Skip to main content

Complementary Research Methods: An Introduction and Overview

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Complementary Research Methods for Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

Abstract

This chapter serves as an introduction to the edited volume and has three broad purposes. First, the chapter defines complementary research methods as the application of multiple methodologies and methods to the study of related policy and leadership issues. Second, the chapter relates leadership and policy research using the concept of a policy research continuum. This continuum situates leadership and policy researchers as being part of the same research community. Finally, the chapter supports novice scholars, specifically, by describing the ways in which readers might use the volume, and it provides some reflective questions that illuminate the epistemological, methodological, and conceptual ideas undergirding the volume’s contents.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bascia, N., Cumming, N., Datnow, A., Leithwood, K., & Livingstone, D. (Eds.). (2005). International handbook of education policy. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, J. S., & Normore, A. N. (2015). Qualitative research and educational leadership: Essential dynamics to consider when designing and conducting studies. International Journal of Educational Management, 29(7), 798–806.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cranston, N. (2013). School leaders leading: Professional responsibility not accountability as the key focus. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41(2), 129–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desimone, L. (2009). Complementary methods for policy research. In D. Plank, G. Sykes, & B. Schneider (Eds.), AERA handbook on education policy research (pp. 163–175). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diem, S., Young, M. D., Welton, A. J., Mansfield, K. C., & Lee, P. (2014). The intellectual landscape of critical policy analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(9), 1068–1090.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuhrman, S. H., Cohen, D. K., & Mosher, F. (Eds.). (2007). The state of education policy research. Mahwah: Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, J. L., Camilli, G., & Elmore, P. B. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of complementary methods in education research. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heck, R. H. (2004). Studying educational and social policy: Theoretical concepts and research methods. Mahwah: Lawrence Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herriott, R. E., & Firestone, W. A. (1983). Multisite qualitative policy research: Optimizing description and generalizability. Educational Researcher, 12(2), 14–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honig, M. I. (2003). Building policy from practice: District central office administrators’ roles and capacity for implementing collaborative education policy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 292–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knapp, M. S. (2002). Understanding how policy meets practice: Two takes on local response to a state reform initiative. Seattle: University of Washington. Retrieved from http://www.education.uw.edu/ctp/sites/default/files/ctpmail/PDFs/PolicyPractice-MSK-06-2002.pdf

  • Knapp, M. S. (2016). The practice of designing qualitative research on educational leadership: Notes for emerging scholars and practitioner-scholars. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 12(1), 26–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knapp, M. S., & Feldman, S. B. (2012). Managing the intersection of internal and external accountability: Challenge for urban school leadership in the United States. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(5), 666–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lochmiller, C. R., & Hedges, S. (2017). Education policy implementation research: A call for new approaches. In J. N. Lester, C. R. Lochmiller, & R. Gabriel (Eds.), Discursive perspectives on education policy and implementation (pp. 17–40). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2017). Future directions for education policy research and language-based methods. In J. N. Lester, C. R. Lochmiller, & R. Gabriel (Eds.), Discursive perspectives on education policy and implementation (pp. 241–252). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Koyama, J. (2011). Principals, power, and policy: Enacting “supplemental educational services”. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 42(1), 20–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koyama, J. (2014). Principals as bricoleurs: Making sense and making do in an era of accountability. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(2), 279–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, H. M., McEwan, P. J., Belfield, C. R., Bowden, A. B., & Shand, R. D. (2017). Economic evaluation in education: Cost-effectiveness and benefit-cost analysis. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orland, M. (2009). Separate orbits: The distinctive worlds of educational research and policymaking. In D. Plank, G. Sykes, & B. Schneider (Eds.), AERA handbook on education policy research (pp. 113–128). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riehl, C., & Firestone, W. A. (2005). What research methods should be used to study educational leadership. In W. A. Firestone & C. Riehl (Eds.), A new agenda for research in educational leadership. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1997). Disciplines of inquiry in education: A new overview. In R. Jaeger (Ed.), Complementary methods for research in education (2nd ed., pp. 3–31). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, G., Schneider, B., & Plank, D. N. (Eds.). (2009). Handbook of education policy research. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, M. D., & Crow, G. M. (Eds.). (2017). Handbook of research on the education of school leaders (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chad R. Lochmiller .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Lochmiller, C.R. (2018). Complementary Research Methods: An Introduction and Overview. In: Lochmiller, C. (eds) Complementary Research Methods for Educational Leadership and Policy Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93539-3_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93539-3_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-93538-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-93539-3

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics