1. INTEGRATING QUANTITATIVE, QUALITATIVE,AND
MIXED METHODS APPROACHES INTO AN INQUIRY
COURSE SEQUENCE
JOHN L. HOFFMAN, CLAIRE CAVALLARO, & EUGENE FUJIMOTO
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY,FULLERTON

2. OVERVIEW

3. CAL STATE FULLERTON CONTEXT
 3-year cohort-based Ed.D. with specializations in P-12 and
Community College Leadership
 6 Terms of Coursework (Years 1-2), each consisting of two core
courses plus a small group Research Support Seminar
 Students complete dissertations inYear 3
 IfYear 4 is needed, students return to the classroom to complete
their dissertations under the guidance of a faculty instructor
(students retain their original dissertation committee)

4. ASSUMPTIONS
 Our graduates will face new and increased demands to lead inquiry
and evaluation efforts in order to meet increased expectations for
data-informed decision-making and educational accountability
 We value authentic assessment and we also believe that academic
exercises should be evaluated in light of students’ development of
knowledge, skills, and dispositions that can be applied to practice as
well as by products that have direct application to practice

5. ASSUMPTIONS
Educational inquiry and the social and moral consequences that
derive from its interpretation and application are too important to
be left in the hands of experts, and too significant to be ignored
and trivialized by the uninformed and indifferent.*
*Language adapted from Peter Gomes (1996)

6. CENTRAL PROBLEM
 CSUF employs a “traditional” five-chapter dissertation, but with
emphasis on educational leadership outcomes
 The traditional research sequence did not serve well dissertations
driven by problems of practice
 Many students’ research questions—as well as the pragmatic
realities of their studies—pointed to mixed methods designs
 In response, we piloted a three course “inquiry sequence” within
the community college specialization beginning in Spring, 2009

7. INQUIRY I (SPRING – 16 WEEKS)
 Preceded by EDD 627: Epistemology
 EDD 611: Inquiry I
 10 weeks quantitative (QUAN) (philosophical foundation, research designs,
bivariate statistics)
 3 weeks qualitative (QUAL) (philosophical foundation)
 3 weeks mixed methods (MM) (philosophical foundation, exemplar studies)

8. INQUIRY II (SUMMER – 8 WEEKS)
 EDD 612: Inquiry II
 5 weeks (10 sessions) QUAL (research designs, data collection, coding and
analysis, reporting)
 2 weeks (4 sessions) QUAN (multivariate statistics)
 1 week (2 sessions) MM (mixed methods designs and analysis)

9. INQUIRY III (FALL – 16WEEKS)
 EDD 613: Inquiry III
 3 weeks QUAN, QUAL, and MM wrap-up
 2 weeks addressing validity and trustworthiness, connected back to
philosophical foundations
 10 weeks on project/contract-based on the elements of Chapter 3
 1 week connecting forward to the dissertation proposal
 Followed by EDD 626B: Integrative Seminar (Proposal Support)

10. THE RESEARCH SUPPORT SEMINAR
TERM RESEARCH SUPPORT SEMINAR INQUIRY
SEQUENCE
1ST Fall 670a: Literature Analysis;Topic  Problem (627: Epistemology)
1st Spring 670b: Research Questions; Practice Chapter1 611: Inquiry I
1st Summer 670c: Qual. Exam Prep; Literature Development 612: Inquiry II
2nd Fall 670d: Practice Chapter 2 613: Inquiry III
2nd Spring 670e: Proposal Development (626b: Integrative Sem.)
2nd Summer 670f: Proposal and IRB (604: Forecasting)
(630: Leadership)

11. LESSONS LEARNED & CHALLENGES
 We now ask students using QUAN-only or QUAL-only approaches
to justify why they are not using MM.
 Some faculty do not have the methodological breadth necessary to
teach these classes. Others have strong commitments to teaching
QUAN-only or QUAL-only courses.
 We lose some QUAN/QUAL depth to add MM—but not much.
 Some MM designs can be a barrier to 3-year completion goals—and
the same is true for some QUAN and QUAL designs.

12. GROUP WORK

13. PROCESS OVERVIEW
 Table Hosts
 Three Discussions
 Methodology Courses for Educational Leadership
 The Inquiry Sequence Model
 Approaches to the Research Support Seminar
 Table Host Reports
 Concluding Comments

14. DISCUSSION #1: METHODOLOGY COURSES FOR
EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP
 Prompts:
 What methodology-related outcomes must Ed.D. students master in
order to be effective leaders in the field?
 What are the strengths and/or limitations of “traditional”
methodology sequences?
 When, where, and how should we teach mixed methods?

15. DISCUSSION #2: THE INQUIRY SEQUENCE MODEL
 Review:
 Inquiry I: Phil. Foundations;
10 weeks QUAN; 3 weeks
QUAL; 3 weeks MM
 Inquiry II: 10 weeks QUAL;
4 weeks QUAN; 2 weeks MM
 Inquiry III: 3 weeks QUAN,
QUAL, and MM; 2 weeks
validity; 10 weeks Chap. 3
 Prompts:
 Compare and contrast your
research methodology
approach. What do you like?
What could be improved upon?
 Discuss the role of mixed
methods within the sequence.

16. DISCUSSION #3: RESEARCH SUPPORT SEMINARS
 Review:
 670a: Topics  Problems; Lit.
 670b: RQs; Practice Chap. 1
 670c: Exam Prep; Lit. Dev.
 670d: Practice Chap. 2
 670e: Proposal Development
 670f: Proposal & IRB
 Prompts:
 Compare and contrast your
research support approach.
What do you like? What could
be improved upon?
 In what ways does this
sequence/your sequence
achieve educational leadership
outcomes?

17. TABLE HOST REPORTS AND CONCLUSION

18. CONTACT INFORMATION
 CSUF Ed.D.: edd@fullerton.exchange.edu; ed.fullerton.edu/edd;
@CSUFEDD; 657.278.4023
 John L. Hoffman: jhoffman@fullerton.edu
 Claire Cavallaro: ccavallaro@fullerton.edu
 Eugene Fujimoto: efujimoto@fullerton.edu