With any inquiry or research question, a number of aspects need to be considered before a conclusion is made. Even so, there is no definite end when there are various perspectives that may not have been identified. When conducted appropriately, depending on certain circumstances and situations, both quantitative and qualitative approaches could be used independently or together to provide a relatively accurate evaluation of topic interest.
Quantitative, as Dr. John W. Creswell points out, “gives us a large general surface,” or information as a whole. It can be identified through numbers in statistics and is strictly objective. Thus, it requires a large sample size, which leads to high costs and limitations on how the data could be measured or counted, such as using surveys. Essentially, the quantitative approach “strives for generalizations [that lead] to prediction, explanation, and understanding” (Anderson, 2006). Results are used for comparisons and identifies correlations based on “subjects” that were tested.
In the school system, quantitative approaches are used on a continuous basis to measure student learning. Through tests, exams, attendance records, report cards, and grade level segregations, we could monitor progress and create expectations that are reasonable for each subject area. Other examples include, gender playing a role in Physical Education evaluations; and even the minimum number of recorded hours doing community service or work experience are calculated for graduation. The data is used by schools to further enhance and modify their programs; used by post secondary admissions; and by provincial (state) and federal government to provide support and funding.
In comparison, a qualitative approach “gives us the in-depth picture” (Creswell, 2013). It is the details and emotions behind stories and experiences that numbers cannot express. The subjective perspective provides a better understanding of the answers we are given, through observations of what is said or done. The “participants” are generally in a more natural setting, rather than controlled, and the approach is quite flexible (Anderson, 2006). Although, it could be time consuming, it costs less than the qualitative approach and smaller sample sizes are focused on.
If we return to the school setting to see how qualitative approaches are used, we can also see that it is used as frequently as quantitative approaches. Behavioral and classroom management is essential to building safe, welcoming, and productive environments for learning. To do so, teachers must monitor, address, and teach appropriate responses and respect for one another. Skills of attentiveness, building relationships, team work, patience, motivation, and tenacity are some aspects of character and leadership qualities that students are also taught. From these interactions we can learn “meanings, concepts, characteristics, metaphors, symbols, and description of things” (Anderson, 2006). Furthermore, we learn how to direct students based on their previous experiences and knowledge, home environment and culture, and extracurricular activities and responsibilities to name a few.
As identified, the differences between the two methods of collecting information works well for the purposes that were exemplified. However, despite the benefits of each, we can also see that in a single setting, both are required to create a bigger picture. Through the qualitative method, we can recognize recurring themes that may lead in many different directions whereas quantitative method is “hard science” focused on theories, and norm testing, leading towards “universal law” (Anderson, 2006). Together, as a “mixed method,” “triangulation,” “pluralistic research,” either could validate the other or further inform the other, while expanding ideas and ways of thinking. According to the video interview with Dr. John W. Creswell, the combination of using the two methods are already being used widely by researchers, “to health care, to social sciences and to education settings.”
Through my own personal experience and the courses that I teach in a high school setting, I rely on both quantitative and qualitative approaches to understand and evaluate my students fairly. I teach home economics and fine arts, which require students to be present and punctual. This reflects the amount of time the students have to develop and practice the hands-on skills because of the limitations to materials and equipment available only in class. I have been told that it may be impractical to evaluate a student on their attendance, but it spans beyond the general understanding of tallying them in class or not. Before final marks could be given, I try to understand the stories each student has to tell. Some students are tardy or absent due to various reasons and extensions to complete a project could be arranged to ensure they have an equal amount of class time. Or, if I see students simply working at a slower pace but have labored to keep up, then again, arrangements could be made for further assistance.
How students are measured, in numbers that they understand, sets a standard of expectations for students to reach and to gauge their own progress. On a broad system, having friendly competitions in class and trying to match the level of learning set by their peers also creates motivation. These numbers collected are a means of communication. The teacher’s responsibility is to ensure those numbers have not been collected on a rigid scale. Flexibility to accommodate various learning types and levels are put in place so that students are still learning, not discouraged, and challenged appropriately. Thus, various means of quantitative and qualitative methods could only give better outcomes when clarity had been achieved in its process.
References
Anderson, John D. (2006). Qualitative and Quantitative research. Grants & Evaluation Office: Imperial COE.
Creswell, John W. (Mar. 1, 2013). Telling a Complete Story with Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research. SAGE. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5e7kVzMIfs
“Qualitative VS Quantitative Research.” (May 31, 2011). Sarah A. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddx9PshVWXI
Quantitative, as Dr. John W. Creswell points out, “gives us a large general surface,” or information as a whole. It can be identified through numbers in statistics and is strictly objective. Thus, it requires a large sample size, which leads to high costs and limitations on how the data could be measured or counted, such as using surveys. Essentially, the quantitative approach “strives for generalizations [that lead] to prediction, explanation, and understanding” (Anderson, 2006). Results are used for comparisons and identifies correlations based on “subjects” that were tested.
In the school system, quantitative approaches are used on a continuous basis to measure student learning. Through tests, exams, attendance records, report cards, and grade level segregations, we could monitor progress and create expectations that are reasonable for each subject area. Other examples include, gender playing a role in Physical Education evaluations; and even the minimum number of recorded hours doing community service or work experience are calculated for graduation. The data is used by schools to further enhance and modify their programs; used by post secondary admissions; and by provincial (state) and federal government to provide support and funding.
In comparison, a qualitative approach “gives us the in-depth picture” (Creswell, 2013). It is the details and emotions behind stories and experiences that numbers cannot express. The subjective perspective provides a better understanding of the answers we are given, through observations of what is said or done. The “participants” are generally in a more natural setting, rather than controlled, and the approach is quite flexible (Anderson, 2006). Although, it could be time consuming, it costs less than the qualitative approach and smaller sample sizes are focused on.
If we return to the school setting to see how qualitative approaches are used, we can also see that it is used as frequently as quantitative approaches. Behavioral and classroom management is essential to building safe, welcoming, and productive environments for learning. To do so, teachers must monitor, address, and teach appropriate responses and respect for one another. Skills of attentiveness, building relationships, team work, patience, motivation, and tenacity are some aspects of character and leadership qualities that students are also taught. From these interactions we can learn “meanings, concepts, characteristics, metaphors, symbols, and description of things” (Anderson, 2006). Furthermore, we learn how to direct students based on their previous experiences and knowledge, home environment and culture, and extracurricular activities and responsibilities to name a few.
As identified, the differences between the two methods of collecting information works well for the purposes that were exemplified. However, despite the benefits of each, we can also see that in a single setting, both are required to create a bigger picture. Through the qualitative method, we can recognize recurring themes that may lead in many different directions whereas quantitative method is “hard science” focused on theories, and norm testing, leading towards “universal law” (Anderson, 2006). Together, as a “mixed method,” “triangulation,” “pluralistic research,” either could validate the other or further inform the other, while expanding ideas and ways of thinking. According to the video interview with Dr. John W. Creswell, the combination of using the two methods are already being used widely by researchers, “to health care, to social sciences and to education settings.”
Through my own personal experience and the courses that I teach in a high school setting, I rely on both quantitative and qualitative approaches to understand and evaluate my students fairly. I teach home economics and fine arts, which require students to be present and punctual. This reflects the amount of time the students have to develop and practice the hands-on skills because of the limitations to materials and equipment available only in class. I have been told that it may be impractical to evaluate a student on their attendance, but it spans beyond the general understanding of tallying them in class or not. Before final marks could be given, I try to understand the stories each student has to tell. Some students are tardy or absent due to various reasons and extensions to complete a project could be arranged to ensure they have an equal amount of class time. Or, if I see students simply working at a slower pace but have labored to keep up, then again, arrangements could be made for further assistance.
How students are measured, in numbers that they understand, sets a standard of expectations for students to reach and to gauge their own progress. On a broad system, having friendly competitions in class and trying to match the level of learning set by their peers also creates motivation. These numbers collected are a means of communication. The teacher’s responsibility is to ensure those numbers have not been collected on a rigid scale. Flexibility to accommodate various learning types and levels are put in place so that students are still learning, not discouraged, and challenged appropriately. Thus, various means of quantitative and qualitative methods could only give better outcomes when clarity had been achieved in its process.
References
Anderson, John D. (2006). Qualitative and Quantitative research. Grants & Evaluation Office: Imperial COE.
Creswell, John W. (Mar. 1, 2013). Telling a Complete Story with Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research. SAGE. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5e7kVzMIfs
“Qualitative VS Quantitative Research.” (May 31, 2011). Sarah A. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddx9PshVWXI