Taking a critical stance towards mixed methods research: A cross-disciplinary qualitative secondary analysis of researchers’ views

Recent growth and institutionalization in the field of mixed methods research has provided fertile ground for a wide range of thoughtful criticism of how this research approach has been developed and conceptualized by some members of the mixed methods community. This criticism reflects the increasing maturity of the field as well as the different theoretical perspectives and methodological practices of researchers in different disciplines. While debates addressing these criticisms are likely to lead to valuable insights, no empirical studies have been carried out to date that have investigated researchers’ critical views on the development and conceptualization of mixed methods research. This study examines the criticisms of the mixed methods field raised by a cross-national sample of researchers in education, nursing, psychology, and sociology. We carried out a secondary analysis of semi-structured interviews with 42 researchers and identified 11 different criticisms, which we classified in four domains: essence of mixed methods, philosophy, procedures, and politics. The criticisms related to the procedures domain were equally distributed among the four disciplines, while those related to the essence, philosophy and politics domains were more common among sociologists. Based on our findings, we argue that the divergence of views on foundational issues in this field reflects researchers’ affiliation to different communities of practice, each having its own principles, values, and interests. We suggest that a greater awareness of this divergence of perspectives could help researchers establish effective collaboration and anticipate potential challenges when working with researchers having different methodological approaches.

YouTube Politics

“With the shift of television to digital format in the next decade, it will become virtually interchangeable with the internet. Hence, those firms that come to dominate digital television may well be poised to play a major role in the age of the internet” (McChesney, 1999, p. 167). The previous quote, written long before YouTube existed, is somewhat prescient. YouTube is a website of influence and power for traditional media conglomerates. Even early in scholarly literature about mass media, Todd Gitlin suggested that human experience, as it relates to mass media, has become a commodity. According to Gitlin (1980), the only way to solve that problem is to “demolish the media and to create a movement as an alternative source of values, network of relations and standard of authenticity” (p. 255). His politically charged language frames well what it means to be political in YouTube. That said, being “political” in YouTube is different for everyone and all of the definitions resonate with traditional ideas of political activity in terms of demonstrations and the exercise of democratic and free speech. For many, the 2008 presidential campaign is a watershed moment for YouTube, as it is credited with helping candidates gain supporters and increase political activism, specifically among younger voters. While this technologically deterministic view is limited, YouTube provides an inexpensive and socioculturally relevant platform for political messages from politicians and the people. International politics, in particular the Arab Spring and the spate of horrific murders committed in the name of fundamentalist political and religious fervor by Isis and others, have found a worldwide audience in YouTube who comment, post, and repost videos and generally provide thoughtful criticism about what's happening. This is an obvious contradiction of what many in the popular press see as YouTube's raison d'être. YouTube is also a place for local political activity, although not as prevalent as national politics nor used as efficiently. In terms of political activity, user-generated videos uploaded by “citizen journalists” have been credited for motivating change in countries around the world, no doubt related to YouTube's worldwide audience.

People in Mathematics

In order to encourage feedback and thoughtful criticism of the Mathematics Teacher from among its readers, each Editorial Panel member meets every so often with a local teacher advisory panel. One such panel from the Buffalo, New York, area felt that the journal ought to include more features of a personal nature. The Editorial Panel of the journal agreed and encouraged that advisory panel to find a way to implement its suggestion. Consequently, four members of that group (none of whom had previously prepared manuscripts for publication) chose to interview three people from their locale who had an interest in mathematics education. They selected two teachers and a student, and the Editorial Panel decided to include their interviews in this issue.