You are here:

Mixed Methods for Research on Blended Learning in Teacher Education PROCEEDINGS

, , , Indiana University - Bloomington, United States ; , Indiana University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-64-8 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Abstract

Blended learning has great potentials to be applied in teacher education to increase the access and quality of teacher education programs. Mixed methods combine quantitative and qualitative methods to collect, analyze, and interpret data. Applying mixed methods to study online learning in teacher education helps to enrich research findings for a more comprehensive understanding and to enhance the study's scientific rigor. To ensure the rigor of mixed methods studies on online learning in teacher education, researchers should justify the selection of mixed methods based on research purpose and questions, integrate quantitative and qualitative methods meaningfully and effectively, and maintain methodological congruence.

Citation

Wang, Y., Bonk, C.J., Delandshere, G. & Brush, T. (2008). Mixed Methods for Research on Blended Learning in Teacher Education. In K. McFerrin, R. Weber, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2008--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 4359-4361). Las Vegas, Nevada, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 19, 2018 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Beard, L.A., & Harper, C. (2002). Student perceptions of online versus on campus instruciton. Education, 122(4), 658663.
  2. Creswell, J.W., Clark, V.L.P., Gutmann, M.L., & Hanson, W.E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social& Behaviroal Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications
  3. Greene, J.C., Caracelli, V.J., & Graham, W.F. (1989). Towards a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11(3), 255-274.
  4. Howe, K., & Eisenhart, M. (1990). Standards for qualitative (and quantitative) research: A prolegomenon Educational Researcher, 19(4), 2-9.
  5. Knupfer, N.N., & McLellan, H. (1996). Descriptive Research Methodologies. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. New York: Macmillan.
  6. Maxwell, J.A., & Loomis, D.M. (2003). Mixed methods design: An alternative approach. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social& Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
  7. Moghaddam, F.M., Walker, B.R., & Harre, R. (2003). Cultural distance levles of abstraction, and the advantages of mixed methods. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research (Vol. 111-134). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  8. Morse, J.M. (2003). Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social& Behavioral Research (pp. 189-208). Thousand Oaks, CA:
  9. Newman, I., Ridenour, C.S., Newman, C., & DeMarco, G.M.P.J. (2003). A typology of research purposes and its reationship to mixed methods. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Scoial & Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  10. Osguthorpe, R.T., & Graham, C.R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. The Quaterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227-233.
  11. Sitzmann, T., Kraiger, K., Stewart, D., & Wisher, R. (2006). The comparative effectiveness of Web-based and classroom instruction: A meta-analysis Personnel Psychology(59), 623-664.
  12. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research (pp. 3-50). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
  13. Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Yan, B., & Tan, S. (2005). What makes the difference? A practical analysis of research on the effectiveness of distance education. Teacher College Record, 107, 1836-1884.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.