![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
Mixed methods research has increased in popularity over the past 20 years. Literature reveals that exploratory qualitative analysis followed by confirmatory survey research is common and concurrent studies outnumber longitudinal design. Longitudinal studies using quantitative and qualitative methods in sequence for exploratory purposes are rare, and no studies were found that combine exploratory quantitative analysis followed by both an exploratory cross-case analysis, and an exploratory longitudinal analysis. This design was used in the present study of postsecondary disability support services, and it is being presented to highlight how recursive analysis at each stage can be used to refine subsequent research questions.
Keywords mixed methods, qualitative, disability, longitudinal, grounded theory
|
Brewer S. , & Hunter, A. (1989). Multimethod research: A synthesis of styles. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and quality in social research. London: Routledge. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 675-694). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Christ, T. (2006). Longitudinal cross case analysis of support services for students with disabilities in postsecondary education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64 (05). (UMI No. 3216053) Google Scholar | |
|
Christ, T. , & Stodden, R. (2005). Advantages of developing survey constructs when comparing educational supports offered to students with disabilities in postsecondary education. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 22(1), 23-31. Google Scholar | |
|
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods design (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Creswell, J. (2006, April 10). Continuing the discourse: Advocates for and challengers to mixed methods research. Symposium conducted at the American Education Research Association Mixed Methods SIG Business Meeting, San Francisco. Google Scholar | |
|
Collins, K. , Onwuegbuzie, A. , & Sutton, I. (2006). A model incorporating the rationale and purpose for conducting mixed methods research in special education and beyond. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 4(1), 67-100. Google Scholar | |
|
Denzin, N. , & Lincoln, Y. (2003). Strategies of qualitative inquiry. London: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Glaser, B. (1992). The basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs. forcing Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Glaser, B. , & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine. Google Scholar | |
|
Gomm, R. , Hammersley M. , & Foster, P. (Eds.). (2002). Case study method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Greene, J. , Caracelli, V. , & Graham, W. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 11(3), 255-274. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Hair, J. , Anderson, R. , Tathem, R. , & Black, W. (1992). Multivariate data analysis withreadings (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan. Google Scholar | |
|
Heck, R. (1998). Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory approaches. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods of business research (pp. 177-215). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar | |
|
Howe, K. (2004). A critique of experimentalism. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(4), 42-61. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Huberman, A. , & Miles, M. (2002). The qualitative researcher's companion. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Lincoln, Y. , & Guba E. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 191-214). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Maxwell, J. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Merriam, S. (2001). Qualitative research and case study application in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass . Google Scholar | |
|
Onwuegbuzie, A. , & Johnson, R. (2004). Mixed method and mixed model research. In R. Johnson & L. Christansen (Eds.), Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (pp. 408-431). Neeham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Google Scholar | |
|
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Plano Clark, V.L. (2006, April). Discipline perspectives on mixed methods research: Case analyses from counseling psychology, primary care, and physical education research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. Google Scholar | |
|
Stake, R. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York: Guilford. Google Scholar | |
|
Strauss, A. , & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Tashakkori, T. , & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Tashakkori, A. , & Teddlie, C. (2003). Issues and dilemmas in teaching research methods courses in social and behavioral sciences: US perspective. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 6, 61-77. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Yin, R. ( 2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Yin, R. ( 2006, April). Mixed methods research: Are methods genuinely integrated or merely parallel? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. Google Scholar |
