A Systematic Review of Research Questions in Mixed Methods Studies in Instructional Design
Full Text (PDF)
More Detail
1 Department of Equity, Leadership Studies, and Instructional Technologies, San Francisco State University, USA2 Department of Educational Leadership, University of North Carolina Charlotte, USA3 Stearns Center for Teaching and Learning, George Mason University, USA* Corresponding Author
Abstract
Researchers’ reliance on using mixed methods for in-depth understanding of a phenomenon is on a rise. This review provides a synthesis of studies using Mixed Methods Research (MMR) approach in the field of instructional design, with a particular focus on research questions. The results show that of the 752 articles published on MMR in the instructional design field, only 80 studies framed the research questions that were consistent with the practice of MMR. Of those 80 studies, findings revealed that experimental research questions and descriptive research questions were the most popular types of research questions used. Furthermore, the MMR articles were published in multiple (n=59) peer-reviewed journals are mostly in higher education (44%) and K-12 settings (42.5%). Although, there is a steady increase in the application MMR with the highest number of studies published in 2018 (29%) and 2017 (25%), the number of articles that accurately frame research questions were very low. This study revealed a need to build instructional design researchers’ ability to use MMR questions in their studies. This report suggests optimal ways to develop research questions that are grounded in the fundamental principles of MMR.
License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Article Type: Research Article
PEDAGOGICAL RES, Volume 6, Issue 4, October 2021, Article No: em0107
https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11282
Publication date: 20 Oct 2021
Article Views: 1791
Article Downloads: 1498
Open Access Disclosures References How to cite this articleDisclosure
Declaration of Conflict of Interest: No conflict of interest is declared by author(s).
Data sharing statement: Data supporting the findings and conclusions are available upon request from the corresponding author(s).
References
- Adham, R., Parslow, P., Dimitriadi, Y., & Lundqvist, K. Ø. (2018). The use of Avatars in gender segregated online learning within MOOCs in Saudi Arabia-Arwaq case study. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(1), 202-220. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i1.3139
- Akay, C. (2017). Turkish high school students’ English demotivation and their seeking for remotivation: A mixed method research. English Language Teaching, 10(8), 107-122. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n8p107
- Alise, M. A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). A continuation of the paradigm wars? Prevalence rates of methodological approaches across the social/behavioral Sciences. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(2), 103-126. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689809360805
- Alt, D. (2014). The construction and validation of a new scale for measuring features of constructivist learning environments in higher education. Frontline Learning Research, 2(3), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v2i2.68
- Alyaz, Y., & Genc, Z. S. (2016). Digital game-based language learning in foreign language teacher education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 17(4), 130-146. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.44375
- Annetta, L. A., Frazier, W. M., Folta, E., Holmes, S., Lamb, R., & Cheng, M.-T. (2013). Science teacher efficacy and extrinsic factors toward professional development using video games in a design-based research model: The next generation of STEM learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(1), 47-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9375-y
- Awada, G., & Diab, H. B. (2018). The effect of Google Earth and Wiki models on oral presentation skills of University EFL learners. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 30(1), 36-46. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1169829.pdf
- Borup, J., West, R. E., Thomas, R., & Graham, C. R. (2014). Examining the impact of video feedback on instructor social presence in blended courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(3), 232-256. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i3.1821
- Brereton, P., Kitchenham, B. A., Budgen, D., Turner, M., & Khalil, M. (2007). Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(4), 571-583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2006.07.009
- Brown, A. L. (2014). Implementing active learning in an online teacher education course. American Journal of Distance Education, 28(3), 170-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2014.924695
- Chen, C. Y., & Pedersen, S. (2012). Learners’ internal management of cognitive processing in online learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 49(2), 363-373. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2012.728873
- Chen, S. H., & Tsai, M. Y. (2013). Using the interactive whiteboards to teach picture books: The case of Taiwan. International Education Studies, 6(11), 86-92. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v6n11p86
- Chow, A. S., & Croxton, R. A. (2017). Designing a responsive e-learning infrastructure: Systemic change in higher education. American Journal of Distance Education, 31(1), 20-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2017.1262733
- Chua, J. H., & Jamil, H. (2014). The effect of field specialization variation on technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) among Malaysian TVET instructors. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2(1), 36-44. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1086399.pdf
- Ciampa, K., & Gallagher, T. L. (2015). Blogging to enhance in-service teachers’ professional learning and development during collaborative inquiry. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(6), 883-913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9404-7
- Clark, V. P., & Badiee, M. (2010). Research questions in mixed methods research. SAGE Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research, 275-304. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193.n12
- Collins, K. M. T., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Jiao, Q. G. (2007). A mixed methods investigation of mixed Methods Sampling Designs in Social and Health Science Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 267–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807299526
- Conn, S. S., Boyer, J. D., Hu, D., & Wilkinson, T. (2010). Scaling large-size undergraduate classes at a top research university via eLearning strategies: A facilitated model of instruction using a web 2.0 paradigm. Information Systems Education Journal, 8(5), 5. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1146937.pdf
- Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd edn.), Pearson Education.
- Creswell, J. W. (2014) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th edn.), Sage Publications.
- Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications.
- Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V., Gutmann, M., & Hanson, W. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 209-240). Sage Publications.
- Crompton, H., Burke, D., Gregory, K. H., & Gräbe, C. (2016). The use of mobile learning in science: A systematic review. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 149-160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9597-x
- Deveci, T. (2018). Student perceptions on collaborative writing in a project-based course. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(4), 721-732. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2018.060415
- Dimitroff, A. R., Dimitroff, A. J., & Alhashimi, R. (2018). Student motivation: A comparison and investigation of ESL and EFL environments. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 10(2), 1-13. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1207226.pdf
- Durdu, L., & Dag, F. (2017). Pre-Service teachers’ TPACK development and conceptions through a TPACK-Based course. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42(11), 10. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2017v42n11.10
- Dursun, O. O., Donmez, O., & Akbulut, Y. (2018). Predictors of cyberloafing among preservice information technology teachers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(1), 22-41. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6209
- Ebrahimzadeh, M. (2017). Readers, players, and watchers: EFL students’ vocabulary acquisition through digital video games. English Language Teaching, 10(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n2p1
- Ermeling, B. A., Tatsui, T. T., & Young, K. R. (2015). Virtual coaching for instructional leaders: A multi-method investigation of technology-enabled external assistance. Teachers College Record, 117(11), 110303.
- Firat, M. (2016). Determining the effects of LMS learning behaviors on academic achievement in a learning analytic perspective. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 75-87. https://doi.org/10.28945/3405
- Foster, A., & Shah, M. (2015). The play curricular activity reflection discussion model for game-based learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 47(2), 71-88. https://doi.org/10.1018/15391523.2015.967551
- Frazier, D. K., & Trekles, A. M. (2018). Elementary 1: 1 iPad implementation: Successes and struggles during the first year. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 46(4), 463-484. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239517737965
- Gibson, C. B. (2017). Elaboration, generalization, triangulation, and interpretation: On enhancing the value of mixed method research. Organizational Research Methods, 20(2), 193-223. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428116639133
- Gokcearslan, S. (2017). Perspectives of students on acceptance of tablets and self-directed learning with technology. Contemporary Educational Technology, 8(1), 40-55. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6186
- Grace, L. (2017). Using time dynamically in static intervals: Does it close the achievement gap? Learning Environments Research, 20(2), 249-267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-017-9227-z
- Green, L. S., Jones, S. A., & Burke, P. A. (2017). School librarians fully online: Preparing the Twenty-First century professional. School Library Research, 20, 1-21. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1150570.pdf
- Hanson, W. E., Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Petska, K. S., & Creswell, J. D. (2005). Mixed methods research designs in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 224-235. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.224
- Hart, L. C., Smith, S. Z., Swars, S. L., & Smith, M. E. (2009). An examination of research methods in mathematics education (1995-2005). Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(1), 26-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689808325771
- Hazaea, A. N., & Alzubi, A. A. (2016). The effectiveness of using mobile on EFL learners’ reading practices in Najran University. English Language Teaching, 9(5), 8-21. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n5p8
- Hoque, M. S., Idrus, R. M., & Islam, Y. M. (2018). A health-check of communicative language teaching (CLT) in rural primary schools of Bangladesh. English Language Teaching, 11(7), 163-175. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v11n7p163
- Hsu, P. S., Van Dyke, M., Smith, T. J., & Looi, C. K. (2018). Argue like a scientist with technology: the effect of within-gender versus cross-gender team argumentation on science knowledge and argumentation skills among middle-level students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(3), 733-766. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9574-1
- Huh, Y., Reigeluth, C. M., & Lee, D. (2014). Collective efficacy and its relationship with leadership in computer-mediated project-based group work. Contemporary Educational Technology, 5(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6112
- Jahanbakhsh, E., & Chalak, A. (2018). Contributory role of virtual courses via Skype to control embarrassment of Iranian EFL learners’ performance. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 19(2), 61-71. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.415660
- Jara, I., Claro, M., Hinostrozaa, J. E., Martín, E. S., Rodríguez, P., Cabello, T., Ibieta, A., & Labbé, C. (2015). Understanding factors related to Chilean students’ digital skills: A mixed methods analysis. Computers & Education, 88, 387-398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.016
- Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
- Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014
- Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2005, April). Mixed methods research: Is there a criterion of demarcation? [Paper presentation]. Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
- Jones, W. M., Hope, S., & Adams, B. (2018). Teachers’ perceptions of digital badges as recognition of professional development. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(3), 427-438. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12557
- Kale, U., & Akcaoglu, M. (2018). The role of relevance in future teachers’ utility value and interest toward technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(2), 283-311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9547-9
- Kara, N. (2018). Understanding university students’ thoughts and practices about digital citizenship: A mixed methods study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(1), 172-185. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26273878
- Kayacan, A., & Razi, S. (2017). Digital self-review and anonymous peer feedback in Turkish high school EFL writing. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(2), 561-577. https://www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/719
- Kihoza, P. D., Zlotnikova, I., Bada, J. K., & Kalegele, K. (2016). An assessment of teachers’ abilities to support blended learning implementation in Tanzanian secondary schools. Contemporary Educational Technology, 7(1), 60-84. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6163
- Kim, C., Kim, M. K., Lee, C., Spector, M., & DeMeester, K. (2013). Teacher beliefs and technology integration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 76-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.005
- Klisc, C., McGill, T., & Hobbs, V. (2017). Use of a post-asynchronous online discussion assessment to enhance student critical thinking. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3030
- Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Lim, W. Y. (2017). Teacher professional development for TPACK-21CL: Effects on teacher ICT integration and student outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(2), 172-196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116656848
- Konijn, W. S., Essink, D. R., de Cock Buning, T., & Zweekhorst, M. B. M. (2018). Flipping the classroom: an effective approach to deal with diversity at higher education. Educational Media International, 55(1), 64-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2018.1439711
- Korucu, A. T. (2017). Teachers’ technology acceptance and usage situations and the evaluation of web pedagogic content knowledge in terms of different variations and the determination of the relationship between these. International Education Studies, 10(3), 54-75. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v10n3p54
- Kuo, Y. C., Belland, B. R., & Kuo, Y. T. (2017). Learning through blogging: Students’ perspectives in collaborative blog-enhanced learning communities. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(2), 37-50.
- Lan, Y. J., & Lin, Y. T. (2016). Mobile seamless technology enhanced CSL oral communication. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 335-350. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.19.3.335
- Leech, N. L., Collins, K. M. T., Jiao, Q. G., Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2011). Mixed research in gifted education: A mixed research investigation of trends in the literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34(6), 860-875. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353211425095
- Lenski, S., Larson, M., McElhone, D., Davis, D. S., Lauritzen, C., Villagómez, A., Yeigh, M., Landon-Hays, M., LeJeune, M., & Scales, W. D. (2016). What teachers want: A statewide survey of reading and English language arts teachers’ instructional materials, preferences, and practices. Literacy Research and Instruction, 55(3), 237-261. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2016.1156202
- Leong, K. E., & Alexander, N. (2014). College students attitude and mathematics achievement using web based homework. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 10(6), 609-615. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1220a
- Li, L. (2011). How do students of diverse achievement levels benefit from peer assessment? International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(2), n2. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2011.050214
- Lin, C.-J., Hwang, G.-J., & Lin, C.-J. (2018). A flipped contextual game-based learning approach to enhancing EFL students’ English business writing performance and reflective behaviors. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(3), 117-131. https://doi.org/10.2991/aisteel-18.2018.31
- Looi, C. K., Sun, D., & Xie, W. (2015). Exploring students’ progression in an inquiry science curriculum enabled by mobile learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 8(1), 43-54. https://doi.org/10.1109/tlt.2014.2376968
- Lopez-Fernandez, O., & Molina-Azorin, J. (2011). The use of mixed methods research in interdisciplinary educational journals. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 5(2), 269-283. https://doi.org/10.5172/mra.2011.5.2.269
- Michelson, K., & Dupuy, B. (2014). Multi-storied lives: Global simulation as an approach to developing multiliteracies in an intermediate French course. L2 Journal, 6(1), 21-49. https://doi.org/10.5070/l26119613
- Mohammadipour, M., Rashid, S. Md, Rafik-Galea, S., & Thai, Y. N. (2018). The relationships between language learning strategies and positive emotions among Malaysian ESL. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 6(1), 86-96. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.6n.1p.86
- Moher, D., Altman, D. G., Liberati, A., & Tetzlaff, J. (2011). PRISMA statement. Epidemiology, 22(1), 128.
- Moran, C. M. (2018). “Just don’t bore us to death”: Seventh graders’ perceptions of flipping a technology-mediated English language arts unit. Middle Grades Review, 4(1), 5. https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/mgreview/vol4/iss1/5
- Nami, F., Marandi, S. S., & Sotoudehnama, E. (2018). Interaction in a discussion list: An exploration of cognitive, social, and teaching presence in teachers’ online collaborations. ReCALL: the Journal of EUROCALL, 30(3), 375-398. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344017000349
- Niglas, K. (2004). The combined use of qualitative and quantitative methods in educational research. Tallinn Pedagogical University Press, Tallinn, Estonia.
- O’Bannon, B. W., Skolits, G. J., & Lubke, J. K. (2017). The influence of digital interactive textbook instruction on student learning preferences, outcomes, and motivation. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 49(3-4), 103-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2017.1303798
- O’Hara, S., Pritchard, R., Huang, C., & Pella, S. (2013). The teaching using technology studio: Innovative professional development to meet the needs of English learners. TESOL Journal, 4(2), 274-294. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.58
- Oktaviyanthi, R., & Supriani, Y. (2015). Utilizing Microsoft mathematics in teaching and learning calculus. Indonesian Mathematical Society Journal on Mathematics Education, 6(1), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.6.1.1902.63-76
- Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Corrigan, J. A. (2018). What is happening now? An overview of mixed methods applications in special education. Research in the Schools, 25(2), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01372.x
- Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2006). Linking research questions to mixed methods data analysis procedures. The Qualitative Report, 11(3), 474-498. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol11/iss3/3
- Parenti, M. A. (2013). Student perceptions of asynchronous and asynchronous web based tools and perceived attainment of academic outcomes. Journal of Educational Technology, 9(4), 8-14. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.9.4.2128
- Pellas, N. (2018). Is the flipped classroom model for all? Correspondence analysis from trainee instructional media designers. Education and Information Technologies, 23(2), 757-775. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9634-x
- Plano Clark, V. L. (2019). Meaningful integration within mixed methods studies: Identifying why, what, when, and how. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 57, 106-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.01.007
- Plano Clark, V. L., & Ivankova, N. V. (2016). Mixed methods research: A guide to the field. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483398341
- Putman, R. S. (2017). Technology versus teachers in the early literacy classroom: an investigation of the effectiveness of the Istation integrated learning system. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(5), 1153-1174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9499-5
- Qayyum, M. A., & Smith, D. (2015). Learning from student experiences for online assessment tasks. Information Research: An International Electronic Journal, 20(2), 674. http://InformationR.net/ir/20-2/paper674.html
- Rienties, B., Héliot, Y., & Jindal-Snape, D. (2013). Understanding social learning relations of international students in a large classroom using social network analysis. Higher Education, 66(4), 489-504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9617-9
- Rodriguez, J., & Diaz, M. V. (2017). Media with captions and description to support learning among children with sensory disabilities. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(11), 2016-2025. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.051118
- Ross, A. A., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2010). Mixed methods research design: A comparison of prevalence in JRME and AERJ. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 4(3), 233-245. https://doi.org/10.5172/mra.2010.4.3.233
- Squires, D. R. (2018). Bridging the learning gap augmented reality’s impact on associative information processing, cognitive load, and working memory: A mixed-methods research study. Journal of Educational Technology, 15(1), 17-25. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.15.1.14618
- Stanley, D., & Zhang, Y. (2018). Do Student-Produced videos can enhance engagement and learning in the online environment. Online Learning, 22(2), 5-26. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i2.1367
- Tang, J., & Rich, C. S. (2017). Automated writing evaluation in an EFL setting: Lessons from China. JALT CALL Journal, 13(2), 117-146. https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v13n2.215
- Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. (2007). Exploring the nature of research questions in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 207-211. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807302814
- Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches (Vol. 46). Sage Publications.
- Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.) (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Sage Publications.
- Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (Eds.) (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative techniques in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage Publications.
- Thompson, B., Vernado, T., & Matthews, B. (2009). Design without make - A new design pedagogy for STEM education. Journal of Educational Technology, 6(1), 20-27. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.6.1.207
- Truscott, D., Swars, S., Smith, S., Thornton-Reid, F., Zhao, Y., Dooley, C., Williams, B., Hart, L., & Matthews, M. (2010). A cross-disciplinary examination of the prevalence of mixed methods in educational research: 1995-2005. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 13, 317-328. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570903097950
- Turgut, Y. (2017). Tracing preservice English language teachers’ perceived TPACK in sophomore, junior, and senior levels. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1368612. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2017.1368612
- Tuševljak, M., Majcen, L., Mervar, L., Stepankina, T., & Čater, B. (2016). E-Learning in higher education: Focus groups and survey among students in central Europe. Journal of Educational Technology, 13(2), 11-20. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1131833.pdf
- van Thiel, L. (2018). Professional learning design framework: supporting technology integration in Alberta. Research in Learning Technology, 26, 1989. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v26.1989
- Walker, A., Recker, M., Robertshaw, M., Osen, J., Leary, H., Ye, L., & Sellers, L. (2011). Integrating technology and problem-based learning: A mixed methods study of two teacher professional development designs. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based learning, 5(2), 7. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1255
- Watson, S. L., Watson, W. R., Yu, J. H., Alamri, H., & Mueller, C. (2017). Learner profiles of attitudinal learning in a MOOC: An explanatory sequential mixed methods study. Computers & Education, 114, 274-285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.005
- Weaver, G., Green, K., Rahman, A., & Epp, E. (2009). An investigation of online and face-to-face communication in general chemistry. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(1), n1. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2009.030118
- Webb, M., & Doman, E. (2016). Does the flipped classroom lead to increased gains on learning outcomes in ESL/EFL contexts? CATESOL Journal, 28(1), 39-67. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1111606.pdf
- Wu, W. C. V., Wang, R. J., & Chen, N. S. (2015). Instructional design using an in-house built teaching assistant robot to enhance elementary school English-as-a-foreign-language learning. Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 696-714. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.792844
- Wyant, J. D., Jones, E. M., & Bulger, S. M. (2015). A mixed methods analysis of a single-course strategy to integrate technology into PETE. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 34(1), 131-151. https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.2013-0114
- Xie, N. C., Kim, M. K., Cheng, S.-L., & Luthy, N. C. (2017). Teacher professional development through digital content evaluation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(4), 1067-1103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9519-0
- Yang, N., Ghislandi, P., & Dellantonio, S. (2018). Online collaboration in a large university class supports quality teaching. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(3), 671-691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9564-8
- Youde, A. (2016). Tutor emotional competences valued by learners in a blended learning contex. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-learning, 19(2), 63-79. https://doi.org/10.1515/eurodl-2016-0008
- Zhu, M., Sari, A., & Lee, M. M. (2018). A systematic review of research methods and topics of the empirical MOOC literature (2014-2016). The Internet and Higher Education, 37, 31-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.01.002
- Zilka, G. C., Cohen, R., & Rahimi, I. (2018). Teacher presence and social presence in virtual and blended courses. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 17(1), 103-126. https://doi.org/10.28945/4061
How to cite this article
APA
Merchant, Z. H., Sadaf, A., Olesova, L., & Wu, T. (2021). A Systematic Review of Research Questions in Mixed Methods Studies in Instructional Design. Pedagogical Research, 6(4), em0107. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11282
Vancouver
Merchant ZH, Sadaf A, Olesova L, Wu T. A Systematic Review of Research Questions in Mixed Methods Studies in Instructional Design. PEDAGOGICAL RES. 2021;6(4):em0107. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11282
AMA
Merchant ZH, Sadaf A, Olesova L, Wu T. A Systematic Review of Research Questions in Mixed Methods Studies in Instructional Design. PEDAGOGICAL RES. 2021;6(4), em0107. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11282
Chicago
Merchant, Zahira Husseinali, Ayesha Sadaf, Larisa Olesova, and Tong Wu. "A Systematic Review of Research Questions in Mixed Methods Studies in Instructional Design". Pedagogical Research 2021 6 no. 4 (2021): em0107. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11282
Harvard
Merchant, Z. H., Sadaf, A., Olesova, L., and Wu, T. (2021). A Systematic Review of Research Questions in Mixed Methods Studies in Instructional Design. Pedagogical Research, 6(4), em0107. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11282
MLA
Merchant, Zahira Husseinali et al. "A Systematic Review of Research Questions in Mixed Methods Studies in Instructional Design". Pedagogical Research, vol. 6, no. 4, 2021, em0107. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11282