Philosophy

Methodology and Methods in Educational Research

Education forms an integral part of our social world. Therefore, education has been subject to

extensive research by social scientist across a broad spectrum; from educational inequality to home

schooling (Jones, 2015). Education can be defined as the formal or informal process of delivering and

receiving knowledge, skills, values and beliefs (McNeil & Smith, 2018). In this essay, three different

approaches to educational research will be explored – quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods.

This will be done by comparing and analysing academic research journal papers focused on

educational inequality.

When using a quantitative methodological the emphasis is on objective measurements and

numerical analysis of data collected through questionnaires, surveys or secondary data (Both & Cross,

2009). This approach is demonstrated in a study exploring the association between school enrolment,

wealth inequality and educational environment in Mexico (Esposito & Villaseñor, 2017).

In comparison, a qualitative methodological approach involves collecting and analysing

language, pictures or audio to understand concepts, opinions, or experiences. Methods such case

studies, focus groups and interviews as used. It can be used to gather in-depth insights into a

problem/context or generate new ideas for research (Marsh, 2011). This approach is demonstrated

by Molla and Cuthbert (2014) in a study which aimed to explore the experiences of women in

Ethiopian higher education (Molla & Cuthbert, 2014).

Also, researchers in education are increasingly considering mixed methods. By combining

elements of both quantitative and qualitative methodologies they can limit some of the disadvantages

and capitalise on the advantages (Both & Cross, 2009). Researchers may choose to get a broad

overview with quantitative methods and then focus in on a particular aspect to enhance the richness

of their data, resulting the most comprehensive research possible in education (Marsh, 2011).

However, it is worth bearing in mind that mixed methods is not without its flaws; it is likely to be the

most costly and time-consuming option and researchers may only be experienced in one type of

methodological approach (Hoodoo, 2020).

First to compare the different goals of the research in the studies. In quantitative studies the

main goal is to study relationships and analyse cause and effect (McGee, 2013). For example, the study

of Mexican school enrollment aimed to establish any country wide association between wealth

inequality and the educational environment a child is exposed to in their own household as well as at

the municipal level (Esposito & Villaseñor, 2017). The goal being to get generalizable results to

establish any wide-scale, countrywide associations (cause and effect) between the variables and

provide the catalyst for further research as well as insights for policymakers.

In comparison, qualitative studies tend to have a goal focused on studying a phenomenon in

rich detail (McGee, 2013) For example, the study focused on women’s experiences of higher education

had the main purpose of balancing the data heavy information already present on the topic with a

deeper understanding of women’s actual experiences (Molla & Cuthbert, 2014). Here we can see a

clear difference– the quantitative study had the goal of establishing associations and patterns that

could be generalized but void of individual experience whereas the qualitative study aimed to redress

the dominance of data in favour of gaining a deeper, richer understanding unique to individuals

(Booth, 2019).

In terms of the methodology, quantitative methodology tends to emphasise objective

measurements and statistics across a large sample size, such as questionnaires, surveys and structured

interviews (Booth, 2019). For example, Esposito & Villaseñor (2017) in their study exploring school

enrollment and wealth, used the 2010 Mexican census which was based on a questionnaire and had

a huge sample size of 2.9 million households (Esposito & Villaseñor, 2017). Researchers in quantitative

studies are looking for a representative sample, increasing the reliability of their study. As was the

case in this study, a random sample is often chosen to be as representative as possible. Quantitative

methodology results in numerical data that can highlight patterns and associations and is feasible to

conduct across a large sample size. This is an advantage when educational researchers are seeking to

establish overarching patterns and associations that can be generalized to whole populations (McGee,

2013).

In comparison, qualitative methodology places more emphasis on depth, detail and context.

Smaller sample sizes are used with methods being researcher led, such as case studies, focus groups,

interviews and participant observation (Cook & Hill, 2019). Participant selection is more specific with

researchers focusing in on a particular demographic, place or situation (Booth, 2019). For example,

Molla & Cuthbert (2014) used focus groups as their method and had a sample size of n=40 participants

across two universities aimed to be as diverse as possible. Although the sample size is much smaller

than in quantitative research, in this study researchers were able to around 2 hours with participants

meaning they could really explore the meaning, relevance and importance of what participants had

to say, no just observe patterns. This produces data that is rich and detailed and can provide insights

into how issues that arise in research could actually be addressed.

The final point of comparison is how the two differing methodological approaches analyse and

process education data once it has been collected. Quantitative methods typically produce numerical

data to be statistically analysed whereas qualitative methods typically produce data centered around

language or in some cases media and images, which is then interpreted (Cook & Hill, 2019). For

example, Esposito & Villaseñor (2017) analysed their numerical data using statistics to look for

statically significant relationships between wealth inequality and the educational environment. They

found that wealth inequality negatively impacted school enrollment whereas a good educational

environment positively influenced school enrollment (Esposito & Villaseñor, 2017). Quantitative

analysis allowed them to condense large amounts of numerical data into meaningful figures which

represented real life cause and effect they had found in their research. This could then be generalized

to Mexico and demographically similar countries to inform educational policy and practice (Booth,

2019).

Comparatively, Molla & Cuthbert (2014) in their qualitative study used thematic analysis to

allow them to draw out key themes from their spoken interviews. They found that women still

experienced prejudice and sexual violence towards them in higher education despite policies aimed

at addressing gender inequality. Although qualitative analysis produced context specific data, it is

detailed and can help provide explanations and even potentially solutions from participants.

Moreover, researchers could still identify thematic patterns to highlight the most important findings

from their research. This could provide a focus for educational policy and practice, and for future

research (Booth, 2019).

When exploring the advantages and disadvantages of the different methodological

approaches it is important to remember that there are various reasons why educational researchers

adopt different research methodologies. It may be linked to the norm within that research field, the

researchers own research experience, epistemological perspective or practical considerations

(Mangule, 2006).

If they are aiming to identify broad population trends or prove/disprove a hypothesis;

quantitative research can allow meaningful interpretation of large amounts of numerical data into

findings for education. However, accessing such large numbers of people can be time-consuming and

costly. Quantitative research is broadly linked to a more objective approach which can help ensure as

little research biased as possible (Holmes, 2011). Yet, such an objective approach can mean data

provide very little explanatory insight and can lack a human touch important in the social science (Both

& Cross, 2009). Humans after all are subjective in their very nature.

If researchers are looking to explore a more human side to education; focusing on

experiences, discovering potential explanations for phenomena in education, then qualitative

methodologies can also be very valuable. However, findings can be hard to generalise to any wider

context so applicability may be limited. Qualitative data is more accessible for smaller research teams,

as a smaller sample size can result in a less resource intensive study (Crosswaite, 2018). However,

conducting face-to-face research can also be time consuming and analysis of large amounts of written

data can be time consuming (Both & Cross, 2009). Qualitative research is broadly linked to a subjective

view of education, accepting that as humans we have individual experiences. This can provide

insightful and interesting research but runs the risks of producing findings that cannot be utilised

outside of that specific research context (Hernandez Monzoy, 2017).

In conclusion, educational research is complex and as such requires a multi-faceted approach

to help us better understand the educational world through research. Researchers may use different

methodologies for different situations and research contexts. Although no methodological approach

is perfect, the studies analysed here show us that both approaches can produce meaningful findings

for education. Mixed methods also provides another alternative approach should researchers wish to

enhance the benefits of quantitative and qualitative approaches.

Bibliography

Molla, T., & Cuthbert, D. (2014). Qualitative inequality: experiences of women in Ethiopian higher

education. Gender and Education, 26(7), 759-775. doi: 10.1080/09540253.2014.970614

Esposito, L., & Villaseñor, A. (2017). Wealth Inequality, Educational Environment and School

Enrolment: Evidence from Mexico. The Journal of Development Studies, 54(11), 2095-2118. doi:

10.1080/00220388.2017.1385768