Teaching multi-methodology research courses to doctoral students

Abstract

This paper presents a novel research model-Contextual Constructs Model (CCM) and the theory that underpins it-Contextual Constructs Theory (CCT). First developed as part of a complex project investigating user perceptions of information quality during Web-based information retrieval , the CCM is not a single research method per se, but is a modelled research framework providing an over-arching perspective of scientific inquiry, by which a researcher is able to identify multiple possible methods of study and analysis according to the identified research constructs and their contexts. Central to CCM/CCT is that all research involves the fusion of two key elements: 1) context; and 2) cognitively-driven constructs; and that the co-dependent nature of the relationship between these two research components inform the research process and eventual outcomes. The resulting CCM is one that frames research as a contextual process of phases, in-dentifying the conceptual, philosophical, implementation, and evaluation tasks associated with a research investigation. The value of framing research within a CCM comes from its capacity to frame complex, real world phenomena since its epistemology is a blend of a critical-real world view-where reality can be both constructed and constant; within a systems-science paradigm-where constructs are not reduced to isolated parts, but investigated in terms of multiple co-constructions and the contextual relationships between them

What distinguishes a novice from an expert mixed methods researcher?

“…A premise of the issue is that developing mixed methods proficiency will enhance the quality of scholarship and its dissemination across disciplines (Collins 2010). The collection of articles made a significant contribution, focusing on specific contexts and issues related to teaching mixed methods: teaching doctoral students in a sequence of courses (Baran 2010), teaching online (Ivankova 2010), incorporating philosophical frameworks into teaching (Mertens 2010), and training in organizations (Hansson 2010). As with most studies related to teaching and learning mixed methods, the issue is organized according to the Fink (2003) typology of significant learning experiences, similar to the proficiency conceptual framework guiding the present study.…”

Developing Mixed Methods Research Skills: Becoming Methodologically Trilingual

“…Several mixed methodologist have written about the issues related to the teaching of mixed methods research (Bazeley 2003;Baran 2010;Collins 2010;Leech and Onwuegbuzie 2010;Mertens 2010;Niglas 2009;Robinson 2010). Plowright (2013) surveyed postgraduate students (n = 118) from two UK universities followed by focus groups with the doctoral students during a weekend doctoral workshop at one of the two universities.…”

A brief measure of attitudes toward mixed methods research in psychology

“…The increased use of mixed methods approaches has also been followed by demand for training and education in using mixed methods research. There is an emerging literature on teaching mixed methods research (e.g., Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003 ; Early, 2007 ; Christ, 2009 ; Baran, 2010 ; Ivankova, 2010 ; Onwuegbuzie et al, 2011 , 2013 ; Poth, 2014 ), highlighting the difficulties faced by ‘first generation’ mixed methods instructors ( Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003 ; Early, 2007 ; Onwuegbuzie et al, 2011 ), who often have not themselves been trained in mixed methods research ( Early, 2007 ). There is an identified need for dialog and development of resources to support the teaching of mixed methods research ( Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003 ; Early, 2007 ).…”