혼합 연구방법에서의 패러다임(paradigm)의 혼합 = Mixing Paradigms in Mixed Methods

국문 초록 (Abstract)

최근 교육 연구나 교육 평가 분야에서 혼합 연구방법에 대한 관심이 고조되고 있지만 아직까지 연구 현장에서의 혼합 연구방법의 활용은 단순히 양적 자료와 질적 자료를 동시에 사용하는 수준에 그치는 경우가 대부분이다. 하지만 실질적인 연구방법의 혼합은 패러다임의 혼합에서 이루어진다고 볼때 이러한 단순한 양적, 질적 자료의 활용으로는 혼합 연구방법의 장점을 충분히 활용하지 못한다고 할 수 있다. 이에 본 논문은 혼합 연구방법의 철학적 기반이라고 할 수 있는 패러다임의 혼합에 대한 논의를 통해 혼합 연구방법의 장점을 극대화할 수 있는 방안을 모색하였다. 이를 위해 우선 혼합 연구방법의 의의와 장점을 살펴 본 후, 혼합 연구방법에서의 패러다임의 혼합에 대한 논쟁을 검토하였다. 또한 패러다임의 혼합에 대한 변증법적 입장을 토대로 패러다임 혼합의 네 가지 특징으로서 상이한 패러다임에 대한 개방성, 패러다임 혼합의 의도성, 패러다임의 차이에 대한 존중, 패러다임 혼합의 실제성을 도출하였다. 마지막으로 패러다임 혼합에 관한 사례를 소개함으로써 이러한 패러다임의 혼합이 현장에서 어떻게 이루어질 수 있는지 예시하였다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Using mixing methods on the technical level is very common phenomena in educational research and evaluation in recent years. But, many researchers and evaluators can not utilize the fullest potential of mixed methods, though they routinely use a mix of different methods in their works. And at the level of philosophical assumptions, that is, of paradigms, there has been ongoing debate. The debate on paradigm is very meaningful not only for the legitimacy of mixed methods but also for the maximization of strengths of mixed methods. From this perspective this article investigates strengths of mixed methods, the meaning of mixing paradigms in mixed methods, and how the mixing paradigms can be related to the maximization of strengths of mixed methods. Finally, this article illustrates how mixing paradigm is occurred in practice throgugh a case of mixed methods inquiry.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 〈요약〉 Ⅰ. 서론 Ⅱ. 혼합 연구방법(mixed methods) Ⅲ. 패러다임의 혼합(mixing paradigm) Ⅳ. 패러다임 혼합의 예 Ⅴ. 결론 참고문헌 Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이원석, "타당도 분석을 위한 평가적 접근 모형: 통합적 관점" 한국교육평가학회 22 (22): 1079-1099, 2009

2 Weiss, H. B., "Working it out: The chronicle of a mixed-methods analysis, In Discovering successful pathways in children's development: Mixed methods in the study of childhood and family life" University of Chicago Press 47-64, 2005

3 Patton, M. Q., "Utilization-focused evaluation (New century ed.)" Sage 2000

4 Bickman, L., "Using program theory in evaluation, In New Directions for Evaluation, 33" Jossey-Bass 1987

5 Cronbach, L. J., "Toward reform of program evaluation" Jossey–Bass 1980

6 Johnson, R. B., "Toward a definition of mixed methods research" 1 (1): 112-133, 2007

7 Greene, J. C., "Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs" 11 : 255-274, 1989

8 Chen, H. T., "Theory-driven evaluation" Sage 1990

9 Greene, J. C., "The merits of mixing methods in evaluation" 7 (7): 25-44, 2001

10 Greene, J. C., "The generative potential of mixed methods inquiry" 28 (28): 207-211, 2005

11 Patton, M. Q., "Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.)" Sage 2002

12 Lincoln, Y. S., "Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, In Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.)" Sage 163-188, 2000

13 Lincoln, Y. S., "Naturalistic inquiry" Sage 1985

14 Brewer, J. D., "Multimethod research: A synthesis of styles" Sage 1989

15 Johnson, R. B., "Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come" 33 (33): 14-26, 2004

16 Greene, J. C., "Mixed methods in social inquiry" Jossey–Bass 2007

17 Greene, J. C., "Making paradigmatic sense of mixed methods practice, In Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research" Sage 91-110, 2003

18 Teddlie, C., "Major issues and controversises in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences, In Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research" Sage 3-50, 2003

19 House, E. R., "Integrating the quantitative and qualitative, In The qualitative-quantitative debate: New perspectives" Jossey-Bass 1994

20 Schwandt, T. A., "Evaluation practice reconsidered" Peter Lang 2002

21 Weiss, C. H., "Evaluation (2nd ed.)" Prentice-Hall 1998

22 Greene, J. C., "Defining and describing the paradigm issue in mixed-method evaluation, In Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms" Jossey-Bass 1997

23 Chen, H. T., "Applying mixed methods under the framework of theory-driven evaluations, In Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms" Jossey-Bass 1997

24 Howe, K. R., "Against the quantitative-qualitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die hard" 17 (17): 10-16, 1988

25 Datta, L. E., "A pragmatic basis for mixed-method design, In Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms" Jossey-Bass 1997