Abstract

In the humanities, in the last two decades, there has been an evident increase of research combining quantitative and qualitative methods, techniques, approaches, concepts or language. This paper discusses the arguments for and against these research drafts, which most often appear in literature under the title mixed methods research. While some authors consider this type of research as the announcement of the third paradigm in studying social phenomena and the approach that shifts the war between the two paradigms into the past, other authors claim that the paradigms underlying the two basic research orientations are incompatible because they study essentially different phenomena, and therefore the methods from two research traditions cannot be combined in any way. The third viewpoint, which we advocate as well, argues that qualitative and quantitative methods cannot be applied together in one draft for the purposes of triangulation or cross-validation, but that they can be combined for complementary objectives. This paper describes the example of mixed methods draft of complementary objectives in pedagogy, which refers to evaluation of mathematics curriculum. The example shows that combining qualitative and quantitative methods is not only possible, but that it creates the conditions for arriving at data which would not be possible to obtain using only one or the other approach.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call