The evaluation research: A comparative analysis of qualitative and quantitative research methods

Zanyar Nathir Ghafar

doi:10.58881/jllscs.v2i1.122

Authors

Zanyar Nathir Ghafar National Institute of Technology https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1297-3400

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58881/jllscs.v2i1.122

Keywords:

benefits, drwbacks, testing, evaluation, quantitative, qualitative

Abstract

Researchers often use a mixture of qualitative and quantitative approaches drawn from various fields. It is possible to record or quantify quantitative data. Qualitative data are descriptive, linguistically related, and rely on interpretation. Quantitative data provides information such as how many, how much, or how often something occurs. On the other hand, qualitative data could assist us in comprehending the processes, causes, and occurrences of activities. Each approach has many advantages as well as some disadvantages. This research aims to evaluate the various language testing and assessment approaches and compare and contrast their benefits and drawbacks. These advantages included the opportunity to learn more about the development, administration, and interpretation of assessments and tests and the capability to research test-takers behavior, perceptions, attitudes, and understanding. The study's findings showed that the amount of time required gathering data using quantitative research techniques is much less than the amount of time required collecting data using qualitative research methods. Quantitative research methods, on the other hand, have several drawbacks, such as the difficulty of explicating what a researcher means when using a specific word and the fact that these methods can only provide an overarching comprehension of the topic being studied

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bachman, L. F. (1998). Interfaces between second language acquisition and language testing research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Berg, B. L. (2009). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (7th ed.). Pearson International

Blaikie, N. (2007). Approaches to social enquiry (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.

Blaxter, L., Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (2001). How to research (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Open University Press.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. New York: Oxford University Press.

Carr, L. T. (1994). The strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research: What method for nursing? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 20(4), 716-721. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1994.20040716.x

Chalhoub-Deville, M., & Deville, C. (2008). Utilizing psychometric methods in assessment. In E. Shohamy, & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (2nd ed., Vol. 7, pp. 211-224). New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media LLC.

Corbetta, P. (2003). Social research: Theory, methods and techniques. London: SAGE.

Crano, W. D., Brewer, M. B., & Lac, A. (2015). Principles and methods of social research (3rd ed.). London and New York, NY: Routledge.

Cumming, A. (2001). ESL/EFL instructors’ practices for writing assessment: Specific purposes or general purposes? Language Testing, 18(2), 207-224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026553220101800206

Darlington, Y., & Scott, D. (2003). Qualitative research in practice: Stories from the field. Social Work Education: The International Journal, 22(1), 115-118.

Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. London: SAGE.

Douglas, D. (2014). Understanding language testing. London: Routledge.

Farrimond, H. (2013). Doing ethical research. Basingstoke UK, New York, US: Palgrave Macmillan.

Fidalgo, A. M., Alavi, S. M., & Amirian, S. M. R. (2014). Strategies for testing statistical and practical significance in detecting DIF with logistic regression models. Language Testing, 31(4), 433-451. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265532214526748

Flanagan, T. (2013). The scientific method and why it matters. C2C Journal, 7(1), 4-6.

Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research (5th ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Fulcher, G. (2010). Practical language testing. London: Hodder Education.

Fulcher, G., & Davidson, F. (2007). Language testing and assessment: An advanced resource book. London: Routledge.

Hammersley, M. (2007). Educational research and teaching: A response to David Hargreaves’ TTA Lecture. In M. Hammersley (Eds.), Educational Research and Evidence-based Practice (pp. 18-42). London: SAGE Publications.

Harry, B., & Lipsky, M. (2014). Qualitative Research on Special Education Teacher Preparation. In M. McCray, T. Brownell, & B. Lignugaris/Kraft (Eds.), Handbook of research on special education teacher preparation (pp. 445-460).

ILTA. (2016). Codes of Ethics. Retrieved from http://www.iltaonline.com/images/pdfs/ilta_code.pdf

Jang, E. E., Wagner, M., & Park, G. (2014). Mixed Methods Research in Language Testing and Assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 123-153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0267190514000063

Karavas, K. (2013). Fairness and Ethical Language Testing: The Case of the KPG. Directions in Language Teaching and Testing, 1.

Katzenberger, I., & Meilijson, S. (2014). Hebrew language assessment measure for preschool children: A comparison between typically developing children and children with specific language impairment. Language Testing, 31(1), 19-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265532213491961

Kauber, P. (1986). What’s Wrong With a Science of MIS (pp. 572-574)? Proceedings of the 1986 Decision Science Institute, Honolulu, HA.

Klein, H. K., & Myers, M. D. (1999). A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 67-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/249410

Kroeze, J. H. (2012). Postmodernism, interpretivism, and formal ontologies. In M. Mora et al. (Eds.), Research Methodologies, Innovations and Philosophies in Software Systems Engineering and Information Systems. USA: Information Science Reference.

Lam, R. (2015). Language assessment training in Hong Kong: Implications for language assessment literacy. Language Testing, 32(2), 169-197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265532214554321

Lazaraton, A., & Taylor, L. (2007). Qualitative research methods in language test development and validation. In Fox et al. (Eds.), Language Testing Reconsidered (pp. 113-130). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.

Loizos, P. (2000). Video, film and photographs as research documents. In M. W. Bauer, & G. Gaskell (Eds.), Qualitative Researching with Text. Image and Sound. London: Sage Publications

Marcon, T., & Gopal, A. (2005). Uncertain knowledge, uncertain time. Toronto: ASAC.

Martin, W., & Bridgmon, K. (2012). Quantitative and statistical research methods: from hypothesis to results. New Jersey, USA: Jossey-Bass

Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Sage publications.

McNamara, T. (2000). Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

McNamara, T., & Roever, C. (2006). Language testing: The social dimension (Vol. 1). John Wiley & Sons.

Mohan, B. A. (2012). Qualitative research methods in second language assessment. In L. V. Hedges, R. Coe, & M. Waring (Eds.), Research methods and methodologies in education (pp. 752-767). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Payne, G., & Payne, J. (2004). Key concepts in social research. London: Sage.

Powers, D. E., & Powers, A. (2015). The incremental contribution of TOEIC® Listening, Reading, Speaking, and Writing tests to predicting performance on real-life English language tasks. Language Testing, 32(2), 151-167. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265532214551855

Rasinger, S. M. (2013). Quantitative research in linguistics: An introduction. A & C Black

Ravitch, D. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Richards, T. J., & Richards, L. (1994). Using computers in qualitative research. In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 445-462). London: Sage Publications

Richardson, A. J. (2012). Paradigms, theory and management accounting practice: A comment on Parker (forthcoming) “Qualitative management accounting research: Assessing deliverables and relevance”. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 23(1), 83-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2011.05.003

Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (2013). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. London: Sage.

Rumsey, M., Thiessen, J., Buchan, J., & Daly, J. (2016). The consequences of English language testing for international health professionals and students: An Australian case study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 54, 95-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.06.001

Sallee, M. W., & Flood, J. T. (2012). Using qualitative research to bridge research, policy, and practice. Theory Into Practice, 51(2), 137-144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2012.662873

Schofield, J. W. (2007). Increasing the generalizability of qualitative research. In M. Hammersley (Ed.), Educational Research and Evidence-based Practice (pp. 181-203). London: SAGE Publications

Silverman, D. (2010). Qualitative research. London: Sage.

Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research (Vol. 15). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Van Maanen, J. (1979). Reclaiming qualitative methods for organizational research: A preface. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 520-526. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2392358

Weber, R. (2004). Editor’s comments: The rhetoric of positivism versus interpretivism: A personal view. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), iii-xii. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/25148621.pdf?acceptTC=true

Weir, C. J. (2005). Language Testing and Validation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Wilson, A. (2014). Being a practitioner: An application of Heidegger’s phenomenology. Nurse Researcher, 21(6), 28-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.7748/nr.21.6.28.e1251