In recent decades, the work of teachers has been carried out in classrooms characterised by a high degree of diversity, necessitating the provision of pedagogical responses that promote the inclusion of students. This article is derived from the research, development and innovation (R+D+I) project 'Intergenerational Professional Development in Education Implications for the Professional Initiation of Teachers (DePrInED) and aims to analyse how teachers at compulsory education recognise, characterise and conceptualise the diversity and needs of students. A mixed methodological approach was employed, with information collected through focus groups and interviews with a total sample of 147 teachers from different educational levels (young, senior and retired). Thematic analysis, combined with a comparative analysis, was employed to analyse the data using ATLAS.ti software. The main categories analysed dealt with students' needs and their own diversity. The study's primary findings suggest that, in comparison to their retired counterparts, both young and veteran teachers make greater reference to the diversity and needs of students, and emphasise the scarcity of resources and support to effectively address the diversity of students in the classroom. Experienced teachers are found to make more frequent references to diversity and students' needs, while retired teachers make these references less often. This finding assumes particular significance in light of the paucity of studies that adopt a generational perspective to analyse how teachers perceive diversity.

Ensuring the trustworthiness of qualitative research remains a critical challenge in educational research. However, early career researchers often lack structured guidance on enhancing the credibility of qualitative data analysis. A key issue is the limited discussion on inductive approaches that support systematic theme generation and theory development. To address this gap, this study examines how two early-career researchers employed a three-level inductive methodology during their PhD studies to strengthen the trustworthiness of their findings. Using an autoethnographic approach, the study finds that this methodology deepened their understanding of participants’ experiences, facilitated the emergence of valid themes, and reinforced credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. These findings offer concrete strategies for researchers undertaking similar approaches to ensure trustworthiness in their qualitative inquiry. This study also highlights the importance of equipping PhD researchers in education with strategies to navigate qualitative research rigorously, ultimately enhancing the quality of their studies.

Within the context of investigating belief systems, this work exemplifies a mixed-method approach. Two approaches are utilized to explore the philosophical, ontological, and epistemological assumptions that university students foster regarding the relationships between knowledge and reality. In the first step, written materials that elaborated on the matter at hand were subjected to content analysis with the assistance of Leximancer, a software that recognizes themes and concepts and turns textual data into concept maps that express networks of meaning. The second step involved conducting a cluster analysis on the data obtained from the questionnaire to identify distinct groups of participants who shared consistent epistemological viewpoints. The results obtained from the two approaches are in agreement and shed light on the prevalent epistemic inclination that favors a constructivist viewpoint. Discussion on the ramifications of the findings, as well as the methodological issues that are pertinent to the present illustration, is provided.

A survey of literature on methodology reveals that the whole-part relationship is broken between the overarching definition of methodology and compatible sets of methodic practices and underlying assumptions. Two key general structures are missing: (a) a big picture view within which to organize definitions and parts, and (b) a framework within which to guide analysis of any particular feature of methodology without detaching from an understanding of the particular in relation to the whole. As a consequence, a basic question remains unanswered about what social scientists mean by methodology. The current manuscript explored literature relating to methodology, without emphasis on any specific paradigm, with the aim of synthesizing both the definitions (i.e., the whole) and components (i.e., the parts) of methodology. Using hermeneutic synthesis, nine definitions of methodology and four methodological decision sets were inferred. Definitions and decision sets were integrated into a range-based methodological framework. The resulting framework captures the continuum of methodological choices made by inquirers, which has implications for educators, methodologists, and researchers seeking to engage in inter- and intra-paradigm methodological analysis to understand and compare methodological decision points.