1

1.0 Introduction

Philosophical differences between positivist/postpositivist and constructivist

paradigms contributed to tension “paradigm wars” between quantitative and qualitative

researchers. Accordingly, qualitative researchers stress the socially constructed nature of

reality, the intimate relationship between the researcher and what is studied, and …

emphasize the value-laden nature of inquiry … quantitative researchers emphasize the

measurement and analysis of causal relationships between variables, not processes … within

a value-free framework. Advancement in social science during the 1960s and 1970s led

scholars into debating on issues around the traditional methods of research. For example,

Cook and Campbell (1979) discussed the vital role of the research setting. Tashakkori and

Teddlie (1998) observe that these debates focused on a controlled setting that was important

for positivists and a natural setting that was important to the constructivists. Recognizing that

all methods have limitations researchers felt that biases inherent in any single method could

neutralize or counsel the biases of the other methods Creswell (2008).

This paper explores the mixed methods research design under the sub sections of: the

philosophy of the mixed methods, meaning of mixed methods, conditions for using mixed

methods, characteristics of mixed methods, mixed methods strategies, advantages of using

the mixed methods, disadvantages of using mixed methods and a conclusion. The ideas

presented in this paper are a result of a thorough and critical analysis and review of existing

works of selected renowned authorities in research in general and mixed methods in

particular.

2.0 Mixed Methods

Several research experts have defined mixed methods in variety of ways. In this

paper, we adopt the definition advanced by Creswell:

 2

Mixed methods research is a research design (or methodology) in which the

researcher collects, analyzes, and mixes (integrates or connects) both quantitative and

qualitative data in a single study to understand a research problem (Creswell, 2011,

p. ).

Mixed methods are typically used when investigators have questions that examine both

outcomes and processes and involves combining both qualitative and quantitative method in a

single study.

Research experts may use terms such as multiple methods mixing methodology mixed

methods as a formal research design refer to mixing or co-quantitative and qualitative

research techniques at multiple stages from formulation of research questions through

collection analysis and interpretation of data.

2.1 Philosophical Perspective of Mixed Methods

According to Creswell (2009), the problem is most important than the methods being

used since researchers use methods to understand the problem. By 1990s, researchers began

pointing to the similarities between qualitative and quantitative approaches and calling for

recognition that the divide between purists of the two paradigms was exaggerated

(Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). As a result, there emerged a third philosophical thought in the

field of research: pragmatism.

The word pragmatism dates back to the Greek word, "pragma", meaning "action" or

"affair". The Greek historian Polybius called his writings "pragmatic," meaning thereby that

they were intended to be instructive and useful to his readers. In the philosophy of education

the notion that children learn by doing, that critical standards of procedure and understanding

emerge from the application of concepts to directly experienced subject matters, has been

called "pragmatic." In semiotics, the general theory of language, that part that studies the
 3

relation of the user to the words or other signs that he uses is called pragmatics (as distinct

from semantics and syntax). This input is significant to this presentation as the paper is

focusing on mixed methods research in education. Semiotics will be handy in helping to

understanding the notation system that is unique to the mixed methods research designs.

Therefore, the next section of this paper explores the main tenets of the pragmatic philosophy

as applied in mixed methods research.

2.2 The Principles of Pragmatism

According to Thayer (2013), in its broadest and most familiar sense, "pragmatism"

refers to the usefulness, workability, and practicality of ideas, policies, and proposals as

criteria of their merit and claims to attention. Achieving results, "getting things done" in

business and public affairs is often said to be "pragmatic." In educational research,

pragmatism could imply selecting best strategies from both qualitative and quantitative

paradigms in order to better the results of a single study.

According to Creswell (2009) pragmatism is not committed to any one system of

philosophy reality. This applies to mixed methods researchers when they engage in their

research. They have to embrace both philosophies of reality as advance by both positivists

and constructivists as they strive to combine the two into one philosophy of pragmatism. For

example, the mixed method researcher does not rule out both subjective and objective

realities in one study.

In the pragmatic view, individual researchers have a freedom of choice (Creswell,

2009). They are free to choose the methods, techs and procedures of research that best meet

their needs and purpose. The field of choice here is expansive due to the opportunities at the

researcher’s disposal. Applying this principle of pragmatism, a mixed methods researcher can
 4

draw methods, techniques and procedures from both the qualitative and quantitative

paradigms provided they are suitable for their study.

Pragmatists do not see the world as an absolute unity. Similarly, mixed methods

researchers look at too many approaches to collecting and analyzing data rather than

subscribing to only one way. They do so bearing in mind that there is no single design,

quantitative or qualitative that is superior over the other. Therefore, the two paradigms are

combined in a single study to minimise ‘the paradigm wars’ while trying to acknowledge

their differences.

Within the pragmatic framework, truth is what works at the moment. Truth in this

sense is not based on strict dualism between the mind and reality completely independent of

the mind. Therefore in mixed research, investigators use both equal and quant data because

they work to provide the best understanding of the research problem.

Pragmatists researchers look to what and how to research. This is based on the

intended consequences of the study and where they would like to go with it. Owing to this,

mixed methods researchers need to establish a purpose for their mixing: a rationale for the

reason why qualitative and quantitative data need to be mixed in the first place.

Consequently, the choice of a mixed methods research design is not an accident but rather a

deliberate and well informed one. It has to be justified adequately by the researcher.

Pragmatists agree that research always occur in social historical, political and other

contexts (Creswell, 2009). In this way, mixed methods studies may include a post modern

turn, a theoretical lens that is reflexive of social justice and political aim.

Pragmatic perspective to research posits that researchers need to stop asking questions

about reality and the laws of nature. Therefore, mixed methods researchers would simply

like to change the subject. In so doing, the quality of the answers raised to the research
 5

questions are believed to be a product of thorough and exhaustive study. This is made

possible by the mixed methods research designs.

In a nut shell, for the mixed methods researcher, pragmatism opens the door to:

multiple methods, different world view, different assumptions, and different forms of data

collection and analysis methods. It is important for the researchers to fully understand why

they are employing mixed methods design un conducting their studies. There is need to carry

out a self evaluation to establish whether the conditions discussed in the next section are met

or not.

2.3 Conditions for Using Mixed Methods

According to McMillan (2008) not all research studies qualify for a mixed methods

design. This amounts to some conditions that need to be met by the researcher. Researchers

should carefully examine themselves for the following ways before settling for a mixed

methods research.

The research question using either quantitative or qualitative methods alone may be

inadequate or insufficient to allow the researcher to understand the problem under

investigation. This condition is based on the assumption that no single design is sufficient in

itself. The inadequacy can only be filled with combining quantitative and qualitative research

designs in one study. For example, causes of examination malpractices among secondary

school students in Kenya can be studied both quantitatively and qualitatively for intensive

and extensive study.

Results of quantitative data collection and analysis may not adequately explain the

outcomes and additional data is needed to help interpret the findings. In this scenario, the

researcher may have to draw other methods from the qualitative paradigm to further explore
 6

the phenomenon under study. This gives a deeper and in-depth investigation resulting in

better results is achieved.

Results of qualitative data collection and analysis may not adequately explain the

outcome of additional data is needed to help interpret the findings. Sometimes it is important

to consider the inadequacies of the qualitative data which is usually presented as narration or

verbatim form. Such data may not reveal the trend developed in the participants responses.

One way of going about this is by introducing mixed methods to establish such trends. This

helps in enhancing a deeper understanding of the research findings by the readers.

The researcher may first need to identify variables, key concepts and themes through

equal data collection in advance of using quant, tech to further investigate a problem

2.4 Purpose and Characteristics of Mixed Methods Research

Mixed methods researchers have made tremendous effort to highlight factors that set

the mixed methods research apart from the earlier paradigms. Creswell and Piano Clark

(2011) identified characteristic and of mixed methods research. The research: collect and

analyse persuasively and vigorously both qualitative and quantitative data.

This is based on research question; mixes or integrates or links the form of data

concurrently by combining them or merging them by having one build on the other

sequentially or embedding one with the other; gives priority to one/both forms of data in

terms of what research emphasizes; uses these procedures in a single study or in multiple

phases of programme of study; frames these procedures with philosophical worldview and

theoretical lenses; combines the procedures into specific research design that direct the plan

for conducting the study; mixed methods research offers a practical approach to addressing

research problem and question to the potential for the increased applicability because these

problem questions are examined in different ways.

 7

Having explored conditions, purpose and characteristics of the mixed methods design,

this paper discusses the various designs under this emerging paradigm. It is imperative for

any researcher to decide which design they intend to employ in their study. Accordingly, the

key principles to follow when designing a study include:

Deciding on the type of design; identifying the design approach to use; matching the

designs to the study’s problem, purpose and questions; and being clear about the

reason for using mixed methods (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011, p. 54).

From this assertion, it can be deduced that the choice of any research design, mixed methods

designs inclusive, is not an easy task. Therefore, the researcher should pay close attention to

the factors cited by Creswell & Plano Clark, (2011) in selecting the most suitable mixed

methods design to use in any given study.

In examining the factors above, the researcher should bear in mind and be conversant

with the language used in mixed method research. Unlike the qualitative and quantitative

research designs which are straight forward, the mixed methods designs employ a set of

symbols called notations to help the mixed methods researchers and readers understand the

research design(s) in any given study. Therefore, it is important to be conversant with the

notation system before choosing any mixed methods research design.

2.5 Notations used in Mixed Methods

Notations used in mixed methods research provide shorthand labels and symbols that

convey important aspects of mixed methods research, and provides a way that mixed methods

researchers can easily communicate their procedures (Creswell, 2013). The notation system

used today in mixed methods research was developed by Morse (1991). The Morse notation

system shows whether: the study has a qualitative (QUAL) or quantitative (QUAN)

orientation; which aspect of the research design is dominant (QUAN or QUAL); which
 8

research design is least dominant (quan or qual); whether the studies are carried out

simultaneously (QUAL + quan); and whether the studies are carried out sequentially

(QUAN qual).

Table 1 Labels and Symbols used in Mixed Methods Research

Notation Meaning
QUAN Quantitative-oriented
QUAL Qualitative oriented
+ (QUAN +qual) Studies are conducted concurrently
Studies are carried out simultaneously
UPPERCASE (QUAN or QUAL) A dominant design
lowercase (quan or qual) Less dominant design
Brackets ( ) Embedded or Nested design

3.0 Types of Mixed Methods Research Designs

From the summary of the notation system in table 1 above, Creswell (2009) has come

up with six strategies or designs for carrying out the mixed method research. These are:

sequential explanatory; sequential exploratory; sequential transformative; concurrent

triangulation; concurrent nested; and concurrent transformative strategies. Each one of them

has been examined in the section that follows.

3.1 Sequential Explanatory Mixed Methods Research Design

According to Creswell (2009), this is the most straightforward of the six major mixed

methods approaches. It is characterized by collection and analysis of data followed by

qualitative data. In this approach to mixed methods research, priority is given to the

quantitative data and the two methods are integrated during the interpretation phase of the

study. As the name suggests, one phase occurs after the other, that is, the quantitative phase

precedes the qualitative phase.

 9

Findings from the first phase lead to the development of the second phase. A

researcher employing the sequential explanatory design draws the final conclusions based on

data drawn from both phases. Therefore, (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003) assert that the

research questions and data collection and analysis for the second phase evolve from the first

phase.

Notation: QUAN qual

According to Morse (1991), the sequential explanatory design can be very useful

when unexpected results arise from a quantitative study. If this is the case, then the

subsequent qualitative data that follows can be used to examine and explain the quantitative

results in more details. Therefore, the qualitative results assist the mixed methods researcher

in explaining and interpreting the relationships in the findings.

Although the length of time for data collection with the two separate phases to give

equal priority to the two designs can be much, this is not to say that the design has no

strengths. Some of the strengths of the sequential explanatory design include: its

straightforward nature and its ease in implementation due to its steps that fall into clear and

distinct stages.

3.2 Sequential Exploratory Mixed Methods Design

Although this design has many features similar to the sequential explanatory strategy,

it is conducted in two phases with priority given to the qualitative phase.

Notation: QUAL quan

3.2.1 Conducting Sequential Exploratory Design

In contrast to the sequential explanatory strategy, this model is characterized by initial

phase of qualitative data collection and analysis. Therefore, in this model, priority is given to
 10

the qualitative aspect of the study. The findings are then integrated during the interpretation

phase.

3.2.2 Conditions for Sequential Exploratory Design

There are some conditions that summon the use of the sequential exploratory research

design. These include the need to: use quantitative data to assist in the interpretation of

qualitative findings; focus of this strategy is to explore a phenomenon; and test elements of

an emergent theory resulting from the qualitative phase. A sequential exploratory researcher

can generalize qualitative findings to different samples. This is particularly important

considering that generalizeability is not possible with qualitative studies as they focus mainly

on one or few individuals whose circumstances may not be similar to another group

elsewhere.

3.2.3 Strengths of Sequential Exploratory Design

Many research scholars have identified strengths of the sequential exploratory

strategy in conducting mixed methods research. This paper adopted the strengths as

highlighted by Creswell (2009). These include: the strategy can be useful to a researcher who

wants to explore a phenomenon but also wants to expand on qualitative findings; its two

phase approach makes it easy to implement and straightforward to describe and report; and

the strategy is advantageous as it can make a largely qualitative study more palatable to

quantitative supervisor, panel or research community that may be unfamiliar with the

naturalistic tradition.

3.2.4 Limitations of Sequential Exploratory Design

The strategy requires a substantial length of time to complete both data collection

phases, which can be a drawback for some research situations. Besides, the researcher may
 11

find it difficult to build from the qualitative analysis to the subsequent quantitative data

collection.

3.3 Sequential Transformative Strategy

In this strategy, there are two distinct phases following each other. However, the

outstanding feature is that priority can be given to either qualitative or quantitative or even

both. Either design can be used first. As mentioned earlier, either design can be implemented

first before the results from the two phases are integrated during the interpretation phase.

Notation: QUAN +QUAL

However, unlike the first two strategies, the Sequential transformative strategy has a

theoretical perspective to guide the study (Creswell, 2009). The theoretical perspective can be

presented in the form of a conceptual framework, a specific ideology and/or a specific

advocacy. For example,

3.4 Concurrent triangulation strategy

This strategy is considered by some research scholars such as Creswell (2009) as the

traditional mixed methods. According to Morgan (1998) the concurrent triangulation is

deemed appropriate when a researcher uses two different methods in an attempt to confirm,

cross-validate and/or corroborate findings within a single study. An investigator employing

this strategy uses separate quantitative and qualitative methods as a means to offset the

weaknesses inherent within one method with the strengths of the other.

Notation: QUAN + QUAL

Under the concurrent triangulation design, quantitative data are collected from one

level and qualitative data are collected from a different level. Data are analysed by level by

level and results for the quantitative level and the qualitative level are used to formulate

conclusions (Creswell, 2009). This means that the QUAN and QUAL data are analysed

separately. However, inferences are integrated to generate conclusions that represent both
 12

levels hence convergence. Interpretation of the findings can take two forms: convergence of

findings to strengthen knowledge claims of the study and/or explain the lack of convergence

that may result.

As a traditional strategy in the mixed methods, the concurrent triangulation is familiar

to most researchers and can result in well-validated and substantiated findings. Concurrent

data collection leads to a shorter data collection period as opposed to one of the consequential

approaches. However, the concurrent triangulation design requires great effort to adequately

study a phenomenon with two separate methods. It can be difficult to compare the results of

two analyses using data of different forms. A researcher may be unclear about how to resolve

discrepancies that may arise in the findings.

3.5 Concurrent nested strategy

Like the concurrent triangulation, the concurrent nested strategy can be identified by

its data collection phase, that is, both qualitative and quantitative data are collected

simultaneously. However, unlike concurrent triangulation, this strategy has a predominant

design that guides the study. The priority however, can be any of the designs.

Notation: QUAN +( qual) or QUAL + (quan)

According to McMillan (2008), nesting may mean that the embedded method

addresses a different question from that/ those in the dominant method or seeks information

at different levels. Data collected from the two methods are mixed during the analyses phase

of the study and there is analogy of hierarchical analysis. An important feature that

distinguishes this strategy from the concurrent triangulation is that here, a guiding theoretical

perspective is optional.

According to Creswell (2009), the concurrent nested strategy can be useful in that:

qualitative design could embed some quantitative data to enrich the description of the sample

participants. This helps in further understanding of the characteristics of the participants and
 13

an eventual increased better understanding of their responses. For example, the demographic

information about participants who were interviewed or those who participated in focus

group discussion in a study.

The strategy helps the researcher to gain a deeper understanding of the phenomenon

than would be the case if only one paradigm was used. A researcher employing the

concurrent nested strategy is able to gain a broader perspective than they would have if only

one predominant design was used. This is necessitated by the fact that qualitative data could

be used to describe an aspect of the quantitative study that cannot be quantified.

A concurrent nested investigator may choose to utilize different methods to study

different groups or levels. For example, principals can be studied qualitatively through in-

depth interviews while students could be studied quantitatively using questionnaires to gather

data. Due to this, sometimes the concurrent nested design is referred to as the multi-level

design.

Through the concurrent nested design, a mixed methods investigator is able to collect

the two types of data simultaneously, during a single data collection phase. Therefore

researcher can gain perspectives from the different types of data or from the different levels

within the study. The design also provides the study with advantages of both quantitative and

qualitative data.

Characteristics and strengths, the design also has some limitations. These include: the

need for data to be transformed in order to gain integration within analysis phase; minimal

advice on how a researcher should resolve discrepancies occurring between the two types of

data. Due to the unequal priority in the designs, unequal evidence is likely to emerge within a

study that may disadvantage interpretation of final results.

 14

3.6 Concurrent transformative strategy

In this strategy, the researcher is guided by the use of a specific theoretical

perspective which is reflected in the purpose of the study or research questions. As the earlier

concurrent strategies, the two types of data are collected at the same time in one phase in this

design. Integration occurs during one data collection phase although integration during the

interpretation phase is a possible variation.

Notation: QUAN + Qual

The strategy positions mixed methods research within the transformative framework

thus making it especially appealing to qualitative and quantitative researchers who may be

already using transformative framework to guide their inquiry.

4.0 Selecting an Appropriate Mixed Method Design

(Key Decisions In Choosing A Mixed Methods Study)

The level of interaction between the quantitative and qualitative strands

The priority of the strands

The timing of the strands
Where and how to mix the strands

5.0 Steps in Conducting Mixed Methods Research

Seven steps to conducting mixed methods studies have been identified by Creswell

(2005). It is important to note that these steps apply regardless of the researchers design

specifications. However, this does not imply that the steps are universally strict.

At the initial step, the researcher determines the feasibility of conducting a mixed

method study. The researcher preoccupies him/herself with questions relating to their level of

training and expertise in the mixed methods. Other factors to consider include the time and

resources at the researcher’s disposal for data collection and analyses. Any inadequacy in
 15

these could be a pointer to the reduced likelihood of successfully conducting a mixed

methods study to completion. For instance, there is need for the researcher to be competent

and trained in both the qualitative and quantitative research paradigms as these inform the

mixed methods.

Secondly, the researcher should justify the choice of the mixed methods design. This

rationale is important as it is likely to assist the researcher in clearly justifying the purpose of

the study to the readers/audience. Therefore, solid reasons for conducting the research should

be articulated before the actual study is initiated.

Thirdly, the researcher should determine the design, type of data and strategy for data

collection. The researcher can go about this by selecting from triangulation, explanatory or

exploratory. The priority and sequence of data collection and specific forms of information to

be collected also constitute an important part of planning the procedures to be followed in the

study. It is also at this point that the researcher maps out the design using the notation system.

An example would include: QUAN qual, QUAL quan, QUAN + QUAL or

QUAN + qual and so forth.

Fourthly, the specific quantitative and qualitative research questions are established.

Some authors would argue that the research questions should be specified earlier, Creswell

suggests that this should be done at this level. In specifying research questions, caution

should be taken so that besides reflecting the design, they should be solicit answers through

the specified data collection methods. Typically, it is expected that the researcher develops

separate quantitative and qualitative research questions to incorporate into a single study. For

example, in an exploratory study, it may be necessary to define quantitative questions prior to

the analysis of qualitative data.

Fifthly, data collection is carried out. The researcher should bear in mind that this can

be the lengthiest stage in the entire research process and therefore very much time
 16

consuming. This is because the researcher has to follow the conventional procedures for each

type of data in order to ensure appropriateness of data collection. The sequence of data

collection spelt out in the third step should also be adhered to. If the sequence is QUAL +

quan, then the researcher has to collect the data at the same time.

Sixthly, the researcher analyses data from the field. Again, this is tied to the design

and sequence specified in step three. Depending on the design and sequence, data can be

analyzed separately and independently or might involve integration of qualitative and

quantitative data into a single analytical strategy.

Finally, the report is written depending on the design employed in the study.

However, regardless of the design, both qualitative and quantitative components of the study

must be clearly reported within the method section. Whereas reports of triangulation designs

are likely to integrate qualitative and quantitative results around research questions in a single

results section, the explanatory and exploratory designs do not. Instead, the results for

quantitative and qualitative analyses may be reported in different sections for each phase of

the study.

6.0 Evaluation Mixed Methods Studies

According to Mertens (2005), the following questions can be applied to the evaluation

of mixed method studies: What are the multiple purposes and questions that justify the use of

a mixed methods design?; To what extent has the researcher adhered to the criteria that define

quality for the quantitative portion of the study?; To what extent has the researcher adhered to

the criteria that define quality for the qualitative portion of the study?; How has the

researcher addressed tension between potentially conflicting demands of the paradigms in the

design implementation of the study?;

Has the researcher appropriately acknowledged the limitations associated with data

that were collected to supplement the main data collection of the study; how has the
 17

researcher integrated the results from the mixed methods? Where necessary, has the

researcher explained conflicting findings that resulted from the different methods?; and What

evidence is there that the researcher developed the design to be responsive to the practical

and cultural needs of specific subgroups on the basis of such dimensions as disability, culture,

language, educational levels, gender, socioeconomic class and so forth.

7.0 Strengths and Limitations of Mixed Methods Research

There are many advantages when a researcher uses the mixed methods design in

conducting their study. According to McMillan (2008), mixed methods is advantageous to the

researcher in that: the ability to examine multiple forms of data; ability to answer complex

research questions that cannot be addressed through the use of quantitative or qualitative

methods alone; allows the researcher to capitalize on what are viewed as strengths of one

method in a manner that compensates for what have typically been viewed as the weaknesses

in the other.

However, there are some limitations that a researcher using mixed methods is likely to

encounter during the study. Considering that the style for reporting quantitative and

qualitative results are distinctly apart, this can be a challenge to the researcher along with the

integration of findings to come up with a coherent report from the two separate parts. In

addition, Tashakkori & Teddle (2003) observe that handling mixed methods study calls for

more than a rudimentary level of understanding of the procedures and data analysis

techniques. To sufficiently carry out a mixed study, there ought to be some level of expertise.

Lastly, mixed method studies involve more extensive data collection and subsequent analysis

and a more labour intensive requirement on the researcher.

 18

8.0 Conclusion

Having examined mixed methods design in conduction research, we can say that

within the right context, maize and beans, flour and sugar and even bananas and mangoes can

be mixed together to arrive at a more appealing and satisfying product than one alone. The

research problem and research questions under investigation provide the context within

which the mixed method studies are conducted. Answers to these research questions are the

end result as they provide a thorough explanation of the research problem than either of the

qualitative or quantitative procedures could alone. Researchers conducting studies within the

pragmatic framework are thus summoned to value both objective and subjective

understanding while relying on diverse approaches to research problems. What is

fundamental is the research question- research methods should follow the research questions

in a way that offers the best opportunity to obtain useful and most thorough answers.
 19

References

Creswell, J.W. (2012). .Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative ( ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ; Sage.

Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods

approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore: Sage.

Creswell, J.W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

Education.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V.L. (2006). Designing and conducting mixed methods

research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

McMillan, J.H. (2008). Educational Research: Fundamentals for the Consumer. Boston:

Pearson Education.

Mertens, D.M. (2005). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating

diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Onwoegbuzie, A.J., & Slate, J.R. (2006). Conducting mixed methods data analyses:

A step-by-step guide. Presentation materials from a professional development

course at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,

San Francisco.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural

research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.