Syamsul - Michael has answered well.

Your first list is conventional of a single methodology design. That said, the methodology chapter may well be separated into methodology and methods (design) depending on the methodology. For instance, a phenomenological study will require a detailed philosophical methodology chapter - as well as as a seperate methods/design chapter.

Your second list is classic of a conventional mixed methods approach - and is fine to use for that purpose.

The attached chapter, while directed to nursing and midwifery research (but the principles are generic) may be of some use.

Thanks Michael and Dean. Great input. Actually I am using the exploratory sequential mixed design- qual-quant. Interesting experience but a challenge to report, especially with page and number of words limitations.

Here's the RG link to one of the Mixed Methods experts that can be very useful for you: R. Burke Johnson

Best regards,

Debra

Dear Debra, thanks for your response, but somehow, the link is missing. I would be glad if you could re-post.

TQSM

Basically, qualitative researchers try to find the best way of presenting their studies, not always using the conventional or mainstream form of presentation (see for instance the guidelines for authors in journals such as "Qualitative Psychology" and more so "Qualitative Inquiry").

Theses, however, are different than articles in that they demonstrate not only your capacity to write up a research report, but also that you can work within the "given" structures of academia. The cynics, therefore argue, that a good dissertation is one that is complete.

Therefore, I would argue that the structure you should abide to is that which your supervisor supports. If he/she is ok with a structure that is less "mainstream" that should be ok. An important caveat, however, is that if you do go for a less typical structure, make sure to explicitly note in your introduction section that you are going to do, and add a rationale for your choice. This should appease grumpy and more conservative reviewers. It would help your case to add a reference that specifically claims that such choices are commonplace in qualitative research.

Best of luck.

Thanks Jacob, that is exactly what I am worried about- a conservative reviewer.

If you explain the rationale and ground your abandoning of the conventional structure in literature, you should be fine.

'Conventional' thesis/paper form ensures that 'everyone is on the same page'---especially important when one's studentship work will be reviewed, as Michael observes above.

However, if for whatever reason, one alters form slightly, the overriding criterion for doing so will be transparency.

The "conventional" thesis structure derives from the positivist research model. At the extreme end of naturalistic research it's argued that, for example, the literature review doesn't necessarily inform the research question but rather, the discussion of the results leading to the conclusions. I'd say that the majority of quant/qual research falls in between, and the structure of a thesis, I believe, should reflect what is the dominant paradigm of the research i.e. whether inductive or deductive reasoning has been used to draw your conclusions.

I struggled with this very question in relation to my mixed methods PhD thesis published in 2001 (Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia), entitled 'The process and organisational consequences of new artefact adoption in surgery', which is available electronically from the university and this website. It was a collective case study and the outcomes of the various quantitative data analyses became part of the body of evidence that were triangulated with qualitative (observational and interview) data to draw my conclusions.

As others have remarked, it's important to justify, not only your methodology and data collection methods, but any significant deviation from the conventional positivist-influenced thesis structure. In my thesis, I did this justification in the opening chapter in subsections that were essentially literature reviews relating to (1) research paradigm issues relating to the study and (2) the collective case study approach. Chapter 2 provided the organisational context of the study, and chapter 3 provided the theoretical framework. My defence of the latter was that it's tantamount impossible to defend a position in which one can argue that the literature has not informed a study's theoretical framework ....so my review of the literature pertaining to my research problem preceded the study design and methods - in chapter 4 - which included separate subsections in which I described qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods; the techniques used to use all data to draw conclusion; and a sub-section about assuring rigour in my chosen approach.

Personally, I cringe at the notion of using a conventional/positivist structure to satisfy supervisors and/or examiners. Mixed methods research has been accepted, at least by progressive academics/researchers for long enough now, for researchers to publish appropriate-to-paradigm-and-research-design articles and thesis.

Unfortunately, many students are in the position of having to satisfy 'traditionally-minded' supervisors in regard to their examinations. A fact of university life.

There is always a room for innovation even in methodology but such must come from a thorough knowledge of the extant methods and not because the candidate is ignorant of those methods. It must be the case that the realities of the particular research demand a new approach that is absent in the familiar methods. However, that is not applicable in the present case. Michael provides an unassailable justification for following extant rules in thesis writing. I only wish to add that Syamsul has, in my opinion, done exactly that, given the nature of his design, namely mixed methods.

Yes Philip, I want to be as transparent as possible as I feel that it will credibility and trustworthiness to my work.

Thanks peter

Thanks Lynne, that was insightful, and I agree, as mixed method is getting to be more common, our horizons should be expanded.