In the previous two posts, we looked at how we could choose a proper research method for our study needs, specifically, the qualitative or quantitative instruments we can use to gather data. But a research study’s methodological design is more than determining the specific data collection instruments. There is a broader consideration – the overall framework of the design. This framework could be a particular type of research design or a research paradigm that provides guidance for the data collection process.

For example, we are conducting a study to evaluate the impact of a new pedagogical approach on learning outcomes, and we may consider the experimental/semi-experimental design. In our study, we have an independent variable – new pedagogical approach, and a dependent variable – learning outcomes. We can treat the independent variable as the experimental stimulus, and see what happens when it’s present/absent. Given our resources, we may further consider whether a classical experiment is possible, or we should use semi-experimental designs like the time-series design or using non-equivalent control groups. Once we are clear about the design, we can further figure out the specific data gathering methods – methods we can use to collect data that measures the two variables.

Another example – let’s say we are interested in finding out what competencies are essential for reference librarians. Survey could be an appropriate method to use – we can send out surveys to reference librarians and ask them to self-report the competencies they consider essential to their work. But what if we are hoping to generate a consensus from the study, where the list of competencies is agreed upon by the study participants? In that case, we may use the Delphi study design as the design framework to guide the data collection process – the first step is to select a panel of experts (e.g. established authors in journals like RUSQ, leaders of the profession such as the head of RUSA), and then, we administer rounds of surveys among them to reach a consensus on what competencies are essential for reference librarians.

In qualitative research, there are numerous research paradigms that we can use as the framework of methodology –case study, grounded theory, participatory action research, institutional ethnography, ethnomethodology, and naturalism. These different paradigms represent different approaches to qualitative research. There are no specific methods attached to these paradigms. The distinctions are epistemological, having to do with what data mean, regardless of how they are collected.

Now it’s time to conclude the series of posts on determining the proper research methods – from the overall design to specific data collection methods, we need to understand both our own study needs/constraints and the characteristics and affordance of each method/design in order to make the best decision.