Melampaui Paradigm Wars: Pragmatisme sebagai Meta-Framework untuk Integrasi Tradisi Filosofis dalam Mixed Method Research

Muttaqin Khabibullah; Alimin; Gus Malik Imam Sholahuddin

doi:10.62048/qjms.v2i2.81

Penulis

Muttaqin Khabibullah Program Studi Manajemen Pendidikan Islam, Universitas Qomaruddin, Gresik, Indonesia
Alimin Program Studi Manajemen Pendidikan Islam, Universitas Qomaruddin, Gresik, Indonesia
Gus Malik Imam Sholahuddin Program Studi Pendidikan Agama Islam, Universitas Qomaruddin, Gresik, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62048/qjms.v2i2.81

Kata Kunci:

Philosophical Integration, Mixed Method Research, Pragmatisme, Meta-Framework, Integrasi Filosofis

Abstrak

Dalam beberapa dekade terakhir, MMR muncul sebagai gerakan metodologis ketiga atas terjadinya “paradigm wars” antara kuantitatif dan kualitatif. Filosofi pragmatisme seringkali dikaitkan dengan MMR karena fleksibilitasnya dalam mengintegrasikan beragam metode untuk menjawab kebutuhan penelitian. Meskipun demikian, masih terdapat tantangan besar dalam mengintegrasikan filosofi mendasarinya, terutama aspek onntologi, epistemologi, dan metodologi. Kajian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis bagaimana filsafat pragmatisme dapat digunakan sebagai meta-framework dalam MMR; bagaimana pragmatisme mampu mengakomodasi positivisme, konstruktivisme, realisme kritis, dan transformatif-emansipatoris dalam berbagai model MMR; serta mengembangkan kerangka konseptual untuk memahami posisi ontologi, epistemologi, dan metodologi dari integrasi ini. Pendekatan yang digunakan dalam kajian ini adalah sintesis literatur dengan metode narrtive review. Kajian ini menghasilkan temuan bahwa pragmatisme dalam MMR bertindak sebagai meta-framework yang dapat mengkombinasikan beragam metode penelitian dengan mengakomodasi beragam pandangan filosofis yang relevan. Hasil kajian ini juga menemukan bahwa pragmatisme mampu mengakomodasi beragam paradigma filosofis dengan menerima bahwa baik kuantitatif maupun kualitatif (maupun metode lainnya) mempunyai value yang setara dan saling melengkapi dalam memproduksi pengetahuan ilmiah. Lebih jauh, hasil kajian ini juga menyajikan kerangka konseptual yang dapat memposisikan ontologi, epistemologi, dan metodologi dalam integrasi MMR.

Referensi

Bhaskar, R. (2013). A realist theory of science. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203090732

Bhaskar, R. (2015). The possibility of naturalism: A philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences. Routledge.

Biesta, G. (2015). Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. In S. N. Hesse-Biber & R. B. Johnson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 95–118). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193.n4

Biesta, G. (2020). Educational research: An unorthodox introduction. Bloomsbury.

Bryman, A. (1984). The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: A question of method or epistemology? The British Journal of Sociology, 35(1), 75–92.

Bryman, A. (2006). Paradigm peace and the implications for quality. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 9(2), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570600595280

Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Cameron, R., & Miller, P. (2007). Mixed method research: Phoenix of the paradigm wars. In Proceedings of the 21st ANZAM Conference (pp. 1–15).

Chambers, R. (2014). Rural development: Putting the last first. Routledge.

Cherryholmes, C. H. (1992). Notes on pragmatism and scientific realism. Educational Researcher, 21(6), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176502

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2021). A concise introduction to mixed methods research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Dewey, J. (2007). Experience and nature. Read Books.

Dewey, J. (2013). Logic: The theory of inquiry. Read Books Ltd.

Dewey, J. (2024). The quest for certainty: A study of the relation of knowledge and action. Gyan.

Fals-Borda, O. (1988). Knowledge and people’s power: Lessons with peasants in Nicaragua, Mexico and Colombia. Indian Social Institute.

Fals-Borda, O., & Rahman, M. A. (1991). Action and knowledge: Breaking the monopoly with participatory action research. The Apex Press.

Feilzer, M. Y. (2010). Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689809349691

Feilzer, M. Y. (2023). A pragmatist approach to mixed methods research. In R. S. Barbour (Ed.), Doing a PhD in the social sciences (pp. 45–59). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003273288-3

Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. John Wiley & Sons.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 191–215). SAGE Publications.

James, W. (1942). Essays in radical empiricism. Longmans, Green and Co. https://doi.org/10.2307/2178070

James, W. (2006). Pragmatism: A new name for some old ways of thinking. Longmans, Green and Co. https://doi.org/10.1037/10851-000

James, W. (2010). The meaning of truth: A sequel to pragmatism. The Floating Press.

Johnson, R. B., de Waal, C., Stefurak, T., & Hildebrand, D. L. (2017). Understanding the philosophical positions of classical and neopragmatists for mixed methods research. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 69(S1), 63–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-017-0452-3

Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014

Khabibullah, M., Alimin, A., & Sholahuddin, G. M. I. (2024). Tahapan dan langkah-langkah penerapan mixed method research (MMR) dalam penelitian pendidikan. Qomaruna Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 2(1), 69–86. https://doi.org/10.62048/qjms.v2i1.55

Kretzmann, J. P., & McKnight, J. (1993). Building communities from the inside out: A path toward finding and mobilizing a community’s assets. The Asset-Based Community Development Institute.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2016). The constructivist credo. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315418810

Maarouf, H. (2019). Pragmatism as a supportive paradigm for the mixed research approach: Conceptualizing the ontological, epistemological, and axiological stances of pragmatism. International Business Research, 12(9), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v12n9p1

Maxwell, J. A. (2012). A realist approach for qualitative research. SAGE Publications.

Maxwell, J. A., & Mittapalli, K. (2010). Realism as a stance for mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 145–168). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193.n6

McBeath, A. (2022). Mixed methods research: The case for the pragmatic researcher. In S. Bager-Charleson & A. McBeath (Eds.), Supporting research in counselling and psychotherapy: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research (pp. 187–205). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13942-0_10

Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. Guilford Press.

Mertens, D. M. (2023). Mixed methods and evaluation. In International encyclopedia of education (4th ed., pp. 531–537). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818630-5.11052-8

Mitchell, A. (2018). A review of mixed methods, pragmatism and abduction techniques. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 16(3), 103–116.

Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/2345678906292462

Morgan, D. L. (2014). Pragmatism as a paradigm for social research. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(8), 1045–1053. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800413513733

Morgan, D. L. (2022). Paradigms in mixed methods research. In M. D. Fetters & J. F. Molina-Azorin (Eds.), The Routledge handbook for advancing integration in mixed methods research (pp. 97–112). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429432828-10

Muijs, D. (2022). Doing quantitative research in education with IBM SPSS Statistics (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Peirce, C. S. (1932). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vols. 1–8, C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss, Eds.). Harvard University Press.

Peirce, C. S. (2024). How to make our ideas clear: The fixation of our beliefs. In The essential Peirce (pp. xx–xx). LM Publishers. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003265634-4

Romani, L., Primecz, H., & Topçu, K. (2011). Paradigm interplay for theory development: A methodological example with the Kulturstandard method. Organizational Research Methods, 14(3), 432–455. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428109358270

Rorty, R. (1996). Philosophy and social hope. Penguin Books.

Shannon-Baker, P. (2016). Making paradigms meaningful in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(4), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815575861

Tashakkori, A., Johnson, R. B., & Teddlie, C. (2021). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. SAGE Publications.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. SAGE Publications.

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.