1

Task 4: Methodologies and Methods

Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research Approaches

Qualitative Approach Quantitative Approach

Involves collecting and interpreting non- Involves collecting and analyzing

numerical data numerical data

Aims to understand meaning, perceptions, Aims to describe, predict, or control

and lived experiences variables objectively

Uses an interpretive, naturalistic approach Uses a structured, controlled approach

Studies social reality as experienced by Seeks to test theories and establish general
participants laws

Data includes text, interviews, Data includes surveys, experiments, and

observations, videos, and photographs standardized tests

Research is exploratory and seeks to Research is confirmatory and seeks to

answer 'how' and 'why' questions answer 'what' and 'how much' questions

Methods include interviews, case studies, Methods include experiments, surveys,

focus groups, and ethnography statistical analysis, and clinical trials

Analysis is thematic, interpretative, and Analysis is statistical and seeks objectivity

context-dependent

Subjective, as the researcher is involved in Objective, as the researcher aims to

data interpretation remain separate from the data

Findings are context-specific and not Findings aim to be generalizable across

always generalizable different populations

Allows for the evolution of research Requires a pre-determined research design

design as the study progresses before data collection begins

Justification of a Chosen Methodological Approach

 2

This study requires qualitative research methods because they allow researchers to explore
teachers’ deep understanding about AI integration in education. Qualitative research differs
from quantitative studies since it examines human interactions within contextual and
meaningful settings instead of using statistics for generalization purposes (Lim 2024). This
necessary approach enables researchers to identify various teacher AI adjustment methods
and their workplace role transformations alongside autonomy changes and instructional
procedure changes. The interpretive and naturalistic approach of qualitative research helps
researchers reveal findings that emerge directly from real-world settings to show teachers'
genuine experiences (Tomaszewski et al., 2020). This research design accepts that reality
comes from personal perspectives and the systems which form our educational context. The
fast-evolving nature of AI in education makes qualitative research suitable for discovering
unexpected themes and changes in attitudes so researchers can build a detailed understanding
of its effects. Qualitative research allows extensive open-ended analysis which produces
detailed insights about how AI affects educators (Tomaszewski et al., 2020). The research
methodology relies on descriptive data collection methods instead of predefined variables to
achieve adaptability when examining the complex technological changes in education.
Through this method teachers' perspectives and professional knowledge lead to an improved
understanding of AI involvement in contemporary educational teaching practices.

Choosing Research Methods

Literature Review

The literature review serves as an essential qualitative research technique which examines
academic literature to grasp AI implementation in education. Onwuegbuzie et al. (2022)
explain that this method enables researchers to merge findings from past studies as well as
policy documents and theoretical frameworks to develop an extensive understanding of how
AI transforms teaching practices. A literature review uses peer-reviewed articles with added
educational reports and case studies which supply historical and present-day knowledge
about the topic while revealing practical approaches plus future developments and challenges
(Onwuegbuzie et al., 2022). A literature review provides the critical advantage of creating a
wide knowledge base about teacher AI influences which supports deeper understanding of
academic alongside policy discussions about individual experiences. The review enables
researchers to spot research voids that will determine forthcoming investigation paths.
Secondary sources face a major drawback because they tend to fall behind recent and
 3

location-specific teaching experiences due to slow academic publication cycles (Hammarberg

et al., 2016). The reliability of literature reviews depends on the quality of available studies
while their ability to generalize findings can be affected by existing research availability. The
study requires a literature review to establish foundation research that will pair with primary
data collection methods (Susanto et al., 2024). Through this approach the study gains stronger
validity as it merges various viewpoints to shape interpretations about AI education
applications.

Focus Group

A focus group provides qualitative research worth by allowing several participants to jointly
share their experiences and viewpoints about AI implementation in educational settings. As
noted by Akyıldız and Ahmed (2021), this research approach promotes interactive exchanges
so participants can both expand each other's concepts and evaluate beliefs as well as review
different interpretation methods. The study would gain first-hand knowledge about teacher
perspectives involving AI influences through a focused group discussion. A focus group
produces rich dynamic data by allowing participants to interact with each other during the
research sessions (Nyumba et al., 2018). Focus groups differ from one-on-one interviews
because they make participants analyse shared encounters to uncover mutual obstacles and
shared perceptions. Through group interaction participants generate additional themes which
remain inaccessible during one-on-one interviews because social dynamics lead to more
detailed discussions with new viewpoints. The main disadvantage of focus groups occurs
when strong voices control discussions which can prevent quieter participants from sharing
their opinions (Nyumba et al., 2018). Social desirability bias emerges in groups when
participants choose to adopt popular opinions instead of sharing their genuine thoughts. The
execution of focus groups depends on professional facilitation so participants can interact
equally and have meaningful exchanges. Group discussions reveal important trends and
educational concerns that affect AI adoption practices in the field of education.

Semi-Structured Interviews

The semi-structured interview approach functions as an effective qualitative research

methodology to understand teacher experiences of AI within flexible interview scopes.
McGrath et al. (2019) explain how this research technique uses predefined questions
alongside open-ended discussions which permits data collection of detailed contextual
information and participant-specific viewpoints. Semi-structured interviews produce deep
 4

understanding of how AI shapes teaching practices and judgment making and teacher
professional freedom through individual conversational exchanges. Semi-structured
interviews maintain a strong point because they combine structured question consistency with
open-ended flexibility (Quintela Do Carmo et al., 2024). My interview technique features
pre-set questions to follow research themes but enables me to ask additional questions about
new material that arises during conversations and reveals unexpected information beyond
numerical data or structured interview formats. The methods' strengths lie in its capacity to
identify complex AI integration patterns through participant candid responses that free
subjects from rigid response items. The implementation of semi-structured interviews faces
several constraints according to Quintela Do Carmo et al. (2024). The research procedure
requires substantial time commitment for interviews and qualitative data transcription as well
as analysis. The style of questions and interviewer tone during interviews might affect
participant answers due to potential interviewer bias effects. Qualitative interviews face
limitations when it comes to generalization because their findings remain specific to each
particular context.

Justification of Selected Method

The systematic literature review stands as the best method for this study because it delivers
comprehensive education-AI knowledge without primary data collection restrictions. A
systematic literature review serves better than primary research techniques since it evaluates
numerous studies through a diverse range of educational contexts while encompassing
multiple perspectives (Ahmed, 2025). A literature review offers more efficient results than
primary data collection because it provides easier access to diverse data, as researchers need
substantial time together with monetary support and official approval to perform interviews
or classroom observations of educators (Cheong et al., 2023). Hence, a systematic literature
review uses existing research which reduces logistical barriers during data collection and
allows researchers to draw their conclusions from wider knowledge domains.

A literature review provides exceptional value through its ability to achieve comparability of
various studies. The data obtained through primary research usually targets one particular
sample that fails to represent overall AI adoption patterns (Cash et al., 2022). Multiple studies
with different locations form the basis of systematic reviews to provide unbiased and widely
applicable conclusions about the impact of AI on teaching practices (Onwuegbuzie et al.,
2022). A systematic review enables researchers to recognize existing research trends while
 5

addressing its identified gaps and contradictions which surpasses primary research limitations
through a single database.
 6

References

Ahmed, S.K., 2025. Sample size for saturation in qualitative research: Debates, definitions,
and strategies. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 5, pp.1-10.

Akyıldız, S.T. and Ahmed, K.H., 2021. An overview of qualitative research and focus group
discussion. International Journal of Academic Research in Education, 7(1), pp.1-15.

Cash, P., Isaksson, O., Maier, A. and Summers, J., 2022. Sampling in design research: Eight
key considerations. Design studies, 78, pp.1-17.

Cheong, H.I., Lyons, A., Houghton, R. and Majumdar, A., 2023. Secondary qualitative
research methodology using online data within the context of social
sciences. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, pp.1-16.

Hammarberg, K., Kirkman, M. and De Lacey, S., 2016. Qualitative research methods: when
to use them and how to judge them. Human reproduction, 31(3), pp.498-501.

Lim, W.M., 2024. What is qualitative research? An overview and guidelines. Australasian
Marketing Journal, pp.1-14.

McGrath, C., Palmgren, P.J. and Liljedahl, M., 2019. Twelve tips for conducting qualitative
research interviews. Medical teacher, 41(9), pp.1002-1006.

Nyumba, T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C.J. and Mukherjee, N., 2018. The use of focus group
discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in
conservation. Methods in Ecology and evolution, 9(1), pp.20-32.

Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Leech, N.L. and Collins, K.M., 2022. Qualitative analysis techniques for
the review of the literature. Qualitative report, 17, pp.1-15.

Quintela Do Carmo, G., Vinuesa, V., Dembélé, M. and Ayotte-Beaudet, J.P., 2024. Going
beyond adaptation: An integrative review and ethical considerations of semi-
structured interviews with elementary-aged children. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, 23, pp.1-16.

Susanto, P.C., Yuntina, L., Saribanon, E., Soehaditama, J.P. and Liana, E., 2024. Qualitative
method concepts: Literature review, focus group discussion, ethnography and
grounded theory. Siber Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary, 2(2), pp.262-275.
 7

Tomaszewski, L.E., Zarestky, J. and Gonzalez, E., 2020. Planning qualitative research:
Design and decision making for new researchers. International journal of qualitative
methods, 19, pp.1-16.