Hello everyone, I'm pressing on with writing and planning and I'd like to ask what you think of this...

I'm using a mixed methods design for my work and so I think that describing this and all the considerations that you have to make should make my methodology chapter. Now, my mixed methods model consists of 3 phase and each phase is made up of particular methods that I have to use for the data collection. What I want to do is not have these methods in the methodology chapter since these methods are not actually the methodology - plus it would make my methodology chapter more complicated and unclear than the bible. What I want to do is have 3 proceeding chapters in my thesis that describe each phase, so chapter 3: Phase 1, chapter 4: phase 2, and so on. In each of the proceeding chapters, I'd then like to discuss the particular methods and results of the mixed methodology study I have done for each phase. I think it will flow better and make for a clearer read, and show how each phase of the mixed methodology study informs the next.
I'd be really interested and appreciative to see what you think, if I am making sense.

======= Date Modified 05 Jan 2010 12:35:34 =======
Blimey, other people's PhDs are so complcated; I think we forget how indepth our stuff is much of the time. It sounds alright to me, but I'm in a completely different area, so maybe someone like Sneaks who, I think, has more of a clue about your kind of work.

Good luck, all sounds very inventive. Here, ahve th last of the turkey, it's been curried to oblivion, so don't worry about salmonella... (turkey)

Aww, cheers for the turkey, Eska. Pity I've just had scrambled eggs for my dinner and am now eating a Wham bar. Thanks for your input too, as it's nice to know someone else thinks it's logical too. I'll see what other people think too - and if I can get a consensus, I'll feel happier rolling with it.

I'm using mixed methods too - but I have put these methods in my methodology chapter, relating each set to both the chapter and the research aims and research questions. that way it is easy to see why I have used specific methods in each one, mine also builds on previous chapters. I have put the main argument about qual and quant approaches in an appendix, since I think whoever reads it would know enough to be able to skip that bit if they want, and have concentrated on the reasoning behind using the approach I have taken. I also spent a bit of time on my use of the internet etc. and the ethics.

Hi Joyce, thanks for your input on this. I'm not sure what mixed methods model you might have used in your research, but I've adopted a sequential exploratory mixed methods design to design a questionnaire and it's comprised of 3 phases. The first phase is concerned with generating the content, the second with assembling the instrument and the third with, essentially, validating it. I've found that there are so many considerations in formulating and implementing a mixed methodology study that it alone should constitute the methodology chapter in my thesis. So what models did I consider, what sampling strategy, data collection and data analysis, validation paradigms and the like.
My idea was then to break down the chapters into into one for each of the phases, which can deal with how the questionnaire was put together in the sequential form indicated by the methodology, so it follows the spirit of the sequential exploratory design and shows, bit-by-bit, how one phase informs the other and the questionnaires is gradually put together. So, although the methodology chapter discusses phase 1 as qualitative and concerned with item generation, the actual method that was used to do it (descriptive phenomenology in my case) and results are covered in the phase 1 content generation chapter. I just find that what I have done is so complicated and so many considerations where made that I just can't fit it into a single methodology chapter because of the size and complexity. You have really got me thinking now. I'll bet it probably seems really stupid now. :$

Hi Walminski,

with all respect, that sound really complicated what you have written down.

I have worked as follows:

One chapter addressing:

1. Explained what methodology was chosen and for what reason
2. Based on the methodology which data collection method and data analysis method were chosen and for what reason.

I think your project is more complex as mine, yet even so, I would suggest to try and keep it simple, especially if the issues are complicated and hard to grasp.:-)

My mix of methods is really mixed! However my chapters also lead from one to another, starting with very important material which comes from another area (business) so might seem a bit odd. but at the beginning of my thesis - in a rough draft way at the moment - I have put in a table with the chapters named, labelled and each one has the aim of the chapter and the research question it will answer. This means that I can refer to these when writing my methodology. The main general argument about qual, quant, mixed methods etc. had been placed in the appendix and I refer to this in the main methodology chapter, keeping this chapter for info about the way I have used the different methods, and why I have used them. For example my questionnaire contains material for several chapters, so I have put a note to this effect, what will go where and why, and why I have chosen to work on my thesis in this way, how my approach is different (my sup says it is any way :$. He says the methodology chap should relate very closely to what you do/did and why this worked for you. (I suppose because you should assume that the people reading it know all about the pros and cons of different methods or they wouldn't be reading it!). I have also made a chart to show how the chapters fit together, if you can do this it will clarify where you are going - my sup likes this too!:-)- then how ever complicated your thought process/methodology is it will give the reader something to which they can refer to make sure they understand where you are going. I think if you try to describe things in each chapter they might not like it, convention rules OK (this comes from someone who, when the class was asked to produce a pot, instead of following everyone else and making a little didy thing, actually formed hers in two dustbin lid which she then joined together, so it was a bit - um- larger than everyone else's pot :$

Thank you both Rick and Joyce for you helpful comments; it's much appreciated. This is really food for thought and I'm really struggling to think about the best way of going forward with my methodology. To me, it just seems more logical to discuss the overall methodology and then have the individual methods and results described for each individual phase - I think it would flow better. But the, as you say Joyce, there is convention. Hopefully, there is also more than one way to skin a cat.

hey Wal, how was the Wham bar?

I think its a tricky one. I tell my MSc students to make it as easy to read for the marker as possible so I guess the same applied for the PhD. If it reads easier in your format go for it!

I am using mixed methods but I'm not totally sure what I am going to do. I think its going to be 1) how difficult research is in my area 2) methods I have chosen and the philosophical stuff about using quant and qual methods and then I think I will just talk about the actual methods in each chapter relating to the study e.g. interviews, analysis techniques etc.

Morning, Sneaks. Thanks you very much for the PM. I'm going to send you a very nice mixed methods book. I've will have used a lot of techniques, all with their own theoretical considerations and methods that need describing and it just seems so stupid (even though it's probably not) to stick it all in a methodology chapter - it'll be huge if I do. Plus with trying to show how the questionnaire is put together in each of the phases...I'll have the methodology that describes the entire thing and it'll be really unwieldy and much more difficult to follow. I'll have phase 1 and then the methods (descriptive phenomenology), which will need describing, plus the rules and conventions I used to write the items. Then I'll have phase 2 concerning item selection, the method I used for this and then the pre-testing method. Then phase 3 and all the methods I used for that. I'm not sure how I can hope to plonk that all in one chapter. There's always the linking with the appendix, but that'll already be full. I'm going to have a meeting with my supervisors I think, see what they think and argue if necessary.
The Wham bar was okay, but they've changed the recipe, it didn't have many fizzy bits in it and the cold weather made it extremely crunchy. I've had better Wham bars to be honest.

Hi. I've just found this site today. I'm using a sequential exploratory MM design for my PhD research and have just really started thinking about how I will write it up. Has anyone read/seen a thesis using a sequential exploratory design, if so I'd be interested in the reference information. Thanks