Based on the pragmatic view, and also based on the strengths and weaknesses of both qualitative and quantitative methods stressed above, this study applied a mixed research method to investigate Chinese returnees’ reentry experiences into their home country’s higher education. “Mixed methods research”, as defined by Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004, p. 17), is “the class of research where the researcher mixes or combines
quantitative and qualitative research techniques, methods, approaches, concepts or language into a single study”. It is an attempt to legitimate the use of multiple approaches in answering research questions (Creswell, 2009). Thus, the overall strength of a study using mixed methods under some circumstances is greater than either a qualitative or a quantitative study (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004).
According to (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2003, pp. 14-15), mixed method research has the following characteristics:
• Mixed methods research can answer research questions that other methodologies cannot.
• Mixed methods research provides better (stronger) inferences.
• Mixed methods provide the opportunity for presenting a greater diversity of divergent views.
3.2.2.4.1 Matching the research questions with the mixed method
In Chapters 1 and 2, the background of the current study and the existing literature on this topic were reviewed and some research gaps concerning returnees’ re-entry experiences were identified (see 2.3.6). The research questions for the current study were also established (see 1.6). Establishing research questions is very important, because research questions determine the research methodology used, the research setting and the respondents involved, and the search for relevant, comprehensive and rich information (Ritchie, 2003).
The research questions became the framework within which the questions for in-depth interviews and the quantitative survey questions were developed. With these three research questions established, the current study aims to discover what experiences returnees had during their re-entry, why they had such experiences and how they managed the process of re-adapting into home culture. It intends to interpret the situations that these foreign-educated returnees experienced in their home country’s academic and
sociocultural contexts, to answer the research questions regarding individuals’ personal
perspectives. The questions also try to explore the difficulties and challenges that these returnees faced when they went back to China. Possibilities and suggestions were solicited for people at the management level and for Chinese students who were studying
overseas and intended to return to. At the same time, as outlined in the research questions, the study was also interested in exploring the attitudes and views that non- returnee colleagues and administrators held towards returnees regarding returnees’ role and performance at these universities and the reasons behind these attitudes and views.
It intends to provide multiple sources about returnees’ re-entry experiences when they returned to work in Chinese universities. Evidence gathered from multiple sources is more accurate and more convincing than evidence obtained from a single source of information (Yin, 2014) and it helps to support research credibility (Davis, 1995).
While qualitative research could provide the researcher with rich information about
returnees’ experiences, it was not enough to provide a general perspective for the studied
groups. If only a qualitative method was used to collect and analyse data, the findings of the research would be produced without any means of statistical results and further,
the findings could be influenced by the researcher’s personal biases. However, the use
of a quantitative approach alone would not be adequate for exploring the research
questions in depth or probing into participants’ feelings and experiences. Therefore, a mixed method could help to best answer the research questions and to compensate each
other’ strengths and weaknesses in answering the questions
3.2.2.4.2 Providing stronger inferences and the opportunity for greater divergent views
Further, a mixed method could provide better inferences and present a greater diversity of divergent views. As Morse and Niehaus pointed out (2009), qualitative methods can provide a micro-level understanding of the research problem, while quantitative methods can help to obtain an answer on the macro level. The current study aimed to build a multi-layered picture of the Chinese returnees’ reentry experiences. The micro level
involved the perspective of each individual’s attitudes and views on returnees’ reentry
experiences in Chinese universities, exploring the in-depth reasons for those attitudes and perspectives through qualitative methods, whereas the macro level involved the overall views of each interviewed group, examining the general attitudes and views each group
held towards returnees’ re-entry experiences, through quantitative methods.
The integration of quantitative and qualitative research approaches was thus appropriate for this study and could maximise the effectiveness of the research design and minimise mistakes, as recommended in the literature (Creswell, 2012; R. B. Johnson & Christensen,
2012; Punch, 2009). The qualitative method allowed the researcher to probe deeply into the phenomena of the research questions. It was valuable for the researcher to
understand returnees’ experience of life and to measure “what the interviewees wanted and to answer why they behaved in the certain way” (Tenopir, 2003, p. 16). Moreover, it was helpful to provide a rich understanding and description of how the study groups make meaning of their social life (Hesse-Biber, 2010), whereas the quantitative method could complement the data, adding strength to the research design and providing a general numerical description of the research questions. Further, it enabled the researcher to compare the attitudes and views of these three different groups (returnees, non-returnees, and administrators) towards the same issues, thus building an understanding of different
perspectives regarding returnees’ re-entry experiences. It provided the researcher more options to answer the research questions from different perspectives, and to help further probe into the phenomena being investigated. Thus, the mixed method approach helped to maximise the effectiveness of the research design and to facilitate the gathering of comprehensive data.