Strengths and weaknesses
weakness
The data for this paper were gathered by the first author. One strength of the paper is that internal consistency was high regarding the transcription and coding of the interviews. Conversely, this could be a weakness in that the interpretations and perspectives were limited to those of one person. Missing interviews were not repeated due to limitations in work capacity. However, it was never both the T1 and T2 interviews with the same participant that were missing. Therefore, the person’s perspectives and opinions were still included, but in a general sense. The first author attended the training on TIK-KT; hence, she was attached to the ideas, and it was therefore possible that she may have been biased in her views of what the interviewees reported. To reduce these weaknesses, the coauthors provided feedback and discussion on the content and process. The first author was supervised by Inger Lise Teig regarding the coding to reduce bias. Another strength of this paper was the opportunity to explore kindergarten leaders’ and teachers’ experiences in depth because the qualitative approach resulted in rich data. Furthermore, this approach made it possible to grasp how the interviewees’ descriptions changed both during a single interview and between interviews at two different times. However, we can only reflect on and understand what the interviewees themselves discussed with respect to their practices. We were unable to directly measure what they did, so there may be a mismatch. We aimed to make this paper transparent in the sense of being explicit regarding the authors’ interpretations.