There are both conceptual and practical challenges in dealing with data from mixed methods research studies. There is a need for discussion about various integrative strategies for mixed methods data analyses. This article illustrates integrative analytic strategies for a mixed methods study focusing on improving urban schools facing challenging circumstances. The research was conducted using a concurrent mixed methods approach. The qualitative and quantitative strands of data were analyzed independently through thematic analysis of qualitative data and factor analysis of survey data, followed by integrative data analytic procedures. The integrative data analytic approach included strategies such as parallel integration for member checking, data transformation for comparison, data consolidation for emergent themes, and case analysis for fine-grained descriptions of school profiles. The integrative data analysis process featured the iterative nature of mixing data sources at various points and allowed the researchers to pay attention to emergent insights made available through mixed methods research.
Alexander, K.L., Entwisle, D.R., & Kabbani, N.S. (2001). The dropout process in life course perspective: Early risk factors at home and school. Teachers College Record , 103, 760-822.
2.
Barth, P., Haycock, K., Jackson, H., Mora, K., Ruiz, P., Robinson, S., et al. (1999). Dispelling the myth: High poverty schools exceeding expectations. Washington, DC: Education Trust.
3.
Bazeley, P. (2006). The contribution of computer software to integrating qualitative and quantitative data and analyses. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 64-74.
4.
Bernhardt, V. (2004). Continuous improvement: It takes more than test scores. Leadership, 34(2), 16-20.
5.
Brannen, J. (2005). Mixed methods: The entry of qualitative and quantitative approaches into the research process. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8, 173-184.
6.
Bray, B. (2005). Data can drive development. Technology and Learning, 25(11), 10-13.
7.
Brewer, J., & Hunter, A. (2006). Foundations of multimethod research: Synthesizing styles. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .
8.
Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research, 6, 97-113.
9.
Bryman, A. (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1); 8-22.
10.
Caracelli, V.J., & Greene, J.C. (1993). Data analysis strategies for mixed method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 195-207.
11.
Caracelli, V.J., & Greene, J.C. (1997). Crafting mixed method evaluation designs. In J. C. Greene & V. J. Caracelli (Eds.), Advances in mixed methods evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (New Directions for Evaluation No. 74, pp. 19-32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
12.
Connell, N. (1996). Getting off the list: School improvement inNew York City.New York: New York City Educational Priorities Panel.
13.
Cousins, J.B., Ross, J.A., & Maynes, F. (1994). The nature and consequences of teachers' joint work: A study of three exemplary schools. Elementary School Journal, 94, 441-465.
14.
Creswell, J.W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15.
Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V.L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
16.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1995). Policy for restructuring. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), The work of restructuring schools: Building from the ground up (pp. 157-176). New York: Teachers College Press.
17.
Denzin, N.K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
18.
Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2005). Painting a data-rich picture. Principal Leadership, 5(5), 16-20.
19.
Ed, E. (2001). Before Head Start: Income and ethnicity, family characteristics, child care experiences, and child development. Early Education and Development, 12(4), 545-559.
20.
Epstein, J. (1991). Effects on student achievement of teachers' practices of parent involvement. In S. B. Silvern (Ed.), Advances in reading/language research: Vol. 5. Literacy through family, community, and school interaction (pp. 261-276). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
21.
Freeman, J.A. (1997, November). Contextual contrasts between improving and stable elementary schools in Louisiana. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Mid-South Educational Research Association , Memphis, TN.
22.
Fullan, M.G. (1990). Change processes in secondary schools: Toward a more fundamental agenda. In M. McLaughlin , J. Talbert, & N. Bascia (Eds.), The contexts of teaching in secondary schools: Teachers' realities (pp. 224-225). New York: Teachers College Press.
23.
Fullan, M.G. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London: Falmer.
Greene, J.C., & Caracelli, V.J. (1997). Defining and describing the paradigm issue in mixed method evaluation. In J. C. Greene & V. J. Caracelli (Eds.), Advances in mixed methods evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (New Directions for Evaluation No. 74, pp. 5-17). San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
28.
Greene, J.C., Caracelli, V.J., & Graham, W.F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed methods evaluation design. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 11, 255-274.
29.
Guskey, T. (2000). Analyzing lists of characteristics of effective professional development to promote visionary leadership. National Association of Secondary School Principals, 87(637), 4-21
30.
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2006). Sustainable leadership. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
31.
Harris, A., & Chapman, C. (2001). Leadership in schools facing challenging circumstances . Report to the National College of School Leadership, London, UK.
32.
Heller, M., & Firestone, W. (1995). Who's in charge here? Sources of leadership for change in eight schools. Elementary School Journal, 96, 65-86.
33.
Henderson, A., & Berla, N. (1994). A new generation of evidence: The family is critical to student achievement. St. Louis, MO, and Flint, MI: Danforth Foundation and Mott (C. S.) Foundation.
34.
Hopkins, D. (2001). Meeting the challenge: An improvement guide for schools facing challenging circumstances. London: Department for Education and Skills.
35.
Hopkins, D., Ainscow, M., & West, M. (1994). School improvement in an era of change. New York: Teachers College Press.
36.
House, E.R., & Howe, K.R. (1999). Values in evaluation and social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37.
Howe, K.R. (1988). Against the quantitative-qualitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die hard. Educational Researcher, 17(8), 10-16.
38.
Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Turner, L.A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research . Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112-133.
39.
Joyce, B., Calhoun, E., & Hopkins, D. (1999). The new structure of school improvement. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
40.
Leithwood, K.A., Jantzi, D., & Steinbach, R. (1999). Changing leadership for changing times. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
41.
Leithwood, K.A., & Steinbach, R. (2002). Successful leadership for especially challenging schools. Journal of Leadership in Education, 79(2), 73-82.
42.
Levin, B. (2006). Schools in challenging circumstances: A reflection on what we need to know. School Effectiveness and School Improvement , 17, 399-407.
43.
Li, S., Marquart, J.M., & Zercher, C. (2000). Conceptual issues and analytic strategies in mixed methods studies of preschool inclusion. Journal of Early Intervention , 23, 116-132.
44.
Louis, K.S., & Kruse, S.D. (1995). Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
45.
Louis, K., & Smith, B. (1990). Teacher working conditions. In P. Reyes (Ed.), Teachers and their workplace: Commitment, performance and productivity (pp. 23-47). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
46.
Maden, M. (Ed.). (2001). Success against the odds: Five years on. London: Routledge Falmer.
47.
Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate? Educational Researcher , 17(2), 13-17.
48.
Maxwell, J.A. (1992). Understanding and validity in qualitative research . Harvard Educational Review, 62, 279-300.
49.
Maxwell, J.A., Bashbook, P.G., & Sandlow, C.J. (1986). Combining ethnographic and experimental methods in educational evaluation. In D. M. Fetterman & M. A. Pittman (Eds.), Educational evaluation: Ethnography in theory, practice, and politics (pp. 121-143). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
50.
Maxwell, J.A., & Loomis, D.M. (2003). Mixed methods design: An alternative approach . In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 241-271). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
51.
McCartney, C., & Schrag, F. (1990). Departmental and school leadership in promoting higher-order thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22, 529-543.
52.
McDougall, D.E., Gaskell, J., Flessa, J., Kugler, J., Jang, E.E., Herbert, M., et al. (2006). Improving student achievement in schools facing challenging circumstances. Toronto, Canada: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto.
53.
Morales, J.R., & Guerra, N.G. (2006). Effects of multiple context and cumulative stress on urban children's adjustment in elementary school. Child Development, 77, 907-923.
54.
Morgan, A. (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 8-22.
55.
Muijs, D., Harris, A., Chapman, C., Stoll, L., & Russ, J. (2004). Improving schools in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas: A review of research evidence. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15, 149-175.
56.
Murphy, J. (2002). Reculturing the profession of educational leadership: New blueprints. In J. Murphy (Ed.), The educational challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century. Yearbook of the National Society of the Study of Education (pp. 62-82). Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
57.
Patton, M. (1988). Paradigms and pragmatism. In D. M. Fetterman (Ed.), Qualitative approaches to evaluation in education: The silent scientific revolution (pp. 116-137). New York: Praeger.
58.
Randi, J., & Zeichner, K. (2004). New visions of teacher professional development . In M. Smylie & D. Miretszky (Eds.), Developing the teacher workforce (pp. 180-227). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
59.
Reichardt, C.S., & Rallis, S.F. (1994). The qualitative-quantitative debate: New perspectives . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
60.
Reynolds, D., Hopkins, D., Potter, D., & Chapman, C. (2001). School improvement for schools facing challenging circumstances: A review of research and practice. London : Department for Education and Skills.
61.
Rimm-Kaufman, S.E., Pianta, R.C., Cox, M.J., & Bradley, R.H. (2003). Teacher-rated family involvement and children's social and academic outcomes in kindergarten. Early Education and Development, 14(2), 179-198.
62.
Rosenholtz, S.J. (1989). Teachers' workplace: The social organization of schools. New York: Longman.
63.
Ross, D., & Webb, R.B. (1995). Implementing shared decision making at Brooksville Elementary School. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), The work of restructuring schools: Building from the ground up (pp. 64-86). New York: Teachers College Press.
64.
Ross, J., Hannay, L., & Brydges, B. (1998). District-level support for site-based renewal: A case study of secondary school reform. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 44; 349-368.
65.
Ryan, J. (2006). Inclusive leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
66.
Smith, J.K. (1983). Quantitative versus qualitative research: An attempt to clarify the issue. Educational Researcher, 12(3), 6-13.
67.
Smith, J.K., & Heshusius, L. (1986). Closing down the conversation: The end of the quantitative-qualitative debate among educational researchers. Educational Researcher, 15(1), 4-12.
68.
Spillane, J. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
69.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
70.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.
71.
Teddlie, C., Reynolds, D., & Sammons, P. (2000). The methodology and scientific properties of school effectiveness research. In C. Teddlie & D. Reynolds (Eds.), The international handbook of school effectiveness research. London: Falmer.
72.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2006):A general typology of research designs featuring mixed methods. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 12-28.
73.
Thompson, B. (2002). What future quantitative social science research could look like: Confidence intervals for effect sizes. Educational Researcher, 31(3), 25-32.
74.
Thrupp, M., & Lupton, R. (2006). Taking school contexts more seriously: The social justice challenge. British Journal of Educational Studies , 54, 308-328.
75.
Van Horn, L. (2006). Re-imagining professional development. Voices From the Middle, 13(4), 58-64.
76.
Weisner, T. (Ed.). (2005). Discovering successful pathways in children's development: Mixed methods in the study of childhood and family life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
