Writing for Publication: Transitions and Tools that Support Scholars’ Success - Mary Renck Jalongo, Olivia N. Saracho 2016

Conclusion
From Mixed-Methods Research to a Journal Article
Conference Proposals and Article Types

In work with living things, hybridization is a major mechanism for reducing flaws and producing hardier stock. Plants, for example, are cross-pollinated in the hopes of capturing the best attributes of each. New plants are produced that have greater resistance to pests or diseases, resilience under different growing conditions, or higher crop yields per acre. However, there are no guarantees. Some of the anticipated goals may not be achieved and the hybrid plant could turn out to have other, more serious limitations. Mixed methods research has similar risks and rewards. Ideally, it propels the field forward but it also can become mired in complexity and fail to deliver on its promise. Without a doubt, blending the two research paradigms requires a research skills, high level conceptualization and strength in scholarly writing.

At its best, mixed methods research is an intellectual and practical combination of qualitative and quantitative methodologies that is designed to address complex research questions more extensively and more completely (Morse, 2010). This third research paradigm aims high and attempts to generate “the most informative, complete, balanced, and useful research results” (Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, & Turner 2007, p. 129). A mixed methods research study can lead to insights that cannot be obtained from a qualitative or quantitative research alone (O’Cathain, Murphy, & Nicholl 2007a, 2007b). Above all, mixed methods researchers need to generate a well-written report that reflects “the highest standards of ethical practice both with respect to human participation and with respect to the execution of professional conduct and judgment in research” (AERA, 2006, p. 39).

References

American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 33—40.CrossRef

American Psychological Association Publications and Communications Board Working Group on Journal Article Reporting Standards. (2008). Reporting standards for research in psychology: Why do we need them? What do they need to be? American Psychologist, 63(9), 839—851.CrossRef

American Educational Research Association. (2009). Standards for reporting on humanities- oriented research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 38(6), 481—486.CrossRef

American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Annesley, T. M. (2010a). Bars and pies make better desserts than figures. Clinical Chemistry, 56(9), 1394—1400.CrossRef

Annesley, T. M. (2010b). Bring your best to the table. Clinical Chemistry, 56(10), 1528—1534.CrossRef

Annesley, T. M. (2010c). If an IRDAM journal is what you choose, then sequential results are what you use. Clinical Chemistry, 56(8), 1226—1228.CrossRef

Annesley, T. M. (2010d). “It was a cold and rainy night”: Set the scene with a good introduction. Clinical Chemistry, 56(5), 708—713.CrossRef

Annesley, T. M. (2010e). Put your best figure forward: Line graphs and scattergrams. Clinical Chemistry, 56(8), 1229—1233.CrossRef

Annesley, T. M. (2010f). Show your cards: The results section and the poker game. Clinical Chemistry, 56(7), 1066—1070.CrossRef

Annesley, T. M. (2010g). The abstract and the elevator talk: A tale of two summaries. Clinical Chemistry, 56(4), 521—524.CrossRef

Annesley, T. M. (2010h). The discussion section: Your closing argument. Clinical Chemistry, 56(11), 1671—1674.CrossRef

Annesley, T. M. (2010i). The title says it all. Clinical Chemistry, 56(3), 357—360.CrossRef

Annesley, T. M. (2010j). Who, what, when, where, how, and why: The ingredients in the recipe for a successful methods section. Clinical Chemistry, 56(6), 897—901.CrossRef

Arnon, S., & Reichel, N. (2007). Who is the ideal teacher? Am I?—Similarity and difference in perception of students of education regarding the qualities of a good teacher and of their own qualities as teachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(5), 441—464.CrossRef

Arnon, S., & Reichel, N. (2009). Closed and open-ended question tools in a telephone survey about “The Good Teacher”: An example of a mixed method study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(2), 172—196.

Bannink, A., & Van Dam, J. (2007). Bootstrapping reflection on classroom interactions: Discourse contexts of novice teachers’ thinking. Evaluation and Research in Education, 20(2), 81—99.CrossRef

Benge, C., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Mallette, M. H., & Burgess, M. L. (2010). Doctoral students’ perceptions of barriers to reading empirical literature: A mixed analysis. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 5, 55—77.

Bernardi, L., Keim, S., & von der Lippe, H. (2007). Social influences on fertility: A comparative mixed-methods study in Eastern and Western Germany. Journal of Mixed-Methods Research, 1(1), 23—47. doi:10.1177/23456789062922381-27.CrossRef

Bondi, M., & Sanz, R. L. (Eds.). (2014). Abstracts in academic discourse: Variation and change. New York: Peter Lang.

Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6), 3—15.CrossRef

Brown, J. I., Fishco, V. V., & Hanna, G. (1993). Nelson-Denny reading test: Manual for scoring and interpretation, forms G and H. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.

Burgess, L., Benge, C., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Mallette, M. H. (2012). Doctoral students’ reasons for reading empirical research articles: A mixed analysis. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 12(3), 5—33.

Campbell, D. T. (1957). Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. Psychological Bulletin, 54(4), 297—312.CrossRef

Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1963, 1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago, IL: Rand-McNally.

Collins, K. M. T., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Sutton, I. L. (2006). A model incorporating the rational and purpose for conducting mixed methods research in special education and beyond. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 4(1), 67—100.

Creswell, J. W., Fetters, M. D., & Ivankova, N. V. (2004). Designing a mixed methods study in primary care. Annals of Family Medicine, 2(1), 7—12.CrossRef

Creswell, J. W. (2013a). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2013b). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W., & Tashakkori, A. (2007). Developing publishable mixed methods manuscripts. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 107—111.CrossRef

Dellinger, A. B., & Leech, N. L. (2007). Toward a unified validation framework in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(4), 309—332.CrossRef

Ely, M., Vinz, R., Downing, M., & Anzul, M. (1997). On writing qualitative research: Living by words. New York: Routledge.

Flecha, R. (2014). Using mixed methods from a communicative orientation: Researching with grassroots Roma. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 8(3), 245—254.CrossRef

Gliner, J. A., Morgan, G. A., & Leech, N. L. (2009). Research methods in applied settings: An integrated approach to design and analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry (Vol. 9). New York: Wiley.

Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255—274.CrossRef

Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society (Vol. 1). Boston: Beacon Press.

Hayden, H. E., & Chiu, M. M. (2015). Reflective teaching via a problem exploration—teaching adaptations—resolution cycle: A mixed methods study of preservice teachers’ reflective notes. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(2), 133—153.CrossRef

Jacobs, E. (2003). Mixed methods and moving to opportunity. The Educational Exchange, IX(3), 14—15. Retrieved December 12, 2015, from http://www.hfrp.org/evaluation/the-evaluation-exchange/issue-archive/

Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14—26.CrossRef

Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112—133.CrossRef

Kallemeyn, L., Schiazza, D., Ryan, A. M., Peters, J., & Johnson, C. (2013). Ambitious U.S. history teachers bringing professional development into the classroom: A mixed methods study. Research in the Schools, 20(1), 39—56.

Knaggs, C. M., Sondergeold, T. A., & Schardt, B. (2015). Overcoming barriers to college enrollment, persistence, and perceptions for urban high school students in a college preparatory program. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(1), 7—30.CrossRef

Leech, N. L. (2012). Writing mixed research reports. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(6), 866—881.CrossRef

Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2010). Guidelines for conducting and reporting mixed research in the field of counseling and beyond. Journal of Counseling and Development, 88(1), 61—69.CrossRef

Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2011). Mixed research in counseling: Trends in the literature. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling, 44, 169—180.CrossRef

Leech, N. L., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Combs, J. P. (2011). Writing publishable mixed research articles: Guidelines for emerging scholars in the health sciences. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 5(1), 7—24.CrossRef

Mayring, P. (2007). On generalization in qualitatively oriented research. Retrieved January 13, 2016, from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/291/641

Mack, C. (2012). How to write a good scientific paper: Title, abstract, and keywords. The Journal of Micro/Nanolithography, MEMES, and MOEMS, 11(12), 020101.

McCrudden, M. T., Magliano, J. P., & Schraw, G. (2010). Exploring how relevance instructions affect personal reading intentions, reading goals and text processing: A mixed methods study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(4), 229—241.CrossRef

Mertens, D. (2010). Transformative mixed methods research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 469—474.CrossRef

Milardo, R. M. (2015). Crafting scholarship in the behavioral and social sciences: Writing, reviewing, and editing. New York: Routledge.

Miles, M., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Morse, J. M. (2010). Procedures and practice of mixed method design: Maintaining control, rigor, and complexity. In A. Tashakkori & E. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 339—352). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRef

Newman, I., Ridenour, C. S., Newman, C., & De Marco, G. M. P. (2003). A typology of research purposes and its relationship to mixed methods. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 167—188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

O’Cathain, A., Murphy, E., & Nicholl, J. (2007a). Integration and publications as indicators of “yield” from mixed methods studies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 147—163.CrossRef

O’Cathain, A., Murphy, E., & Nicholl, J. (2007b). Why, and how, mixed methods research is undertaken in health services research: A mixed methods study. BMC Health Services Research, 7(1), 85. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-7-85. Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/7/85

O’Cathain, A., Murphy, E., & Nicholl, J. (2008). Multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, or dysfunctional? Team working in mixed-methods research. Qualitative Health Research, 18(11), 1574—1585.CrossRef

Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2003). Expanding the framework of internal and external validity in quantitative research. Research in the Schools, 10, 71—90.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Collins, K. M. T., Leech, N. L., Dellinger, A. B., & Jiao, Q. G. (2010). A meta-framework for conducting mixed research syntheses for stress and coping researchers and beyond. In G. S. Gates, W. H. Gmelch, & M. Wolverton (Series Eds.), & K. M. T. Collins, A. J. Onwuegbuzie, & Q. G. Jiao (Vol. Eds.), Toward a broader understanding of stress and coping: Mixed methods approaches (pp. 169—211). The Research on Stress and Coping in Education Series (Vol. 5). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Press.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Combs, J. P. (2011). Data analysis in mixed research: A primer. International Journal of Education, 3(1), E13.CrossRef

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daniel, L. G. (2004). Reliability generalization: The importance of considering sample specificity, confidence intervals, and subgroup differences. Research in the Schools, 11(1), 60—71.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2004). Enhancing the interpretation of “significant” findings: The role of mixed methods research. The Qualitative Report, 9(4), 770—792.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2005). On becoming a pragmatic researcher: The importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory and Practice, 8(5), 375—387.CrossRef

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2006). Linking research questions to mixed methods data analysis procedures. The Qualitative Report, 11(3), 474—498.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). A call for qualitative power analyses. Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 41(1), 105—121.CrossRef

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Leech, N. L., & Collins, K. M. T. (2012). Qualitative analysis techniques for the review of the literature. The Qualitative Report, 17(Art. 56), 1—28.

Onwuegbuxie, A. J., Collins, K. M. T., Leech, N. L., Dellinger, A. B., & Jiao, Q. C. (2007, April). Mixed methods + literature reviews = mixed research syntheses: A framework for conducting and writing rigorous, comptehensive, and insightful literature reviews. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Witcher, A. E., Collins, K. M. T., Filer, J. D., Wiedmaier, C. D., & Moore, C. W. (2007). Students’ perceptions of characteristics of effective college teachers: A validity study of a teaching evaluation form using a mixed-methods analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 44(1), 113—160.CrossRef

Parylo, O. (2012). Qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods: An analysis of research design in articles on principal professional development (1998—2008). International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 6(3), 297—313.CrossRef

Parylo, O., & Zepeda, S. J. (2014). Describing an ’effective’ principal: Perceptions of the central office leaders. School Leadership & Management: Formerly School Organisation, 34(5), 518—537.CrossRef

Reichel, N., & Arnon, S. (2005). Three portraits of teachers in the view of students of teaching: The ideal teacher, the teacher of teachers and the image of the student him/herself as a teacher. Dapim, 40, 23—58.

Sandelowski, M. (2003). Tables or tableaux? Writing and reading mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 321—350). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Schwab, J. (1973). The practical translation into curriculum. School Review, 81, 501—522.CrossRef

Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). Exploring the nature of research questions in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 207—211.CrossRef

Taskakkori, A. M., & Teddlie, C. B. (Eds.). (2010). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.