teachers were
informed of the research and asked to voluntarily consent to participate. In addition, they were informed that they had the opportunity to withdraw at any time and that their
anonymity would be protected as far as possible.
67 Key details pertaining to the three case study teachers, all given pseudonyms in
this study, selected for participation is outlined in the Table 4 below:
Participant
Pseudonym
Age Gender
Year of Teaching English
Education Background
Maya 32
F 10
Public Universities Andi
30 M
3 Private Universities
Joko 44
M 4
Public Universities
Table 4: Selected case study participants - key information
The above table shows Maya is an English college teacher who has comparatively longer teaching experience than the other two participants. She earned her Bachelor’s
degree from a prestigious public university in Malang and is now in the process of earning a Master’s degree in Education from the same university. Andi, by contrast, is a
novice teacher with three years of experience in teaching English. He obtained his Bachelor and Master’s degrees from two different private universities in Malang. Joko
is the oldest case study teacher, but he is nonetheless a novice teacher with four years of experience in teaching English. He completed his Bachelor and Master’s degrees at
different public universities. An overview of the case selection process implemented in this study is
illustrated in Chart 2 below:
Chart 2: Case selection process
Step1. Contac3ng
thepoten3al par3cipants
Step2. GeMngethics
approval Step3.
GeMng approval
fromthe
Rectorof KUMwhere
thedatawas collected
Step4. Conduc3ng
firstdata collec3on
Step5. Selec3ng
threecase study
teachers Step6.
Conduc3ng seconddata
collec3onfor threecase
studies
68 As can be seen in Chart 1, the first step in the case selection processes was contact the
potential participants to gauge their willingness to participate in the study. Participants were contacted by email and by Facebook. All ten contacted teachers agreed to
participate in this study. The next step was to obtain approval for the study from the UNSW Human Research Ethics Committee HREC and Human Research Ethics
Advisory HREA. This approval was required in order to recruit, interview, and observe teachers. The process to gain approval involved contacting the Rector of KUM
to obtain a letter of support given the university was the work setting of the research participants. The letter of support from the rector of KUM is included as Appendix B.
When approval was obtained, the first phase of the data collection process was initiated specific details of the data collection procedures are discussed in Subsection 3.3.2 of
this chapter. The next step involved the selection of the three case study teachers and the initiation of the second round of data collection. The second data collection phase
was completed three-and-a-half months after the first data collection phase.
3.3.2 Data collection process
