Qualitative. There were four qualit

Qualitative. There were four qualitative data sources. Field notes written in short hand
during the class session provided one source. These notes were based on field observations and
written after the activity was complete. Artifact collection provided a second source of data. The
artifacts for this study were the five digital timelines, which the participants created about the
United States Civil War. Comments from the Likert surveys were the third source. Of the preservice
teachers to turn in the survey 65% or 15 of the 23pre-service teachers included
comments. The fourth qualitative source was the large group interview conducted with 23 of the
25 participants. The interview questions focused on the knowledge and skills necessary for
using Timeliner as well as how the participants would integrate a similar activity as professional
teachers. The interview took place two weeks after the initial class activity.
Qualitative research methods were used for the analysis of the collected data. Field
notes, artifacts, and interviews were analyzed using a three-step interpretive approach (Miles &
Huberman, 1994). Data were organized according to categories. The constant-comparative
method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) then was used to find patterns within and across categories.
Each source of data was compared and contrasted in order to identify similarities, differences,
and frequencies within the data. The frequencies were further analyzed to establish patterns in
the data. While reading the data and using the initial broad categories, patterns and themes were
made into codes (Merriam, 1998). Meta-matrices were created in order to allow for contrasts,
comparisons, quotes, and additional themes to be probed (Miles & Huberman, 1994).