A researcher is often guided by a research paradigm: the „world view‟ (Guba & Lincoln 1994) that provides a kind of guide for „viewing reality‟ (Silverman 2005). In the past three decades two research approaches have emerged: quantitative and qualitative (Creswell 2007).
These „paradigms‟ (Kuhn 1962) provide the structure of reference for organising and explaining our observations (Babbie 2005). Both models and „methods of knowing‟
contribute to knowledge building (Grinnel & Unrau 2008). A third research approach increasingly being recognised currently is „mixed-method‟ (Clark & Creswell 2008). Mixed-methods or mixed methodology can be defined as „research in which the investigator collects and analyses data, integrates the findings and draws inferences using both qualitative and
61 quantitative methods in a single study‟ (Tashakkori & Creswell 2007 p. 4). Similarly, Johnson et al. (2007, p. 123), through an extensive review of the definitions, define mixed methods as:
the type of research in which a researcher or team of researchers combines elements of qualitative and quantitative research approaches (e.g., use of qualitative and quantitative viewpoints, data collection, analysis, inference technique for the broad purpose of breadth and depth of understanding and corroboration.
Johnson et al. (2007) illustrate that researchers who use the approach incorporate several overlapping types of methods (qualitative and quantitative) and this can be viewed in the form of a continuum (Figure 3.4). Researchers use mixed methods in social and behavioural research to communicate results that help inform decisions and extend understandings (Reichardt & Rallis 1994).
Figure 3.4: Graphic of the three major research paradigms, including subtypes of mixed methods research
Source: Johnson et al. (2007, p. 124)
Authors posit that both quantitative and qualitative methods are useful and can combine complementary strengths (Onwuegbuzie & Johnson 2006). The method chosen should strongly help to answer the research questions, to elicit themes and to formulate meanings and understanding relevant to the study (Silverman 2005). In this context, the mixed method design can be referred to as a procedure for collecting, analysing and reporting data, incorporating both research approaches (Caracelli & Greene 1993; Creswell et al. 2003;
Sandelowski 2003; Teddlie & Yu 2007). Because of its flexibility to incorporate both
62 quantitative and qualitative research paradigms, researchers can apply this advantage in the approach in various phases of a study, i.e. in the determination of questions or hypothesis, in data gathering, in analysis and in inferences (Clark & Creswell 2008; Tashakkori & Teddlie 1998). An increasing number of researchers have begun to adopt the principles of paradigm relativism, i.e. the use of any methodological approach that works for the particular research problem under study (Tashakkori & Teddlie 2008). Mixed methods are a „matter of course‟
and are being applied in most major areas of research, for example, in the humanities (Tashakkori & Teddlie 2008, p. 10).
There are four major types of mixed method designs within the literature: concurrent, embedded, sequential explanatory and sequential exploratory (Clark & Creswell 2008). The concurrent design involves simultaneously collecting and analysing both quantitative and qualitative data, merging both and combining them to best understand the research problem (Onwuegbuzie & Johnson 2006). The embedded design consists of including one method within a larger study that applies another method; for example, using a quantitative component to enhance a qualitative interpretation (Clark & Creswell 2008). The sequential explanatory and exploratory designs implement different methods in two separate phases, in which one „follows through‟ the other (Creswell et al. 2003). Generally, the research designs are differentiated by the sequence of methods used, how the methods are integrated and the relative priority of the methods being used to address the study‟s objectives (Clark &
Creswell 2008).
3.3.1 Locating the methodology of this research: Concurrent Mixed Design
3.3.1.1 Rationale
The research strategy employed in this study is Concurrent Mixed Design. The philosophy that quantitative and qualitative methods are both useful and can combine complementary strengths (Onwuegbuzie & Johnson 2006) mainly motivated the approach to this study. The overall aim of using this method is to address the relevant research question and „offset the weakness inherent within one method with the strengths of the other method‟ (Creswell et al.
2003 p. 183). Silverman (2005) contends that research questions give a project direction, boundaries, focus, and framework, and point to the methods and data that will be needed.
63 Another main consideration in the choice of mixed method is its flexibility and sophistication for integrating the different types of data collected, i.e. for triangulation (Clark & Creswell 2008; Jick 1979). Triangulation advocates that quantitative and qualitative methods are compatible, and the goal is to improve the accuracy of the judgements made by collecting different types of data to address an issue (Jick 1979). He also argues that when different types of data are collected and then analysed, either independently or subject to multiple analysis, and the same conclusions are reached, they provide more certainty to the issue being studied. Authors suggest this is relevant to the validity aspect of the research and findings (Bloor 1997; Robson 2002).
Another rationale for the choice made was the aptness of applying methods employed by previously published studies that considered similar theoretical underpinnings and the case study approach. However, these previous studies differed in, among other things, the geographical context, the degree of qualitative analysis employed and the model developed (Skoien 2006; Ziebro 2000).
3.3.1.2 Concurrent Mixed Design
According to Onwuegbuzie & Johnson (2006) there are three conditions attached to concurrent mixed design: a) the quantitative and qualitative data are collected separately at about the same time; b) they are analysed separately; c) the results are not consolidated at the interpretation stage; and d) integration or inferences are drawn after the separate interpretations are made. In other words, this design requires that inferences are triangulated as a way of strengthening the findings or to explain any lack of convergence of those findings (Creswell et al. 2003). The basic definition of the design applies when the researcher uses two different methods to cross-validate or confirm findings (Creswell et al. 2003).
In this research, data analyses are described in Chapter 4: Case Study A, in Chapter 5: Case Study B, and in Chapter 6: Survey on Factors that Influence Urban Secondary Students’
Recycling Participation. This study also extended the findings based on the concurrent mixed design method by synthesising them and consequently formulating a conceptual model of proposed strategies relevant to the study objective. These are explained in Chapter 7 and 8 accordingly. Figure 3.3 illustrates the overall research approach.
64 Figure 3.5: Diagram of the design process applying the Concurrent Mixed Design
RQ3
- NGOs‟ role, process of facilitating social learning; collaboration
- Institutional constraints; local relevance - Factors influencing secondary students‟
65