The article "Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come" by R. Burke Johnson and Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie positions mixed methods research as a natural complement to traditional qualitative and quantitative research. It advocates for pragmatism as a philosophical partner for mixed methods research, emphasizing its methodological pluralism and eclecticism. The authors review the paradigm "wars" between quantitative and qualitative research, highlighting commonalities between the two approaches and the incompatibility thesis. They argue that mixed methods research can bridge the divide between these paradigms by drawing from the strengths of both quantitative and qualitative research. The article outlines the fundamental principles of mixed methods research, including the pragmatic approach, which emphasizes the practical consequences of beliefs and the iterative nature of research. It provides a framework for designing and conducting mixed methods research, including specific designs for mixed-model and mixed-method studies. The authors also discuss the strengths and weaknesses of mixed methods research, emphasizing its ability to add insights and understanding that might be missed with a single method. The article concludes by advocating for the recognition of mixed methods research as a third major research paradigm in education and the social sciences, suggesting that it can promote a shared responsibility in attaining accountability for educational quality. It calls for methodologists to catch up with practicing researchers and formally recognize and develop mixed methods research.The article "Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come" by R. Burke Johnson and Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie positions mixed methods research as a natural complement to traditional qualitative and quantitative research. It advocates for pragmatism as a philosophical partner for mixed methods research, emphasizing its methodological pluralism and eclecticism. The authors review the paradigm "wars" between quantitative and qualitative research, highlighting commonalities between the two approaches and the incompatibility thesis. They argue that mixed methods research can bridge the divide between these paradigms by drawing from the strengths of both quantitative and qualitative research. The article outlines the fundamental principles of mixed methods research, including the pragmatic approach, which emphasizes the practical consequences of beliefs and the iterative nature of research. It provides a framework for designing and conducting mixed methods research, including specific designs for mixed-model and mixed-method studies. The authors also discuss the strengths and weaknesses of mixed methods research, emphasizing its ability to add insights and understanding that might be missed with a single method. The article concludes by advocating for the recognition of mixed methods research as a third major research paradigm in education and the social sciences, suggesting that it can promote a shared responsibility in attaining accountability for educational quality. It calls for methodologists to catch up with practicing researchers and formally recognize and develop mixed methods research.