The Sample

How it was chosen

This study used a purposive snowball sampling approach to find twenty two participants with experience in creating teaching and learning materials in non-dominant languages. The population that this study addresses is small, dispersed, and very busy, so snowball sampling was the best choice for finding participants. Snowball sampling entails beginning a research project with a few selected participants, then asking those participants to recommend other potential participants. The primary benefit of this approach is being able to find a sufficient sample of hard-to-find people. Another is that it increases the likelihood that potential participants will agree to take part in the study because they share a connection with the person who referred them. In this case, it also made it easier to find participants who have worked together, which provided different perspectives on the same project. Even without the snowball sampling, this might have happened. Over the course of the interviews, some participants referred to participants other than the person who referred them, which implies that this community is small and well-networked. 
One weakness of snowball sampling is that it biases the sample; in this case, there was no randomness at all in how the participants were contacted. To counter this issue, purposive sampling was employed to ensure that the participants and projects covered a range of organization types, regions, funding models, language families, and scripts. Through examining these variations, it was possible to detect overarching themes, groups of projects with common traits, and unusual aspects of particular projects. 

Description of the sample

WHO WAS IN THE SAMPLE?
Snowball sampling yielded sufficient diversity in the study on a variety of facotrs, including characteristics of the languages, materials, projects, technology, time frame, and funding.

Limitations of the Methodology