A Word About Method and Methodology

The goal of most research, especially applied studies, is to find the answer to some question or solution to some problem and translate that answer into findings or reports that may lead to practical decisions of one kind or another. As discussed above, findings from these kinds of studies might be presented in the form of words, numbers, or both. Numbers, often generated as scores on tests or ratings on surveys, are usually presented in tables and charts based on descriptive or inferential statistical procedures. When words are the primary reporting medium, it is ordinarily the result of analyzing what are known as qualitative data (not to be confused with the term qualitative research), obtained from such collection methods as long-answer questionnaires, interviews, or field notes.

These data collection, analysis, and reporting options are specified by research plans, often called research designs, which are usually characterized by an emphasis on either qualitative or quantitative data collection methods. Some plans may even emphasize both types of data, often referred to as mixed-methods designs. Researchers often refer to these data collection tools, such as interviews or tests, as methods. Research plans emphasize one kind of data over the other or, in the case of mixed methods, a mixture of both. Again, in this context the terms qualitative and quantitative refer to the kinds of data collected, not to the methodology or research approach being used (such as an experimental, survey, case study, or ethnographic approach) or to the more abstract idea of research paradigm.

Working within the qualitative and quantitative nomenclature, researchers must also select an overall research approach, sometimes called a methodology (also known as disciplined inquiry). Choosing a particular form of inquiry involves determining what is to be investigated (for example, the question, problem, or hypothesis) and which methodological design may best respond to the object and concerns of the proposed study. For example, a researcher may be faced with two kinds of concerns related to a school program. She may need to find out how the program works and what the overall short-term effect has been. Or she may need to determine if a program produces the kind of improved student achievement initially promised. The first question is one that may be best answered using an evaluation design (a methodology) in order to thoroughly describe the day-to-day program operation along with its overall immediate worth. The second might be better resolved through some kind of experimentation (another methodology) in which student results are assessed in terms of outcomes or gains. Thus, selection of which methodology to apply grows directly out of the problem faced.

In this text, for the purposes of convenience and clarity, we have requested that the authors make as fine a distinction as possible between the terms method (tools) and methodology (form of inquiry). In everyday research practice, however, we fully recognize that method and methodology have a tendency to interact to the point of becoming indistinguishable from one another. Although we portray method as a way of doing and methodology as a way of thinking about designing research, some argue that much of research is about method (Wolcott, (1990). One respected researcher notes that methodology is really a set of methods, practices, and procedures normatively followed by members from each discipline or field of study. As this investigator explains, “What researchers do in their reports of (empirical) research is list the methods used. They don't write a section properly labeled ‘methodology’” (G. V Glass, personal communication, October 4, 2010). One must be cautious in creating such neat and clean categories as method and methodology, recognizing that, as with most human activity worth understanding, the act of conducting research is a complicated enterprise.

At a more abstract level, as suggested earlier in regard to paradigms, the terms quantitative and qualitative are also commonly used in yet other ways when discussing general views of research. As a shorthand form of communication, professional researchers often express the paradigmatic idea of traditional statistical research by using the term quantitative, whereas interpretive and critical investigators use the word qualitative to refer to any number of methodologies in their paradigms. It should come as no surprise that these multiple applications of these two terms create confusion, especially among those new to educational and social research.