leave paradigms, schisms and mixing methods for later, or even leave them out of
training courses altogether.
It is not enough merely to eliminate the q-words from module headings and
resources. The change has to be adopted by all tutors respecting every kind of
evidence for what it is, and following this respect through in their own teaching and
writing. This is what I have implemented successfully in both previous universities in
which I have worked. It is what I am trying to implement in my current institution -
encouraged as ever by national funding bodies, supported by the upper echelons of
the university, and opposed by the least research-active of my colleagues who seem
to want to cling their comforting paradigms, perhaps as an explanation for their
unwillingness to conduct relevant, rigorous and ethical research. This is part of the
reason why I would want research methods development for new researchers to be
exclusively in the hands of the most successful practical researchers, who are often
busy doing research, rather than in the hands of those supposed methods specialists,
who are often unencumbered by research contracts and so free to corrupt the
researchers of the future. Busy practical researchers will tend to focus on the craft,
the fun, the importance and the humility of research. They will want new researchers
to help them combat inequality, inefficiency, and corruption in important areas of
public policy like health, education, crime and social housing. There is just no time to
waste on meaningless complications and the cod philosophy of the q-word
paradigms.
Summary
This chapter looks at the idea of mixed methods approaches to research and
concludes that this is the way new researchers would naturally approach the solution
of any important evidence-informed problem. This means that a lot of the
epistemology and identity routinely taught to new researchers is not just pointless; it
may actually harm their development. The chapter reminds readers of the importance
of research design, and how this neglected stage of the research cycle is completely
independent of issues like methods of data collection and analysis. The schismic
classifications of qualitative and quantitative work are unjustifiable as paradigms.
19