research IS research ... what drives research are good questions ... good hunches ... curiosity ... and using good methods
what we need to focus on are the questions of interest ... and, then try to use the best methods we can to help us answer these questions ...
if that is a case study? fine ... go to it
if that is an experiment ... great ... go to it
if what you are interested in are validities of tests ... go do some correlations ...
if you are concerned about authorship of old writings ... some content/word analysis will be good ... go to it
what you do depends on what your questions are and ... what sorts of things you are looking for ...
thus ... mixed methods ... which i do think mainly refers to some quantitative ... some qualitative ... i would ban from use
At 10:36 AM 1/22/2003, Rolf Dalin wrote:
> > Even when a qualitative researcher > > first point ... one is not a qualitative researcher ... either you are a > researcher or not a researcherThis is a good point, I think. I find it difficult to accept that a research question could be best studied if the researcher makes a restriction as to which methods be allowed. I have noticed the term mixed-method approach. Is that a new term? The approach is probably not new at all, but it seems that academic staff in some subject areas here in Sweden at least, avoid mixing methods.
. . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
