Mixed Methods Journal Reviewing in Early Childhood Special Education

Abstract

The goal of the journal review process is to ensure that published manuscripts are of high quality and address important topics. Technical criteria about methodology, rigor, and clarity can impact how a manuscript is reviewed. However, journal reviewers rely on accumulated wisdom about credibility, accuracy, reasonableness, timeliness, and relevance to base their judgment about the appropriateness, desirability, or publishability. The purpose of this study was to explore editorial board members’ experiences in relation to mixed methods research (MMR). Using a MMR design, we explored the extent to which research judgments, skills, and paradigmatic values are diverse among editorial board members for three high-impact early childhood special education journals and how those features interact when reviewers judge research. First, editorial board members were invited to participate in an online survey. Then, editorial board members who volunteered during the survey were individually interviewed. We present the results and discuss how they can inform peer review process.

Keywords

research methodologies

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brantlinger

Jimenez

Klingner

Pugach

Richardson

(2005). Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100205

Caputo

R. K.

(2019). Peer review: A vital gatekeeping function and obligation of professional scholarly practice. Families in Society, 100(1), 6–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044389418808155

Chong

S. W.

Lin

(2023). Feedback practices in journal peer-review: A systematic literature review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2164757

Corr

Snodgrass

M. R.

Greene

J. C.

Meadan

Santos

R. M.

(2020). Mixed methods in early childhood special education research: Purposes, challenges, and guidance. Journal of Early Intervention, 42(1), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/105381511987309

Corr

Snodgrass

M. R.

Love

Kern

Chudzik

(2022). Mixed methods research in special education: Doctoral students’ skills, perceptions, and values. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37, 314–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/088840642211039

Corr

Snodgrass

M. R.

Love

Scott

I. M.

Kim

Andrews

(2021). Exploring the landscape of published mixed methods research in special education: A systematic review. Remedial and Special Education, 42(5), 317–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932520924030

Greene

J. C.

(2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. John Wiley & Sons.

Guetterman

T. C.

Fetters

M. D.

Creswell

J. W.

(2015). Integrating quantitative and qualitative results in health science mixed methods research through joint displays. Annals of Family Medicine, 13(6), 554–561. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1865

Hsieh

H. F.

Shannon

S. E.

(2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687

10.

Klingner

J. K.

Boardman

A. G.

(2011). Addressing the “research gap” in special education through mixed methods. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 34(3), 208–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948711417559

11.

Kozleski

E. B.

(2017). The uses of qualitative research: Powerful methods to inform evidence-based practice in education. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 42(1), 19–32.

12.

Leko

M. M.

Hitchcock

J. H.

Love

H. R.

Houchins

D. E.

Conroy

M. A.

(2022). Quality indicators for mixed-methods research in special education. Exceptional Children. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029221141031

13.

McKim

C. A.

(2017). The value of mixed methods research: A mixed methods study. Journal of Mixed Methods, 11(2), 202–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815607096

14.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

M. A.

Saldaña

(2014). Qualitative data analysis. SAGE.

15.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

M. A.

Saldaña

(2019). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. SAGE.

16.

Onwuegbuzie

A. J.

Corrigan

J. A.

(2018). What is happening now? An overview of mixed methods applications in special education. Research in the Schools, 25(2), 1–22.

17.

Teddlie

C. C.

Tashakkori

(2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In Tashakkori

Teddlie

(Eds.), SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 3–50). SAGE.

18.

Teddlie

C. C.

Tashakkori

(2012). Common “core” characteristics of mixed methods research: A review of critical issues and call for greater convergence. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(6), 774–788. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764211433795

19.

Tracy

S. J.

(2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780041038312

20.

Trainor

A. A.

Leko

(2014). Qualitative special education research: Purpose, rigor, and contribution. Remedial and Special Education, 35(5), 263–266. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932514536996

21.

Wiley Author Services. (n.d.). What is peer review? https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/journal-reviewers/what-is-peer-review/index.html

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.08 MB