8/31/2023 0 Comments Explanatory mixed methods designThe authors’ subsequent question, “To what extent do two instructors differ in the types and quantity of Instructor Talk they appear to use?,” aimed to enhance the findings from the qualitative phase and provided ways to further study and generalize this construct in a variety of class types ( Seidel et al., 2015). To understand the prevalence of such language in biology classrooms, the authors asked, “What types of Instructor Talk exist in a selected introductory college biology course?” This question was exploratory in nature and merited qualitative inquiry that focused on identifying the types of Instructor Talk the two instructors used. Instructor Talk is distinct from language used to describe specific course concepts. Such language, which the authors termed “Instructor Talk,” is the language used to facilitate overall learning in the classroom, for example, language used to give directions on homework assignments or justifying use of active-learning strategies. (2015) investigated non–content related conversational language, such as procedural talk, used by course instructors in a large reform-based introductory biology classroom cotaught by two instructors. In a recent study that used both quantitative and qualitative methods, Seidel et al. Recent studies from the biology education literature will help illustrate the types of research that benefit from a mixed-methods approach. Rather, the goal of mixed methods is to build on the strengths of both methods and minimize their weaknesses when the research merits using more than one method ( Creswell et al., 2003 Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004). Certain problems-for example, addressing gains in standardized test scores-are better addressed through quantitative methods (e.g., Knight and Wood, 2005), and some-for example, understanding the meaning students assign to reaction arrows-merit qualitative research (e.g., Wright et al., 2014). The goal of mixed methods is not, however, to replace either the quantitative or the qualitative approaches. While quantitative methods can reveal empirical evidence showing causal or correlative relationships or the effects of interventional studies, qualitative methods provide contextual information that colors the experiences of individual learners. Integration of research findings from quantitative and qualitative inquiries in the same study or across studies maximizes the affordances of each approach and can provide better understanding of biology teaching and learning than either approach alone. Green's description captures the essence of mixed methods-a pragmatic choice to address research problems through multiple methods with the goal of increasing the breadth, depth, and consistency of research findings. Part 3 provides general guidelines on how to select an appropriate MMR design and attend to methodological issues that may arise when using MMR.Ī mixed-methods way of thinking is an orientation toward social inquiry that actively invites us to participate in dialogue about multiple ways of seeing and hearing, multiple ways of making sense of the social world, and multiple standpoints on what is important and to be valued and cherished. Part 2 provides a general description of mixed-methods approaches commonly found in biology education research (BER). Part 1 provides introductory remarks that situate MMR within the larger context of research paradigms in science education. This article, therefore, focuses on the various ways in which quantitative and qualitative methods can be combined to address questions of interest in biology education and the many productive ways in which MMR can be used to support claims about biology teaching and learning. However, given the disciplinary ethos and divergent content perspectives of academic disciplines, it is important that researchers planning to use MMR become familiar with the theory and designs most commonly used within their disciplinary context. Consequently, several handbooks and articles have been written that describe the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences ( Tashakkori and Teddlie, 1998, 2010 Creswell et al., 2003 Creswell and Plano Clark, 2011 Greene, 2008 Terrell, 2011), focusing on both the theoretical underpinnings and procedural steps of conducting MMR. This increase coincides with general growth and expanded interest in mixed-methods approaches to research in various fields of study over the past 30 years ( Plano Clark, 2010). An increasing number of studies in biology education are reporting the use of mixed-methods research (MMR), in which quantitative and qualitative data are combined to investigate questions of interest in biology teaching and learning (e.g., Andrews et al., 2012 Jensen et al., 2012 Höst et al., 2013 Ebert-May et al., 2015 Seidel et al., 2015).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |