SAGE Journal Articles
SAGE Journal Articles combine cutting-edge academic journal scholarship with the topics in your course for a robust classroom experience.
Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.
Article 1: Christ, T. W. (2014). Scientific-Based Research and Randomized Controlled Trials, the “Gold” Standard? Alternative Paradigms and Mixed Methodologies. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(1), 72-80.
Summary: This article addresses three controversial issues related to mixed methods research and policy. This article challenges current practices of prioritizing specific research methodologies used to evaluate interventions. As an alternative, logical purpose statements and research questions should be the standard used to guide decisions about appropriate methodologies and procedures.
Questions to Consider:
1. What is the “Gold Standard”?
2. Compare and contrast critical realism, pragmatism, and constructivism, and postpotivism.
***
Article 2: Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
Summary: The purposes of this article are to position mixed methods research as the natural complement to traditional qualitative and quantitative research, to present pragmatism as offering an attractive philosophical partner for mixed methods research, and to provide a framework for designing and conducting mixed methods research.
Questions to Consider:
1. Discuss the paradigm wars and incompatibility thesis.
2. What is the key feature of mixed methods research?
***
Article 3: Sommer Harrits, G. (2011). More Than Method? A Discussion of Paradigm Differences Within Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods, 5(2), 150-166.
Summary: This article challenges the idea that mixed methods research (MMR) constitutes a coherent research paradigm and explores how different research paradigms exist within MMR. Realizing such differences at the ontological, epistemological, and methodological level contributes to discussions on how to move forward MMR, embracing differences instead of imposing homogeneity.
Questions to Consider:
1. The authors identified a couple of areas in which mixed-methods is not prominent. What are they?
2. What are the differences between the two strategies that are discussed?