This assignment will demonstrate your ability to apply the concepts and techniques taught and used in class. Your ability to apply the course material to “real-world situations” through identifying strengths and weaknesses in published research will be assessed.
The critique should be approximately 3-5 pages and is due at the end of Module 4. You are required to submit a PDF of your article to your instructor along with your critique.
Select a primary source research study (no longer than 20 pages) that uses a mixed method design and data. Be mindful of your selection, which must be an actual research study done by the authors.
Critique the study based on the mechanics of a good research study and the principles of mixed methods. Your written critique must include the identification of the research question, type of design used, the appropriateness of the design for the research question, and comment on the data analysis/results using in-text cited course materials from Modules 1-4.
Use these questions to guide you. When offering your critique and areas for improvement, use in-text cited course materials from Modules 1-4 to support your argument. Be careful not to simply report what was done. This is a critique—NOT a summary of a research article.
- Do the research questions appear to warrant a mixed methods study? Explain your thoughts on this.
- What was the authors’ reason(s) for integrating quantitative and qualitative research? Was it implied or stated explicitly? Were mixed methods needed?
- What philosophical perspective appears to provide the foundation for the study?
- How were the mixed methods design characteristics of timing (simultaneous or sequential), priority (equal, quantitative, or qualitative), and integration (how the quantitative and qualitative methods were mixed) implemented? Did the author(s) do a good job?
- Classify the study’s mixed methods design. Which typology was used and why? Do you believe this was the best fit for the research questions?
- What mixed methods sampling strategies did the authors report? Was this appropriate? Sufficient?
- What were the strengths and weaknesses of this study’s methodology?