The Opposition and Integration of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods in the Age of Big Data: Critique on Research Model of Qualitative and Quantitative in English Teaching
Yuanfen Wang   Student ID: 1904140 
Abstract：In the age of big data, how to find basic rules and conduct normative and empirical analysis in a large amount of abstract data is a problem that academic research must face seriously. In view of this, the author thinks deeply about the opposition and integration of quantitative and qualitative methods in modern society, and discusses the rational model of quantitative and qualitative analysis in English teaching.
Key words：opposition; integration; quantitative; qualitative; research model
1.	Introduction
The appearance of big data is the development result of information and internet. The scale and form of big data is beyond the ability of traditional data processing methods to manage and analyze. For scholars engaged in social science research, the adjustment of data architecture and data integration is imminent. Theoretically, if we can extract the most valuable information from the complexity of big data and conduct scientific analysis, then we can grasp the direction of social science research more accurately. Quantitative and qualitative analyses are frequently used in social science research. Quantitative methods usually analyze and illustrate complicate problems by intuitive data, models or mathematical formula, which is to simplify the complex problems with much higher logic and accuracy, therefore, quantitative analysis is favored and preferred by many researchers; Qualitative analysis concentrate on factual judgment and valuation, which is centered on inductive logic through empirical description. [3] In spite that qualitative analysis can make up for the shortcomings of quantitative approach to some degree, it is often short of the logical constraints by strict system, which usually result in great subjectivity and indeterminacy. We can't help mentioning instrumentalism, constructivism and positivism when discussing the research methods of quantitative and qualitative. 
Instrumentalism is tool-based research approach which stress the significance of research approach, believing the correct method is the foundation for all researches. During the period of big data, the data volume is expanding rapidly, the researchers should think about new methods for data collection and information analysis, rather than continuing to be at a loss in the vast array of information. In spite of that, I don’t agree with the supremacy advocated by instrumentalism. Tools cannot take the place of ideas to be the subject, or they are missing the point? Constructivism is related to cognitive theory; it pays more attention to the background of the researches rather than stress the tool and methods for research. Compared with instrumentalism, constructivism has taken a step forward in the study of the subject. Positivism is a kind of simple realism, which focus on quantitative analysis in research. [2]  
This paper is divided into five parts. In the first part, the author introduces quantitative and qualitative analyses from instrumentalism, constructivism and positivism. In the second part, the author describes the ontology, epistemology and methodology of two methods, and then discusses the relationship between them. Part three is focused on academic debate on the analysis approaches. The author makes critical comments on the combination modes of quantitative and qualitative researches in part four and a conclusion is made in the last part.

2.The Ontology, Epistemology and Methodology of Quantitative and Qualitative Research
The view of knowledge exploration, usually as a Paradigm or Philosophical orientation, requires researchers to explain the following problems in a Philosophical sense firstly: what is knowledge (ontology), how can we acquire knowledge (epistemology), and the process of studying knowledge (methodology). Many schools of philosophy hold different views on the above three theories, such as post-positivism, constructivism and post-modernism. we should explore the ontology, epistemology and methodology of quantitative and qualitative research.
2.1Quantitative Research
The method of quantitative study assumes that knowledge is speculative -- there is no absolute truth and the evidence established in the study is always imperfect. Quantitative research generally focuses on causation, and emphasizes empirical observation and measurement in order to prove a theory. Therefore, the researchers propose the relationship between variables in the form of questions or hypotheses, and draw conclusions by deductive method. In order to keep the validity and reliability of a study, researchers must strictly examine the deviations. Quantitative approach as a traditional "scientific method" is widely used in the field of English teaching. For example, a comparison of students' two test scores (T-test), a survey questionnaire (which can be given to teachers and students, respectively), a questionnaire on the needs of learners (Descriptive Statistics), etc.
Because quantitative method follows a scientific procedure and collects large materials, it has a high degree of generalization. The advantage of this kind of research is that it is more objective and easier to repeat, confirm or disprove, so it has higher reliability and external validity. But in the meanwhile, the shortcoming of the approach is obvious. Due to the lack of comprehensive and in-depth investigation and research, the analysis and interpretation of the exceptions are all deductive and lack of strong examples. Therefore, the internal validity of the research results is affected to some extent.
2.2Qualitative Research 
Qualitative approach is to summarize a regular pattern from the comprehensive description of the research object and the environment through logical thinking of the data collected from case studies, field observation, open interviews and so on. Quantitative analysis is to process and analyze the collected numerical information through standardized statistical procedures. [2]
Qualitative Research method holds that the multidimensional understanding of the problem is based on the multiple interpretations of the problem by a variety of participants. And their understandings are based on the construction of society and history. Therefore, researchers often adopt open questions and generate theories by reasoning. As the latest explanatory method, qualitative research has already occupied a dominant position in the methodology of social sciences such as pedagogy and psychology. 
2.3The relationship Between Qualitative Method and Quantitative Method
We can make the following conclusion from the point of definition: Quantitative research is to describe the intrinsic relationship of phenomena statistically by standard procedures, but the facts are separated from values sometimes; Qualitative research is to illustrate and summarize the relationship between various facts or phenomena through non-standard procedures, the value is connected with the phenomena. Qualitative method emphasizes the critical thinking and significant judgment, while the quantitative method pays more attention to continuity and the neutrality of value.
The combination of qualitative method and quantitative method is defined as "pragmatism" in methodology. [2] As two independent scientific research methods, quantitative research and qualitative research are opposite and complementary to each other. In the field of social sciences such as education and psychology, qualitative research has covered quantitative research in a great sense. For example, questionnaire survey, if used as a case study, can use research methods such as analyze statistics and deduce statistics, rather than using probability samples. This is because quantitative research is objective and employs objective methods and attitudes to solve objective problems. 
Nevertheless, not everything can be quantified in the complicated social which is changing and developing. In more cases, the problem needs to be solved involves more complicate systems, structures, organizations, thoughts and understandings from different people, as well as multiple and complex relations between people and various systems. As a tool for solving problems, in contemporary society where human rights and human standard are increasingly prominent, it is the most important characteristic of qualitative research to explain the ideological significance of different people to the problems that need to be solved. [2] Compared with the two methods, this is the main reason qualitative research is more difficult to grasp; It is one of the reasons why English teachers need to receive strict training. We need the scientific methodology as guidance to solve the new problems in current English teaching research.
The epistemology of qualitative research holds that the interaction between researchers and research objects is obvious and subjective. The analysis report of qualitative research tries to clarify the significance of the subject research and the concept of the researchers. Human beings interact with society, so humans try to understand and explain this interaction. The pattern of interaction has a positive effect at the hermeneutic level. This meaning is realized through continuous comparison and contrast in dialectical mutual transformation. It is worth emphasizing that researchers do not have subjective bias in reporting and analyzing data, and avoid the appearance of self-reflection to maintain the scientific and objective nature of the report.  
Positivism emphasizes getting rid of subjective state and respecting objective reality, so that such research reports are more scientific. Moreover, data-based discoveries can in turn serve research purposes. From the comparison of the assumptions arising from the two different philosophical thought systems, we can see that quantitative analysis is much clearer in the study paradigm, which includes the problems of research, the methods of research, data collection and data analysis. But this kind of positivism theory does not meet the changing social situation, especially the problem in education. This is why the application of qualitative research methods has become more and more common in the field of education in recent years. However, qualitative research is unable to grasp in many cases, such as the specific application and implementation of data collection methods in the collection and analysis, involving ethical, cultural, power, bias and methodological reliability and effectiveness of the argument. 
What they have in common is that the philosophical viewpoint in the research has a significant influence on the development of teaching strategies, including the actual investigation carried out in the research, the understanding and interpretation of the findings.[3] That is to say, ontology and epistemology determine the approaches of information collection and analysis. The research method refers not only to the skill of data collection, but also to the problem of the nature of knowledge, the quality standard of knowledge accumulation, the attitude and training situation of the investigator , the pronunciation, intonation, the reflection of investigators, and the control situation of the investigators and so on, these factors will play an important role in the whole study.
In a word, the two research methods are two kinds of complex systems. In some places, quantitative analysis is more suitable, while in other places, qualitative research is more suitable. In some cases, the two methods should be combined organically to guide the research of English teaching effectively.

3.The Debate on Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in Academic 
The debate between qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis has never stopped in the field of social science research over the past decades. The academic circles have been arguing about the necessity and development of the two researches, which can be divided into two major groups: radicalization and conservatism. Activists believe that the advent of the big data period will further promote the application of quantitative researches in the social sciences. Quantitative research is replacing qualitative research which has become the general trend. Conservatives argue that understanding is the ultimate value of research, which is the strength of qualitative research that focuses on the analysis of ideas. They believe that quantitative research is an empirical tool at best. Even if tit-for-tat, each group does not negate the other side's views completely. The issue is about which method will dominate social science research in the future. [10] It is gratifying to note that scholars from both sides recognize the importance of research approaches and analytical methods in social science. The radicals are mostly young scholars that is worthy of attention, they are deeply affected by the western tradition research concept of social science, advocating that quantitative analysis should be taken as the main method, and the system for rigorous logical reasoning and logical argumentation should be applied; The conservatives are mainly represented by academic predecessors, the older generation advocate academic meditation actively and object to excessive quantification for science research content. In their view, the application of quantitative research approach in the social sciences will only lead to the latter losing their independent status and becoming the appendage of the natural sciences. [11]
As a matter of fact, the debate between the two groups reflects the fundamental opposition between humanistic method and positivist method in ontology, epistemology and methodology. The philosophical view of humanism method is to regard the world as the product of both social reality with multiple individuals’ subjective consciousness, in which the behavior characteristics are complicated. There isn’t any clear pattern for general behavior, and the subjective world and behavior of each individual are various according to the different circumstances. As a result, in order to understand human behavior, researchers must take qualitative analysis approach for a comprehensive observation and interpretation to the subject of the investigation and the environment in which it is located. On the contrary, the philosophical view of positivist scientific methods believes that the world is external, the objective material entity is not governed by the subjective consciousness of man. And the society of human is the same, in order to understand it and find out the rules or some relationships, researchers should employ the quantitative analysis methods. 
From the viewpoint of dialectical materialism, the objective object is the organic unity of "attribute" and "quantity" two kinds of information, qualitative or quantitative is not the result of meta-method division, quantitative research is guided by qualitative research, which is a high-level empirical form of sociology. [4] At present, the positivism represented by quantitative research seems to have gradually gained the upper hand in the time of big data. The philosophical basis of qualitative research is humanism, which uses the text description under theoretical constructivism, and its purpose is to gain a comprehensive understanding of social phenomena. From the angle of rational exploration, both quantitative analysis and qualitative analysis belong to the category of instrumentalism, while positivism and constructivism are projections of different philosophical tendencies in the various research paradigms of sociology. [2] If we can understand the relationship between them, then the debate between quantitative and qualitative research methods will be solved. The tool itself is not an end, it is only the external expression of the researchers' ideas in the academic field, and the essence of the inner thought is the true meaning that we have been pursuing tirelessly.
Scholars still have to reflect on the trap of "instrumentalism", that is, are we moving from one extreme to another? Do research methods and thought cognition truly merge? In the face of the era of big data, with the rapidly expanding of the amount of information and the diversity of information structures, how to combine instrumentalism, constructivism and positivism organically requires the academic community to analyze and consider it with a rational attitude. 
I believe that the ultimate goal of both quantitative and qualitative research is to know and comprehend the research object. If you are over-entangled in the approach, it really falls into the trap of tool supremacism.[4] In contrast, if we are simply obsessed with cognition and critical thinking, and belittle research methods and analytical paths, it will be hard for us to break away from the proliferation of information in the big data era. As a rational and rigorous scholar, we need not only the support of instrumentalism, but also the cognitive horizon of constructivism and the quantitative description of positivism. 

4.Critique on the Combination Mode of Qualitative Analysis and Quantitative Analysis
Qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis are frequently used in the study of social sciences and humanities. Although the two approaches are hard to reconcile from the philosophical point of view, that is, ontology and epistemology, they aren’t clear-cut in methodology. In education study, Howe (1988) proposed a compatibility term "pragmatism" to combine two methods together, which emphasized the compatibility of the two camps. [12] This hybrid approach is now known as "mixed methods." As the quantitative-qualitative debate cools down, more and more people are using hybrid methods in social science research.
China's foreign language teaching and scientific research, especially in empirical research level is still lagging behind western countries. Empirical research is still the mainstream of current scientific research, especially in China, which is strongly advocated, publicized, taught and implemented. It can be said that in China's social sciences and humanities, the adoption of quantitative methods is relatively late, quantitative and empirical methods in foreign language teaching research are even later. In China, applied linguistics research is changing from non-experimental to experimental, especially quantitative research, which are steadily increasing. [1] While promoting and popularization of foreign language teaching and scientific research, we should also pay attention to the development trend of scientific research methods: from the emphasis on quantitative research to the integration of qualitative research and quantitative research.
It can be seen that the use of mixed methods has become the mainstream of today's scientific research. Researchers can adopt any method that is suitable for their research topic, research purpose and research object, instead of focusing on the qualitative, quantitative, humanistic or empirical methods. On the basis of summarizing and combining the research of qualitative and quantitative analysis, the author introduces three modes of combining the two methods as follows.
Qualitative analysis -> Quantitative Analysis  
In a study, qualitative methods are used first, followed by quantitative approach. For instance, in order to investigate students' motivation to learn English, we can use qualitative analysis methods such as natural interviews firstly. After analyzing and sorting out the collected information, we can discover the recurring patterns or regular things. Based on these, we could make possible research hypotheses. Then, the data can be gained by means of questionnaires, experiments, etc. and analyzed by statistical procedures to test whether these assumptions are statistically significant. 
Quantitative Analysis -> Post-Qualitative Analysis
In a study, quantitative methods are used first, followed by qualitative methods. Many studies using hybrid methods follow this pattern. After the evaluation results are analyzed with the quantitative method of basic statistics and correlation analysis, the evaluation results (which are statistically significant in correlation analysis) are further analyzed with the qualitative method.
Qualitative Analysis <-> Quantitative Analysis
In a study, quantitative methods can be used firstly, qualitative methods can be used secondly, then quantitative methods, and vice versa (in this linear process, the initial quantitative or qualitative methods are usually tentative, which can help researchers find new research topics, test the feasibility of existing topics, or deepen the unmatured subjects); The use of research methods can also be multi-layered, i.e. two or more methods (with qualitative or quantitative orientation) can be used simultaneously or in stages for the same research topic, which is often used in scientific research as "triangulation".[5] This model is often seen in larger research projects. 
Research method is not only the tool and path to discovery and explore the unknown object, but also the driving force for concepts innovation. Multiple approaches could bring different perspectives to academic research, which could stimulate new ideas and dig deeper connotations. Practical social science study is usually the fusion of multiple methods, qualitative research puts forward ideas and arguments, quantitative analysis serves as the foundation for demonstration and analysis, or its data results serve as the support of a certain viewpoint, forming a set of rigorous logical reasoning system, thus effectively increasing the scientificity and innovation of academic research.[2] The advent of the era of big data means that the original research objects and research content have undergone qualitative or quantitative changes, information is not only expanding at the rate of exponential growth, but more importantly, data structure and form also present new irregular changes. In this way, we can no longer stick to the routine and continue to use traditional methods to understand new things, but need to adjust in three levels: methodology, basic and specific method and technology. From the methodological point of view, there is no fundamental conflict between quantitative and qualitative methods. In the course of many empirical studies and normative studies, they are able to make up for each other's shortcomings and rely on each other. [7] 
As a branch of pedagogy, the study of English teaching embraces two competing research perspectives for social sciences: the established traditional view of quantitative research and the new explanatory view of qualitative research. Quantitative research and qualitative research are two kinds of English teaching research methods which are both scientific and feasible. 
The analysis and comparison of methodology reveal the rational application of quantitative analysis and qualitative analysis in English teaching. This comparative study will show that qualitative research and quantitative research have practical and extensive application value in English teaching and have considerable guiding role in English teaching theory and research. In addition, the exploration of implementation methodology in the field of English teaching research will certainly promote the improvement of English teachers' practical teaching ability and the development of English teaching activities. [9] For example, to study the impact of critical teaching and non-English majors' English writing proficiency, we need not only data collection in the early stage, data processing and analysis in the middle stage, but also qualitative research in the later stage. The research results are fact judgment and value analysis based on rigorous quantitative analysis. Through the study, we need to test the accuracy of the previous fact description and value judgment, that is, the higher critical thinking ability is, the higher English writing ability is. Is there a perfect positive correlation? In addition to this, whether there are any research problems that we have not yet discovered, etc. The application of multiple approaches will certainly open the door to the unknown world for us.

5. Conclusion
Quantitative analysis guided by positivism and qualitative analysis based on constructivism are both tools to explore unknown objects in the period of big data. The accelerated development of the information society means that quantitative methods may play a greater role in the social sciences, but this does not justify the denial of qualitative analysis. We have a deep feeling that the traditional emphasis on qualitative research over quantitative research has restricted the space for the development of social sciences in China, and now we seem to be on the opposite side of it. Some scholars even say that excessive quantification will lead to a second division of social science. [8] Of course, this view is somewhat alarmist, but from another side reflects the current domestic academic circles some undesirable phenomena. Although there are opposites and differences between quantitative research and qualitative research in philosophical basis, research paradigm, logical process, theoretical model, research objective and expression mode, they are essentially integrated relations, that is, both belong to the specific methods and technical levels of social science research.
English teaching is a lively interaction between teachers and students. The complexity of teaching itself determines that its scientific research should not be a purely empirical summary, nor a simple list of data. The analysis and comparison of methodology show that English teaching not only needs the support of quantitative and qualitative methods, but also needs to place them in a guiding position. Otherwise, English teaching research will lose its seriousness.

References:
[1] Borg, S. ‘Teachers’ Pedagogical Systems and Grammar Teaching: A Qualitative Study’[J]. TESOL QUARTERLY,Vol.32,No.1,Spring1998:p7～38
[2] Mertens, D. M. 1998. ‘Research methods in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Qualitative & Qualitative Approaches’[M]. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998
[3] Guba, E.G. & Lincoln Y. S. ‘Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research’ [M]. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds), ‘The handbook of qualitative research’ Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,1994: p105～117
[4] Mertens, D. M. ‘Research Methods in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Qualitative & Qualitative Approaches’ [M]. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications,1998
[5] Creswell, J.W. ‘Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches’ (2nd Ed) [M]. Thousand Oaks: SagePublications,2003
[6] Kerlinger, F. N. ‘Foundations of Behavioral Research’ [M]. New York: Holt, Rinehart&Winston,1970 
[7] Foster, P. and Ohata, A.S. ‘Negotiation for Meaning and Peer Assistance in Second Language Classrooms’ [J]. App lied Linguistics, 2005, (3)
[8] Levine, J.H. ‘Exceptions Are the Rule: An Inquiry into Methods in the Social Sciences’[M]. Boulder, CO: Westview, 1993. 
[9] Zhang, M. ‘Interrogative Structures in the Interlanguage of ESL Learners: Further Evidence of the Role of Language Universals’[J]. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 2004, (1).
[10] William, M. K. ‘The Qualitative-Quantitative Debate, Qualitative and Quantitative Data, Qualitative and Quantitative Assumptions’ [EB/OL]. The Research Methods Knowledge Base, 2002. Retrieved December 6, 2006, from http: //trochi. human. Cornell. Edu. /kb/quadlet. htm 
[11] Howe, K. R. ‘Against the Quantitative-Qualitative in Compatibility Thesis or Dogmas Die Hard’ [J]. Educational Researcher,1988, (17). 
[12] Greene, J.C., V. J. Caracalla and W.F. Graham. ‘Toward a Conceptual Frame Work for Mixed-method Evaluation Designs’ [J]. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1989, (11). 
[13] Brewer, J .and A. Hunter. ‘Multimethod Research: A Synthesis of Styles’[M]. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1989.