Theme 3

First paper
The paper 'Mixed research and online learning: Strategies for improvement' by Lowenthal and Leech argues that the major problem when doing research on online learning is that the researchers often only apply one type of research method when analyzing it. Using only one type of research method can almost never find all important and groundbreaking nuances in using online learning tools. Most research done only applies either comparison research between said online learning and traditional face-to-face learning or content analysis which refers to analyzing the online discourse or dialog. Each method type provides results but research using only one method is often classified as low quality research because of the unwillingness to use mixed methods who could provide a more thorough and true answer.

The approach of using either quantitative or qualitative methods has been referred to as the paradigm wars throughout the years. Researchers on both sides argues which gives the truest answers, which in my opinion is rather ignorant considering using both can make you understand each types results better. This view that I adopt is commonly known as the pragmatic paradigm and it is basically using each method type when it is appropriate, which is known as using mixed methods.

The hardships of using mixed methods is that you have to integrate both quantitative and qualitative aspects in the research question outlining the frame and body of the research study. Lowenthal and Leech gives an example of a view voiced by the same Leech and another researches named Onwuegbuzie that good qualitative research should give you the variables and groups of variables concerned in the research while the quantitative research should provide the description of these. Other than this the paper continues to delve into the major problems of using either research method and how to eliminate these. The conclusion of the paper states that while you should use mixed methods for a better and higher classified research it is no small matter because that it is such a new reproach.

Second paper
Cleveland-Innes and Campbell states in their paper 'Emotional presence, learning and the online learning environment' the hypothesis that emotion as a sensation is a part in learning and that emotion therefore is going to be present in online learning tools and/or environments. They question if emotions at all are present in online learning environments of it they are what kinds of emotion they are.

One immediate concern of mine is that the major part of the investigation is mainly conducted using only quantitative methods. The target group involved (students) where asked to  answer a questionnaire about their online learning experience, this way of getting results is quantitative yes, but without supplementing this by thorough qualitative methods (i.e using mixed methods when incorporating both qualitative and quantitative methods) like focus groups or interviews you do certainly get a lot less explanation about the variables given in the study and why they react as they do. Yes they used open ended questions after each finished course and that is classified as qualitative but it is not the most thorough type of qualitative method. They still loose the advantage of seeing the participants interact, dissect and analyze the subject further which could have been done using a more appropriate method of qualitative research.

In the end Cleveland-Innes and Campbell concludes that, yes, emotion is part of online learning. It can serve as a distraction if handled poorly but can also help in decision making etc. They do not define what kinds of emotions are present but encourages to further studies about this.