According to Poggenpoel & Myburgh (2009), qualitative meta-synthesis is a type of research method that is aimed at the interpretation of similar phenomena in order to contribute to knowledge development. Similarly, Au (2007) indicates that qualitative meta-synthesis is a type of research where the results of qualitative studies are synthesized in order to obtain a better understanding of a phenomenon’s general nature. In the same regard, Tellez & Waxman (in press) state that meta-synthesis is “an umbrella term referring to the synthesis of findings across multiple qualitative reports to create a new interpretation” (Tellez & Waxman, in press, p. 11). On the other hand, Barnett-Page & Thomas (2009) pertains to meta-synthesis as constructions of constructions where a construction refers to a primary study. Likewise, Bondas & Hall (2007) refer to qualitative meta-synthesis as a research of research where the primary source of data consists of previous research publications and where the decision for the sampling method to be used is dependent on these publications.
In addition, while Au (2007) refers to meta-analysis as synonymous to meta-synthesis, Barnett-Page & Thomas (2009) make a distinction between meta-synthesis and meta-analysis in that meta-synthesis is qualitative in nature while meta-analysis is more quantitative.
Moreover, Barnett-Page & Thomas (2009) name other meta-methods that are used in research, namely meta-ethnography, grounded theory, thematic synthesis, textual narrative synthesis, meta-study, meta-narrative, and critical interpretive synthesis.
Meta-ethnography refers to the process of putting together – not merely integrating – written interpretive accounts in order to come up with a comparative understanding of a phenomenon and not merely obtain an aggregated set of data. On the other hand, grounded theory involves simultaneous stages of data collection and analysis; which eventually leads to the formulation of a new theory. In the same regard, a thematic synthesis uses a combination of the meta-ethnography and grounded theory approaches while the textual narrative synthesis involves the arrangement of studies into groups that are more homogeneous. A meta-study involves a meta-data analysis, a meta-method analysis, and a meta-theory analysis prior to the conduct of the synthesis. Likewise, meta-narrative involves the synthesis of evidence in order to inform the creation ad modification of policies. Finally, the critical interpretive synthesis combines the techniques used in the meta-ethnography and grounded theory approaches.
Poggenpoel & Myburgh (2009) used the meta-synthesis research method to gain a better understanding of South African learners’ experience of aggression in secondary schools and to determine ways to help them deal with such experiences. The findings enabled the researchers to identify how students experienced aggression and what guidelines they were provided to help them manage their aggression, in turn enabling the researchers to provide recommendations with regards to practice, research, and education (Poggenpoel & Myburgh, 2009). For the study conducted by Au (2007), the meta-synthesis research method was used to determine the effects of high-stakes testing on the curriculum. In this study, he found that the influence that high-stakes tests had on the curriculum largely depended on the structures of the tests (Au, 2007). Similarly, De Gagne & Walters (2009) used the meta-synthesis method to investigate the experience of online educators in American higher education institutions in order to determine how they bridge the gaps between the conventional ways of teaching and the newer media of instruction. As a result, they were able to identify four key themes to describe the teachers’ experiences, namely professional development, teaching strategies, role changes, ad work intensity (DeGagne & Walters, 2009). As well, Tellez & Waxman (in press) used the meta-synthesis research method to determine the effective practices for ESL learners in American schools. In particular, they identified these practices to include the following: communitarian teaching, protracted language events, building on prior knowledge, and the use of multiple representations (Tellez & Waxman, in press).
On the other hand, Barnett-Page & Thomas (2009) provided critique and information about the various methods that can be used for the synthesis of qualitative research in order to enable researchers and commissioners to identify the most appropriate method for their purpose. They described the best uses for such methods, how they could be conducted effectively, as well as what their potential pitfalls were (Barnett-Page & Thomas, 2009). Similarly, Bondas & Hall (2007) provided an analysis of the challenges that come with conducting a meta-synthesis research and also pointed out the values and strengths of this method. They asserted that the qualitative meta-meta-synthesis method is used to obtain an interpretation and integration of the research of a particular phenomenon and to recognize the different perspectives presented (Bondas & Hall, 2007).
One similarity among the methods used by Poggenpoel & Myburgh (2009), Au (2007), De Gagne & Walters (2009), and Tellez & Waxman (in press) was their use of the qualitative method of meta-synthesis. In this regard, they used both peer-reviewed journals and unpublished dissertations for their studies. They used libraries and electronic databases in searching for the publications and they used certain keywords in their search. They also used their own criteria for filtering the publications that they found.
On the other hand, the main difference in the methods that these researchers used is in the way that they collected and analyzed their data. For example, Poggenpoel & Myburgh (2009) classified their results into themes and categories. On the other hand, while Tellez & Waxman (in press) also used codes and categories, their main strategy for analyzing the data was through the integration of study results across time and research. Moreover, De Gagne & Walters (2009) used the meta-ethnographic methodology for analyzing their data while Au (2007) used the template analysis method.
References
Au, W. (2007, June/July). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative
meta-synthesis. Educational Research, 36 (5), 258-267.
Barnett-Page, E. & Thomas, J. (2009, August). Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research:
A critical review. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9 (59). doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-
9-59.
Bondas, T. & Hall, E.O.C. (2007, January). Challenges in approaching meta-synthesis research.
Qualitative Health Research, 17 (1), 113-121.
De Gagne, J.C. & Walters, K. (2009, December). Online teaching experience: A qualitative
meta-synthesis (QMS). MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5 (4), 577-
589.
Poggenpoel, M. & Myburgh, C. (2009, June). A meta-synthesis of completed
qualitative research on learners’ experience of aggression in secondary schools in South
Africa. International Journal of Violence and School, 8, 60-84.
Téllez, K. & Waxman, H. (in press). A meta-synthesis of qualitative research on effective
teaching practices for English language learners. In J.M. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.),
Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching. Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing.
