Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods to Examine Student Resistance to Active Learning
Saved in:
| Title: | Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods to Examine Student Resistance to Active Learning |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Shekhar, Prateek (ORCID |
| Source: | European Journal of Engineering Education. 2019 44(1-2):6-18. |
| Availability: | Taylor & Francis. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 13 |
| Publication Date: | 2019 |
| Sponsoring Agency: | National Science Foundation (NSF) |
| Contract Number: | 1347417 1347482 1347580 1347718 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Mixed Methods Research, Resistance (Psychology), Active Learning, Undergraduate Students, Engineering Education, Focus Groups, Expectation, Classroom Observation Techniques, Student Surveys, Teaching Methods, Learner Engagement |
| DOI: | 10.1080/03043797.2018.1438988 |
| ISSN: | 0304-3797 |
| Abstract: | Engineering education researchers are increasingly integrating qualitative and quantitative research methods to study learning and retention in engineering. While quantitative methods can provide generalisable results, qualitative methods generate rich, descriptive understanding of the investigated phenomenon. On the other hand, a mixed methods approach provides benefits of the two approaches by incorporating them in a single study. However, engineering faculty often faces difficulty in integrating qualitative and quantitative methods and designs in their education research. This article discusses mixed methods in the context of an actual ongoing engineering education research project investigating student resistance to active learning. We describe the research design in phases that show the integration of quantitative and qualitative results, and how these data sources can help influence the direction of the research and triangulate findings. Our mixed method research experience highlights the importance of thinking iteratively between qualitative and quantitative data sources during the instrument development process. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Number of References: | 35 |
| Entry Date: | 2019 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1203288 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Engineering education researchers are increasingly integrating qualitative and quantitative research methods to study learning and retention in engineering. While quantitative methods can provide generalisable results, qualitative methods generate rich, descriptive understanding of the investigated phenomenon. On the other hand, a mixed methods approach provides benefits of the two approaches by incorporating them in a single study. However, engineering faculty often faces difficulty in integrating qualitative and quantitative methods and designs in their education research. This article discusses mixed methods in the context of an actual ongoing engineering education research project investigating student resistance to active learning. We describe the research design in phases that show the integration of quantitative and qualitative results, and how these data sources can help influence the direction of the research and triangulate findings. Our mixed method research experience highlights the importance of thinking iteratively between qualitative and quantitative data sources during the instrument development process. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0304-3797 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/03043797.2018.1438988 |
