Exploring the role of the mixed methods practitioner within educational research teams: A cross-case comparison of the research planning process

References

• Alise, M. A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). A continuation of the paradigm wars? Prevalence rates of methodologi-cal approaches across the social/behavioral sciences. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4, 103–126. doi:10.1177/1558689809360805
   Google Scholar
• ATLAS-ti ©. (2012). (Version 6.2.25) [Computer software]. Berlin, Germany: Scientific Software Development.
   Google Scholar
• Benjamin, J. (2000). The scholarship of teaching in teams: What does it look like in practice? Higher Education Research & Development, 19, 191–204. doi:10.1080/072943600445646
   Google Scholar
• Beran, T. , Violato, C., Kline, D., & Frideres, J. (2009). What do students consider useful about student ratings? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34, 519–527. doi:10.1080/02602930802082228
   Google Scholar
• Birenbaum, M. (1994). Toward adaptive assessment-the students angle. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 20, 239–255. doi:10.1016/0191-491X(94)90011-6
   Google Scholar
• Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research Journal, 6(1), 97–113. doi:10.1177/1468794106058877
   Google Scholar
• Capraro, R. M., & Thompson, B. (2008). The educa-tional researcher defined: What will future researchers be trained to do? The Journal of Education Research, 10, 247–253. doi:10.3200/JOER.101.4.247-253
   Google Scholar
• Carpenter, D. M. II, Crawford, L., & Walden, R. (2007). Testing the efficacy of team teaching. Learning Environment Research, 10, 53–65. doi:10.1007/s10984-007-9019-y
   Google Scholar
• Christ, T. (2010). Teaching mixed methods and action research: Pedagogical, practical, and evaluative considerations. In A. Tashakkor & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods (2nd ed., pp. 643–676). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, I. D., Trick, D., & Van Loon, R. (2011). Academic reform: The policy options for improving the quality and cost-effectiveness of undergraduate education in Ontario. Kingston, ON: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, K. M. T., & O’Cathain, A. (2009). Ten points about mixed methods research to be considered by the novice researcher. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3(1), 2–7. doi:10.5172/mra.455.3.1.2
   Google Scholar
• Collins, K., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Sutton, I. (2006). A model incorporating the rationale and purpose for conducting mixed methods research in special education and beyond. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 4, 67–100.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J., & Plano Clark, V. (2010). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Curry, L. A., O’Cathain, A., Plano Clark, V. L., Aroni, R., Fetters, M., & Berg, D. (2012). The role of group dynamics in mixed methods health sciences research teams. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6, 5–20. doi:10.1177/1558689811416941
   Google Scholar
• Dellinger, A. B., & Leech, N. L. (2007). Toward a uni-fied validation framework in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 309–332. doi:10.1177/1558689807306147
   Google Scholar
• de Vaus, D. (2001). Surveys in social research. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dugan, K., & Letterman, M. (2008). Student appraisals of collaborative teaching. College Teaching, 56, 11–15. doi:10.3200/CTCH.56.1.11-16
   Google Scholar
• Entwistle, N. (2009). Teaching for understanding at university: Deep approaches and distinctive ways of thinking. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Entwistle, N., McCune, V. , & Hounsell, J. (2002). Approaches to studying and perceptions of university teaching–learning environments: Concepts, measures and preliminary findings. Edinburgh, Scotland: University of Edinburgh.
   Google Scholar
• Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
   Google Scholar
• Guder, F. , Malliaris, M., & Jalilvand, A. (2009). Changing the culture of a school: The effect of larger class size on instructor and student performance. American Journal of Business Education, 2(9), 83–90.
   Google Scholar
• Hanusch, F. , Volcic, Z., & Obijiofor, L. (2009). Theoretical and practical issues in team-teaching a large undergraduate class. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20, 66–74.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, L. C., Smith, S. Z., Swars, S. L., & Smith, M. E. (2009). An examination of research methods in mathematics education (1995–2005). Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3, 26–41. doi:10.1177/1558689808325771
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A Research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(3), 14–26. doi:10.3102/0013189X033007014
   Google Scholar
• Joughin, G. (2009) Introduction: Refocusing assessment. In G. Joughin (ed.), Assessment, learning and judgement in higher education (pp. 1–11). New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media BV.
   Google Scholar
• Kember, D., Leung, D. Y. P. , & Kwan, K. P. (2002). Does the use of student feedback questionnaires improve the overall quality of teaching? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 411–425. doi:10.1080/0260293022000009294
   Google Scholar
• Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Leech, N. L., Dellinger, A. B., Brannagan, K. B., & Tanaka, H. (2010). Evaluating mixed research studies: A mixed methods approach. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4, 17–31. doi:10.1177/1558689809345262
   Google Scholar
• Lester, J. N., & Evans, K. R. (2009). Instructors’ experiences of collaboratively teaching: Building something bigger. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20, 373–382.
   Google Scholar
• Ludlow, L. H. (2005). A longitudinal approach to understanding course evaluations. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10(1). Retrieved from http:// pareonline.net/getvnp/v=10&n=1
   Google Scholar
• Luhanga, U. (2012). Confirmatory factor analysis of the short revised experiences of teaching and learning questionnaire (SR-ETL-Q): Examining the internal structure within a Canadian undergraduate population. (Unpublished Masters Thesis), University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
   Google Scholar
• Luth, R. (2010). Assessment and grading at the University of Alberta: Policies, practices, and possibilities. A report to the Provost and the University (Unpublished manuscript). Retrieved from www.ualberta.ca/˜rluth
   Google Scholar
• Miles, A., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, E., Chu, M., Poth, C., & Daniels, L. (2011, March). The impact of a team instructional approach: The perspectives of students, teaching assistants, and instructors involved in multiple sections of large classes. Poster at Festival of Teaching and Learning, Edmonton, AB.
   Google Scholar
• Morse, J. M. (2003). Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 189–208). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Mulryan-Kyne, C. (2010). Teaching large classes at college and university level: Challenges and opportunities. Teaching in Higher Education, 15, 175–185. doi:10.1080/13562511003620001
   Google Scholar
• O’Cathain, A. (2010). Assessing the quality of mixed methods research: Toward a comprehensive framework. In A. Tashakkori, & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 531–555). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Daniel, L. G., & Collins, K. M. T. (2007). A meta-validation model for assessing the score-validity of student teaching evaluations. Quality & Quantity, 41, 233–249. doi:10.1007/s11135-006-9000-3
   Google Scholar
• Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Johnson, R. B. (2006). The validity issue in mixed research. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 48–63.
   Google Scholar
• Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Johnson, B., & Collins, K. M. T. (2009). Assessing legitimation in mixed research: A new framework. Quality & Quantity, 45, 1253– 1258. doi:10.1007/s11135-009-9289-9
   Google Scholar
• Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2006). Linking research questions to mixed methods data analysis procedures. The Qualitative Report, 11, 474–498.
   Google Scholar
• Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Leech, N. L., & Collins, K. M. T. (2011). Toward a new era for conducting mixed analysis: The role of quantitative dominant and qualitative dominant crossover mixed analysis. In M. Williams & W. P. Vogt (Eds.), The Sage handbook of innovation in social research methods (pp. 353–384). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Plano Clark, V. L., Garrett, A. L., & Leslie-Pelecky, D. L. (2010). Applying three strategies for integrating quantitative and qualitative databases in a mixed methods study of a nontraditional graduate education program. Field Methods, 22, 154–174. doi:10.1177/1525822X09357174
   Google Scholar
• Poth, C. (2010). Examining the contributions of a mixed methods exploratory sequential design: A qualitative perspective. In M. Pourkos & M. Dafermos (Eds.), Qualitative research into social sciences: Epistemological, methodological and ethical issues (pp. 525–539), Athens, Greece: Topos.
   Google Scholar
• Poth, C. (2012, May). Assessing the impact of a team instructional approach: A mixed methods study of effective large class learning environments. Paper at 8th International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Urbana-Champaign, IL.
   Google Scholar
• Poth, C., Bustos, M., Chu, M-W., Seitz, P. , Chudnovskaya, E., Luhanga, U., … Coates, T. (2012, July). ‘Help me learn in a big class!’: Key features of an effective team instructional approach. Poster at Centre for Teaching and Learning’s Teaching Big: The Joy of Large Classes, Edmonton, AB.
   Google Scholar
• Poth, C., Reidel, A., & Luth, B. (2011, March). Undergraduate experiences and attitudes related to assessment: The Canadian context. Paper at Global Learn Asia Pacific annual meeting on Learning and Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, A., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2010). Mixed meth-ods research design: A comparison of prevalence in JRME and AERJ. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 4(3), 233–245. doi:10.5172/mra.2010.4.3.233
   Google Scholar
• Sandler, R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 1, 1–25.
   Google Scholar
• Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443–466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Struyven, K., Dochy, F. , & Janssens, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions about evaluation and assess-ment in higher education: A review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 325–341. doi:10.1080/02602930500099102
   Google Scholar
• Suskie, L. (2009). Assessing student learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). The past and future of mixed methods research: From data triangulation to mixed model designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 671–701). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Wiliam, D., Lee, C., Harrison, C., & Black, P. (2004). Teachers developing assessment for learning: Impact on student achievement. Assessment in education: Principles, policy and practice. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 11, 49–65. doi:10.1080/0969594042000208994
   Google Scholar
• Willis, G. B. (2005). Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Wulff, D. H., Nyquist, J. D., & Abbott, R. D. (1987). Students’ perceptions of large classes. In M. Weimer (ed.), Teaching large classes well: New directions for teaching and learning (pp. 17–30). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou, G., Kim, J., & Kerekes, J. (2011). Collaborative teaching of an integrated methods course. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 3, 123–138.
   Google Scholar