Issues

In the opening paragraphs of his article, Denzins (2009) makes his position against a shift
towards an evidence-based model very clear; he refers to it as an intruder whose presence can
no longer be ignored (p.139). Ercikan and Roth (2006), meanwhile, seem to look at the
situation in a different light and state instead of dichotomizing research into qualitative and
quantitative, we need integrative approaches that provide the appropriate forms of knowledge
needed [by different stakeholders] (p.23). The differing views of the authors dont end there.
Denzin (2009) seems to hold a traditional view of qualitative and quantitative research in that it
is dichotomous in nature and each field of research stands alone. Ercikan and Roth (2006)
propose a framework that integrates both forms of research and suggest we look instead at a
scale that incorporates low-level and high-level inference levels. They argue that the question
we are trying to answer will drive whether it is at the low-level inference or high-level inference
of the scale; although there is importance in making distinctions, research placing itself at
either extreme end cannot be expected to fully answer research questions (Ercikan & Roth,
2006, p.21). Denzin (2009) states that qualitative and quantitative research methods are
incompatible and cannot be combined because it fails to address the incommensurability
issue- the fact that the two paradigms are in contradiction (p.141).

Ercikan and Roth (2006) seem to support the National Research Councils report suggesting
research questions be the driver for how research is conducted. The stage at which the current
research is in for the area of exploration should be the driver, the report states, and can be
driven by three questions: What is happening?, Is there a systematic effect? and Why or
how is it happening (Ercikan & Roth, 2006, p.21); As the questions move towards the latter,
the research shifts to higher-level inference. Denzin (2009) seems to be under the impression
that these guidelines proposed by the National Research Council are an attack on the
qualitative research community (qrc) and that they (qrc) must create [their] own standards of
quality (p.140).

I agree with Ercikan and Roths (2006) view that all research questions have a qualitative and
quantitative aspect to them and the framework they propose aligns with my experiences in
K-12 education and working as an accountant in the private sector. I also agree that one of the
driving forces behind research should be to provide value to the larger community and that one
of those factors could be to provide better guidance for education decision makers and policy
makers (Ercikan & Roth, 2006, p.21).

Rationales and Implications

Integrating technology in order to try and influence pedagogical changes with teachers can be a
daunting task and one that many administrators are having to undertake in British Columbia.
The curriculum changes taking place in BC are shifting classroom focus from just content driven
lessons to those that focus on 21st century skills such as curricular competencies and big
ideas (Building Student Success - BC's New Curriculum, 2017). With these changes come tough
decisions that administrators and district policymakers need to consider and there is great
value in funded research guiding these decisions. If the school is to consider initiatives such as
bring your own device (BYOD), one must ensure that the schools technological infrastructure is
able to support the added devices. It is important not to view BYOD in isolation, not to focus
only on the device. BYOD can only take place within the context of certain enablers, such as a
suitable wireless broadband infrastructure, with supporting policies and procedures for secure
and appropriate use (Parsons & Adhikar, 2016, p.67). Looking at ways other schools or
districts have implemented such infrastructure improvements can not only stretch valuable
taxpayer money, it can also begin to guide pedagogical changes in teachers. Parsons and
Adhikar (2016) conduct both a qualitative and quantitative analysis of student, teacher and
parent perceptions around BYOD and found that some teachers were hesitant to change stating
there were big gaps in pedagogical practice showing between those with devices and who are
using them and others who aren't (p.70) or other issues such as educators assuming that all
students had broadband internet access at home. Concerns from parents were also found
around students being less active around the house since they were more involved in the
device; useful information to know issues that may need to be tackled before they arise and all
research that is qualitative in nature.

In my own context, I am a part of a school that is undergoing a drastic change and what is
expected of the educators who teach there. The Rick Hansen Secondary School is in the final
stages of launching a School of Business and a School of Science this upcoming September. I
am working closely with the school administration and school counsellors to plan the two year
business program; since this is the first school of business in BC, there is not a lot of direct
research to guide our decisions. There is however much research around BYOD and how it is
conducive to the development of twenty-first century skills such as digital literacy and fluency,
critical thinking, problem solving and collaboration (Cheng, Guan & Chau, 2016, p.2).
Preparing students with these twenty-first century skills is one of the driving factors behind the
school of business and from my interpretation of it, the shift in the provinces curriculum
design. Using Ercikan and Roths (2006) framework, once we have answered the question what
is happening, we need to transition towards higher-level inference questions such as why is it
happening and how can we replicate it? Quantitative methods [are] important. However,
when quantitative methods are used alone, or used to acquire more depth about a topic, they
are not sufficient. To get the complete picture, it is important to understand and be able to
conduct qualitative research (Watkins, 2012, p.153)
Administrators, educators and parents in British Columbia should be paying a lot of attention to
the research around what other schools around the world are doing because the successful
implementation of BYOD depends on collaboration at every level of the education system,
including rigorous enforcement of acceptable use policies and thoughtful consideration for
pedagogical design (Cheng, Guan & Chau, 2016, p.2-3).

Denzin (2009) made a great argument for the value of qualitative research and the complexity
that is involved in analysing and interpreting this data, however I found his closed approach to
mixed-method research cripples his view. The implications of sound educational research are
far reaching and we must answer all three questions: what is happening, what is the effect, and
why is it happening. Practically, as more schools in British Columbia try their own model to
implement the new curriculum, in-depth research, both qualitative and quantitative must be
done on what has worked and why is has worked in order to guide others who find themselves
in these situations in the near future.
References

Building Student Success - BC's New Curriculum. (2017). Retrieved February 21, 2017, from
https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/

Cheng, G., Guan, Y., & Chau, J. (2016). An Empirical Study towards Understanding User
Acceptance of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) in Higher Education. Australasian Journal Of
Educational Technology, 32(4), 1-17.

Denzin, N. K. (2009). The elephant in the living room: Or extending the conversation about the politics of
evidence. Qualitative Research, 9(2), 139-160. doi:10.1177/1468794108098034

Ercikan, K., & Roth, W. (2006). What Good Is Polarizing Research into Qualitative and Quantitative?
Educational Researcher, 35(5), 14-23. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/stable/3699783

Parsons, D., & Adhikar, J. (2016). Bring Your Own Device to Secondary School: The Perceptions
of Teachers, Students and Parents. Electronic Journal Of E-Learning, 14(1), 66-80.

Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight Big-tent criteria for excellent qualitative research.
Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837-851. doi:10.1177/1077800410383121

UNESCO. (2013) Policy guidelines for mobile learning, Retrieved from

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002196/219641e.pdf

Watkins, D. C. (2012). Qualitative research: The importance of conducting research that Doesnt
Count. Health Promotion Practice, 13(2), 153-158. doi:10.1177/1524839912437370