Trends in Methodological and Theoretical Approaches to Communicating Gender Issues on University Campuses
ABSTRACT Globally, gender scholars have carried out studies on gender mainstreaming in higher education. They affirm that the best approach to gende...
ABSTRACT
Globally, gender scholars have carried out studies on gender mainstreaming in higher education. They affirm that the best approach to gender research is not just quantitative but qualitative as well. This study investigated how scholars have employed research methodologies and theories in university-based gender mainstreaming studies. Applying content analysis method, eighty journal articles published between 2007 and 2014 were selected as a purposive sample and their contents were coded electronically and manually. Findings showed that 55% of the studies employed qualitative approach, 31.2% used quantitative methods, and 13.8% adopted mixed methods. The most frequently used research instrument was interview/in-depth interview with 21.7%. In addition, findings revealed that majority of the studies (76.3%) on gender mainstreaming in university campuses did not apply theories. Some of these studies, especially those that employed qualitative approach did not specifically state the theories used, though it could be inferred that feminist theory seemed to dominate the discussions. Apparently, research studies on gender mainstreaming on university campuses are still being dominated by qualitative approach, few adopt mixed methods or triangulation and fewer still work from research problems which are derived from theoretical propositions.
Key Words: Gender Mainstreaming, Methodological Approaches, Theoretical Approaches, University Campuses, Gender Studies
* Olayinka Abimbola Egbokhare, Ph.D. is a Lecturer in the Department of Communication and Language Arts, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
** Israel Ayinla Fadipe is a Lecturer in the Department of Communication and Language Arts, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
JCMR Journal of Communication and Media Research, Vol. 9, No. 2, October 2017, 58 – 66