Mixed methods research in service-learning: an integrative systematic review

Celia Camilli Trujillo (), Laura Cuervo Calvo (), Desirée García Gil () and Carolina Bonastre Valles ()
Additional contact information
Celia Camilli Trujillo: Complutense University of Madrid (UCM)
Laura Cuervo Calvo: Complutense University of Madrid (UCM)
Desirée García Gil: Complutense University of Madrid (UCM)
Carolina Bonastre Valles: Autónoma University of Madrid (UAM)

Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 2022, vol. 56, issue 4, No 25, 2386 pages

Abstract: Abstract In view of the challenges involved in designing a study of Mixed Methods (MM), as well as the problematics inherent in studying Service-Learning (S-L) from new research perspectives, and considering the lack of systematic reviews of MM in S-L, this study proposes to analyse the use of MM research to evaluate S-L through a systematic integrative review of scientific papers published in international databases (ERIC, DIALNET, SCOPUS, and Web of Science) using the terms ‘mixed methods research’ and ‘service-learning’. The contextual and methodological variables were analysed descriptively and inferentially using Excel and Stata programs. Moreover, 149 predefined codes were created and analysed using the qualitative program Atlas.ti to identify which terms associated with the research methodology were used most frequently in relation to the MM for S-L methodology, and how and why they were used. Of the 192 papers found, only 93 met the inclusion criteria. The results show that very few investigations specify the MM they used in sufficient detail. Only 28% provide information to estimate the effect size, suggest interventions based on S-L, and collect measures for post-intervention evaluation. This demonstrates that the relationship between MM and stages of the S-L are not complemented in the methodological design. The results demonstrated that researchers should continue working with MM in S-L for the integration of qualitative and quantitative results. This research can be a methodological guide for professionals and academics who want to investigate MM in S-L because it identifies methodological deficiencies and strengths and offers and alternative designs to evaluate the service.

Keywords: Systematic review; Mixed methods research; Service-learning; Research method (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-021-01218-3 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:56:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s11135-021-01218-3

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11135

DOI: 10.1007/s11135-021-01218-3

Access Statistics for this article

Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology is currently edited by Vittorio Capecchi

More articles in Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().