Qualitative and Qualitative Research Methods in Early Childhood Education Essay

The extremity for scientific look into method actingologies that would bring about accurate and analytic question findings and results have put ahead of time nestlinghood bringing up scholars and investigateers into the question of whether valued or soft methodology would best fit in the studies of phenomena (Shavelson and Towne, 2002). motivatingless to say, the debate in the early command research literature concerns the essential for reli adequate to(p) and validated research studies in order to contribute to the living literature as well as to aid in the policy making of educational institutions and the government (Cobb, et.al. , 2003). However, the issue of using the quantitative or qualitative methods be still ambiguous for about educational researchers especially on the issue of which is more than scientific between the dickens (Berliner, 2002). This write up evidences two research articles on early childhood education specifically on the promotion and acceptance of young children of their dis satisfactoryd consorts in early childhood education. Specifically, the focus of this paper is on the methodological go on of the twain articles (quantitative vs.qualitative) and how these articles have contributed to the literature and understanding on the topic. Methods of Research in archaean Childhood Education The approaches for the promotion for the acceptance of young children on their peers who be disabled have been an important issue in the inclusion of children with disabilities in regular early childhood education classroom. Two studies using two different research methodologies had explored the locatings of young children as well as the agency of improving their acceptance on young disabled children.The first withdraw conducted by Favarazza, Phillipsen and Kumar (2000) employed quantitative and qualitative research in tell the problem whereas Batchelor and Taylor (2005) had used the qualitative approach al nonpareil. Usin g the Acceptance master for Kindergarten (ASK), Favazza, Phillipsen and Kumar (2000) inter soak uped 48 kindergarten students and used pre-tests, post-tests and follow up in order to leave a reliable quantitative information from the purposive sampling that was done. The data obtained from their film were then collated and a quantitative summary was do.Consequently, a qualitative data analysis was made from the responses on the interviews that were conducted from the researchers. Hence, the authors used what is termed as the multi-method research approach wherein, quantitative data is verified and further analysed with the use of qualitative data. The research findings revealed that teachers and their activities in the classroom poop importantly impact on the levels of acceptance of young children on their disabled peers.On the otherwise hand, Batchelor and Taylor (2005) drawing upon the case muse of a four twelvemonth old with a moderate developmental disability had empl oyed interviews, placard through the employment of classs such as the Stay, Play and Talk as well as social integration activities. Before the impact of the program was measured, the researchers had developed a baseline data in order to examine the degree of differences in the attitude of the children and the four year old proceeds on her peers.The field of force revealed that social intervention programs can nurture a more positive attitude from young children on their disabled peers as well as disabled childrens attitude towards their peers. Primarily, the similarity of Favarazza, Phillipsen and Kumars (2000) and Batchelor and Taylors (2005) articles includes their use of interviews in order to expound and further analyze the data they have on hand. For instance, both authors had interviewed the teachers of the children in order to trammel the attitudes of the children on their disabled peers.Second, both articles had used observation in their analysis- firearm Batchelor an d Taylor (2000) had used observation more extensively than avarazza, Phillipsen and Kumars (2000), their tapeed observations were meaningful part of their analysis of the issue. Finally, the result of the studies of both articles is similar that the attitudes of young children on their disabled peers are positively influenced by the social interaction programs that are implemented by the teachers and the schools.Consequently, both articles contributed greatly to the understanding of the ways to promote positive attitude in inclusive early childhood education programs. While there had been similarities between the two articles, there are more differences in price of orientation and methodological approach. First, Favarazza, Phillipsen and Kumar (2000) used a qualitative-quantitative method of inquiry- employing both quantitative and qualitative method through the use of a standardized survey (ASK survey), interviews and observation.On the other hand, Batchelor and Taylor (2005) ut ilized the qualitative approach alone employing a case subject approach of one four-year-old girl. Hence, the pristine instrument used in their show is observation and report notes including interviews made to the teachers of the child. With the different methods used, the article of Batchelor and Taylor (2005) provided a more in-depth study in the mental and social impact of social activities in the promotion of positive attitude of young children on their disabled peers.For instance, Batchelor and Taylor (2005) were able to discuss and evaluate the responses of the child on specific activities at different points in time. Hence, the degree of the exploration of the authors on the childs mental aspect has been deeper than the results outlined in the study of Favarazza, Phillipsen and Kumar (2000). However, while the case study rendered a better backchat of the psycho-social impact of social activities programs, the study of Favarazza, Phillipsen and Kumar (2000) provides a b roader and more widely distributed view of childrens responses to their disabled peers.Drawing from forty eight (48) respondents, the authors were able to let not erect an individual response but rather a more generalized response. The use of a bigger population is inevitable in order to plot differences and similarities in attitudes- something that was not accomplished in the study of Batchelor and Taylor (2005). Consequently, the use of a standardized survey served not just an a posteriori purpose but also a theoretical purpose. The study of Favarazza, Phillipsen and Kumar (2000) was able to validate the ASK survey.Hence, the study provided not only empirical significance but theoretical significance as well. Second, the quantitative-qualitative approach of Favarazza, Phillipsen and Kumar (2000) can be considered to be more rigorous and accordingly, more scientific than that of Batchelor and Taylors (2005) study. This is because the study of the former had used pre-tests, po st-tests as well as follows up tests in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the survey measure in determining the validity of the opinions expressed in the survey questionnaire.Consequently, the perspectives that were solicited in the study of Favarazza, Phillipsen and Kumar (2000) had come from several numbers of students and teachers while that of Batchelor and Taylors came from some teachers and one student alone. Suffice it to say, the attitude of the young children on their disabled counterparts cannot be accurately described and explained by the teachers- it is the students themselves who can accurately express their perceptions and feelings. However, it should be noted that both studies had been objective in recording their observations through circumspect record keeping.Finally, as concurred by Batchelor and Taylor (2005) in their study, the case study is check in scope because it only employed one child hence, the need to further explore the topic by including more chi ldren. On the other hand, there is a need for Favarazza, Phillipsen and Kumar (2000) to provide a more small study on the psycho-social impact of social promotion programs of the children. The method of employing record keeping and direct observation by Batchelor and Taylor (2000) had been effective and important measures in order to provide a deeper psycho-social analysis of young children.Analysis qualitative and quantitative research methods had been traditionally been seen as poles apart in terms of administration, instruments used as well as the depth and degree of analysis that they contribute in education researches. However, while the difference between these two methods had been pronounced in earlier literature, contemporary research methods in education (McMillan, 2008) recognizes that quantitative and qualitative research methods can be used in conjunction with one other- one can actually validate the other.Hence, multi-method or the use of both qualitative and quantitat ive research methods had gained acceptance in the literature. In this paper, we have examined the similarities as well as the differences of a qualitative-quantitative research versus that of a purely qualitative research. The result showed that the qualitative-quantitative research provided a broader give-and-take of young childrens acceptance of their peers than its purely qualitative counterpart.Consequently, the qualitative-quantitative method was able to provide a more generalizable study because of the scope of its respondents whereas the qualitative study through the use of case study of one soulfulness is limited- peculiarly on the issue that it cannot be argued that it is representative of the population. Moreover, a case study would be highly dependent on the individuality of the participant hence the result would more likely be different with a person in the same situation.However, in the quantitative-qualitative study, the validity of the findings are more general and hence, more acceptable because it was not confined to one person alone but on a sample that is representative of a inclined population. While the quantitative-qualitative approach is generally seen as more valid, the qualitative study of Batchelor and Taylor (2005) provided deeper analysis on the behavior and the changes that can be made on a young child. By focusing on one person, the authors were able to provide a holistic approach in studying the psychological responses of the child in social interaction programs and activities.Quantitative and qualitative approaches both have their strengths and weaknesses- the goal of early childhood researches are to determine the most appropriate method to be used in the questions that are existence ask. Suffice it to say, there is no inferior or superior research method but rather it would depend on the science, objectiveness and the devotion of the researchers to answer the questions. Hence, valuable scientific findings can be found in both modes of inquiry. References Batchelor, D. and Taylor, H.(2005) sociable Inclusion-The Next Step User-Friendly Strategies to Promote Social Interaction and Peer Acceptance of Children with Disabilities. Australian Journal of Early Childhood. 30 (1). Berliner, D. C. (2002) Educational Research The hardest science of all. Educational Researchers. 31 (8) 18-20. Cobb, P. , Confrey, J. , diSessa, A. , Lehrer, R. and Chasuble, L. (2003) Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researchers. 32 (1) 9-13. Favazza, P. , Phillipsen, L. and Kumar, P.(2000) Measuring and Promoting Acceptance of Young Children with Disabilities. exceptional Children. 66 (1). Harper, L V, & McCluskey, K. S. (2003). Teacher-child and child-child interactions in inclusive preschool settings Do adults inhibit peer interactions? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18, 163-184. McMillan, J. H. (2008) Educational research fundamentals for the consumer. fifth Ed. New York Longman Shavelson, R. J. and Towne, L. (2002) Scientific research in education. Washington D. C. National honorary society Press.