Week 2 Research Proposals Nam Joon Kang By PresenterMedia.com

Objectives of week 2 Lecture about the first research tradition 1 Do an exercise using the first article 2 Lecture about the second research tradition 3 Do an exercise using the second article. 4 Discussion about your own research 5 Applying Ethical Issues in your research 6

Two main traditions of research Positivistic natural science based, hypothetic-deductive, quantitative or even simply scientific  starting with theory. Interpretive ethnographic or qualitative  starting with data analysis.

Process 1 Summarizes and organizes knowledge Positivistic A theory is a general statement that summarizes and organizes knowledge by proposing a general relationship between events – if it is a good one, it will cover a large number of events and predict events that have not yet occurred or been observed. (example : use the first article.  p. 57 ( What is science? There is no case study that has scientific evidence and objectivity) Process 4 Re-analyse the collected data on the basis of findings and raise research questions Process 3 Relate events or knowledge already exist to the events that is expected to occur. Process 2 Raise hypothesis by proposing a general relationship between events Process 1 Summarizes and organizes knowledge

Five sequential steps for scientific approach; 1.Deducing a hypothesis from theory 2. Expressing the hypothesis in operational terms Testing this operational hypothesis top down logic, a testable proposition about the relationship between two or more events or concepts).  Look at the article What areas of literature are used? (i.e. ones indicating exactly how the variables are to be measured) which propose a relationship between two specific variables thinking about methods  Thinking about how?   This will involve an experiment or some other form of empirical enquiry (An inquiry based on an evidence through observation) .  triangulating methods  What methods were used and why? Examining the specific outcome of the enquiry. It will either tend to confirm the theory or indicate the need for its modification.  How it had happened?  Testing this operational hypothesis Modifying the theory in the light of the findings

Interpretive, ethnographic or qualitative – among several other labels. Theories and concepts tend to arise from the enquiry. They come after data collection rather than before it. Because of this, it is often referred to as hypothesis generating ( as against ‘hypothesis testing’) research. An initial bout of data collection is followed by analysis, the results of which are then used to decide what data should next be collected. Example: RQ: Students’ perceptions on CBI approaches in improving their writing skills Collected data about what primary school students use for ELL and how they think of it.

Still marriage of the two traditions serve better. For those interested in carrying out relatively small –scale real world investigations, each of these traditional models presents difficulties. Hypothetico-deductive scientific approaches is that one is often forced to work without maps, or with very sketchy ones Will face many variables in other words, the firm theoretical base that is called for is just not there. And primary concern is not in developing theory. Waist of time in collecting data to be analysed

Developing the research questions Know the Area  literature review or lecture. Widen the base of your experience researchers in other fields and from other disciplines may well be wrestling with problems similar to yours, or from which useful parallels can be drawn.  Psychology or Creativity education. Consider using techniques for enhancing creativity. Each individual generate questions independently. And it is passed on to informally to other members of the group  and then individuals revise their questions taking other people’s comments into consideration  choose the right one. Avoid the pitfalls of

Ethical Issues Experimental research with people poses ethical problems in sharp forms. Science viewed as leading to prediction gives the possibility of control over what people do, which obviously has a moral dimension. A possible exception would be where the latest educational fad was seeping the schools and a demonstration of its drawbacks might be a useful inoculation for the system – although even in this case, my experience has been that the conclusion ends up something like if you want to take on this new approach, these are the conditions under which it seems to be most effective. Think about these Ethical issues relating to your own research.

Q1. Think about ethical issues in relation to conducting experimental lessons using to experimental groups and use of traditional methods to control group. Q2. Is the giving of necessary additional resources of staff, equipment or whatever to the places where the research talks place, simply part of the deal; the investigator showing good faith by giving as well as taking? Q3. Do individuals have the right not to take part? Q4. Do they know what they are letting themselves in for?

Q5. Will individuals participating be protected, not only from any direct effects of the intervention, but also by the investigator ensuring that the reporting of the study maintains confidentiality? Q6. Is, on the other hand, confidentiality always appropriate? Is people have done something good and worthwhile, and probably put in extra effort and time, why shouldn’t they get credit for it? Conversely, if ineficiency or malpractice is uncovered in the study should the investigator let the guilty ones hide? Q7 what responsibility do investigators have for the knowledge that they have acquired? Are they simply the hired hand doing the bidding of the paymaster?

Homework Read chapter 3 and summarize survey, Experiments, case study methodology, and Establishing Truth worthiness Finalize your research questions