I am a PhD student, and my research involves conducting a six-week intervention to investigate its effect on reading skills. Following the intervention, I conducted interviews with participants to explore their perceptions and reading experiences, utilising predetermined questions. Initially, I considered an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design. However, due to time constraints and the school setting of the intervention, I was unable to analyse the quantitative data immediately after its collection. Instead, I analysed both the quantitative and qualitative data after collecting all the data. Given these conditions, I am uncertain about the most appropriate mixed-methods design for my study.
Given that there are only three widely used research designs in mixed methods, you can eliminate exploratory sequential and explanatory sequential, which leaves you with convergent. The problem that frequently occurs in reporting results from a convergent design is a low level of integration, i.e., a separate reporting of each study with too little connection between the qualitative and quantitative results. So, the more that you can to make the two sets of results comment on each other, the better your overall report will be.
Use one of the concurrent design
1. concurrent triangulation
2. concurrent nested
3. concurrent transformative design
watch the video below, it might be useful
Planning a Mixed Methods Research by Philip Adu, Ph.D. (youtube.com)
Joseph Baidoo First, the term "triangulation" is no longer widely used, ever since the Journal of Mixed Methods Research announced that it would no longer consider articles based on triangulation, due to the widespread confusion around the meaning of that term. Second, a great many embedded designs turn out to be QUAN --> qual, since the QUAN provides the context for the embedding.
That one journal did drop triangulation. Yet, run a search in any database limited to 2023-2024, and mixed methods triangulation is alive and well with many major journals (including brands Wiley, Springer, Routledge, and Elsevier, etc.). My advice is instead of getting hung up on jargon (Cresswell and Plano-Clark list 67 possible names over the years), follow the recent advice of me and colleagues: decide how you will sample in each (3 choices: 1:1, different samples, or hybrid), how each stage supports the other, the timing of each stage, and the concordance of merged results (which must have convergence/divergence). Good luck.
Journal of Mixed Methods Research is not just "one journal,: it is the flagship journal in the field of mixed methods research. I suggest you follow the advice of the leading experts in the field.
I concur with David Coker's message. After gathering your data, I suggest you look at the Mixed Method and possibly use the Narrative Approach.
Did you have surveys, feedback forms, etc? If so, I suggest you get a copy of the following:
Sammons, P. & Davis, S. (2017) Mixed Methods Approaches and their Application in Educational Research Chapter 23 in Dominic Wyse, Neil Selwyn, Emma Smith and Larry E. Suter (2017) The BERA/Sage Handbook of Educational Research Volume 1 London: Sage.
It is available online, depending on whether your university is registered to that system.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Books