CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
4.4 B ROAD O RIENTATION OF THE S TUDY
4.4.3 The research as a qualitatively dominant mixed method study
Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, & Turner (2007) analyse the definitions of mixed methods research given by 19 leading mixed methods researchers. They identify a number of key themes in all the definitions given and use these themes to arrive at the following general definition:
Mixed methods research is the type of research in which a researcher or team of researchers combines elements of qualitative and quantitative research approaches (e.g.
the use of qualitative and quantitative viewpoints, data collection, analysis, inference techniques) for the broad purposes of breadth and depth of understanding and corroboration. (R. B. Johnson et al., 2007, p. 123)
In an influential scheme, Greene, Caracelli and Graham (1989, p. 259) identify five purposes for mixed-method research. On the basis of reviews of reasons given in methodological and research articles for using mixed methods, Niglas (2004, cited in Bryman, 2006, p. 105) developed a different, eighteen-category scheme, but I will use Greene et al. to categorise the present research. The purposes for mixed-method research identified by Greene et al. are:
triangulation, complementarity, development, initiation and expansion. Triangulation seeks convergence, corroboration and correspondence of results across methods. Complementarity seeks ―elaboration, enhancement, illustration, clarification‖ (Greene et al., 1989, p. 259) of results from one method with results of the other. Development aims to use the result of one method to help develop (sample, implement, measure) the other. Initiation looks for recasting of questions or results from one method with questions or results from the other. Expansion aims to extend the breadth and range of enquiry by using different methods. In terms of these purposes, my reasons for choosing to undertake mixed methods research were, using this scheme, primarily to seek complementarity and triangulation.
Greene et al. posit that ―The core premise of triangulation as a design strategy is that all methods have inherent biases and limitations, so use of only one method to assess a given phenomenon will inevitably yield biased and limited results‖ (1989, p. 256). In my research, the primary method of data collection was the transect walk through classrooms focusing on texts used in teaching reading. My main assumption was that through close examination of texts in the classrooms I would be able to access how teachers teach reading. However, the transect walk was potentially limited as a data collection method by the assumptions that all texts used in teaching reading would be displayed; that teachers would be able to articulate their use of texts in their teaching; and that a friendly, conversational relationship between the researcher and the teachers would facilitate full access to data about how teachers teach reading. In order to counter such potential limitations, methodological triangulation enabled
MY RESEARCH
similar data to be gathered through a questionnaire and interviews. These research methodologies had their own, different, biases, but the fact that the data collected through all three methods was coherent, as will be detailed in Chapter 5, increases the validity of the research.
The relative strength accorded to qualitative and quantitative methods in mixed methods research, as well as the point(s) in the research at which these different methods are used distinguishes different types of mixed method research. The interplay of qualitative and quantitative data gathering and analysis in this study is illustrated in Figures 10 and 11.
Greater detail of the design of these components in this study is provided in Figure 12 which follows. Figure 10 shows how my research is qualitatively dominant, and Figure 11 illustrates how the quantitative component is less important and embellishes what is essentially a qualitative study.
Figure 10: Continuum of research paradigms (adapted from R. B. Johnson et al., 2007, p. 124)
Mixed methods broadly speaking
Pure Qualitative
Qualitative Mixed
―Pure‖
Mixed
Quantitative Mixed
Pure Quantitative
Qualitative Dominant
Equal Status
Quantitative Dominant
Figure 11: Visual representation of quantitative methods used to embellish a primarily qualitative study
(adapted from J.W. Creswell, Plano Clark, Gutmann, & Hanson, 2003, p. 214)
A key consideration in mixed method research is when and how the qualitative and quantitative components relate to one another. Although the specific design of this research will be covered in detail later in this chapter, a flow chart showing the phases of the study is included at this point in Figure 12 in order to illustrate the interplay between qualitative and quantitative research in this project.
In Onwuegbuzie & Johnson‘s typology (2006), mixed method research design can be concurrent mixed, sequential mixed, conversion, parallel or fully mixed design types. My research was largely a concurrent mixed design in which both qualitative and quantitative data were collected separately at approximately the same time. In Figure 12, this is exemplified in research phases 3 (Quantitative data collection about the beliefs of teachers about teaching) and 4 (Qualitative classroom observations). However, neither set of data built on the other during the data analysis stage and results were not consolidated until both sets of data had been separately collected and analysed. After data from each component had been interpreted, a meta-inference was drawn which integrated the two sets of data (Onwuegbuzie & Johnson, 2006, p. 53). In addition, parts of the study exhibited sequential mixed design, in which data from one phase informed another phase of the study, as in the case of the questionnaire used in phase 3 which threw up the fact that two of the three teachers had been trained as ABET teachers, leading to the setting up of a group discussion to explore this aspect further in phase 5 of the research. In Figure 12, this is indicated by the curved arrows linking phases of the study together. These examples illustrate the recursive and iterative nature of the research process.
QUALITATIVE
Quantitative
RESULTS
Figure 12: Phases of research to explore the teaching of reading in this case