Teaching mixed methods and action research to graduate students has great advantages but also poses interesting challenges. The purpose of this article is to make transparent the process by which a mixed methods research instructor helped inform a student-researcher of the limitations in a pilot study that was compromised by methodology, including sampling conditions and analysis procedures. The student-researchers' Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) intervention was proposed initially to be examined via a pretest-posttest design intended to determine whether video clips were an effective intervention to teach Arabic language and Egyptian customs to non-native speakers. Although data included videotaped teaching sessions, interviews, observations, expert testimonials, and pre- and post-surveys, the research design, sample size, and analysis procedures were insufficient to assess causality. At best, the data collected before the student-researcher had taken an introductory mixed methods research course were useful to understand the participants' perceptions about the effectiveness of CLT techniques for learning. This article provides specific suggestions with applicable references about how the CLT pilot study could be improved and presents a rationale for classifying the study as an exploratory multimethod study, or an arrested action research study, rather than as a mixed methods effectiveness study as originally proposed. Advice for novice researchers concerning paradigms, stages within the research process, interactive research elements, typologies, and issues of credibility are provided along with a 7-step planning process designed to improve novice researchers' projects.