Methodological synergy in a national project: The VITAE story

Evaluation and Research in Education

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 102-125

  Day, Christopher ^a   Sammons, Pam ^a   Kington, Alison ^a   Gu, Qing ^a   Stobart, Gordon ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

commitment; effectiveness; identity; mixed methods approach; pupils; teachers

Indexed keywords

EID: 35448985513     PISSN: 09500790     EISSN: 17477514     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2167/eri422.0     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. British Educational Research Association. 2004. Revised Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research, Macclesfield: BERA.
2. Brophy, J., and Good, T., 1986. “ Teacher behavior and student achievement ”. In Handbook of Research on Teaching, Edited by: Wittrock, M., 340–370. New York: Macmillan.
3. Bryman, A., 1988. Quality and Quantity in Social Research, London: Allen & Unwin.
4. Buchanan, D. R., 1992. An uneasy alliance: Combining qualitative and quantitative research methods. Health Education Quarterly, 19: 117–135.
5. Cresswell, J. W., 2003. Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6. Day, C. W., Sammons, P., Stobart, G., Kington, A., and Gu, Q., Teachers Matter: Variations in Work, Lives and Effectiveness, Maidenhead: Open University Press. (forthcoming)
7. Day, C. W., Stobart, G., Sammons, P., and Kington, A., 2006a. Variations in the work and lives of teachers: Relative and relational effectiveness. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 12 (2): 169–192.
8. Day, C. W., Stobart, G., Sammons, P., Kington, A., Gu, Q., Smees, R., and Mujtaba, T., 2006b. Variations in Teachers' Work, Lives and Effectiveness Final project report for DfES
9. Department for Education and Skills. 2000. A longitudinal study of factors contributing to variation in teacher effectiveness, London: DFES. Tender No: 4/RP/173/99
10. Ford-Gilboe, M., Campbell, J., and Berman, H., 1995. Stories and numbers: Coexistence without compromise. Advances in Nursing Science, 18: 14–26.
11. Goldstein, H., 1995. Multilevel Statistical Models, London: Edward Arnold.
12. Gorard, S., 2001. Quantitative Methods in Educational Research: The Role of Numbers Made Easy, London: Continuum.
13. Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., and Graham, W. F., 1989. Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11: 255–274.
14. Hammersley, M., 1996. Post mortem or post modern? Some reflections on British sociology of education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 44: 4
15. Hammersley, M., and Atkinson, P., 1983. Ethnography: Principles in Practice, London: Tavistock.
16. Johnson, R. B., and Onwuegbuzie, A. J., 2004. Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33 (7): 14–26.
17. Lincoln, Y., and Guba, E., 2000. “ Pragmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluencies ”. In Handbook of Qualitative Research, Edited by: Denzin, N. K., and Lincoln, Y. S., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18. Miles, M. B., and Huberman, A. M., 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd edn, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Mortimore, P., and Watkins, C., 1999. Understanding Pedagogy and its Impact on Learning, London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
20. Muijs, D., and Reynolds, D., 2005. Effective Teaching: Evidence and Practice, London: Sage.
21. Rossman, G. B., and Wilson, B. L., 1994. Numbers and words revisited: Being shamelessly eclectic. Quality & Quantity, 28: 315–327.
22. Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Taggart, B., and Elliot, K., 2005. Investigating the effects of pre-school provision: Using mixed methods in the EPPE research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8 (3): 207–224.
23. Shulman, L. S., 1986. Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15 (2): 4–14.
24. Strauss, A., and Corbin, J., 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research, Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd edn, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25. Strike, K., Anderson, M., Curren, R., van Geel, T., Pritchard, I., and Robertson, E., 2002. Ethical Standards of the American Educational Research Association: Cases and Commentary, Washington: AERA.
26. Tashakkori, A., and Teddlie, C., 1998. Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27. Tashakkori, A., and Teddlie, C., 2003. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28. Tomlinson, P., 1989. Having it both ways: Hierarchical focusing as research interview method. British Educational Research Journal, 15 (2): 155–176.
29. Walberg, H. J., 1986. “ Synthesis of research on teaching ”. In Handbook on Research on Teaching, 3rd edn, Edited by: Wittrock, M. C., 214–229. New York: Macmillan.
30. Wittrock, M. C., 1986. Handbook of Research on Teaching, New York: Macmillan.