What Good Is Polarizing Research Into Qualitative and Quantitative?

Abstract

In education research, a polar distinction is frequently made to describe and produce different kinds of research: quantitative versus qualitative. In this article, the authors argue against that polarization and the associated polarization of the “subjective” and the “objective,” and they question the attribution of generalizability to only one of the poles. The purpose of the article is twofold: (a) to demonstrate that this polarization is not meaningful or productive for education research, and (b) to propose an integrated approach to education research inquiry. The authors sketch how such integration might occur by adopting a continuum instead of a dichotomy of generalizability. They then consider how that continuum might be related to the types of research questions asked, and they argue that the questions asked should determine the modes of inquiry that are used to answer them.

A favor de la Investigación Plural en Educación Artística. Integrando diferentes enfoques metodológicos

“…Incluso existen defensores como Ercikan & Roth (2006) de una postura estereoscópica o múltiple, colaborativa entre investigadores, que permita un acercamiento integrado a las cuestiones de investigación sobre educación, bajo una concepción continua y no en dicotomía entre el polo cualitativo y el cuantitativo; puesto que no parece una polarización provechosa para la investigación educativa. Y es que se ha pasado del uso e integración de una metodología mixta a una sinergia de entendimientos, de una forma cada vez más popular en los últimos años.…”

“…Valoramos como contribución relevante la combinación de diferentes metodologías en un momento histórico fuertemente marcado por el diálogo entre diferentes epistemologías (Agra, 2005;Cauduro et al, 2009;Coulter & Smith, 2009;Day et al, 2008;Eisner & Barone, 2006;Ercikan & Roth, 2006;Hernández, 2008;Holley & Coylar, 2009;Marín, 2005). La Investigación Plural es más que un enfoque metodológico, es una alternativa alentadora en el campo de la Educación Artística.…”

The Qualitative-Quantitative ‘Disparities’ in Social Science Research: What Does Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) Brings in to Bridge the Gap?

“…Quantitative social science research approach is the application of natural science principles, particularly, a positivist/empiricist approach in explaining social phenomena (Bryman, 1984;Cormack, 1991;Ercikan & Roth, 2006). Positivism involves such principles as: setting operational definitions to concepts, ensuring objectivity by detaching from the subjects, striving for replication and establishing causality (Ercikan & Roth, 2006).…”

“…Positivism involves such principles as: setting operational definitions to concepts, ensuring objectivity by detaching from the subjects, striving for replication and establishing causality (Ercikan & Roth, 2006). Unlike qualitative research which in principle approaches the subjects in their natural settings, quantitative research approach employs a procedure similar to that of a controlled experiment.…”

“…Quantitative and qualitative research styles in social science research are hotly debated as to which one of them is more appropriate than the other in meeting the criteria of good research, such as establishing causal inference and achieving generalizability (Ercikan & Roth, 2006). While some quantitative researchers have strong belief on systematic statistical analysis as the only way to establish causal relationship and achieve generalization in social sciences research, some in the qualitative track challenge this claim on the grounds that social phenomena are complex and therefore, cannot effectively be understood through the use of quantitative approaches.…”