The untapped potential of mixed-methods research approaches for German history education research

Manuel Köster,Holger Thünemann

doi:10.18546/herj.16.1.03

Abstract

Despite some pioneering studies, mixed-methods research approaches are uncommon in the German history education community, in contrast to the general increase in mixed-methods research in the educational and social sciences. Conversely, German history education research currently appears to favour quantitative methods as opposed to qualitative approaches – at least in larger research projects. In this paper, we argue for a more inclusive research approach combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Discussion of a pioneering study from the 1980s (Jeismann et al ., 1987) highlights implementation of this unusual approach to history education research in Germany. To illuminate the added value of such a mixed-methods research approach, we discuss two published German studies that respectively rely on quantitative (Trautwein et al ., 2017) and qualitative (Köster, 2013) research methods. A mixed-methods approach might have illuminated each study's 'blind spots'.

Highlights

While uncommon in German history education research, increasingly social science and education research studies combine qualitative and quantitative approaches, as documented in handbooks since 2000, the Journal of Mixed Methods Research founded in 2007, and the Mixed Methods International Research Association (MMIRA)
Mixed-methods research approaches combine a range of research methods, procedures and techniques from different methodological areas
This paper contains several highly contrasting mixed-methods research models in a brief overview of different ways of combining qualitative and quantitative approaches that focuses on the benefits of mixed methods research for history education

Summary

Introduction

While uncommon in German history education research, increasingly social science and education research studies combine qualitative and quantitative approaches, as documented in handbooks since 2000 (for example, Creswell, 2003; Creswell and Plano Clark, 2007; Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009; Gläser-Zikuda et al, 2012; Kuckartz, 2014), the Journal of Mixed Methods Research founded in 2007, and the Mixed Methods International Research Association (MMIRA). Kelle (ibid.: 53) argues that ‘inflexibly allotting methods to certain epistemological positions or “paradigms” [was] by no means imperative’ Instead, he points out that research practice proved that qualitative and quantitative methods were not at all incompatible. According to Tashakkori and Teddlie (2003: 711), mixed-methods research can be defined as ‘a type of research design in which QUAL and QUAN approaches are used in types of questions, research methods, data collection and analysis procedures, or in inferences’. This broad definition allows for a considerable level of heterogeneity, and enables researchers to make decisions in a number of fields, depending on the goals of the research project. Two different types of sequential design are possible: depending on whether the project begins with a qualitative or a quantitative study, it is an ‘explanatory design’ or an ‘exploratory design’

26 Köster and Thünemann

Conclusion

Notes on the contributors