Advertisement

Mixed Methods

  • Yvette C. Latunde
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter discusses the importance of mixed methods research in parental involvement. The characteristics of mixed methods research are outlined and published works on the topic are shared. The strengths and weaknesses of the methods that act as the foundation for mixed methods are reviewed, as are considerations for researchers when deciding if mixed methods are appropriate for their study.

Keywords

Focus Group Mixed Method Parental Involvement Focus Group Interview Teacher Preparation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Barbour, R. S. (1998). Mixing qualitative methods: Quality assurance or qualitative quagmire? Qualitative Health Research, 8(3), 352–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbour, R. S. (2005). Making sense of focus groups. Medical Education, 39(7), 414–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bourdieu, P. (1997). The forms of capital. In A. H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown, & A. S. Wells (Eds.), Education: Culture, economy, and society (pp. 40–58). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brase, C., & Brase, C. (2012). Understanding basic statistics (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  5. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2012). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2012). The landscape of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Epstein, J. (1995). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(9), 701–712.Google Scholar
  9. Flick, U. (1992). Triangulation revisited: Strategy of validation or alternative? Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 22(2), 175–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Green, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  11. Kevern, J., & Webb, C. (2001). Focus groups as a tool for critical social research in nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 21(4), 323–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Louque, A., & Latunde, Y. (2014). Cultural capital in the village: The role African-American families play in the education of children. Multicultural Education, 21(3&4), 5–10.Google Scholar
  13. Merton, R. K., Fiske, M., & Kendall, P. L. (1990). The focused interview: A manual of problems and procedures (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  14. Patton, M. Q. (1999). Paradigms and pragmatism. In D. M. Fetterman (Ed.), Qualitative approaches to evaluation in education: The silent scientific revolution (pp. 116–137). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  15. Reynolds, A. D., Crea, T. M., Medina, J., Degnan, E., & Mcroy, R. (2015). A mixed-method case study of parent involvement in an urban high school serving minority students. Urban Education, 50(6), 750–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1985). Numbers and words: Combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation study. Evaluation Review, 9(5), 627–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Thompson, G. (2007). Up where we belong: Helping African American and Latino students rise in school and life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yvette C. Latunde
    • 1
  1. 1.Teacher EducationAzusa Pacific UniversityAzusaUSA

Personalised recommendations