Teaching Mixed Methods Research for Development and Evaluation of Culturally Constructed Intervention Programming

• In Event: Pedagogical Considerations for Addressing Advancements in Mixed Methods Research: Reflections From Authors in the Field

Abstract

Our investigation of the use of mixed methods research (MMR) in the context of development and evaluation of interventions (XXX, 2016) stemmed from concerns about the limitations of applying evidence-based interventions (EBIs) across diverse populations and contexts. These concerns are articulated in translational and implementation science, which both raise questions about how to best translate EBIs validated under controlled conditions to the diversity of real-life settings (Eccles & Mittman, 2006; Whaley & Davis, 2007). These areas of study have been concerned with extending intervention research from a limited focus on outcomes, documented primarily via randomized-controlled trials (RCTs), to understanding (a) the conditions under which outcomes are achieved, and (b) the necessary adaptations related to translating EBIs to different cultural contexts and populations. We propose the use of MMR to rigorously inform the development, adaptation, and evaluation of interventions in order to address noted shortcomings of current EBI research. In particular, we propose the use of formative ethnographic MMR to study culture and context prior to intervention development or adaptation, and evaluative MMR to monitor and examine program process and outcomes. We contend that the combination of formative and evaluative MMR helps elucidate the conditions necessary for effective program implementation. Our approach to MMR applied to intervention development embodies a participatory process for involving key stakeholders, a thorough study of the culture of the target context, and an iterative research-intervention process to inform program adaptations, monitoring and evaluation that can allow for strong causal inference. The active involvement of stakeholders as partners can also help to facilitate cultural and contextual specificity, ownership, and sustainability.

In this presentation, we will discuss considerations for the teaching of MMR. Given the aforementioned complexity of MMR, it is unlikely that students will learn all they need to know in a single MMR course and thus integration across the curriculum is essential. We propose a scientist-practitioner (praxis; Belar & Perry, 1992) approach to the teaching of MMR applied to culturally constructed program development and evaluation. A praxis approach is characterized by a recursive theory, research, practice cycle (Nastasi, 2010); for example, when applied to program development and evaluation: theory + existing research->program goal->research->program development->evaluation research->program adaptation/sustainability. We propose the teaching of MMR applied to program development and evaluation within the context of applied science or practice courses in education, psychology, public health, etc. Within these courses, students would be provided with a model for engaging in cultural construction of interventions coupled with hypothetical and real-life opportunities for application to solving real-world problems in respective fields. In addition, students would have opportunities to engage in critical analysis of the cultural validity of existing EBIs for intended populations, to design ethnographic MMR to examine culture of intended context and population, and to design relevant MMR evaluation research. Faculty can also provide examples of such work from the literature and involve students in ongoing research projects within local communities. In this presentation, we will illustrate this approach through examples from our own teaching and research.

Authors

• Bonnie K. Nastasi, Tulane University

• John H. Hitchcock, Indiana University - Bloomington