Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article presents guidance for researchers planning school-based mixed methods research studies involving students with extensive support needs. The purpose of the article is to briefly summarize previous research in this area, identify common challenges that reflect the contexts in which this research can occur, and offer strategies to anticipate and mitigate these challenges when designing a research project. The article outlines these strategies in the various stages of project planning and implementation, and in relation to updated standards for mixed methods special education research.

Keywords

mixed methods school-based research special education extensive support needs

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ahlgrim-Delzell

Rivera

(2015). A content comparison of literacy lessons from 2004 and 2010 for students with moderate and severe intellectual disability. Exceptionality, 23(4), 258–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2015.1064417

Bauer

M. S.

Kirchner

(2020). Implementation science: What is it and why should I care? Psychiatry Research, 283, 112376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.04.025

Bowman

J. A.

McDonnell

Karp

Coleman

O. F.

Clifton

Conradi

L. A.

. . .Farrell

(2024). Using mixed methods to evaluate modified schema-based instruction in general education classrooms. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 49(2), 126–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241242677

Brantlinger

Jimenez

Klingner

Pugach

Richardson

(2005). Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 195–207.

Brock

M. E.

Anderson

E. J.

(2021). Training paraprofessionals who work with students with intellectual and developmental disabilities: What does the research say? Psychology in the Schools, 58(4), 702–722. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22386

Browder

Gibbs

Ahlgrim-Delzell

Courtade

G. R.

Mraz

Flowers

(2009). Literacy for students with severe developmental disabilities: What should we teach and what should we hope to achieve? Remedial and Special Education, 30(5), 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508315054

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

Creswell

J. W.

Plano Clark

V. L.

(2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage.

Damschroder

L. J.

Aron

D. C.

Keith

R. E.

Kirsh

S. R.

Alexander

J. A.

Lowery

J. C.

(2009). Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50

10.

DiStefano

Sadhwani

Wheeler

A. C.

(2020). Comprehensive assessment of individuals with significant levels of intellectual disability: Challenges, strategies, and future directions. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 125(6), 434–448. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-125.6.434

11.

Douglas

Hinckley

Grandbois

Schliep

Wonkka

Oshita

Feuerstein

(2023). How a power differential between clinicians and researchers contributes to the research-to-practice gap. American Journal of Speech-language Pathology, 32(2), 803–810. https://doi.org/10.1044/2022_AJSLP-22-00207

12.

Feuerstein

J. L.

Douglas

N. F.

Olswang

L. B.

(2022). Dissemination research in communication sciences and disorders: A tutorial. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 65(11), 4172–4180.

13.

Finke

E. H.

Finke

E. H.

McNaughton

D. B.

Drager

K. D.

(2009). “All children can and should have the opportunity to learn”: General education teachers’ perspectives on including children with autism spectrum disorder who require AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 25(2), 110–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610902886206

14.

Fish

R. E.

(2019). Teacher race and racial disparities in special education. Remedial and Special Education, 40(4), 213–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932518810434

15.

Fleming

J. I.

Wilson

S. E.

Espinas

van Dijk

Cook

B. G.

(2024). Special education researchers’ knowledge, attitudes, and reported use of open practices. Remedial and Special Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241237268

16.

Greene

J. C.

Caracelli

V. J.

Graham

W. F.

(1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737011003255

17.

Grillo

E. U.

(2019). Building a successful voice telepractice program. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 4(1), 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_PERS-SIG3-2018-0014

18.

Guba

(1990). The paradigm dialog. Sage.

19.

Guetterman

T. C.

Fàbregues

Sakakibara

(2021). Visuals in joint displays to represent integration in mixed methods research: A methodological review. Methods in Psychology, 5, 100080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metip.2021.100080

20.

Hesse-Biber

Johnson

R. B.

(2015). The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry. Oxford University Press.

21.

Jones

J. L.

(2012). Factors associated with self-concept: Adolescents with intellectual and development disabilities share their perspectives. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 50(1), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-50.1.31

22.

Karmiris

(2022). Consent as a relational engagement with children with intellectual disabilities—Ethical conundrums and possibilities. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 37(1), 282–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2022.2061739

23.

Kivunja

(2018). Distinguishing between theory, theoretical framework, and conceptual framework: A systematic review of lessons from the field. International Journal of Higher Education, 7(6), 44–53. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v7n6p44

24.

Kramer

J. M.

Roemer

Liljenquist

Shin

Hart

(2014). Formative evaluation of Project TEAM (Teens Making Environment and Activity Modifications). Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 52(4), 258–272. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-52.4.258

25.

Kurth

J. A.

Lockman Turner

Zagona

A. L.

Kim

Loyless

(2024). Experiences of elementary students with complex support needs in segregated special education classrooms: A mixed methods study. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 50(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241267283

26.

Ledford

J. R.

Lambert

J. M.

Pustejovsky

J. E.

Zimmerman

K. N.

Hollins

Barton

E. E.

(2023). Single-case-design research in special education: Next-generation guidelines and considerations. Exceptional Children, 89(4), 379–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029221137656

27.

Leko

M. M.

(2014). The value of qualitative methods in social validity research. Remedial and Special Education, 35(5), 275–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932514524002

28.

Leko

M. M.

Hitchcock

J. H.

Love

H. R.

Houchins

D. E.

Conroy

M. A.

(2023). Quality indicators for mixed-methods research in special education. Exceptional Children, 89(4), 432–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029221141031

29.

Lereya

S. T.

Cattan

Yoon

Gilbert

Deighton

(2023). How does the association between special education need and absence vary overtime and across special education need types? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 38(2), 245–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2022.2059631

30.

Lindström

E. R.

Fisher

Cook

Perrella

McFadden

K. A.

Chen

Bahadori Fallah

(2023). An observation study of mathematics instruction for students with IDD in grades K–2. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 141, 104591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2023.104591

31.

Lindström

E. R.

Fleming

J. I.

Pfeiffer

D. L.

Kalandadze

Cook

B. G.

(2025). Open-access publishing in special education and related fields: Making scholarship freely available to all. Research in Special Education, 2. https://doi.org/10.25894/rise.2490

32.

Lindström

E. R.

Lemons

C. J.

(2021). Teaching reading to students with intellectual and developmental disabilities: An observation study. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 115, 103990. https://doi.org/gkhq4p

33.

Lindström

E. R.

McFadden

K. A.

(2025). Leveraging observation research to improve instruction for students with intellectual disability: Guidance for adapting tools. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 38(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.13320

34.

Malouf

D. B.

Schiller

E. P.

(1995). Practice and research in special education. Exceptional Children, 61(5), 414–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299506100502

35.

Matzen

Ryndak

Nakao

(2010). Middle school teams increasing access to general education for students with significant disabilities: Issues encountered and activities observed across contexts. Remedial and Special Education, 31(4), 287–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508327457

36.

Paramasivam

Jaiswal

Minhas

Wittich

Spruyt-Rocks

(2021). Informed consent or assent strategies for research with individuals with deafblindness or dual sensory impairment: A scoping review. Archives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation, 3(2), 100115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arrct.2021.100115

37.

The QR Collective. (2023). Reflexive quality criteria: Questions and indicators for purpose-driven special education qualitative research. Exceptional Children, 89(4), 449–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231168106

38.

Root

J. R.

Lindstrӧm

E. R.

(2024). Embracing mixed methods research in special education. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 49(4), 231–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241293420

39.

Ruppar

A. L.

Gaffney

J. S.

Dymond

S. K.

(2015). Influences on teachers’ decisions about literacy for secondary students with severe disabilities. Exceptional Children, 81(2), 209–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914551739

40.

Snodgrass

M. R.

Cook

B. G.

Cook

(2023). Considering social validity in special education research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 38(4), 311–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12326

41.

Snodgrass

M. R.

Love

H. R.

Roberts

C. A.

Gilson

C. B.

Yang

Badgett

N. M.

(2023). Is mixed methods bridging educational research divides? Using prevalence as an indicator of change. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 18, 430–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898231184663

42.

Tashakkori

Teddlie

(2008). Quality of inferences in mixed methods research: Calling for an integrative framework. In M. M. Bergman (Ed.), Advances in mixed methods research (pp. 101–119). Sage Publications.

43.

Taub

D. A.

McCord

J. A.

Ryndak

D. L.

(2017). Opportunities to learn for students with extensive support needs: A context of research-supported practices for all in general education classes. The Journal of Special Education, 51(3), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466917696263

44.

Tucker

J. K.

(2012). Perspectives of speech-language pathologists on the use of telepractice in schools: The qualitative view. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 4(2), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2012.6102

45.

Walton

K. M.

Borowy

A. R.

Gordon

R. A.

Wainer

A. L.

(2023). Enhancing stakeholder roles in autism early interventions in the United States: A stakeholder-driven research agenda. Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice, 28(5), 1120–1134. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613231195743

46.

M. A.

Storr

G. B.

(2012). Learning the concept of researcher as instrument in qualitative research. Qualitative Report, 17(21), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2012.1768

What to Expect When You’re Investigating: Conducting School-Based Mixed Methods Research for Students with Extensive Support Needs

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References