Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 1: Duran, R. P., Eisenhart, M. A., Erickson, F. D., Grant, C. A., Green, J. L., Hedges, L. V., ... & Schneider, B. L. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications American educational research association. Educational Researcher, 35, 33–40.

Abstract: The American Educational Research Association (AERA) is pleased to provide guidelines for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. These guidelines apply to reports of education research grounded in the empirical traditions of the social sciences. They cover, but are not limited to, what are commonly called qualitative and quantitative methods. Other forms of scholarship equally important to education research include reviews of research; theoretical, conceptual, or methodological essays; critiques of research traditions and practices; and scholarship more grounded in the humanities (e.g., history, philosophy, literary analysis, arts-based inquiry). The latter forms of scholarship are beyond the scope of this document.

Journal Article 2: Peugh, J. L., & Enders, C. K. (2004). Missing data in educational research: A review of reporting practices and suggestions for improvement. Review of Educational Research, 74, 525–556.

Abstract: Missing data analyses have received considerable recent attention in the methodological literature, and two “modern” methods, multiple imputation and maximum likelihood estimation, are recommended. The goals of this article are to (a) provide an overview of missing-data theory, maximum likelihood estimation, and multiple imputation; (b) conduct a methodological review of missing-data reporting practices in 23 applied research journals; and (c) provide a demonstration of multiple imputation and maximum likelihood estimation using the Longitudinal Study of American Youth data. The results indicated that explicit discussions of missing data increased substantially between 1999 and 2003, but the use of maximum likelihood estimation or multiple imputation was rare; the studies relied almost exclusively on listwise and pairwise deletion.

Journal Article 3: Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2003). Writing the proposal for a qualitative research methodology project. Qualitative Health Research, 13, 781–820.

Abstract: Writing the proposal for a qualitative research methodology study is a double challenge because of the emergent nature of qualitative research design and because a methodology study entails describing a process to produce a process. How the authors addressed this challenge is shown in the annotated text of the grant proposal—“Analytic Techniques for Qualitative Metasynthesis”—funded by the National Institute of Nursing Research. Appealing qualitative research proposals adhere to principles that engage writers and readers in an informative and mutually respectful interaction.