Mixed Method Research - Coursework Example

 Mixed Method Research Contents An Introduction to the Mixed Methods Research 3 Assumptions in Social Science 4 Overview of the study 5 Comparing qualitative and quantitative results 8 Justification of ontomological and epistemological assumptions in the research 9 Conclusion- Design analysis of the research 10 Introduction to Mixed Method Research With the evolution of research methods for the past couple of years we now identify with three methods which are qualitative research method, the quantitative method and the more recently formed mixed research method. The research paradigm mixed research method is a combination of the qualitative and the quantitative method research. It doesn’t serve to replace the two methods but in actuality serve to supplement the inadequacies of the two and strengthen their weaknesses former research strategies (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004: 15). Over the years there has been a major dispute over the two research techniques i.e. the qualitative method research and the quantitative method research each advocating for their paradigms as the better one of the two. This debate at the epistemological stage is called the ‘paradigms wars’ (Bryman, 2006; 16). The quantitative method, which is also associated with the term extensive research, employed the objective belief. In this they maintain the detached impersonal approach in their study and that the subject of study and the researcher as two different things. This was trusted to give unbiased results since there was no emotional attachment thus no form of influence believing it to be neutral. The qualitative method also referred to as the intensive research strategy is where the researcher is more emphatic on the words rather than the quantity of material collected and analysis (Bryman, 2004). It is mostly based on constructivism, relativism and subjectivity. Qualitative purists are characterized by a sense of subjectivity whereby they don’t believe in the detachment of the subject from what he knows. They are more into details unlike the quantitative purists and descriptions which need not be formal. Mixed method research serves as a link to this two contrasting paradigms where it doesn’t serve to rely on one particular paradigm or philosophy (Caracelli and Greene 1993). It covers points from both qualitative and quantitative research and bridges them. This method helps the researcher use many approaches to get their questions answered thus removing restrictions. It serves to be both creative with insight but at the same time extensive and informative. It brings a better understanding of the subject of research as there is the use of different methods which yields better results compared to the dependency on only one method of study. There is however some arguments why the two methods can be combined one being that they both share the same goal of creating an understanding of the world we are living in (Haase and Myers, 1998). The two also tend to share some techniques and methodologies like observation to achieve this. Reichardt and Rallis (1994) concede that the two are incompatible if the qualitative paradigm assumes that there are no external referents for understanding reality. This is based on methodology. Morgan(1998) and Denzin (1970) state that the more reason to use mixed method is to achieve cross-validation or triangulation which is the combination of theories to create a better understanding and to get results that compliment each other in by the use of one research method to compliment the other. Assumptions in Social Science The researcher has to be quite keen on the method of research he uses since it is related to the knowledge that will be developed. By the particular study the researcher is undertaking the researcher can find out more from other sources first so that they can also have an understanding of the methodology they shall input in their research. The theories of assumption are characterized by their ontology where this is the reality that is entirely independent of their conscious, epistemology which is the real knowledge that is derived from the truth and lastly the methodology which are the inputs to getting this truths. According to Raadscelders (2011), he argued that the ontology and epistemology in science serves to deal with questions like: How do we define knowledge? What are the sources of knowledge? How are these claims of knowledge justified? What is the nature of the reality that we study? What are the sources of this knowledge? What is the relationship between the object of knowledge and the researcher? Methodology on the other hand serves to answer questions like: What methods will be used to support the claim? What methods of collecting data will be used to answer a specific question? Epistemology is providing philosophical grounding for the specialization on the type of knowledge that is possible and ensuring their adequacy and legitimacy (Maynard 1994). Epistemology is moreover concerned with how we can know a particular knowledge and its relationship to reality. Interpretivism suggests that our interpretation of the world determines the knowledge and meaning of a particular occurrence. The concept of ontology in academic literature mostly refers to important philosophical questions like idealism, materialism etc and the unproven assumptions about reality. They deal with the nature of the world and human beings in social contexts (Bryman, 2001). Ontology emphasizes that social phenomenon are independent from other factors meaning that there can only be one perspective of the world. Methodology just entails the specific approaches and ways that research is done to get an understanding of the world. All this information he will get from reading papers and past research from the past that relate to his field of study and observing the methodology used. It will give him an oversight of the methodology he can use and apply. The research will help him in the applying different disciplines that are dictated by a particular paradigm which can be one among positivism, post positivism, critical theory, constructivism or interpretivism. His methodology will also vary a lot according to his personal belief. Creswell (2009) calls this the four different world views. They are positivism, pragmatism, advocacy/ participatory and constructivism. The positivist assumptions are the basis for quantitative research instead qualitative research. It is also called the scientific method, postpositivist research or empirical science. Pragmatism as it is based on Cherryholmes (1992), Cresswell (2009) and Morgan’s(2007) view provides a philosophical basis for research that is not based on any philosophical view but is instead committed to the utilization of mixed methods where the researchers apply all the approaches freely i.e. qualitative and quantitative. Constructivists view often used together with intepretivism, whereby the researcher uses the qualitative approach. The individual interprets the word from their own point of view and their take on the experience is completely subjective. Therefore the aim of the researcher is to actually get the information in accordance with the participant’s view of the situation being studied. Study overview This study was an a research on the students’ language learning motivation as it related to the attrition from a language immersion program using the mixed method research. The research was conducted by survey on a group of 131 students that had graduated from elementary school and interviews to 33 others. This is the combining of both the quantitative and qualitative methods respectively. The mixed method revealed mostly on the psycho social; which was motivation on this case and it gave new results and understandings. Ontology is the study of the structure of reality. It questions on matters like idealism which are mostly in philosophy and it reflects on the theories that are not yet solved or have proof. It dictates that the world is viewed in a single percept which counteracts subjectivity. Epistemology on the other hand is the knowledge of truth. The researcher of the following paper was out to understand the motivations in learning different languages and its constructs among different students. She first did studies on the research methods done in the past and the different views of different scholars like Mc Inerney (1998) who said that examining a motivation can present “emic-etic dilemma” where there is contrast in views between a quantitative ontology and epistemology where everyone is not controlled by external factors and qualitative ontology and epistemology where external factors serve as a major motivator. The writer however wants to cover all the limitations and loop holes that would be created by just using one technique so she opts to the using of both. In the second phase it shows the exploration of students’ motivation in their undertaking a second language (L2) as it relates to their attrition from L2 immersion program. There is research is out to prove how motivation is or is not affected by the attrition from L2 immersion programs to continue learning the L2. In L2 immersion programs the language is not undertaken in a class but is integrated in their daily school life in a one way that they speak the second language half of the day, creating bilingualism with the employment of stuff with efficiency with the two languages. A majority of the L2 immersion programs are mostly in the elementary school and most of the attrition happening during the transition to middle school and that’s where most of the students opt for one language and mostly grammar (Garcia, Lorenz & Robinson, 1995). This is where this study is mostly centered, during this transition. Thus the higher the students go the lower the number of those in the immersion school. With this the students miss out on opportunities that come with bilingualism. In the past researches on learning motivation, they used quantitative methods whereby they commonly measured it by the use of an instrument called the Attitude/ Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) which were scales that measured different aspects and comprised Likert-type questions. On this study the researcher mainly concentrated on the attitudes towards the learning of a language which in the AMTB scale was a minor contributor to motivation according to Gardner (2005). He explains that as much as one can be motivated to learn a new language they don’t have to be excited about it all the time, making attitude an independent variable in motivation. It serves greater deal and yields better results to incur multiple theoretical frameworks since it gives more findings compared to the use of one primary framework which may end up supporting only one approach. Thus the researcher used three diverse concepts of motivation which are the effect of past failures and successes and what was the cause and how it can affect the student(Covington1984), the change in heart and want of the learner, and Dornyei’s (2009) L2 Motivational Self System . This the writer used as her secondary theoretical frameworks. In the past most on the focus on the students’ attrition was on boredom, lack of interests lack of esteem or dislike of the class instructor. However this were not views based on the students themselves but through consultation of parents, administration but the writer is out to clear this by more focusing on the children with the consent of their parents and guardians. She uses the methods of both surveys which is a quantitative method and student interviews which is qualitative strategy. A total of 131 students and their parents responded to survey and 33 of them were interviewed. The sampling method used was modified stratified sampling to ensure that she picked both a continuing and non continuing student. The analysis of the data took place in six phases: preliminary data analysis during data collection, transcriptions and encoding, initial quantitative analysis; statistical analysis, second iteration of qualitative theme analysis, exploration of integrated findings and lastly mini case study. The interviews revealed that learning of a language successfully was totally bases on one’s personality. Qualities like being outgoing, an easy person that avoids frustration and easy comprehension of things. It also took a lot of hard work and effort. Even those that attributed fun to learning the language acknowledged that it needed a lot of studying. Going back and making up for setbacks that can be handled helps the students recover what they have lost successfully and this was seen in the continuing and the discontinuing students showing that they were highly motivated and successful learners It was also found that the students that left the immersion programs were more positive than those that continued with the learning. This was also supported by the qualitative data that was received showing very little difference in attitudes of the two. The interview results showed that the immersion students would be likely to consider language learning as a miraculous process, an experience of learning or as a result of hard work. The definition of a student to the general language learning may have an effect on the results that were taken by the AMTB stemming from the lack of understanding of what they are asked. The students’ understanding of the language may not be a dictating factor to a student on whether to stay in an immersion school or not. The student may have the desires to pursue many fields in their learning but still leave due to the frustration they get from if the mastering. This may stem from the desire to be a certain ideal person that speaks that second language. In immersion students there is a bigger likelihood that they never actually saw the second language like a learning subject thus did not develop an attitude towards it. Comparing quantitative and qualitative results In the first phase of the quantitative survey measured using the AMTB showed consistency in all the 131 surveys. There was an observed difference in views between the continuing and the non continuing students which affected the responses they gave. The survey shows that the students with a more positive attitude were actually those that were not continuing with the immersion program. This serves to counteract that the students that leave immersion program have a negative feeling about leaving the program. The results also show that the attitude of the students does not necessarily affect the learning of a second language with the survey showing that the school that produced the highest number of graduates in 2007 contained students with less positive attitudes. This result therefore shows very little effect of attitude on the persistence of an immersion program. The qualitative data acquired through interviews supported the quantitative data where the results showed little difference in attitude in both the continuing and the non continuing students. The data went further to close examine the results of the quantitative survey. It however revealed how the graduated immersion students viewed language learning. Students from immersion programs viewed the experience as a process that could not be measured. The continuing and non continuing students also viewed it like a grammar learning with reliance to memorization and drill. This research however showed a common view that language learning required a lot of hard work and effort. As it is seen in this study the two methods served to compliment the other. The qualitative data in this study related to language learning expanded on the qualitative results thus giving a more insightful outcome. Justification of ontological and epistemological assumptions in the research In the current times there has been a wide range of use of mixed methods in a range of fields of study where different factors are solved with the combination of different methods like the qualitative and quantitative used in this case to understand issues on education in our schools. Qualitative methods and quantitative methods are two very distinct methods and are due to cause incompatibility when brought together under one study. In as much as it serves to bring many ideas together it may on the other hand lower the value of both the research methods. Basing this on this fact, there may be great disparities in the ontology (the reality), contrast on epistemological perspectives (knowledge of the reality) and the methodologies in the quantitative and survey used in this study. Quantitative research is based on positivist paradigm whereas the quantitative research is based on the constructivism paradigm. If we may put focus on the ontological perspective of quantitative research, there may be same motivational factor which we presume it is the attitude that will help in the learning of a second language. On the other hand from the view of the constructivist paradigm motivation can be culture or learner specific which virtually limits the researcher range of research. Despite the different paradigms the two approaches can be combined in a study to compliment each other. This is what has been done in this study whereby there has been the integration of survey and student interview working simultaneous in the investigations. This serves to emphasizes on the philosophers approach of complementarily which is the view that talks on the combination of qualitative interview and quantitative survey methods. With each day researchers are acquiring new and better methods to honor the difference in paradigms during the combination of the quantitative method research and the qualitative method research. Mixed method serves to help study the motivation of the second language study in a more diverse, with different points of views thus manage to give clearer and more subjective results compared to the results from the past results which were mainly based on one sided research. This serves as a justification for the diversity in the research methods. Epistemologically it helps unravel knowledge that was not there in the beginning. The one on one interview with the students helps in the study because it creates a clear rapport with the interviewer which serves to give more explanations. The more the views the interviewer gets the more the information that she gets. Conclusion-design and alignment The author in this study has employed the two methods with appropriate significance in a way that they have helped fulfill the goals satisfactorily. It was done in stages where it first served to get an in depth study of the subject of study and then followed by a survey that served to give the holistic information of the study. The combination of qualitative and quantitative served to enrich the authors work since it broadened its views by going deeper and expounding broader. The availability of past studies done on the same issue creates a guideline on the research done and thus gives a better comparison to the other. However the study gives a very little difference in attitude among the students which I think would have been avoided had the survey been done over a wider range. The researcher also focuses more on the students that had either continued with the program or the non continuing students that were still willing to continue with the program and that affected the general results of the whole study. In other words the study would have reached a more comprehensive conclusion had the researcher interviewed a wider range and students including those that did not wish to take up the program again. Read More