Quantitative vs. Qualitative

Last week we talked about quantitative versus qualitative research in terms of social sciences. As a science major, I have always thought that to do research well you need to collect quantifiable data. I know see how this does not work so well for social sciences.

Quantitative research stems from the positive system, which is defined as “a system of philosophy that excludes everything from consideration except natural phenomenon and their interrelationships.” It implies cause and effect. Quantitative research obtains numerical data. In this form of research you generally need a control group and an experimental group, and everything else must remain equal. An example outlined in the textbook looks at how instructional time affects the results of a test. One class receives a constant amount of instructional time and the other class receives an altered amount of instructional time. Then the results of the tests are compared to determine if the amount of instructional time affects how students perform on a test. There are large problems with this …Humans are too complex, and have too many differences to compare in this way. How would you know if the differences observed were due to the amount of instructional time received, the quality of instruction, the specific students in each class or any other factors that could influence test scores. There are too many variables when humans are the subject of research. Also, how could you replicate this experiment? The students in each class will only ever be in that class once. The next year there will be different students. Or if you attempt the experiment at another time of year, there may be different seasonal effects. How would you know that the results you obtained were associated with instructional time and not some other variable.

So quantitative research may not work too well when considering humans as the subject matter, what about qualitative research? Qualitative research is a descriptive form of research and the design of research emerges as the research progresses. We discussed Ethnography as a type of qualitative research. In this type of research, the researcher often takes on the role of a participant to understand what happens in that type of setting. For example, a researcher wanting to find out what happens in a gang would actually become a member of a gang. This type of research allows the researcher to get the whole picture, not simply small segments of information. However, it is extremely difficult research because the observer must be alert and observing the entire time, and the observer may create a bias as he or she decides what to include and what not to include as they observe.

So both quantitative and qualitative research has pros and cons and maybe the way to go for educational studies is a combined method. This “mixed-method approach” includes using the best of both research methods. The first step is creating a hypothesis about an issue which leads to observing the subjects to determine how complex the issue is and eventually attempt to narrow to a specific area of interest. The researcher then develops a specific hypothesis that would require a controlled experiment. This controlled experiment would allow the researcher to obtain data that could be statistically analyzed. The researcher would then return to the classroom for more observation or discussion with the teacher or students and the results of the discussion would also be used in the final understanding of the study.

I think this mixed method makes most sense to me. It combines the best of both worlds and probably provides the best data. One of the major downsides, however, is the amount of time this type of study would take, so I think I’ll let the experts do the research!