Qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods: An analysis of research design in articles on principal professional development (1998–2008)

Abstract

AbstractThe study’s purpose was to examine the articles on principal professional development published in eight peer-reviewed journals (1998–2008) to assess trends in the types of articles, prevalence of mixed methods designs, and purposes for mixing. Data analyses were implemented in two stages. First stage, a systematic conceptual content analysis was used to categorize articles as conceptual papers (35%), qualitative (22%), mixed methods (18%), quantitative (15%), and literature reviews (10%). Second stage, the analysis of the purpose and design of the mixed methods studies revealed that the method of integration occurred typically at the data interpretation stage; sequential designs and dominant–less dominant designs were prevalent; and complementarity was the most common purpose for combining methods. Implications regarding the identified trends are discussed.