Mental deficiency,a challenge to education

The purpose of this article is to expose the politics that arise in the research and evaluation of school reform efforts. We draw on qualitative data gathered in a study of comprehensive school reform to elucidate methodological issues in several areas. We discuss how we were perceived as researchers, how participants used our research and our presence in political ways, and how we questioned our own role in the research process. We discuss challenges in the data-gathering process, including the selection of interviewees for the study. Finally, we discuss challenges in the interpretation of data, including the representation of multiple perspectives and how to portray data on schools where reform appears to be a nonevent.     

Integrating data in a complex mixed-methods classroom interaction study

Mixed-methods (MM) designs have gained increasing interest in educational research. Still, many studies collect quantitative and qualitative data but report these data separately and do not attempt to integrate them in practice. The aim of this article is to discuss the purposes and processes of integrating qualitative and quantitative data in an MM classroom interaction study. Issues regarding mixing and integration, including how to overcome integration barriers, are discussed. Based on this outline, the study then presents details about the various integration processes adopted in a recent MM study on classroom interaction in Norway. The possibilities and challenges of integration to produce new knowledge and a deeper understanding throughout the research process in classroom studies are illustrated with a specific focus on points of interface. A key issue is whether the new knowledge obtained in an MM study is more than the sum of the individual quantitative and qualitative parts. Using selected questions from the MM alphabet proved a helpful heuristic for guiding the iterative processes of integration and provided richer explanations and an enhanced understanding of the implementation and impact of a complex classroom intervention initiative. The study provides a new methodological contribution to the MM literature by examining the integration processes and challenges faced in a specific study.     

Public Internet Data Mining Methods in Instructional Design,Educational Technology,and Online Learning Research

We describe the benefits and challenges of engaging in public data mining methods and situate our discussion in the context of studies that we have conducted. Practical, methodological, and scholarly benefits include the ability to access large amounts of data, randomize data, conduct both quantitative and qualitative analyses, connect educational issues with broader issues of concern, identify subgroups/subpopulations of interest, and avoid many biases. Technical, methodological, professional, and ethical issues that arise by engaging in public data mining methods include the need for multifaceted expertise and rigor, focused research questions and determining meaning, and performative and contextual considerations of public data. As the scientific complexity facing research in instructional design, educational technology, and online learning is expanding, it is necessary to better prepare students and scholars in our field to engage with emerging research methodologies.     

Using Focus Groups to Supplement the Assessment of Technical Communication Texts, Programs, and Courses

In this article, we recommend a research methodology, focus groups, that we have found useful in supplementing other, more commonly used measures of qualitative and quantitative assessment. We explain why focus groups are particularly well suited for assessment, how we have used them in our research to examine teacher and practitioner perspectives of effective technical writing, and how others might use them for evaluating texts, programs, or courses.     

Contrasting concepts of learning and contrasting research methodologies: Affinities and bias

This paper analyses the conceptual significance of different methods of researching learning. Based largely upon our own experiences, we briefly compare the use of mini‐ethnography, life history, cross‐sectional surveys and existing panel survey data. We argue that there are strong affinities between each of these methods and significantly different ways of understanding the nature of learning: mini‐ethnographies with learning as participation, life history with learning as construction and both types of survey with learning as acquisition. Three things follow. The first is that decisions about how to research learning are related to decisions about how to conceptualise and theorise learning. The second is that there is no foolproof empirical way to adjudicate between different conceptualisations of learning, though empirical evidence can and should play a significant part in informing such decisions. The third is that though mixing methods (including mixing more than one different qualitative approach) can bring advantages, the integration of the findings of mixed methods in relation to learning requires careful and sometimes difficult conceptual work.     

Mixed methods in educational psychology inquiry

Mixed methods research has the potential to advance theory and enhance the usefulness of research findings. However, the success of a mixed methods research inquiry is tied to how well researchers integrate the quantitative and qualitative strands, and to how well researchers address the standards for quality in quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. In this introduction article, we define mixed methods research and discuss what mixed methods research can offer to the field of educational psychology. Then we consider what constitutes integration and rigor in mixed methods research and describe three core mixed methods research designs. Following this overview, we briefly introduce each article to this special issue, along with the commentary by Vicki Plano Clark. We also discuss how the use of mixed methods can help address common educational problems including: (a) identifying and exploring socially-situated and contextualized learning processes; (b) providing insights into differences across individuals with respect to educational outcomes; and, (c) building instruments that reflect the experiences of individuals who will be assessed by these instruments. Finally, we close with thoughts on the future of mixed methods research.     

A Mixed Methods Content Analysis of the Research Literature in Science Education

In recent years, more and more researchers in science education have been turning to the practice of combining qualitative and quantitative methods in the same study. This approach of using mixed methods creates possibilities to study the various issues that science educators encounter in more depth. In this content analysis, I evaluated 18 studies from science education journals as they relate to the definition, design, and overall practice of using mixed methods. I scrutinized a purposeful sample, derived from 3 journals (the International Journal of Science Education, the Journal of Research in Science Teaching, and the Research in Science Education) in terms of the type of data collected, timing, priority, design, the mixing of the 2 data strands in the studies, and the justifications authors provide for using mixed methods. Furthermore, the articles were evaluated in terms of how well they met contemporary definitions for mixed methods research. The studies varied considerably in the use and understanding of mixed methods. A systematic evaluation of the employment of mixed methods methodology was used to identify the studies that best reflected contemporary definitions. A comparison to earlier content analyses of mixed methods research indicates that researchers' knowledge of mixed methods methodology may be increasing. The use of this strategy in science education research calls, however, for an improved methodology, especially concerning the practice of mixing. Suggestions are given on how to best use this approach.     

定性与定量研究在教育研究过程中的整合

教育领域研究方法在研究范式的发展上表现为定性研究范式与定量研究范式的并存互补,定性、定量研究是研究者分别通过非数字和数字的信号来表征教育现象的方法.定性、定量研究是贯穿教育研究的两条主线,二者的整合,对于科学地揭示教育现象和规律起着重要作用.本文将从定性与定量方法在教育研究中整合的必要性、整合的应用范围和整合的具体方面分别进行阐述,并针对整合后所带来的新问题,提出一些解决的措施.     

T4 MAP™: A Scholar‐Practitioner Model for Performance Improvement

The world of work is changing and we must adapt how we apply human performance technology (HPT) expertise to address our 21st century challenges. This is a formidable challenge. The scholar‐practitioner model seems ideally suited to this high‐speed world by combining the ability to apply theory and rigorous processes to solve practical problems. The T⁴ MAP (T⁴) models a new action research process grounded in human and organizational development (HOD) theory. It incorporates quantitative and qualitative data and so equips scholar‐practitioners and practitioners to address workplace problems and advance theory by enabling a deeper contextual understanding of people in the organization. A T⁴ pilot demonstrated the ability to generate salient data that helped teams identify performance improvement opportunities and enabled participants to take accountability for implementation. It offered a basis for grounded theory and presented opportunities for future research.     

Traversing the Challenges of Conducting Research with Young, Immigrant Children: The Case of Korean Children

Based on a qualitative study on young Korean immigrant children’s interpretation of American popular culture, this paper reflects on the researchers’ role by examining the research challenges faced. Prior to discussing the research obstacles in conducting the study, we begin with briefly describing its methodology and design. Next, we discuss the various obstacles we encountered when conducting our study and howwe attempted to overcome these dilemmas by discussing two major struggles during the research process: a) the relationships between the researchers and our young participants, and b) the cultural sensitivity that was needed in initially gaining permission from and working with the parents of our informants. It then illuminates how the researchers attempted to cope with such difficulties by rethinking a researchers’s role emphasizing the importance of cultural context in research. Finally, the paper provides some discussions and implications based on our research experiences.     

Quantifying Qualitative Scholarship: A Fool’s Errand or a Methodological Necessity?

This paper describes our efforts to systematically generate knowledge from ethnographic and other qualitative scholarship as a way of bridging intellectual gaps found in quantitative research. We ground this scholarly endeavor in the study of gangs, which has a lengthy history in the field of criminology, yet lacks a coherent, coordinated, and comparative understanding of gang dynamics, behavior, and impacts. We discuss the importance of acknowledging the multiple and mixed methodologies used in gang scholarship and detail the inductive, deductive, and iterative process that helped us (1) develop a comprehensive coding instrument for coding a range of qualitative works, (2) establish the instrument’s inter-rater reliability, and (3) remain cognizant and reflexive about the strengths of both quantitative and qualitative research. Finally, we share the critical yet informative challenges we faced throughout the project and conclude with reflections on why the project was unsuccessful in the way we originally envisioned.     

问诊课堂提问,提高教学的参与度——上海进城务工人员随迁子女学校课堂质量观察报告

本文以上海市M区进城务工人员随迁子女学校的课堂为研究对象,采用一套整合定性与定量方法的观察量表,以实地观察的方式对四所学校的16节课堂进行观察,在统计分析观察结果的基础上,从教师提问、课堂教学方法以及教学质量等方面归纳了现存的问题,并提出了相应的建议。     

The Quantitative/Qualitative Divide Revisited: A Study of Published Research,Doctoral Program Curricula,and Journal Editor Perceptions

This article explores the quantitative/qualitative divide in the fields of criminology and criminal justice. The article reports findings from a study of: (1) quantitative and qualitative methods used in a sample of journal articles published in top‐tier and lower‐tier academic journals; (2) doctoral methods and statistics curricula; and (3) journal editor perceptions about the quantitative/qualitative divide. The study found a large gap between the use of quantitative and qualitative methods in published research that reported empirical findings. The content analysis of Ph.D. curricula suggests that the qualitative/quantitative divide in published research is a logical extension of a similar divide in the teaching of methods in doctoral programs. The interviews with journal editors suggest that they are generally receptive to qualitatively oriented research; however, these journal editors also identified several important barriers that contribute to the ongoing divide in published criminology and criminal justice research. Implications are discussed.     

直面质性研究之“质”——基于教育质性研究的科学性评价与新思考

教育质性研究作为一种方法论有其显著的特点,属于人学的研究。但其研究中个人的倾向问题、资料的真实性、过程与方法是否系统严谨以及结论的推广价值问题等常常受到争议。故建议从人本性、可靠性、严谨性与推广度四个维度衍生八个标准去评价质性研究的科学性,而且对于质性研究面临的新挑战要保持警醒。     

Installing a System of Performance Standards for National Assessments in the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago: Issues and Challenges

This article explores the challenge of setting performance standards in a non-Western context. The study is centered on standard-setting practice in the national learning assessments of Trinidad and Tobago. Quantitative and qualitative data from annual evaluations between 2005 and 2009 were compiled, analyzed, and deconstructed. In the mixed methods research design, data were integrated under an evaluation framework for validating performance standards. The quantitative data included panelists’ judgments across standard-setting rounds and methods. The qualitative data included both retrospective comments from open-ended surveys and real-time data from reflective diaries. Findings for procedural and internal validity were mixed, but the evidence for external validity suggested that the final outcomes were reasonable and defensible. Nevertheless, the real-time qualitative data from the reflective diaries highlighted several cognitive challenges experienced by panelists that may have impinged on procedural and internal validity. Additional unique hindrances were lack of resources and wide variation in achievement scores. Ensuring a sustainable system of performance standards requires attention to these deficits.     

Differentiating between and synthesizing quantitative,qualitative, and longitudinal research on polarized school cultures: a comment on Van Houtte (2006)

Van Houtte provides a valuable large‐sample quantitative analysis of differentiation and polarization processes between and within school cultures in Belgium. Such research across 34 secondary schools provides greater confidence that the findings in the ethnographic tradition for the differentiation–polarization theory are not due to idiosyncracies of the individual schools chosen. However, it is unhelpful to contrast her large‐sample approach with the ethnographic tradition by characterizing the former as quantitative and the latter as qualitative. Many ethnographic studies of secondary schools have employed quantitative methods. It is better to characterize her research as multi‐site and the ethnographic tradition as case‐study. This illuminates how the two methodologies can be more constructively synthesized. Within large sample multi‐site approaches some selection of in‐depth case studies, together with longitudinal data analysis, are needed to disentangle socio‐economic class effects from differentiation effects in order to determine causality.     

Weaving an interpretivist stance throughout mixed methods research

ABSTRACT

A recurring debate in mixed methods research involves the relationship between research methods and research paradigms. Whereas some scholars appear to assume that qualitative and quantitative research methods each necessarily belong with particular research paradigms, others have called for greater flexibility and have taken a variety of stances toward the integration of paradigms and methods in mixed-method studies. In this article, we review these arguments and stances, positioning ourselves in favour of flexible (but intentional) integration of any research method with any research paradigm. We then draw on a recent study of teachers’ experiences of professional development to provide an illustration of how a single paradigm can be used to inform the entirety of a mixed methods study, including study design, data collection, analysis and reporting. This illustration is particularly noteworthy since past mixed-method studies that have been grounded in a single paradigm have typically used the post-positivist paradigm, whereas our study involved an interpretive stance and a social constructivist epistemology. This article may, therefore, provide a useful resource for those considering the design of mixed methods studies as well as a practical demonstration to support theoretical claims in support of moving away from binary methods–paradigm associations and assumptions.     

Meta-Analysis and Meta-Synthesis Methodologies: Rigorously Piecing Together Research

For a variety of reasons, education research can be difficult to summarize. Varying contexts, designs, levels of quality, measurement challenges, definition of underlying constructs, and treatments as well as the complexity of research subjects themselves can result in variability. Education research is voluminous and draws on multiple methods including quantitative, as well as, qualitative approaches to answer key research questions. With increased numbers of empirical research in Instructional Design and Technology (IDT), using various synthesis methods can provide a means to more deeply understand trends and patterns in research findings across multiple studies. The purpose of this article is to illustrate structured review or meta-synthesis procedures for qualitative research, as well as, novel meta-analysis procedures for the kinds of multiple treatment designs common to IDT settings. Sample analyses are used to discuss key methodological ideas as a way to introduce researchers to these techniques.     

Teachers’ self-efficacy: progressing qualitative analysis

Teacher self-efficacy has predominantly been explored using quantitative instruments such as Likert scales-based questionnaires. Several researchers have questioned these methods, suggesting they offer only a limited view of the concept. This paper considers their claim by exploring the self-efficacy of UK secondary science teachers participating in a two-year professional development programme using both traditional quantitative scales and qualitative methods, including interviews and lesson observations. The findings support the suggestion that traditional quantitative scales do not fully capture teacher self-efficacy and highlight inconsistencies between self-efficacy assessments through the different research approaches. We argue that to achieve a more complete and comprehensive picture of teacher self-efficacy, it is essential that traditional quantitative approaches are better triangulated and integrated with other sources of data, in particular lesson observations. We offer an emerging approach of how qualitative data sources might be used to develop this comprehensive picture.