qualitative research mathematics education

• Math Careers

Search form

• MAA Centennial
• Spotlight: Archives of American Mathematics
• MAA Officers
• MAA to the Power of New
• Council and Committees
• MAA Code of Conduct
• Policy on Conflict of Interest
• Statement about Conflict of Interest
• Recording or Broadcasting of MAA Events
• Policy for Establishing Endowments and Funds
• Avoiding Implicit Bias
• Copyright Agreement
• Principal Investigator's Manual
• Planned Giving
• The Icosahedron Society
• Our Partners
• Advertise with MAA
• Employment Opportunities
• Staff Directory
• 2022 Impact Report
• In Memoriam
• Membership Categories
• Become a Member
• Membership Renewal
• MERCER Insurance
• MAA Member Directories
• New Member Benefits
• The American Mathematical Monthly
• Mathematics Magazine
• The College Mathematics Journal
• How to Cite
• Communications in Visual Mathematics
• About Convergence
• What's in Convergence?
• Convergence Articles
• Mathematical Treasures
• Portrait Gallery
• Paul R. Halmos Photograph Collection
• Other Images
• Critics Corner
• Problems from Another Time
• Conference Calendar
• Guidelines for Convergence Authors
• Math Horizons
• Submissions to MAA Periodicals
• Guide for Referees
• Scatterplot
• Math Values
• MAA Book Series
• MAA Press (an imprint of the AMS)
• MAA Library Recommendations
• Additional Sources for Math Book Reviews
• About MAA Reviews
• Mathematical Communication
• Information for Libraries
• Author Resources
• MAA MathFest
• Proposal and Abstract Deadlines
• MAA Policies
• Invited Paper Session Proposals
• Contributed Paper Session Proposals
• Panel, Poster, Town Hall, and Workshop Proposals
• Minicourse Proposals
• MAA Section Meetings
• Virtual Programming
• Joint Mathematics Meetings
• Calendar of Events
• MathFest Programs Archive
• MathFest Abstract Archive
• Historical Speakers
• Information for School Administrators
• Information for Students and Parents
• Registration
• Getting Started with the AMC
• AMC Policies
• AMC Administration Policies
• Important AMC Dates
• Competition Locations
• Invitational Competitions
• Putnam Competition Archive
• AMC International
• Curriculum Inspirations
• Sliffe Award
• MAA K-12 Benefits
• Mailing List Requests
• Statistics & Awards
• Submit an NSF Proposal with MAA
• MAA Distinguished Lecture Series
• Common Vision
• CUPM Curriculum Guide
• Instructional Practices Guide
• Möbius MAA Placement Test Suite
• META Math Webinar May 2020
• Progress through Calculus
• Survey and Reports
• "Camp" of Mathematical Queeries
• DMEG Awardees
• National Research Experience for Undergraduates Program (NREUP)
• Neff Outreach Fund Awardees
• Tensor SUMMA Grants
• Tensor Women & Mathematics Grants
• Grantee Highlight Stories
• "Best Practices" Statements
• CoMInDS Summer Workshop 2023
• MAA Travel Grants for Project ACCCESS
• 2024 Summer Workshops
• Minority Serving Institutions Leadership Summit
• Previous Workshops
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Course Resources
• Industrial Math Case Studies
• Participating Faculty
• 2020 PIC Math Student Showcase
• Previous PIC Math Workshops on Data Science
• Dates and Locations
• Past Programs
• Leadership Team
• Support Project NExT
• Section NExT
• Section Officers Meeting History
• Preparations for Section Meetings
• Bylaws Template
• Editor Lectures Program
• MAA Section Lecturer Series
• Officer Election Support
• Section Awards
• Section Liaison Programs
• Section Visitors Program
• Expense Reimbursement
• Guidelines for Bylaw Revisions
• Guidelines for Local Arrangement Chair and/or Committee
• Guidelines for Section Webmasters
• MAA Logo Guidelines
• MAA Section Email Policy
• Section Newsletter Guidelines
• Statement on Federal Tax ID and 501(c)3 Status
• Communication Support
• Guidelines for the Section Secretary and Treasurer
• Legal & Liability Support for Section Officers
• Section Marketing Services
• Section in a Box
• Subventions and Section Finances
• Web Services
• Joining a SIGMAA
• Forming a SIGMAA
• History of SIGMAA
• SIGMAA Officer Handbook
• MAA Connect
• Meetings and Conferences for Students
• Opportunities to Present
• Information and Resources
• MAA Undergraduate Student Poster Session
• Undergraduate Research Resources
• MathFest Student Paper Sessions
• Research Experiences for Undergraduates
• Student Poster Session FAQs
• High School
• A Graduate School Primer
• Reading List
• Student Chapters
• Awards Booklets
• Carl B. Allendoerfer Awards
• Regulations Governing the Association's Award of The Chauvenet Prize
• Trevor Evans Awards
• Paul R. Halmos - Lester R. Ford Awards
• Merten M. Hasse Prize
• George Pólya Awards
• David P. Robbins Prize
• Beckenbach Book Prize
• Euler Book Prize
• Daniel Solow Author’s Award
• Henry L. Alder Award
• Deborah and Franklin Tepper Haimo Award
• Certificate of Merit
• Gung and Hu Distinguished Service
• JPBM Communications Award
• Meritorious Service
• MAA Award for Inclusivity
• T. Christine Stevens Award
• Dolciani Award Guidelines
• Morgan Prize Information
• Selden Award Eligibility and Guidelines for Nomination
• Selden Award Nomination Form
• AMS-MAA-SIAM Gerald and Judith Porter Public Lecture
• Etta Zuber Falconer
• Hedrick Lectures
• James R. C. Leitzel Lecture
• Pólya Lecturer Information
• Putnam Competition Individual and Team Winners
• D. E. Shaw Group AMC 8 Awards & Certificates
• Maryam Mirzakhani AMC 10 A Awards & Certificates
• Two Sigma AMC 10 B Awards & Certificates
• Jane Street AMC 12 A Awards & Certificates
• Akamai AMC 12 B Awards & Certificates
• High School Teachers
• MAA Social Media

You are here

Approaches to qualitative research in mathematics education.

• From Amazon
• From the MAA Bookstore

temp hardcoded node--book.tpl.php

Angelika Bikner-Ahsbahs, Christine Knipping, and Norma Presmeg, editors

• Table of Contents

Over the last twenty years, qualitative research has fought hard to earn legitimacy as opposed to the critical eyes of the positivist approach. Slowly these have emerged as complementary paradigms of scientific inquiry. It is still not uncommon, however, for colleagues and students to ridicule qualitative research methods as being loose, unscientific, or illegitimate. Approaches to Qualitative Research in Mathematics Education: Examples of Methodology and Methods is a clever gift for the skeptics who believe that pursuing truth is only possible through traditional empirical research.

In the book are 19 total chapters that cover the theories and methodologies of qualitative inquiry for research in mathematics education. Each chapter includes an abstract, keywords, sections and references. Together they cohesively showcase the variety of theories and methods within the broad framework of qualitative research and focus on connecting theories and research methods along with rich research examples. The theories and methods covered in the book include grounded theory, ideal type construction, theory of argumentation, the Vygotskian semiotic approach, networking of theories, mixed methods, multilevel analysis, qualitative content analysis, triangulation, and design-based research.

The book is too thick to be read in several days, but this is not a bad thing. Still, I doubt that the book can serve as an effective text for undergraduate students. Given the academic and technical nature of this book, it will better serve doctoral students in mathematics education, particularly students interested in examples of theoretical framework, design, and methods for qualitative study; as well as mathematics education researchers interested in gaining a current snapshot of advanced qualitative methodologies in the field.

It should be noted that each chapter stands alone: the chapters are neither interconnected nor presented in sequence. So readers may search for theories or methods in the subject index and read their chapters of interest. The author index is useful as well. For example, I was interested in how students develop abstract knowledge in the mathematics classroom. I searched the subject index and found an entry for abstractions, which led me to Chapter 8, titled “The Nested Epistemic Actions Model for Abstraction in Context.” The abstract for the chapter stated, “abstraction in context is a theoretical framework for studying students; processes of constructing abstract mathematical knowledge as it occurs in a context that includes specific mathematical, curricular and social components as well as a particular learning environment (p.185).” I was hooked and kept reading. The chapter provided an outline of the theoretical framework of Abstraction in Context, background information on the methodology, and a detailed account of how the theory and methodology supported one another in research design along with findings and analysis.

The work of the contributors inspires researchers in the field of mathematics education to replicate the studies and, more importantly, creates opportunities to further reflect on the ways theories inform qualitative research designs and methods. Whether the editors meant to achieve this or not, one thing is clear from reading the collective scholarly work: the book offers endless possibilities for our field to pursue truth beyond statistical significance in the phenomena of teaching and learning mathematics.

Woong Lim ( [email protected] ) is an Assistant Professor of Mathematics Education at University of New Mexico. His research interests include interrelations between language and mathematics, content knowledge for teaching, and social justice issues in mathematics education.

See the table of contents in pdf format .

• Log in to post comments

Dummy View - NOT TO BE DELETED

MAA Publications

• Periodicals
• MAA History
• Policies and Procedures
• Support MAA
• Member Discount Programs
• Propose a Session
• MathFest Archive
• Putnam Competition
• AMC Resources
• Curriculum Resources
• Outreach Initiatives
• Professional Development
• Communities

Connect with MAA

Mathematical Association of America P: (800) 331-1622 F: (240) 396-5647 Email: [email protected]

Copyright © 2024

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Mobile Version

(Stanford users can avoid this Captcha by logging in.)

• Send to text email RefWorks EndNote printer

Approaches to qualitative research in mathematics education : examples of methodology and methods

Available online.

• SpringerLink

More options

• Find it at other libraries via WorldCat
• Contributors

Description

Creators/contributors, contents/summary.

• Part 1: Grounded theory methodology.
• Chapter 1: Anne R. Teppo. Grounded Theory Methods.
• Chapter 2: Maike Vollstedt. To see the wood for the trees: The development of theory from empirical interview data using grounded theory.-
• Part 2: Approaches to reconstructing argumentation.
• Chapter 3: Gotz Krummheuer. Methods for reconstructing processes of argumentation and Chaptericipation in primary mathematics classroom interaction.
• Chapter 4: Christine Knipping and David Reid. Reconstructing argumentation structures: A perspective on proving processes in secondary mathematics classroom interactions.-
• Part 3: Ideal type construction.
• Chapter 5: Angelika Bikner-Ahsbahs. Empirically grounded building of ideal types. A methodical principle of constructing theory in the interpretive research in mathematics education.
• Chapter 6: Angelika Bikner-Ahsbahs. How ideal type construction can be achieved: An example.-
• Part 4: Semiotic research.
• Chapter 7: Luis Radford and Cristina Sabena. The question of method in a Vygotskian semiotic approach.-
• Part 5: A theory on abstraction and its methodology.
• Chapter 8: Tommy Dreyfus, Rina Hershkowitz and Baruch Schwarz. The nested epistemic actions model for Abstraction in Context: Theory as methodological tool and methodological tool as theory.-
• Part 6: Networking of theories.
• Chapter 9: Ivy Kidron and Angelika Bikner-Ahsbahs. Advancing research by means of the networking of theories.
• Chapter 10: Angelika Bikner-Ahsbahs and Ivy Kidron. A cross-methodology for the networking of theories: The general epistemic need (GEN) as a new concept at the boundary of two theories.-
• Part 7: Multi-level-analysis.
• Chapter 11: Geoffrey B. Saxe, Kenton de Kirby, Marie Le, Yasmin Sitabkhan, Bona Kang. Understanding learning across lessons in classroom communities: A multi-leveled analytic approach.-
• Part 8: Mixed Methods.
• Chapter 12: Udo Kelle and Nils Buchholtz. The combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods in mathematics education-A "Mixed Methods" study on the development of the professional knowledge of teachers.-
• Part 9: Qualitative Content Analysis.
• Chapter 13: Philipp Mayring. Qualitative Content Analysis: Theoretical background and procedures.
• Chapter 14: Bjorn Schwarz. A study on professional competence of future teacher students as an example of a study using Qualitative Content Analysis.-
• Part 10: Triangulation and cultural studies.
• Chapter 15: Ida Ah Chee Mok and David J. Clarke. The contemporary importance of triangulation in a post-positivist world: Examples from the Learner's Perspective Study.-
• Part 11: Design research as a research methodology.
• Chapter 16: Arthur Bakker and Dolly van Eerde. An introduction to design-based research with an example from statistics education.
• Chapter 17: Michele Artigue. Perspectives on design research: The case of didactical engineering.
• Chapter 18: Erin Henrick, Paul Cobb and Kara Jackson. Educational design research to support system-wide instructional improvement.
• Part 12: Looking back.
• Chapter 19: Angelika Bikner-Ahsbahs, Christine Knipping and Norma Presmeg. Appendix.- References.- Index of keywords.
• (source: Nielsen Book Data)

Qualitative Approaches in Mathematics Education Research: Challenges and Possible Solutions

2013, Education Journal

Related Papers

Advances in Mathematics Education

Norma Presmeg

Rina Zazkis

With the development of qualitative methodologies, interviewing has become one of the main tools in mathematics education research. As the first step in analyzing interviewing in mathematics education we focus here on the stage of planning, specifically, on designing the interview questions. We attempt to outline several features of interview questions and understand what guides researchers in choosing the interview questions. Our observations and conclusions are based on examining research in mathematics education that uses interviews as a data-collection tool and on interviews with practicing researchers reflecting on their practice.

Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal

Psychology and Education , Jayhad Michael B. Limana

Mathematics is important for a person to live a better life. It has a special position in the educational curriculum. However, it is well known that most students find mathematics challenging. This study examined the high school student's struggles and challenges in learning Mathematics. The Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) anchored from the Modified Van Kaam Approach popularized by Moustakas was utilized in this study to come up with meaningful data on the struggles and challenges of the high school students in learning Mathematics. The subject of this research was chosen using a purposive sampling technique and the participants are all qualified according to the study's inclusion criteria. 10 high school students of Bartolome and Manuela Pañares Memorial National High School participated in the interview. Analyzing the causes is crucial before taking additional steps to enhance students' Math learning. Through an open-ended survey questionnaire, students were questioned about potential causes of their learning challenges. The researchers generated four themes from the gathered data, and these are the following: The Crux of the Matter, Stumbling Block, Get to Grips With, and Significantly Essential Matter. These themes were formulated based on the students' shared experiences in learning Mathematics. The study included cognitive, affective, and contextual factors that determine the struggles and challenges in learning Mathematics. The challenges that students have in learning mathematics include having trouble recalling information from previous classes, forgetting information easily, and having trouble understanding mathematical ideas. It has been observed that students who find mathematics to be extremely difficult tend to give up more easily than those who find the subject simple. The results also showed that teachers must understand the value of making classroom mathematics engaging so that the students will put effort in learning the subject. The result is presented in the context of the students' perspectives and learning methods.

This book by-passes both psychology and sociology to present an original social theory centered on seeing mathematical learning by everyone as an intrinsic dimension of how mathematics develops as a field in support of human activity. Here, mathematics is defined by how we collectively talk about it. Drawing on psychoanalytic theory, the student is seen as participating in the renewal of mathematics through their contributions to our collective gaze on mathematics as the field responds to ever new demands. As such learning takes a critical stance on the standard initiations into current practices often promoted by formal education. In the field of mathematics education, researchers have moved from psychology where individual students were seen as following natural paths of development through existing mathematical knowledge, to socio-cultural models predicated on students being initiated into the human world and understood through the reflective gazes this world has of itself, such as those found in comparisons of student learning in different countries. This book addresses the domain, purpose and functioning of contemporary research in mathematics education and is an original contribution to this theme. The book is aimed at a mathematics education research audience. It continues a dialogue with existing publications, seen widely as a cutting edge and will also be of interest to students and practitioners in the fields of qualitative research, social theory and psychology. New book- Tony Brown A contemporary theory of mathematics education research https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030550998#aboutBook A preface providing an action-packed overview is freely downloadable as a pdf: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-030-55100-1

European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

NELISWA GQOLI

Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia

Sarah Ferguson

This paper draws on two studies, one conducted by each author, where procedures for gaining insights into people’s beliefs about mathematics and learning were developed or adapted for use by the researcher. In this paper we discuss the use in each study of variations of the procedure called Pupil Perceptions of Effective Learning Environments in Mathematics (PPELEM). The paper demonstrates the flexibility of PPELEM as a data collection tool and shows that, even with a large age difference of respondents, the procedure can be used as a prompt for both adults and primary school children and provides insights into beliefs.

Mathematics Education Research Journal

Robyn Jorgensen

Curriculum Inquiry

Margaret Walshaw

In this paper I review some recent reviews of mathematics education research, which seem at first sight to confirm a judgement by Steen (1999) that it'is a field in disarray'. As a PhD student, looking at competing methodologies there can seem a bewildering complexity from which to choose. It appears that there are relatively few (three to five, depending on authors) theoretical perspectives or paradigms that guide the field, but a plethora of methodologies that can be used with them.

Journal of Mixed Methods Research

Susan Swars Auslander

This mixed methods examination of 710 research articles in mathematics education published in six prominent educational journals during the period 1995-2005 finds that 50% of the studies used qualitative methods only, 21% used quantitative methods only, and 29% mixed qualitative and quantitative methods in various ways. Although the number of mixed methods articles show some variation year to year and

RELATED PAPERS

Administração Pública e Gestão Social

aylene bousquat

High Performance …

Koenraad Van Schuylenbergh

Proceedings of the International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (IAARC)

JLTA Journal Kiyo

Yosuke Yanase

Journal of Biomechanics

Stefan Duma

Mae Hyang Hwang

Advances in Multidisciplinary and scientific Research Journal Publication

Lawal Abiola

FAZREENA MANSOR

Frontiers in human neuroscience

Lutz Jäncke

mohammad yahyaei

Arthropod structure & development

Annemariè Oldewage

Constructivist Foundations

Moritz Kriegleder

THE JAPANESE JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Chika Harada

Himanshu Maurya

Journal of Workplace Learning

Irene Bernhard

Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Kevin Perez

José Manuel Palma

Enseñanza y Aprendizaje de Ingeniería de Computadores

Guillermo Botella Juan

RNA biology

Gerhard Steger

Information System and Technology

Bashir Aliyu Yakasai

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Search NYU Steinhardt

Qualitative research in mathematics in education.

The course is oriented to the unique aspects of doing research in mathematics education. It involves an exploration of the processes of doing qualitative research in mathematics education from development of the research question through writing the research report. The course emphasizes the purpose and interconnectedness of each part of the research process. Particular methodologies are explored and research skills are developed.

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education

An official journal of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), JRME is the premier research journal in mathematics education and is devoted to the interests of teachers and researchers at all levels--preschool through college.

• eTOC Alerts
• Latest Issue TOC RSS

Working Interinstitutionally to Apprentice Doctoral Students in Mathematics Education Research

Identity, power, and dignity: a positional analysis of gisela in her high school mathematics classroom.

Multiply minoritized learners face racialized, gendered, and ableist hierarchies of mathematical ability that shape the organization of schools and classrooms and can significantly challenge access to identities as mathematical learners and practitioners as well as to fundamental human dignity. Classrooms and everyday interactions can perpetuate or interrupt these conditions. Contributing to questions about the relationships among identity, power, and dignity in mathematics learning, this article presents a positional interaction analysis of Gisela, a Disabled 10th-grade Latina student, as she took up, challenged, and renegotiated identities of mathematical thinker, learner, and community member over the course of one school year.

Attending to Coherence Among Research Questions, Methods, and Claims in Coding Studies

We consider a kind of study common in mathematics education research: one that allocates qualitative data to categories in a theoretical or conceptual framework. These studies sometimes lack coherence among research questions, sampling and analysis methods, and claims, which can be attributed to tensions in how these aspects are framed. We ground our discussion in examples from five published studies, focusing on the methodological and reporting decisions that increase coherence: answering research questions from the same perspective they are asked (using a variance or a process lens), using (relative) frequencies properly to warrant claims, employing a coherent sampling strategy, and making appropriate generalizations. We argue that attending to coherence can increase the quality and contribution of coding studies.

The Journal for Research in Mathematics Education is published online five times a year—January, March, May, July, and November—at 1906 Association Dr., Reston, VA 20191-1502. Each volume’s index is in the November issue. JRME is indexed in Contents Pages in Education, Current Index to Journals in Education, Education Index, Psychological Abstracts, Social Sciences Citation Index, and MathEduc.

An official journal of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), JRME is the premier research journal in mathematics education and is devoted to the interests of teachers and researchers at all levels--preschool through college. JRME presents a variety of viewpoints. The views expressed or implied in JRME are not the official position of the Council unless otherwise noted.

JRME is a forum for disciplined inquiry into the teaching and learning of mathematics. The editors encourage submissions including:

• Research reports, addressing important research questions and issues in mathematics education,
• Brief reports of research,
• Research commentaries on issues pertaining to mathematics education research.

More information about each type of submission is available here . If you have questions about the types of manuscripts JRME publishes, please contact [email protected].

Editorial Board

The  JRME  Editorial Board consists of the Editorial Team and Editorial Panel.  The Editorial team, led by JRME Editor Patricio Herbst, leads the review, decision and editorial/publication process for manuscripts.  The Editorial Panel reviews manuscripts, sets policy for the journal, and continually seeks feedback from readers. The following are members of the current JRME Editorial Board.

Editorial Staff   

Editorial Panel  

International Advisory Board   

Headquarters Journal Staff  

The editors of the  Journal for Research in Mathematics Education (JRME)  encourage the submission of a variety of manuscripts.

Manuscripts must be submitted through the JRME Online Submission and Review System . 

Research Reports

JRME publishes a wide variety of research reports that move the field of mathematics education forward. These include, but are not limited to, various genres and designs of empirical research; philosophical, methodological, and historical studies in mathematics education; and literature reviews, syntheses, and theoretical analyses of research in mathematics education. Papers that review well for JRME generally include these Characteristics of a High-Quality Manuscript . The editors strongly encourage all authors to consider these characteristics when preparing a submission to JRME. 

The maximum length for Research Reports is 13,000 words including abstract, references, tables, and figures.

Brief Reports

Brief reports of research are appropriate when a fuller report is available elsewhere or when a more comprehensive follow-up study is planned.

• A brief report of a first study on some topic might stress the rationale, hypotheses, and plans for further work.
• A brief report of a replication or extension of a previously reported study might contrast the results of the two studies, referring to the earlier study for methodological details.
• A brief report of a monograph or other lengthy nonjournal publication might summarize the key findings and implications or might highlight an unusual observation or methodological approach.
• A brief report might provide an executive summary of a large study.

The maximum length for Brief Reports is 5,000 words including abstract, references, tables, and figures. If source materials are needed to evaluate a brief report manuscript, a copy should be included.

Other correspondence regarding manuscripts for Research Reports or Brief Reports should be sent to

Patricio Herbst, JRME Editor, [email protected] .

Research Commentaries

The journal publishes brief (5,000 word), peer-reviewed commentaries on issues that reflect on mathematics education research as a field and steward its development. Research Commentaries differ from Research Reports in that their focus is not to present new findings or empirical results, but rather to comment on issues of interest to the broader research community. 

Research Commentaries are intended to engage the community and increase the breadth of topics addressed in  JRME . Typically, Research Commentaries —

• address mathematics education research as a field and endeavor to move the field forward;
• speak to the readers of the journal as an audience of researchers; and
• speak in ways that have relevance to all mathematics education researchers, even when addressing a particular point or a particular subgroup.

Authors of Research Commentaries should share their perspectives while seeking to invite conversation and dialogue, rather than close off opportunities to learn from others, especially those whose work they might be critiquing. 

Foci of Research Commentaries vary widely. They may include, but are not restricted to the following:

• Discussion of connections between research and NCTM-produced documents
• Advances in research methods
• Discussions of connections among research, policy, and practice
• Analyses of trends in policies for funding research
• Examinations of evaluation studies
• Critical essays on research publications that have implications for the mathematics education research community
• Interpretations of previously published research in JRME that bring insights from an equity lens
• Exchanges among scholars holding contrasting views about research-related issues

Read more about Research Commentaries in our May 2023 editorial . 

The maximum length for Research Commentaries is 5,000 words, including abstract, references, tables, and figures.

Other correspondence regarding Research Commentary manuscripts should be sent to: 

Daniel Chazan, JRME Research Commentary Editor, [email protected] .

Editorial Policies

Appeals Process Policy

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

Tools for Authors

The forms below provide information to authors and help ensure that NCTM complies with all copyright laws: 

Student Work Release

Photographer Copyright Release

Video Permission

Want to Review?

Find more information in this flyer  about how to become a reviewer for JRME . 

The  Journal for Research in Mathematics Education  is available to individuals as part of an  NCTM membership  or may be accessible through an  institutional subscription .

The  Journal for Research in Mathematics Education  ( JRME ), an official journal of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), is the premier research journal in math education and devoted to the interests of teachers and researchers at all levels--preschool through college.

JRME is published five times a year—January, March, May, July, and November—and presents a variety of viewpoints.  Learn more about   JRME .

© 2024 National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM)

Powered by: PubFactory

• [66.249.64.20|185.80.151.9]
• 185.80.151.9

Character limit 500 /500

• Education & Teaching
• Schools & Teaching

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required .

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

Image Unavailable

• To view this video download Flash Player

Approaches to Qualitative Research in Mathematics Education: Examples of Methodology and Methods (Advances in Mathematics Education) Softcover reprint of the original 1st ed. 2015 Edition

Purchase options and add-ons.

• ISBN-10 9402406883
• ISBN-13 978-9402406887
• Edition Softcover reprint of the original 1st ed. 2015
• Publisher Springer
• Publication date September 11, 2016
• Part of series Advances in Mathematics Education
• Language English
• Dimensions 6.1 x 1.37 x 9.25 inches
• Print length 607 pages
• See all details

Editorial Reviews

“This book, Approaches to Qualitative Research in Mathematics Education: Examples of Methodology and Methods, edited by Angelika Bikner-Ahsbahs, Christine Knipping, and Norma Presmeg, is a timely and valuable addition to the research literature in mathematics education. … The book is to be strongly recommended.” (Keith Jones and Chronoula Voutsina, Educational Studies in Mathematics, Vol. 96, 2017)

“Approaches to Qualitative Research in Mathematics Education: Examples of Methodology and Methods is a clever gift for the skeptics who believe that pursuing truth is only possible through traditional empirical research. … The work of the contributors inspires researchers in the field of mathematics education to replicate thestudies and, more importantly, creates opportunities to further reflect on the ways theories inform qualitative research designs and methods.” (Woong Lim, MAA Reviews, July, 2015)

From the Back Cover

Product details.

• Publisher ‏ : ‎ Springer; Softcover reprint of the original 1st ed. 2015 edition (September 11, 2016)
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• Paperback ‏ : ‎ 607 pages
• ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 9402406883
• ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-9402406887
• Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 1.86 pounds
• Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 6.1 x 1.37 x 9.25 inches
• #2,672 in Education Curriculum & Instruction
• #3,981 in Science for Kids
• #9,792 in Math Teaching Materials

Customer reviews

Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.

To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.

No customer reviews

• Amazon Newsletter
• About Amazon
• Accessibility
• Sustainability
• Press Center
• Investor Relations
• Amazon Devices
• Amazon Science
• Sell on Amazon
• Sell apps on Amazon
• Supply to Amazon
• Protect & Build Your Brand
• Become an Affiliate
• Become a Delivery Driver
• Start a Package Delivery Business
• Advertise Your Products
• Self-Publish with Us
• Become an Amazon Hub Partner
• › See More Ways to Make Money
• Amazon Visa
• Amazon Store Card
• Amazon Secured Card
• Amazon Business Card
• Shop with Points
• Credit Card Marketplace
• Reload Your Balance
• Amazon Currency Converter
• Your Account
• Your Orders
• Shipping Rates & Policies
• Amazon Prime
• Returns & Replacements
• Manage Your Content and Devices
• Recalls and Product Safety Alerts
• Conditions of Use
• Privacy Notice
• Consumer Health Data Privacy Disclosure
• Your Ads Privacy Choices

Publications — Over 100 years of publishing excellence

• Book Author Resources
• Submit a Book Proposal
• AMS Rights, Licensing, and Permissions
• Open Math Notes
• Frequently asked questions
• Member Journals
• Research Journals
• Translation Journals
• Distributed Journals
• Open Access Journals
• Guidelines and Policies
• Journal Author Resources

Librarian Resources

• eBook Collections
• COUNTER Usage Statistics
• My Subscriptions
• Subscription Information
• Licensing Information

Mathematical Reviews/MathSciNet®

• MathSciNet ®
• Reviewer Home
• MathSciNet ® Subscriptions

Membership — Welcome to your membership center

Join the ams, renew your membership, give a membership, individual membership.

• Member Benefits
• Member Directory
• Reciprocating Societies
• Members in Developing Countries

Institutional Membership

• Domestic Institutions
• International Institutions
• Two-Year Institutions
• Graduate Student Chapter Program

Other Member Types

• Corporate Memberships
• Associate Memberships

Meetings & Conferences — Engage with colleagues and the latest research

National meetings.

• Joint Mathematics Meetings
• Upcoming JMMs
• Previous JMMs
• Special Lectures
• Professional Enhancement Programs (PEPs)

Sectional Meetings

• Upcoming Sectionals
• Previous Sectionals
• Presenting Papers
• Hosting Sectionals

Other Meetings, Conferences & Workshops

• Mathematics Research Communities
• Education Mini-conference
• International Meetings
• Mathematics Calendar
• Short Courses
• Workshop for Department Chairs and Leaders

Meetings Resources

• Suggest a Speaker
• AMS Meetings Grants
• Submitting Abstracts
• Welcoming Environment Policy
• MathSafe – supporting safe meetings

News & Outreach — Explore news, images, posters, and mathematical essays

News from the ams.

• AMS News Releases
• Feature Stories
• Information for Journalists
• In Memory Of

Math Voices

• Feature Column
• Math in the Media
• Column on Teaching and Learning

Explorations

• Recognizing Diverse Mathematicians
• AMS Posters
• Mathematics & Music
• Mathematical Imagery
• Mathematical Moments

Professional Programs — Resources and opportunities to further your mathematical pursuits

Professional development.

• Employment Services
• Mathjobs.org
• BEGIN Career Initiative
• Mathprograms.org
• Mathematical Opportunities Database
• Research Seminars

Institutional Information and Data

• Annual Survey of the Mathematical and Statistical Sciences
• CBMS Survey
• Other Sources of Data
• Directory of Institutions in the Mathematical Sciences
• Professional Directory

Grants & Support

• AMS-Simons Grants for PUI Faculty
• Travel Grants
• Fellowships & Scholarships
• Epsilon Fund
• Child Care Grants

Awards & Recognition

• AMS Prizes & Awards
• Fellows of the AMS

Education — Resources to support advanced mathematics teaching and learning

For students.

• Information for Undergraduate and High School Students
• Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REUs)
• Considering Grad School
• Find Grad Programs
• Applying to Grad School
• What do Mathematicians Do?

For Teachers

• Teaching Online
• Teaching Resources
• Inclusive Classrooms
• Assessing Student Learning
• Education Webinars

For Department Leaders & Mentors

• Information for Department Leaders
• paraDIGMS (Diversity in Graduate Mathematical Sciences)

Government Relations — Advocating for the mathematical sciences

Elevating mathematics in congress.

• Our Mission
• Letters, Statements, & Legislation
• Congressional Briefings

Legislative Priorities

• Federal Issues of Concern
• Federal Budget Process

Get Involved

• Advocacy Resources
• Take Action

DC-Based Fellowships

• Congressional Fellowship
• Mass Media Fellowship
• Catalyzing Advocacy in Science & Engineering (CASE) Fellowship

Giving to the AMS — Your gifts make great things happen for mathematics   Make a Gift

What you can support.

• The 2020 Fund
• Next Generation Fund
• Birman Fellowship for Women Scholars
• JMM Child Care Grants
• MathSciNet for Developing Countries

Create a Legacy

• Make a Tribute Gift
• Create a Permanent Fund
• Establish a Prize, Award or Fellowship
• Bequests and Charitable Estate Planning

Honoring Your Gift

• Donor Stories
• Donor Wall of Honor
• Thomas S. Fiske Society
• AMS Contributors Society
• AMS Gardens

Giving Resources

• AMS Development Committee
• AMS Gift Acceptance Policy

About the AMS — Advancing research. Connecting the mathematics community.

Our organization.

• Executive Staff
• Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion
• Jobs at AMS
• Customer Service

Our Governance

• Board of Trustees
• Executive Committee

Governance Operations

• Calendar of Meetings
• Policy Statements & Guidelines

Mathematics of Computation

Published by the American Mathematical Society since 1960 (published as Mathematical Tables and other Aids to Computation 1943-1959), Mathematics of Computation is devoted to research articles of the highest quality in computational mathematics.

ISSN 1088-6842 (online) ISSN 0025-5718 (print)

The 2020 MCQ for Mathematics of Computation is 1.78 . What is MCQ? The Mathematical Citation Quotient (MCQ) measures journal impact by looking at citations over a five-year period. Subscribers to MathSciNet may click through for more detailed information.

• Articles in press
• Recently published
• All issues : 1943 – Present

Contents of Volume 93, Number 348 HTML articles powered by AMS MathViewer View front and back matter from the print issue

The Combination of Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods in Mathematics Education: A “Mixed Methods” Study on the Development of the Professional Knowledge of Teachers

• First Online: 01 January 2014

Cite this chapter

• Udo Kelle 6 &
• Nils Buchholtz 7  

Part of the book series: Advances in Mathematics Education ((AME))

8862 Accesses

9 Citations

3 Altmetric

Research about education in mathematics is influenced by the ongoing dispute about qualitative and quantitative research methods. Especially in the domain of professional knowledge of teachers one can find a clear distinction between qualitative, interpretive studies on the one hand and large-scale quantitative assessment studies on the other hand. Thereby the question of how professional knowledge of teachers can be measured and whether the applied constructs are developed on a solid theoretical base is heavily debated. Most studies in this area limit themselves to the use of either qualitative or quantitative methods and data. In this chapter we discuss the limitations of such mono-method studies and we show how a combination of research methods within a “mixed methods design” can overcome these problems. Thereby we lay special emphasis on different possibilities a mixed methods approach offers for a mutual validation of both qualitative and quantitative findings. For this purpose, we draw on data and results coming from an empirical study about a teacher training program in mathematics, where quantitative data measuring the development of professional knowledge of student teachers were related to qualitative in-depth interviews about the training program.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Planning and Conducting Mixed Methods Studies in Mathematics Educational Research

Responding to evidence-based practice: An examination of mixed methods research in teacher education

Educational Research on Learning and Teaching Mathematics

Beck and Maier distinguish slightly differently between the “normative” and the “interpretive paradigm” going back on Wilson ( 1970 ).

It should be clear from the preceding discussion that this is not so much a problem of quantitative research per se —it may occur if one strictly follows a hypothetico-deductive approach (which is for many reasons advisable if quantitative methods are applied) and if researchers lack empirically contentful hypotheses, workable theories and/or specific knowledge about the domain under study. The latter is often not so much the fault of uninformed researchers but a consequence of the fact that social action is often structured by culture-bound rules and “local knowledge”.

A methodological adjustment of the treatment groups by measures of treatment evaluation (e.g. propensity score matching) has been omitted so far as the use of elaborate statistical methods to determine treatment effects appeared disproportionate due to the small group sizes. Furthermore, the group differences in Abitur grades are not significant and the relationship of school-related pre-cognitions considering the attendance at Advanced or Basic course merely reflects the pre-cognitions of local convenience samples.

It needs to be noted that performance on the level of individual items can vary due to chance and thus should not be over-interpreted.

Anderson, J. R. (1980). Cognitive psychology and its implications . San Francisco: Freeman.

Google Scholar  

Bammé, A. (2004). Science Wars. Von der akademischen zur postakademischen Wissenschaft [Science Wars. From academic to post-academic science]. Frankfurt/New York: Campus Verlag.

Barton, A. H., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1969). Some functions of qualitative analysis in social research. In G. C. McCall & J. L. Simmons (Eds.), Issues in participant observation . Reading: Addison-Wesley.

Baumert, J., Bos, W., & Lehmann, R. (Eds.). (2000a). TIMSSS/III. Dritte Internationale Mathematik- und Naturwissenschaftsstudie – Mathematische und naturwissenschaftliche Bildung am Ende der Schullaufbahn. Vol. 1: Mathematische und naturwissenschaftliche Grundbildung am Ende der Pflichtschulzeit [TIMSSS/III. Third international mathematics and science study – Mathematics and science education at the end of schooling. Vol 1: Mathematical and Scientific Literacy at the end of compulsory schooling]. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

Baumert, J., Bos, W., & Lehmann, R. (Eds.) (2000b). TIMSSS/III. Dritte Internationale Mathematik- und Naturwissenschaftsstudie—Mathematische und physikalische Kompetenzen am Ende der gymnasialen Oberstufe [TIMSSS / III. Third international mathematics and science study—Mathematical and physical competencies at the end of secondary school]. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

Baumert, J., Klieme, E., Lehrke, M., & Savelsbergh, E. (2000c). Konzeption und Aussagekraft der TIMSS-Leistungstests [Conception and significance of the TIMSS achievement tests]. Die Deutsche Schule , 92 , 103–115 & 196–217.

Baumert, J., Klieme, E., Neubrand, M., Prenzel, M., Schiefele, U., Schneider, W., Tillmann, K.-J. & Weiß, M. (Eds.) (2001). PISA 2000. Basiskompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern im internationalen Vergleich [PISA 2000. An international comparison of students´ basic competencies of students]. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

Beck, C., & Maier, H. (1993). Das Interview in der mathematikdidaktischen Forschung [Interviewing in research about mathematics education]. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 14 (2), 147–179.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bender, P. (2004). Die etwas andere Sicht auf den mathematischen Teil der internationalen Vergleichs-Untersuchungen PISA sowie TIMSS und IGLU [A somewhat different view of the mathematical part of the international comparative studies PISA and TIMSS and IGLU]. Mitteilungen der DMV, 12 (2), 101–108.

Bender, P. (2005). PISA, Kompetenzstufen und Mathematik-Didaktik [PISA, levels of competence and mathematics education]. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 26 (3/4), 274–281.

Bender, P. (2006). Was sagen uns PISA & Co, wenn wir uns auf sie einlassen? [What may PISA & Co tell us, if we get involved with them?]. In T. Jahnke & W. Meyerhöfer (Eds.), PISA & Co—Kritik eines Programms . Hildesheim: Franzbecker.

Beutelspacher, A., Danckwerts, R., Nickel, G., Spies, S. & Wickel, G. (2011). Mathematik Neu Denken. Impulse für die Gymnasiallehrerausbildung an Universitäten [Thinking Mathematics in a New Way. Ideas for secondary teacher education at universities]. Wiesbaden: Vieweg +Teubner.

Blömeke, S., Kaiser, G., & Lehmann, R. (Eds.). (2010a). TEDS-M 2008. Professionelle Kompetenz und Lerngelegenheiten angehender Primarstufenlehrkräfte im internationalen Vergleich [An international comparison of professional competence and learning opportunities of prospective primary school teachers]. Münster: Waxmann.

Blömeke, S., Kaiser, G., & Lehmann, R. (Eds.). (2010b). TEDS-M 2008. Professionelle Kompetenz und Lerngelegenheiten angehender Mathematiklehrkräfte für die Sekundarstufe I im internationalen Vergleich [An international comparison of professional competence and learning opportunities of prospective mathematics teachers for secondary school]. Münster: Waxmann.

Blumer, H. (1928). Method in social psychology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago.

Brannen, J. (Ed.). (1992). Mixing methods: Qualitative and quantitative research . Aldershot: Avebury.

Brewer, J., & Hunter, A. (1989). Multimethod research: A synthesis of styles . Newbury Park: Sage.

Brezinka, W. (1968). Von der Pädagogik zur Erziehungswissenschaft. Vorschläge zur Abgrenzung [From pedagogy to education science. Proposals for a demarcation]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 14 (5), 435–475.

Briedis, K., Egorova, T., Heublein, U., Lörz, M., Middendorff, E., Quast, H., & Spangenberg, H. (2008). Studienaufnahme, Studium und Berufsverbleib von Mathematikern. Einige Grunddaten zum Jahr der Mathematik [Educational and occupational careers of mathematicians. Some basic data for the year of mathematics]. Resource Document. Forum Hochschule 9, Hochschul-Informations-System GmbH. http://www.his.de/pdf/pub_fh/fh-200809.pdf . Accessed 24 Apr 2013.

Bromme, R. (1992). Der Lehrer als Experte: Zur Psychologie des professionellen Wissens [The teacher as an expert: The psychology of professional knowledge]. Bern: Huber.

Bromme, R. (1997). Kompetenzen, Funktionen und unterrichtliches Handeln des Lehrers [The teacher’s competencies, functions and instructional actions of]. In F. E. Weinert (Ed.), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie: Psychologie des Unterrichts und der Schule (Vol. 3, pp. 177–212). Göttingen: Hogrefe.

Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A. (1962). A study of thinking . New York: Science Editions.

Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and quality in social research . London: Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Bryman, A. (2005). Why do researchers integrate quantitative and qualitative research? Paper presented at the Conference “Mixed Method Research Designs: Advanced Issues and Debates” at the University of Basel, 13 Aug 2005.

Bryman, A. (2008). Why do researchers integrate/combine/mesh/blend/mix/merge/fuse/quantitaive and qualitative research? In M. Bergman (Ed.), Advances in mixed methods research. Theories and applications (pp. 87–100). Los Angeles: Sage.

Buchholtz, N., & Blömeke, S. (2012). Mathematik unterrichten lernen. Zur Wirksamkeit hochschuldidaktischer Innovationen in der Mathematik-Lehrerausbildung [Learning to teach mathematics. The effectiveness of innovations in university teaching in mathematics teacher training]. In D. Bosse, L. Criblez, & T. Hascher (Eds.), Reform der Lehrerbildung in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz. Teil 1: Analyse, Perspektiven und Forschung (pp. 255–276). Immenhausen bei Kassel: Prolog-Verlag.

Buchholtz, N., & Kaiser, G. (2013). Improving mathematics teacher education in Germany: Test results from a longitudinal evaluation of innovative programs. International Journal for Science and Mathematics Education, 11 (4), 949–977.

Buchholtz, N., Scheiner, T., Döhrmann, M., Suhl, U., Kaiser, G., & Blömeke, S. (2012). TEDS-shortM. Teacher Education and Development Study—Short Test on Mathematics Content Knowledge (MCK) and Mathematics Pedagogical Content Knowledge (MPCK). Kurzfassung der mathematischen und mathematikdidaktischen Testinstrumente aus TEDS-M, TEDS-LT und TEDS-Telekom . Hamburg: Universität Hamburg.

Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 2 , 81–105.

Carpenter, T. P., & Fennema, E. (1992). Cognitively guided instruction: Building on the knowledge of students and teachers. International Journal of Educational Research, 17 (5), 457–470.

Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., & Carey, D. (1988). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of students’ problem solving. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 19 (5), 385–401.

Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Chiang, C. P., & Loef, M. (1989). Using knowledge of children’s mathematics thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study. American Educational Research Journal, 26 (4), 499–532.

Cresswell, J. W. (1994). Research design. Qualitative and quantitative approaches . Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act. A theoretical introduction to sociological methods . New York: McGraw Hill.

Deutsches PISA Konsortium (Eds.). (2000). Schülerleistungen im internationalen Vergleich. Eine neue Rahmenkonzeption für die Erfassung von Wissen und Fähigkeiten [An international comparison of students’ performance A new conceptual framework for the assessment of knowledge and skills] . Resource document. Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung. http://www.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/Pisa/Rahmenkonzeptiondt.pdf . Accessed 24 Apr 2013.

Eilerts, K. (2009). Kompetenzorientierung in der Mathematik-Lehrerausbildung. Empirische Untersuchung zu ihrer Implementierung [Competence orientation in mathematics teacher education. An empirical study about its implementation]. Münster: LIT Verlag.

Erzberger, C. (1998). Zahlen und Wörter. Die Verbindung quantitativer und qualitativer Daten und Methoden im Forschungsprozess [Numbers and words. The combination of quantitative and qualitative data and methods in the research process]. Weinheim: Deutscher Studien Verlag.

Erzberger, C., & Kelle, U. (2003). Making inferences in mixed methods: The rules of integration. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral sciences (pp. 457–488). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Erzberger, C., & Prein, G. (1997). Triangulation: Validity and empirically based hypothesis construction. Quality & Quantity, 2 , 141–154.

Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., Levi, L., Jacobs, V. R., & Empson, S. B. (1996). A longitudinal study of learning to use children’s thinking in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27 , 403–434.

Fielding, N. G., & Fielding, J. L. (1986). Linking data. Qualitative research methods (Vol. 4). London: Sage.

Flick, U. (1991). Triangulation [Triangulation]. In U. Flick, E. Kardoff, H. Keupp, L. Rosenstiel, & S. Wolff (Eds.), Handbuch qualitative Sozialforschung (pp. 432–434). München: Psychologie Verlags Union.

Flick, U. (1992). Triangulation revisited: Strategy of validation or alternative? Journal of the Theory of Social Behaviour, 2 , 175–197.

Flick, U. (1998). An introduction to qualitative research . Thousand Oaks/London/New Delhi: Sage.

Freudenthal, H. (1983). Didactical phenomenology of mathematical structures . Dordrecht: Reidel.

Gage, N. (1989). The paradigm wars and their aftermath: A “historical” sketch of research and teaching since 1989. Educational Researcher, 18 , 4–10.

Gellert, U. (2006). Mathematik “in der Welt” und mathematische “Grundbildung”. Zur Konsistenz des mathematikdidaktischen Rahmens von PISA [Mathematics “in the world” and mathematical “basic education.” The consistency of the mathematics educational framework of PISA]. In T. Jahnke & W. Meyerhöfer (Eds.), PISA & Co—Kritik eines Programms . Franzbecker: Hildesheim.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research . New York: Aldine.

Gobo, G. (2004). Sampling, representativeness and generalizability. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 435–456). London: Sage.

Grigutsch, S., Raatz, U., & Törner, G. (1998). Einstellung gegenüber Mathematik bei Mathematiklehrern [Beliefs of mathematics teachers concerning mathematics]. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 19 (1), 3–45.

Guba, E. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Technology Research and Development, 29 (2), 75–91.

Hagemeister, V. (1999). Was wurde bei TIMSS erhoben? Über die empirische Basis einer aufregenden Studie [What was surveyed with TIMSS? About the empirical basis of an exciting study]. Die Deutsche Schule, 91 , 160–177.

Hammersley, M. (1989). The dilemma of qualitative method. Herbert Blumer and the Chicago tradition . London: Routledge.

Hammersley, M. (1990). What’s wrong with ethnography? The myth of theoretical description. Sociology, 24 (4), 597–615.

Hartig, J., & Kühnbach, O. (2006). Schätzung von Veränderung mit Plausible Values in mehrdimensionalen Rasch-Modellen [Estimation of change with plausible values in multidimensional Rasch models]. In A. Ittel & H. Merkens (Eds.), Veränderungsmessung und Längsschnittstudien in der der Erziehungswissenschaft (pp. 27–44). Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Hopmann, S., Brinek, G., & Retzl, M. (Eds.). (2007). PISA zufolge PISA – PISA According to PISA. Hält PISA, was es verspricht? – [Does PISA keep it’s promises?]. Wien: LIT-Verlag.

Hunter, A., & Brewer, J. (2003). Multimethod research in sociology. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral sciences (pp. 577–594). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Jablonka, E. (2006). Mathematical Literacy: Die Verflüchtigung eines ambitionierten Testkonstrukts in bedeutungslose PISA-Punkte [Mathematical Literacy: Transforming ambitious test construct into meaningless PISA points]. In T. Jahnke & W. Meyerhöfer (Eds.), PISA & Co—Kritik eines Programms . Hildesheim: Franzbecker.

Jahnke, T. (2009). Kritik empirischer Unvernunft—zur sogenannten Empirischen Bildungsforschung in der Mathematikdidaktik [Critique of empirical irrationality—The so-called empirical education research in mathematics education]. In M. Neubrand (Ed.), Beiträge zum Mathematikunterricht 2009 (pp. 671–674). Münster: WTM-Verlag.

Jahnke, T. (2010). Vom mählichen Verschwinden des Fachs aus der Mathematikdidaktik [The gradual disappearance of the subject from mathematics education]. Mitteilungen der GDM, 89 , 21–24.

Jahnke, T., & Meyerhöfer, W. (Eds.). (2006). PISA & Co—Kritik eines Programms [PISA & Co—Critique of a program]. Hildesheim: Franzbecker.

Jahoda, M., Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Zeisel, H. (1982). Die Arbeitslosen von Marienthal [The unemployed of Marienthal] . Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp (Original work published 1933).

Johnson, B., & Turner, L. A. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 297–320). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Kaiser, G. (2000). Internationale Vergleichsuntersuchungen im Mathematikunterricht—Eine Auseinandersetzung mit ihren Möglichkeiten und Grenzen [International comparative studies in mathematics education—A discussion of their possibilities and limitations]. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 21 (3/4), 171–192.

Kaiser, G., & Buchholtz, N. (2014). Overcoming the gap between university and school mathematics. The impact of an innovative programme in mathematics teacher education at the Justus-Liebig-University in Giessen. In S. Rezat, M. Hattermann, & A. Peter-Koop (Eds.), Transformation – A fundamental idea of mathematics education (S. 85–105). Heidelberg: Springer.

Kelle, U. (2001). Sociological explanations between micro and macro and method triangulation. Resource document. Forum Qualitative Social Research , 2 (1), Art. 5. http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/966/2109 . Accessed 17 April 2013.

Kelle, U. (2006). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in research practice: Purposes and advantages. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (4), 293–311.

Kelle, U., & Erzberger, C. (2004). Qualitative and quantitative methods—Not in opposition. In U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research . London: Sage.

Kelle, U., & Lüdemann, C. (1998). Bridge assumptions in rational choice theory: Methodological problems and possible solutions. In H.-P. Blossfeld & G. Prein (Eds.), Rational choice theory and large-scale data analysis (pp. 112–126). Boulder: Westview Press.

Kießwetter, K. (2002). Unzulänglich vermessen und vermessen unzulänglich: PISA & Co [Inadequately measured and overconfidently inadequate: PISA & Co]. Mitteilungen der DMV, 10 (4), 49–58.

Kirsch, A. (1977). Aspekte des Vereinfachens im Mathematikunterricht [Aspects of simplification in mathematics education]. Didaktik der Mathematik, 2 , 87–101.

Klein, F. (1932). Elementary mathematics from an advanced standpoint. Arithmetic, algebra, analysis (translated from the third German edition by Hedrick, E. R., & Noble, C. A.). New York: Macmillan.

Klieme, E., & Bos, W. (2000). Mathematikleistungen und mathematischer Unterricht in Deutschland und Japan. Triangulation qualitativer und quantitativer Analysen am Beispiel der TIMS-Studie [Performance in mathematics and mathematical education in Germany and Japan. Using TIMSS as an example for triangulating qualitative and quantitative findings ]. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 3 (3), 359–380.

Köller, O., Baumert, J., & Schnabel, K. (1999). Wege zur Hochschulreife. Offenheit des Systems und Sicherung vergleichbarer Standards [Pathways to university entrance qualification. Openness of the system and protection of comparable standards]. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 2 (3), 385–422.

König, J., & Blömeke, S. (2010). Pädagogisches Unterrichtswissen (PUW). Dokumentation der Kurzfassung des TEDS-M Testinstruments zur Kompetenzmessung in der ersten Phase der Lehrerausbildung [Pedagogical teaching knowledge (PUW). Documentation of the short version of the TEDS-M test instrument for measuring competence in the first phase of teacher education.]. Berlin: Humboldt-Universität.

Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Kunter, M., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S., & Neubrand, M. (Eds.). (2011). Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften. Ergebnisse des Forschungsprogramms COACTIV [Professional competence of teachers. Results of the research program COACTIV]. Münster: Waxmann.

Kuntze, S. (2011). Sichtweisen von Studierenden zum Lehren und Lernen im Mathematikunterricht—“Rich pictures” und Multiple-Choice: Gegenüberstellung zweier Erhebungsformate [Perspectives of students on teaching and learning in mathematics education—“rich pictures” and multiple choice: comparison of two survey formats]. In A. Lindmeier & S. Ufer (Eds.), Beiträge zum Mathematikunterricht 2010 (pp. 521–524). Münster: WTM-Verlag.

Lamnek, S. (1995). Qualitative Sozialforschung. Band 1, Methodologie [Qualitative social research. Volume 1, Methodology]. Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Lundberg, G. A. (1929/1942). Social research: A study in methods of gathering data. Green: Longmans.

Mayerhöfer, W. (2004a). Zum Kompetenzstufenmodell von PISA [The model of PISA competence levels]. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 25 (3/4), 294–305.

Mayerhöfer, W. (2004b). Zum Problem des Ratens bei PISA [The problem of guessing in PISA]. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 25 (1), 62–69.

Mayerhöfer, W. (2006). PISA & Co als kulturindustrielle Phänomene [PISA & Co as phenomena of culture industry]. In T. Jahnke & W. Meyerhöfer (Eds.), PISA & Co—Kritik eines Programms . Hildesheim: Franzbecker.

Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis [28 paragraphs]. Resource document. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1 (2), Art. 20, http://nbnresolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0002204 . Accessed 17 Apr 2013.

Mayring, P. (2008). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse—Grundlagen und Techniken [Qualitative content analysis—Basics and techniques] (10th ed.). Weinheim/Basel: Beltz Verlag.

Mayring, P. (2010). Die Methodenfrage in der fachdidaktischen Forschung – qualitativ, quantitativ, mixed? [The question of method in didactic research—Qualitative, quantitative, mixed?]. Plenary lecture at the 44th annual meeting of the German Society of Didactics of Mathematics (GDM) in Munich, 08–12. March 2010. Abstract in A. Lindmeier & S. Ufer (Eds.), Beiträge zum Mathematikunterricht 2010 . Münster: WTM-Verlag.

Morse, J. M. (2003). Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research . Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Nastasi, B. K., Hitchcock, J. H., & Brown, L. M. (2010). An inclusive framework for conceptualizing mixed methods typologies. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Neubrand, M. (Ed.). (2004). Mathematische Kompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern in Deutschland—Vertiefende Analysen im Rahmen von PISA 2000 [Mathematical competencies of students in Germany— In-depth investigations in the context of PISA 2000]. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Piaget, J., & Szeminska, A. (1965). Die Entwicklung des Zahlenbegriffs beim Kinde [The development of the number concept in the child]. Stuttgart: Klett.

Roethlisberger, F. J., & Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the worker . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1985). Numbers and words. Combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single-scale evaluation study. Evaluation Review, 9 (5), 627–643.

Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1994). Numbers and words revisited: Being “shamelessly eclectic”. Quality & Quantity, 28 (3), 315–327.

Rost, J. (2004). Lehrbuch Testtheorie—Testkonstruktion. [Textbook test theory—test construction] (4th ed.). Bern: Verlag Hans Huber.

Schulz, A. (2010). Ergebnisorientierung als Chance für den Mathematikunterricht? Innovationsprozesse qualitativ und quantitativ erfassen [Result orientation as an opportunity for teaching mathematics? Capturing innovation processes qualitatively and quantitatively]. Munich: Herbert Utz Verlag.

Schwarz, B. (2013). Strukturen von Lehrerprofessionswissen. Ergebnisse einer empirischen Untersuchung an Mathematiklehramtsstudierenden [Structures of teachers’ professional knowledge. Results of an empirical study of mathematics teachers students.]. Wiesbaden: Vieweg + Teubner.

Seale, C. (1999). The quality of qualitative research . London: Sage.

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15 (2), 4–14.

Silverman, D. (2000). Doing qualitative research. A practical handbook . London: Sage.

Steinbring, H. (1998). Mathematikdidaktik: Die Erforschung theoretischen Wissens in sozialen Kontexten des Lehrens und Lernens [Mathematics education: Research on theoretical knowledge in social contexts of teaching and learning]. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 30 (5), 161–167.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methods. Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches (Applied social research methods series, Vol. 46). London: Sage.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral sciences (pp. 3–50). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

Warm, T. A. (1989). Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response models. Psychometrika, 54 , 427–450.

Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L. (1966). Unobstrusive measures: Nonreactive research in the social sciences . Chicago: Rand McNally.

Weinert, F. E. (1999). Konzepte der Kompetenz. Gutachten zum OECD-Projekt “Definition and Selection of Competencies: Theoretical and Conceptual Foundations (DeSeCo)” [Concepts of competence. Report on the OECD project “Definition and Selection of Competencies: Theoretical and Conceptual Foundations (DeSeCo)”.]. Neuchatel: Bundesamt für Statistik.

Wellenreuther, M. (1997). Hypothesenprüfung, Theorieentwicklung und Erkenntnisfortschritt in der Mathematikdidaktik. Ein Plädoyer für Methodenpluralismus [Hypothesis testing, theory development and advances in knowledge in mathematics education. A plea for methodological pluralism]. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 18 (2/3), 186–216.

Wilson, T. P. (1970). Conceptions of interaction and forms of sociological explanation. American Sociological Review, 35 (4), 697–710.

Wittmann, E. C. (1995). Mathematics education as a “design science”. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 29 (4), 355–374.

Witzel, A. (2000). The problem-centered interview [26 paragraphs]. Resource document, Forum: Qualitative Social Research , 1 (1), Art. 22. http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1132/2522 . Accessed 17 Apr 2013.

Wuttke, J. (2006). Fehler, Verzerrungen, Unsicherheiten in der PISA-Auswertung [Errors, distortions, uncertainties in PISA assessment]. In T. Jahnke & W. Meyerhöfer (Eds.), PISA & Co—Kritik eines Programms . Hildesheim: Franzbecker.

Wuttke, J. (2009). PISA: Nachträge zu einer nicht geführten Debatte [PISA: supplements to a non-debated debate]. Mitteilungen der GDM, 87 , 22–34.

Znaniecki, F. (1934). The method of sociology . New York: Rinehart.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Helmut-Schmidt-Universität Hamburg, Holstenhoffweg 85, 22043, Hamburg, Germany

Arbeitsbereich Didaktik der Mathematik, Universität Hamburg, Fak. 04, FB ErzWiss 05, Binderstraße 34, 20146, Hamburg, Germany

Nils Buchholtz

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Udo Kelle .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Faculty 3 of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany

Angelika Bikner-Ahsbahs

Christine Knipping

Mathematics Department, Illinois State University, Normal, Illinois, USA

Norma Presmeg

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Kelle, U., Buchholtz, N. (2015). The Combination of Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods in Mathematics Education: A “Mixed Methods” Study on the Development of the Professional Knowledge of Teachers. In: Bikner-Ahsbahs, A., Knipping, C., Presmeg, N. (eds) Approaches to Qualitative Research in Mathematics Education. Advances in Mathematics Education. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9181-6_12

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9181-6_12

Published : 05 September 2014

Publisher Name : Springer, Dordrecht

Print ISBN : 978-94-017-9180-9

Online ISBN : 978-94-017-9181-6

eBook Packages : Humanities, Social Sciences and Law Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

More From Forbes

The solution for the ‘other 95 percent’ to learn math.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

NEW YORK - JANUARY 11: A young student's computer work station during her after-school learning ... [+] program. (Photo by Farah Nosh/Getty Images)

In a striking piece in Education Next , Laurence Holt dives into a series of research studies that show strong results for edtech math products Khan Academy, DreamBox Learning, i-Ready, and IXL— when the programs are used as recommended .

The results across the studies are great—0.26 standard deviations (equivalent to several months of additional learning), 0.20 SD, 0.22 SD, and 0.14 SD, respectively.

The problem? As Holt shows, in each of the studies, roughly 5% of students used each program at the minimum level prescribed. That’s a stunning—and depressing—convergence. To give an idea of what that signifies, just 4.7% of the students in the research study on Khan Academy, for example, use it a minimum of 30 minutes per week. Not a lot of time.

The other 95% of students not properly using the programs see minimal gains at best. Which helps explain why, despite the rapid adoption of digital math programs in the United States, we don’t see the growth in math achievement that you might expect based on the research.

Holt offers some theories as to what’s going on here, but I have a couple myself that could lead to more of the other 95 percent using the programs as prescribed.

Google Chrome Gets Third Emergency Update In A Week As Attacks Continue

Japanese fans are puzzled that yasuke is in ‘assassin’s creed shadows’, forbes releases 2024 30 under 30 asia list, edtech must pay attention to the learning model.

First, as we wrote as far back as Disrupting Class in 2008, it’s not the presence of technology alone that will move learning. It’s the use of technology to support a novel model of learning that will move the needle. What matters most is the model.

A central reason why technology isn’t a silver bullet in education is that when it’s crammed into the existing classroom model, at its best it can only serve as an additional resource to bolster that model’s existing processes and priorities. That means it can make an operation more efficient or allow it to take on additional tasks, but it can’t reinvent the model in and of itself. It also means that in many cases it will conflict with the organization’s processes and priorities and therefore go largely unused.

That could explain what’s going on here. The tech is just an add-on to the whole-class instruction going on. It’s not core to the model. And it’s not that different from Larry Cuban’s research back in the late-1990s showing that fifth graders reported using computers for programs like “Franklin Learns Math” or “Math Rabbit” just 24 minutes a week.

If these edtech vendors instead spent the time and resources to help the schools and classrooms set up even a basic Station Rotation model of blended learning , they could ensure that students would visit the online-learning station for a defined block of time each day in which students would do the digital math program. Then they’d all but guarantee that students would reach the minimum usage levels.

EdTech Needs to Think about Motivation and Learning Differences More

Second, another way to engage more students is to make the learning more intrinsically motivating for each student. In Disrupting Class , we suggested that that could occur in part by personalizing based on a variety of characteristics documented in research .

Holt does a terrific job of showing the potential power of this approach in another article in Education Next, “ The Orchid and the Dandelion .” The piece explores a link between a genetic variation and how students respond to teaching.

The basic idea is that some students seem to respond best when they receive more feedback and stimulation so that they can get a good feeling from the rush of dopamine. With “normal” levels of feedback and stimulation, they get bored and tune out. Others respond differently; too much feedback could cause them to get over-stimulated.

Customizing for these different profiles, as some research shows, may be crucial. But how many edtech providers are building their products to take these sorts of findings into account? This is to say nothing of all the other ways one might want to provide different hooks for students based on their background knowledge and interests to get them excited by different programs or approaches to learning math.

Building for this many different profiles and backgrounds is obviously hard. Which is why in Disrupting Class we hypothesized that so long as the content in digital learning software is built by a single entity, there will be limits to how much customization is possible. Instead, we argued, the ultimate correct amount of customization might only occur when a platform emerged with authoring tools that allow teachers, students, parents and more to easily create different modules for learning different concepts. Think YouTube but with far more interactivity than video.

To create a world in which more students use programs at their prescribed minimum level, this may be a necessary step. I get that we’re unlikely to undo the reality that as humans we like to avoid hard work. But anything edtech providers can do to make sure the work students are assigned is at the right level of ease and that students have the ability to navigate to content that gets them excited, the better the chance we have at making progress.

Because while there’s lots of research that shows promise, the 95% of students not using the products shows us we have a long way to go.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

'I made a major contribution to my research group’s software'

Brandon Li: Physics & Mathematics

A&S Communications

Physics & Mathematics Woburn, Mass.

What was your favorite class and why?  

I’ve taken so many amazing classes that it’s impossible to choose any one of them as my favorite. Basics of Quantum Mechanics taught by Prof. Tomás Arias was the class that taught me just how perfectly designed a physics course could be. The clarity and organization with which the class was taught made a subject with a reputation of being completely incomprehensible into something that felt as natural as learning to count. The next two classes are quite different in character but both stand out in my memory equally. In Prof. Yuval Grossman’s particle physics class, I learned to appreciate the role that intuition plays in uncovering the truth and finding understanding in concepts that are otherwise buried in layers of complexity and technical details. His lectures have a way of getting to the heart of whatever topic is being discussed and exposing its truest essence. In the opposite direction, Prof. Eanna Flanagan’s intermediate quantum mechanics class showed exactly how the technical details and mathematical construction of physics is itself a source of beauty. His rigor and mathematical precision gave me faith in the correctness and power of physics to provide insight in situations where intuition may not be enough. Aside from physics, the other class that provided me with an equal amount of satisfaction was the organ art and technology class taught by professors Annette Richards and David Yearsly. This class serves as a reminder that the two parts of Arts & Sciences cannot exist without each other, that music itself has intrinsic value because it is beautiful. This class showed that the organ is an instrument with many facets that come together to create some of the most beautiful music ever created.

What is your main extracurricular activity and why is it important to you? 

I enjoy going to concerts here. It’s quite incredible that Cornell offers such an eclectic selection of music for us to enjoy. Out of all the concerts I’ve attended recently, there are two that stood above the others. The first was a baroque performance by the group Tafelmusik. Listening to their playing reminded me of how amazing it is to listen to a group of musicians performing a set of interconnected parts that combine to form a cohesive whole. The skill and passion with which they played demonstrated that there are few loves stronger than the love for music. Equally passionate and skillful was the music of the Klezmatics, who took traditional Eastern European Jewish music and played it with so much heart and soul that I couldn’t help but be emotionally moved.

What Cornell memory do you treasure the most?    

My favorite memory is seeing the eclipse from the shores of Lake Ontario. Actually, the eclipse itself wasn’t even visible since it was so cloudy, however what made it special was that I went there with someone special to me, who appreciated it just as much as I did intellectually but was able to see the innate artistic beauty of such an event. When the sun completely disappeared behind the moon, the world went dark, the wind stopped blowing and it became quiet. What remained was an orange glow on the horizon, as if sunset was happening in all directions. During that moment, I was in the middle of a work of art, but where the artist was nature itself. 

What have you accomplished as a Cornell student that you are most proud of?

The accomplishment I’m most proud of is my research work in computational condensed matter physics. This field of physics studies what happens when many atoms come together and interact, which includes, for example, the matter we interact with every day. I have great respect for this field because its depth provides an unending source of insight and interesting ideas and studying it requires applying tools from many other parts of physics and math. A large part of my research has been in a subject called density-functional theory which is a framework for turning the complicated quantum-mechanical interactions between electrons into a much simpler form that can be solved on a computer. My biggest accomplishment was making a major contribution to my research group’s software that allows us to accurately study the responses of crystals to many kinds of external influences. This is a project that has been in my supervisor’s mind for a long time, and I am glad to have finally brought it to fruition. Finally, my current research for my senior thesis involves developing new ways of studying materials composed of several mismatching layers. I hope to use our work to predict very interesting features of these materials that have been observed in experiments so that we can find even more exciting materials.

Who or what influenced your Cornell education the most?

My advisor Prof. Tomás Arias was the person who showed me what doing research in physics really meant. I have learned so much from his mentorship, and his support and guidance throughout these years has given me the inspiration and knowledge to do physics to the best of my ability. Not only have I learned a lot about physics, but I have also learned all the other skills necessary to succeed as a researcher. Seeing the way he supports all his students has made me aspire to treat my future collaborators with the same level of respect and encouragement that he has. I would also like to thank Drake Niedzielski for working with me and always being ready to discuss interesting ideas. Besides being incredibly fun to talk to, he is also a great researcher with great ideas. I will never forget the experience of doing world-class research with some of the most motivated and talented people I have met.    

Every year, our faculty nominate graduating Arts & Sciences students to be featured as part of our Extraordinary Journeys series.  Read more about the Class of 202 4.

More News from A&S

Committee to recommend final expressive activity policy

American Sign Language has found a growing home on the Hill

Extraordinary Journeys: The Class of 2024

BTPI will research relationship between Bitcoin and financial freedom