Individual Journal Assignment:

Mixed-Method Approach in Educational Research

Justin Wu
ETEC 500- 65 A
University of British Columbia
Professor: Sunah Cho
Feb. 25th, 2018
MIXED-METHOD APPROACH IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 2

Both qualitative and quantitative research methods are valuable – one is not superior to

the other. The author of “Introduction to Educational Research,” states that, “the primary goal

of all educational research is to describe, explain, predict, or control educational phenomena”

(Mertler, 2015). The various research methods can produce different views of reality. Both

approaches to research are scientific and contribute to important research findings that help us

better understand educational phenomena. “The combination of both qualitative and

quantitative data tends to provide a better understanding of a given research problem than can

one type of data in isolation” (Mertler, 2015). Rarely do teachers examine the research

methodology used to collect data; instead, we take the given information as facts. With this

being said, educational problems should be investigated using whatever method or methods

appropriate for the research question. The goal of any research study is to generate new

knowledge, gain a better understanding of some issues, or to develop some sort of innovation

that will positively benefit our students.

As the field of research methodology is continually changing, the views held towards the

research methods used to analyze the relevance, value and validity of research are also

constantly changing too. Norman K. Denzin’s article “The Elephant in the Living Room” (2009)

argues that the politics and bias involved in the collection of qualitative evidence affects

objectivity and neglects the issues of equity and social justice. Kadriye Ercikan and Wolff-

Michael Roth’s article, “What Good is Polarizing Research into Qualitative and Quantitative?”

(2006) argues that both qualitative and quantitative research styles limit their effectiveness and
MIXED-METHOD APPROACH IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 3

usefulness, “rather than focusing on the construction of good research questions and

conducting good research” (Ercikan & Roth, 2006).

The two articles address flaws in the current accepted standards of research

methodology. Ercikan and Roth state that the polarization of research is problematic because

“it focuses on certain types of data collection” (Ercikan & Roth, 2006) taking the focus away

from the research question; whereas, Denzin states that “when researchers collect data, the

evidence is inherently biased” (Denzin, 2009). From an educational perspective, when

considering and assessing the value of the different methods of research regarding educational

topics, one must step back and remember the sole purpose of the research. “The purpose of

research is to generate knowledge rather than to concretely realize one method or another”

(Ercikan & Roth, 2006). Regardless of the method chosen, the importance lies within the

research question and the purpose of the research.

Ercikan and Roth disagrees with Denzin in suggested ways to mediate the challenges to

collect meaningful and useful research. They propose adopting a new model in education

research that produces results with both high and low inference levels, as well as various forms

of generalization, linking together the different aspects of knowledge to help address the

varying needs of different members of society (Ercikan & Roth, 2006). On the other hand,

Denzin suggests that randomized, experimental designs are appropriate for some fields of

research. He posits that “this model should not be applied to all research despite its’ success in

some fields” (Denzin, 2009). Ercikan and Roth advocates for the new model because aspects of

quantitative research exist within qualitative data collection, and alternatively that qualitative
MIXED-METHOD APPROACH IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 4

research data collection has quantitative measures as well. The idea of the ‘mixed-method

approach’ should be considered. Using a mixed-method approach to studies in education,

similar to Ercikan and Roth, may give researchers the contextual foundation and evidence-

based validity that they need to assist educational professionals and organizations in the

education field.

For example, it would not make a lot of sense for a researcher studying bullying in

elementary school to spend a lot of time preparing narrow case-study specific information that

is solely on statistics. Instead, the researcher may want some broad contextual information

about the school and home life in the community, and would like more statistics about child

health, poverty, mental health, etc. By mixing both quantitative and qualitative research and

data, the researcher is able to provide a more complete and comprehensive understanding of

the research problem than either quantitative or qualitative approaches alone. The result from

this research will guide parents, teachers and administration on possible interventions to use

for children who are being bullied.

On the other hand, Denzin states that the guidelines for qualitative research are

differing and always fit within the particular context. He argues that mix-methods inquiries fails

to address the bias and subjectivity associated to the collection of qualitative data, allowing the

researcher the power to control the evidence collected, which results in flawed data. Ideally,

Denzin wants an approach that embraces the usefulness of qualitative research, without the

constraints of the quantitative methodology. In order to standardize the collection of evidence

process, he suggests that “all research should conform to a set of shared criteria (e.g. internal,
MIXED-METHOD APPROACH IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 5

external validity, credibility, transferability, confirmability, transparency, warrantability)”

(Denzin, 2009). Since qualitative research is a more holistic approach to data collection, there is

no fair means to control any variables. Researchers simply take the world as it exists and as

they find it. The quality of data that is collected through qualitative research is highly

dependent on the skills and observations of the researcher. If a researcher has a biased point-

of-view, their perspective will be included with the data collected and influence the outcome.

Perhaps the biggest disadvantage of qualitative research is the lack of statistical representation.

It is a perspective-method of research only, which means the responses given are not

measured.

To some degree, one can argue that almost all research is flawed, and as researchers it

is our duty to reduce these flaws. Most educators would agree with Ercikan and Roth’s

argument that, “instead of dichotomizing research into qualitative and quantitative, we need

integrative approaches that provide the appropriate forms of knowledge needed by decision

makers located differently in society and dealing with different units of analysis” (Ercikan and

Roth, 2006). Using the new model for educational research allows researchers to make choices

regarding data sources, data construction, and analysis methods that best fit their research

questions. Each method has its own strengths and weaknesses, but through the use of the

mixed-method approach, researchers will be able to produce valuable information stemming

from the research conducted, while sharing their meaningful discoveries with humanity.

After considering both articles from an educational standpoint, Ercikan, Roth and Denzin

all argue for research methodology that better serves the students’ needs. The polarization of
MIXED-METHOD APPROACH IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 6

research styles takes the focus away from the creation of good research questions and

conducting quality research. By using the mixed-method approach, it allows researchers to

“capitalize on the relative strengths of both quantitative and qualitative data” (Mertler, 2015).

A mixed-method approach offers the broad and generalized data for educational researchers

and organizations who need empirical data and statistics. In combining both qualitative and

quantitative measures, not only can one offset weaknesses of each other (Mertler, 2015), it

also allows more options and flexibility to addressing the given research question. The ultimate

aims of research are to generate measurable and testable data that contributes to human

knowledge and better our understanding of how the world around us works. There is no one

approach that is used to achieve this; rather, there are certain questions in education that

requires the use of both quantitative and qualitative methods in order to get a better

understanding of the problem presented.

MIXED-METHOD APPROACH IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 7

References:

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.

Ercikan, K., & Roth, W-M. (2006). What good is polarizing research into qualitative and

quantitative? Educational Researcher, 35, 14-23.

Mertler, C.A. (2015). Introduction to Educational Research. Sage Publications.