Research in the field of education administration demonstrates that there are plethora of pressing issues that are addressed in this context. While many of the investigations undertaken in this discipline focus on quantitative methodologies, some utilize qualitative methodologies in order to provide a clear understanding of the subject being investigated. A precursory overview of both the quantitative and qualitative methodologies that are used in this field demonstrates that both methodologies are necessary for providing researchers with the critical answers and solutions they seek.Although both quantitative and qualitative methodologies are viable for use in the field of education administration, the reality is that the context of and data collected in these investigations is notably different. With this in mind, there is a clear impetus to examine the differences that exist when it comes to quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Using this as a basis for investigation, this research considers a comparison/contrast of two research studies in the field of education: one quantitative study and one qualitative study.
[...] In other words, in these interviews administrators offered few ideas for altering the current general education programs as a potential strategy for addressing the problems of at-risk children” (p. 223). In order to carry out their investigation, Allington, McGill-Franzen and Schick utilized semistructured interviews with ten administrators in the six districts. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Each administrator was given the same set of open-ended questions. The questions were designed to elicit elaboration or clarification on a specific issue. [...]
[...] In addition to retrospective data, each student was asked to fill out a written questionnaire in the presence of an instructor and the researcher. Staff members were also asked to complete a questionnaire. In total 645 staff members—711 teachers and 34 administrators—completed the questionnaire. The specific procedure utilized for this investigation was four-fold in nature. As identified by the author, the following four steps were used in the investigation: First that impact of tracking on overall student achievement was assessed using multilevel analyses. [...]
[...] In general, the data upon which Van Houtte had based his research provides a salient framework for the reader to understand the issue and its complexity in terms of the variables used by the author. The literature review used by Allington, McGill-Franzen and Schick is not clearly differentiated in the article. The first paragraph of the research—which is not labeled but appears to be the abstract—simply flows into the second paragraph, which begins the literature review. Even though the structure of the literature review used by Allington, McGill-Franzen and Schick is not as formal as the one used by Van Houtte, the content and quality of the research used is of the same caliber. [...]
[...] While Van Houtte provides a detailed account of the methods used for data collection and analysis, Allington, McGill-Franzen and Schick are able to summarize their procedures and data analysis in one small paragraph. In this investigation, the authors detail the type of methodology used (semistructured interviews) but do not provide an indication of the specific questions asked. Further, the authors note that the data was transcribed and coded. However, the authors do not provide a detailed account of the specific parameters that were used for coding the data. [...]
[...] While the abstract contains most of this information, it is expanded in the opening of the paper, providing the reader with a clear sense of the importance and significance of the research. Unlike the research produced by Van Houtte, the qualitative investigation provided by Allington, McGill-Franzen and Schick does not provide a clear purpose or problem statement. In this research study, the authors note the more general issues involved in the context of special education, but do not provide a clear understanding of how their current research provides a segue for understanding these problems. [...]
Online readingwith our online reader
Content validatedby our reading committee