Table 4.

Quality appraisal of qualitative studies (JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research).

Study	Is there congruity between the stated philosophical perspective and the research methodology?	Is there congruity between the research methodology and the research question or objectives?	Is there congruity between the research methodology and the methods used to collect data?	Is there congruity between the research methodology and the representation and analysis of data?	Is there congruity between the research methodology and the interpretation of results?	Is there a statement locating the researcher culturally or theoretically?
Gottlieb (1997)	Although a philosophical perspective is not cited or described, the research design seems appropriate and in line with the evaluative nature of the study aims.	Uses questionnaires, interviews, observations, and achievement data to evaluate changes in resource room group size, in line with the evaluation design.	There is limited information about the questionnaires, interview schedules, and the approach to the qualitative analysis of parental responses. It would have been preferable with a more detailed methodological section.	The authors present data from each source separately. Not much analysis in terms of interpretation or theoretical discussion ‐ descriptive summation only.	The study is purely descriptive.	No theoretical perspectives presented, purely descriptive study.
Huang (2020)	Critical realism is well presented and the author reflects on the congruity between this perspective and the study methodology.	Yes, qualitative interviews are appropriate for exploring the research questions.	Yes, the study methodology and methods are well aligned.	Yes, the analysis reflects the use of qualitative interviews through statements from interviews backing up the analytical points.	Yes, as stated in previous section.	Yes, the study is placed in the Chinese context and within a clear philosophical and methodological tradition.
Keith (1993a)	No philosophical or theoretical perspectives presented.	The research method (mixed methods approach with interviews, survey, and test results) seems appropriate for an evaluative study.	Yes, this is a straightforward evaluation design.	There is very limited description of the collection of qualitative data and the approach to qualitative analysis is not really described.	To some degree, although the study is descriptive and correlational and findings are sometimes phrased as if they were causal in nature.	The study is situated in Virginia. No theoretical or philosophical perspectives presented.
Prunty (2012)	The authors are concerned with the right of children to be heard and the imperative for research to let children's voices be heard—and this is reflected in the research methodology where children are active participants in focus groups interviews.	Yes, the research question concerning children's views on schooling is well answered through the use of interviews and focus groups with children.	Yes, since the methodology is centred around child participation and the authors use interview methods designed to elicit the views of children.	Yes, the analysis is centred around statements from children, in line with the research focus on child participation.	Yes, in that children's voices are allowed to take centre‐stage in the analysis and no interpretations are made which are not in sync with the statements made by the participating children.	Yes, children's perspectives and developments towards including and emphasising children's rights are central to the study, with reference to key governance documents and previous research.
MAGI Educational Services, Inc. (1995)	The authors do not state a philosophical perspective and there is hardly any description of the research design and data collection methods.	This is not possible to determine based on the limited information given in the study.	This is not possible to determine based on the limited information given in the study.	This is not possible to determine based on the limited information given in the study.	This is not possible to determine based on the limited information given in the study.	No, apart from information about where the study took place (New York).

Study	Is the influence of the researcher on the research, and vice‐versa, addressed?	Are participants, and their voices, adequately represented?	Is the research ethical according to current criteria or recent studies, and is there evidence of ethical approval by an appropriate body?	Do the conclusions drawn in the research report flow from the analysis, or interpretation, of the data?	Overall appraisal
Gottlieb (1997)	No such considerations made.	This is difficult to say, since this is less of a research study in the traditional sense and more of a descriptive report summing up key points. It is stated that some school leaders/administrative staff/teachers refrained from participation due to insecurity, meaning that the results most likely constitute a best case scenario.	The authors do not touch upon issues of ethics, but mention that some schools refrained from participation due to insecurities (which authors believe may have skewed the results to only show ‘the best case scenario’).	Yes, the conclusions flow from the data, but are only descriptive (not based on data interpretation).	Include for analysis. No philosophical or theoretical perspectives presented and not a lot of information on methods and analytical procedures. However, the paper works well as an evaluation report, and the design chosen is appropriate for an evaluation. The conclusions drawn flow from the descriptive data presented.
Huang (2020)	The researcher reflects on her preconceptions and potential biases.	Yes, through statements from the semi‐structured interviews.	Yes.	Yes, there is a clear connection between the analysis and empirical findings presented and the conclusions made in the study.	Include for analysis. Class size is not the main topic of the study, but it is touched upon. The study is well‐performed and clearly reported.
Keith (1993a)	No.	The description provided of the interview material is too limited to determine this.	The research does not seem unethical, however, no ethical reflections are described.	The conclusions flow from the descriptive data presented, but this is mostly true for the survey data, as it is unclear in what way data from the site visits and interviews was used.	Exclude from analysis. No philosophical or theoretical perspective stated, very limited description of data collection, and the approach to qualitative analysis is not described. It is unclear in what way the site visits and interview material was used. The paper functions well enough as an evaluation report, but as a qualitative research study, it is inadequately reported and therefore not suited for inclusion.
Prunty (2012)	Not discussed, but the authors describe measures taken to make the focus groups/interviews comfortable and safe for the children.	Yes, in line with the focus on making children's voices heard.	Yes, children's voices are valued and authors describe taking measures to make the interviews safe and comfortable for children to participate in.	Yes, the conclusions drawn are clearly founded in the empirical data presented in the analysis.	Include for analysis. This study is not about differences between different special education settings, but more about differences between mainstream/inclusion and special education. Nonetheless, there are points made here that carry relevance to the issue of special education class size. In terms of methodological quality, the study is well performed and transparently reported.
MAGI Educational Services, Inc. (1995)	No.	Some participant statements are presented, but it is not possible to determine whether these statements are representative for the participants as a whole, as there is no information on how the data were analysed (and thus how excerpts from different sources of data were selected).	No ethical considerations, but there is nothing to indicate problems.	Not possible to assess, since it is unclear how data were collected and there is no description of the approach to qualitative analysis.	Exclude from analysis. No philosophical or theoretical perspective stated, very limited description of data collection, and the approach to qualitative analysis is not described.