JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Qualitative Analysis on Mixed Research in the field of Mathematics for Elementary Students
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Qualitative Analysis on Mixed Research in the field of Mathematics for Elementary Students
Na, Jang Ham; Kim, Jinho;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
The purpose of this study is to analyze how the qualitative research is applied to mixed method research and thereby to gain an insight to suggest reasonable ways of employing qualitative method in order to accomplish intended goal of research, especially in the field of mathematics education. For that purpose, this study carefully selects and analyzes 5 article that used mixed method and were published by Education of Primary School Mathematics Journal in 2012. Unlike those a few previous studied on mixed method that focused on producing general trend by simply showing quantitative information on what the frequence of used research topic, content, methods combination, quantitative methods, and qualitative methods, this study provides detailed result of qualitative analysis on mixed studies. In sum, this study concludes with practical and in-depth suggestions on how to improve validity of mixed research and qualitative research in the field of mathematic of education.
 Keywords
Qualitative research;Mathematics education research;Mixed Research;Qualitative analysis;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
권경인.양정연 (2014). 상담 분야 혼합연구 동향분석. 교육연구논총 35(1), 103-124.(Kwon, K. & Yang, J. (2014). Trends in mixed methods research in counseling. CNU Journal of Educational Studies 35(1), 103-124.)

2.
김동중.배성철.김원.이다희.최상호 (2014). 수학교육연구 및 혼합 연구방법 동향: 최근 10년간 발표된 국내 학술지 논문을 중심으로. 한국수학교육학회지 시리즈 E <수학교육 논문집> 28(3), 303-320.(Kim, D., Bae, S., Kim, S., Lee, S., & Choi, S. (2014). Trends of mathematics education research and mixed methods - Focusing on domestic mathematics Education Journals for the last 10 years. Communications of Mathematical Education 28(3), 303-320.)

3.
나장함 (2006). 질적 연구의 다양한 타당성에 대한 비교 분석 연구. 교육평가연구 19(1), 265-283.(Na, J. (2006). A comparison analysis of validity issues in qualitative research. Journal of Education Evaluation 19(1), 265-283.)

4.
박상완 (2014). 현직교사교육 연구 동향 분석: 특징과 과제. 한국교원교육연구 31(2), 227-254.(Park, S. (2014). A study on the research trends of in-service teacher education in Korea: Implications and tasks. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education 31(2), 227-254.)

5.
박선형 (2010). 교육행정학의 혼합방법연구 활성화를 위한 예비적 논의. 교육행정학연구 28(2), 27-54.(Park, S. (2010). Exploring theoretical issues of the development of mixed methods research in educational adminstration. The Journal of Educational Administration 28(2), 27-54.)

6.
성용구 (2013). 혼합연구 설계의 타당성을 높이기 위한 단계별 전략. 열린교육연구 21(3), 129-151.(Sung, Y. (2013). The strategies for raising the validity of mixed method research design. The Journal of Yeolin Education 21(3), 129-151.)

7.
이원석 (2011). 혼합 연구방법에서의 패러다임(paradigm)의 혼합. 교육문제연구 39, 195-211.(Lee, W. (2011). Mixing paradigms in mixed methods. The Journal of Research in Education 39, 195-211.)

8.
Depaepe, F., De Corte, E. & Verschaffel, L. (2010). Teacher's approaches towards word problem solving: Elaborating or restricting the problem context. Teaching and Teacher Education 26(2), 152-160. crossref(new window)

9.
Maxwell, J. (1992) Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educational Review 62, 279-300. crossref(new window)

10.
Milles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded source book (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

11.
Mousoulides, N. G., Christou, C., & Sriraman, B. (2008). A modeling perspective on the teaching and learning of mathematical problem solving. Mathematical Thinking and Learning 10(3), 293-304. crossref(new window)

12.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Leech, N. L. (2007). A call for qualitative power analysis. Quality and Quantity 41, 105-121. crossref(new window)

13.
Palm, T. (2007). Impact of authenticity on sense making in word problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics 67(1), 37-58.

14.
Patton, M. G. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3nd Ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

15.
Patton, M. G. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th Ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

16.
Shapiro, E. (1973). Educational evaluation: Rethinking the criteria of competence. School Review 81, 523-549. crossref(new window)

17.
Verschaffel, L. ; Greer, B. & De Corte, E. (2002). Everyday knowledge and mathematical modeling of school word problems. In K. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. van Oers, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing, modeling and tools use in mathematics education (pp. 257-276). Dordrecht, Netherlands; Kluwer Academic Publishers.