Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
RESULTS
the two phases. The form that I used to code the articles listed
Findings
the choices.
Most of the articles in the sample were written by one (n=76,
58.5%) or two (n= 33, 25.4%) authors; only two articles had more
than four. Codes for the authors’ occupations were divided into
non-music fields, and eight (6.2%) were from a mixture of the two
sort of
49
reflective. Results for this question were 125 (96.2%) articles in the
If the term was not explicitly stated but both quantitative and
and eight (6.2%) were historical. No articles in this study were found
that underpin their work” (p. 143). While all of the articles
qualities and also recorded what each component was for the
listed in Table 4.
51
.
accordingly.
components without the authors being explicit about them. Therefore, the following
conversations were guided by my interpretations of the components when they were not
Methods. While looking at the number of methods utilized in each article, 52 (40.0%)
discussed using a combination of two methods while 41 (31.5%) only included one method; 25
(19.2%) used three methods and 12 (9.4%) used four or more methods. After counting the
number of methods used («=280) throughout the articles, the most commonly used were
53
six instances where the authors used and discussed methods not
procedures were ANOVA (n= 34), MANOVA (n= 16), any type of
correlation calculation (n= 14), and chi- square analysis (n= 13).
In this study, there was one particular article where the authors
were explicit about using three different methodologies. Besides
the nine articles that used two methodologies, all other articles
results for searches within articles for the terms ism and epistem.
Themes
Challenges
I found that after coding all 130 articles, only two discussed
completed.
56
where indicated:
historical?
57
(b) How are the terms epistemology, theoretical framework, methodology, and
methods utilized within the JRME from Volume 55(4) to Volume 63(4)
in these articles?
Phase Two
Inferences
current study
58
c----------\
Current Article \ /
/ \
Future Research
V________/
was also quality of research. Contributive was used when the passages referred to the study
Furthermore, these two categories referred to references that went beyond the typical review
of literature or any general discussion of further study or research which are common in published
articles. In order for passages to be coded constructive or contributive, the authors must
have contextualized the passage with explicit reasons or descriptions referring to research processes
and connecting those processes to their article. The notes I added to keep the two categories
separate included a description for contributive: “These are reasons why our article is good
research for future studies.”; and for constructive: “These are examples of good research, which are
like ours.” These codes helped group the authors’ discussions around their roles in producing
table:
60
total of 38 passages
Similarly, van der Merwe and Habron (2015) discussed and cited
(p. 447).
this subset for Phase Two were from volume 61 of the JRME. The
following chapter.
Challenges
articles for accuracy was not the intention of this study and
Summary
built from previous works and conversations of how the study can