Research Design, as Independent of Methods

pattern - gives a much better indication of the impact of this research. Methods of
data collection and analysis are not alternatives; they are complementary. Specific
methods might be used to answer a simple, perhaps descriptive, research question in
one phase, but even then the answer will tend to yield more complex causal questions
that require more attention to research design (Cook and Gorard, 2008).

Across all stages of the cycle up to definitive testing, engineering of results into
useable form, and subsequent rollout and monitoring, different methods might have a
more dominant role in any one stage, but the overall process for a field of endeavour
requires a full range of research techniques. It is indefensible for a researcher, even
one limited in expertise to one technique (and so admitting that they are not
competent to conduct even something as basic as a comprehensive literature review,
for example), to imagine that they are not involved in a larger process that ‘mixes’
methods naturally and automatically.

Re-considering the schism

Therefore, the q-word dichotomy has, as illustrated, no relevance to design or indeed
to entire programmes of research. We may consider that surveys and interviews, for
example, are quite different, but even here there may be a continuum through
structured interview schedules to open-ended survey items delivered face-to-face.
The q-word division is not helpful even with methods. Is there such a thing as a
qualitative interview and a quantitative interview? I doubt it. Interview, as a general
category, is enough. The q-words add nothing. So what lies beneath the schism? I
consider here three general propositions - that the schism arises from important
differences in paradigm, scale, and methods of data analysis.

The q-words are not paradigms

In the sociology of science the notion of a 'paradigm', is a description of the sets of
socially accepted assumptions that tend to appear in 'normal science' (Kuhn, 1970). A
paradigm is a set of accepted rules within any field for solving one or more puzzles -
where a puzzle is defined as a scientific question that it is possible to find a solution to

10

<<   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >>

More intriguing information