Quantitative Research Identification - Answers

Study 1: Akour 2006

Read the Method section (page 19; page 3 of PDF) and identify type of study.

http://www.bwgriffin.com/gsu/courses/edur7130/readings/Akour_2006.pdf

1. What type of study was this?

It was quasi-experimental

2. How do we know it was this type of study?

See this description under the Participants sub-section (page 20):

“Seven sections of this course are taught. For the purpose of this study, two intact sections were randomly selected and assigned to either a control group (TI; N=46) or an experimental group (TI plus CAI; N=46).”

Treatment was manipulated, but groups intact, so quasi-experimental.

Study 2: Yildirim et al 2001

Start reading on page 3 of PDF, the Method section.

http://www.bwgriffin.com/gsu/courses/edur7130/readings/Yildirim_et_al_2001.pdf

3. What type of study is this?

True-experimental.

4. How do we know it was this type of study?

See page 210, participants section:

“Among the 3 ninth-grade classrooms in the assigned school, one was chosen through simple random selection. The students in that class were assigned to an experimental group or a control group through a matched-pair technique, according to prior biology achievement scores they received in the previous semester. Randomly from each pair, 1 student was assigned to the experimental group, the other student was assigned to the control group. That technique established equal representation in terms of prior achievement in both control and experimental groups.”

Students were randomly assigned to treatment or control conditions, thus a true experimental study.

Study 3: Candler and Goodman 1977

Start reading at Methods and Materials section, page 2 of PDF.

http://www.bwgriffin.com/gsu/courses/edur7130/readings/Candler_Goodman_1977.pdf

5. What type of study is this and how do we know it was this type of study?

This is a correlational study. Neither variable, authoritarian rating or rating of imitative behavior, were manipulated, both are quantitative, so this is a correlational design.

Study 4: Mattox et al 2005

Start reading on page 3 of PDF at Method section and read pages 3 and 4 of PDF. Then look at Table 3 and Figure 1 on page 7 of PDF.

http://www.bwgriffin.com/gsu/courses/edur7130/readings/Mattox_et_al_2005.pdf

6. What type of study is this? How do we know it was this type of study?

Here are the primary variables in this study (non-descriptive, demographic variables): (1) IV = type of scheduling (block vs. non-block), (2) IV = School (A through E), (3) IV = year of data (1994 to 2000, 6 school years), (4) DV = mathematics achievement scores.

None of these variables were manipulated, so this cannot be true or quasi-experimental.

This is a causal-comparative (ex post facto) study (note two primary groups compared, block vs non-block).

Study 5: Mattox et al 2005

Start reading at Method section.

http://www.bwgriffin.com/gsu/courses/edur7130/readings/Wasson_et_al_1990.pdf

7. What type of study is this? How do we know it was this type of study?

The IVs are grade level and reading ability (3 best, 3 worst readers in each class). The IV, reading ability, was not manipulated by the researcher, and there is group comparison, so this is ex post facto (causal comparative).

Study 6: Nunnery et al 2006

Note title of study, and begin reading at page 5 of PDF at Purpose of Study.

http://www.bwgriffin.com/gsu/courses/edur7130/readings/Nunnery_et_al_2006.pdf

8. What type of study is this? How do we know it was this type of study?

This sentence plays key role in explaining type of study (page 7 of PDF):

“Teachers volunteered with the understanding that they would be randomly assigned to either a treatment group, meaning they would implement AR and RR in their classrooms, or a control group that would not implement either program or participate in professional development related to either program.”

Since there are randomly formed groups and manipulation, this is a true experimental study.