Randomized trials have experienced a marked surge in endorsement and popularity in education research in the past decade. This surge reignited paradigm debates and spurred qualitative critics to accuse these experimental designs of eclipsing qualitative research. This article reviews a current iteration of this debate and examines two randomized trials that incorporate mixed methods to analyze (a) how randomized trials stand up to qualitative critics and (b) how qualitative methods can enhance randomized trials. Each study presented employs an experimental design with both quantitative and qualitative methods. I argue that randomized trials can be used to great effect, particularly in conjunction with qualitative methods. Mixed-methods research designs to study program impact can minimize the trade-offs experienced by overreliance on one approach. Furthermore, international education researchers bring formidable contextual knowledge to bear on these approaches. Mixed methods that incorporate randomized trials hold promise for international and comparative education research.
|Translated title of the contribution||Assessing impact and bridging methodological divides: Randomized trials in countries affected by conflict|
|Number of pages||26|
|Journal||Comparative Education Review|
|State||Published - Aug 2012|
ASJC Scopus subject areas