AIOU Assignment BEd 1.5 Year 2.5 Year 8604 Research Methods in Education Assignment 1

AIOU Assignment BEd 1.5 Year 2.5 Year 8604 Research Methods in Education Assignment 1

Note: For Other Assignment of BEd 1.5 Year or 2.5 Year Please click on the Links Below:

• BEd 1.5 Year
• BEd 2.5 Year

Q.1 Discuss scientific method as a tool of acquiring knowledge. Compare it with various steps in the research process?

Answer: 

The scientific method is an empirical method of knowledge acquisition which has characterized the

development of science since at least the 17th century. It involves careful observation, which includes

rigorous skepticism about what is observed, given that cognitive assumptions about how the world works influence how one interprets a percept. It involves formulating hypotheses, via induction, based on such observations; experimental and measurement-based testing of deductions drawn from the hypotheses; and refinement of the hypotheses based on the experimental findings. These are principles of the scientific method, as opposed to a definitive series of steps applicable to all scientific enterprises.

Though there are diverse models for the scientific method available, in general there is a continuous process that includes observations about the natural world. People are naturally inquisitive, so they often come up with questions about things they see or hear, and they often develop ideas or hypotheses about why things are the way they are. The best hypotheses lead to predictions that can be tested in various ways. The most conclusive testing of hypotheses comes from reasoning based on carefully controlled experimental data. Depending on how well additional tests match the predictions, the original hypothesis may require refinement, alteration, expansion or even rejection. If a particular hypothesis becomes very well supported, a general theory may be developed.

Although procedures vary from one field of inquiry to another, they are frequently the same from one to another. The process of the scientific method involves making conjectures (hypotheses), deriving predictions from them as logical consequences, and then carrying out experiments or empirical observations based on those predictions. A hypothesis is a conjecture, based on knowledge obtained while seeking answers to the question. The hypothesis might be very specific, or it might be broad. Scientists then test hypotheses by conducting experiments or studies. A scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable, implying that it is possible to identify a possible outcome of an experiment or observation that conflicts with predictions deduced from the hypothesis; otherwise, the hypothesis cannot be meaningfully tested.

The purpose of an experiment is to determine whether observations agree with or conflict with the predictions derived from a hypothesis. Experiments can take place anywhere from a garage to CERN's Large Hadron Collider. There are difficulties in a formulaic statement of method, however. Though the scientific method is often presented as a fixed sequence of steps, it represents rather a set of general principles. Not all steps take place in every scientific inquiry and they are not always in the same order. Some philosophers and scientists have argued that there is no scientific method; they include physicist Lee Smolin and philosopher Paul Feyerabend . Robert Nola and Howard Sankey remark that "For some, the whole idea of a theory of scientific method is yester-year's debate, the continuation of which can be summed up as yet more of the proverbial deceased equine castigation. We beg to differ." The term "scientific method" did not come into wide use until the 19th century, when other modern scientific terminologies began to emerge such as "scientist" and "pseudoscience" and significant transformation of science was taking place. Throughout the 1830s and 1850s, by which time Baconianism was popular, naturalists like William Whewell, John Herschel, John Stewart Mill engaged in debates over "induction" and "facts" and were focused on how to generate knowledge In the late 19th a debate over realism vs. antirealism was conducted as powerful scientific theories extended beyond the realm of the observable.

The term "scientific method" came to be used prominently in the twentieth century, with no scientific

authorities over its meaning despite it popping up in textbooks and dictionariesThough there was a steady growth on the concept into the twentieth century, by the end of that century numerous influential philosophers of science like Thomas Kuhn and Paul Feyerabend had questioned the universality of the "scientific method" and in doing so largely replaced the notion of science as a homogeneous and universal method with that of it being a heterogeneous and local practice. In particular, Paul Feyerabend argued against there being any universal rules of science.

Overview

The scientific method is the process by which science is carried out. As in other areas of inquiry, science (through the scientific method) can build on previous knowledge and develop a more sophisticated understanding of its topics of study over time. This model can be seen to underlie the scientific revolution. The ubiquitous element in the model of the scientific method is empiricism, or more precisely, epistemologic sensualism. This is in opposition to stringent forms of rationalism: the scientific method embodies that reason alone cannot solve a particular scientific problem. A strong formulation of the scientific method is not always aligned with a form of empiricism in which the empirical data is put forward in the form of experience or other abstracted forms of knowledge; in current scientific practice, however, the use of scientific modelling and reliance on abstract typologies and theories is normally accepted. The scientific method is of necessity also an expression of an opposition to claims that e.g. revelation, political or religious dogma, appeals to tradition, commonly held beliefs, common sense, or, importantly, currently held theories, are the only possible means of demonstrating truth.

Different early expressions of empiricism and the scientific method can be found throughout history, for instance with the ancient Stoics, Epicurus Alhazen Roger Bacon, and William of Ockham. From the 16th century onwards, experiments were advocated by Francis Bacon, and performed by Giambattista della Porta, Johannes Kepler, and Galileo Galilei.There was particular development aided by theoretical works by Francisco Sanches, John Locke, George Berkeley, and David Hume.

The hypothetico-deductive model formulated in the 20th century, is the ideal although it has undergone significant revision since first proposed. Staddon (2017) argues it is a mistake to try following rules which are best learned through careful study of examples of scientific investigation.

Process The overall process involves making conjectures (hypotheses), deriving predictions from them as logical consequences, and then carrying out experiments based on those predictions to determine whether the original conjecture was correct. There are difficulties in a formulaic statement of method, however. Though the scientific method is often presented as a fixed sequence of steps, these actions are better considered as general principles. Not all steps take place in every scientific inquiry and they are not always done in the same order. As noted by scientist and philosopher William Whewell (1794–1866), "invention, sagacity, [and] genius are required at every step.

Formulation of a question

The question can refer to the explanation of a specific observation, as in "Why is the sky blue?" but can also be open-ended, as in "How can I design a drug to cure this particular disease?" This stage frequently involves finding and evaluating evidence from previous experiments, personal scientific observations or assertions, as well as the work of other scientists. If the answer is already known, a different question that builds on the evidence can be posed. When applying the scientific method to research, determining a good question can be very difficult and it will affect the outcome of the investigation.

Hypothesis

A hypothesis is a conjecture, based on knowledge obtained while formulating the question, that may explain any given behavior. The hypothesis might be very specific; for example, Einstein'sequivalence principle or Francis Crick's "DNA makes RNA makes protein", or it might be broad; for example, unknown species of life dwell in the unexplored depths of the oceans. Astatistical hypothesis is a conjecture about a given statistical population. For example, the population might be people with a particular disease. The conjecture might be that a new drug will cure the disease in some of those people. Terms commonly associated with statistical hypotheses are null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis. A null hypothesis is the conjecture that the statistical hypothesis is false; for example, that the new drug does nothing and that any cure is caused by chance. Researchers normally want to show that the null hypothesis is false. The alternative hypothesis is the desired outcome, that the drug does better than chance. A final point: a scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable,

meaning that one can identify a possible outcome of an experiment that conflicts with predictions deduced from the hypothesis; otherwise, it cannot be meaningfully tested.

Prediction

This step involves determining the logical consequences of the hypothesis. One or more predictions are then selected for further testing. The more unlikely that a prediction would be correct simply by coincidence, then the more convincing it would be if the prediction were fulfilled; evidence is also stronger if the answer to the prediction is not already known, due to the effects of hindsight bias . Ideally, the prediction must also distinguish the hypothesis from likely alternatives; if two hypotheses make the same prediction, observing the prediction to be correct is not evidence for either one over the other.

Testing

This is an investigation of whether the real world behaves as predicted by the hypothesis. Scientists (and other people) test hypotheses by conducting experiments. The purpose of an experiment is to determine whether observations of the real world agree with or conflict with the predictions derived from a hypothesis. If they agree, confidence in the hypothesis increases; otherwise, it decreases. Agreement does not assure that the hypothesis is true; future experiments may reveal problems. Karl Popper advised scientists to try to falsify hypotheses, i.e., to search for and test those experiments that seem most doubtful. Large numbers of successful confirmations are not convincing if they arise from experiments that avoid risk.Experiments should be designed to minimize possible errors, especially through the use of appropriate scientific controls. For example, tests of medical treatments are commonly run as double-blind tests. Test personnel, who might unwittingly reveal to test subjects which samples are the desired test drugs and which are placebos, are kept ignorant of which are

which. Such hints can bias the responses of the test subjects. Furthermore, failure of an experiment does not necessarily mean the hypothesis is false. Experiments always depend on several hypotheses, e.g., that the test equipment is working properly, and a failure may be a failure of one of the auxiliary hypotheses Experiments can be conducted in a college lab, on a kitchen table, at CERN's Large Hadron Collider, at the bottom of an ocean, on Mars and so on. Astronomers do experiments, searching for planets around distant stars. Finally, most individual experiments address highly specific topics for reasons of practicality. As a result, evidence about broader topics is usually accumulated gradually.

Analysis

This involves determining what the results of the experiment show and deciding on the next actions to take. The predictions of the hypothesis are compared to those of the null hypothesis, to determine which is better able to explain the data. In cases where an experiment is repeated many times, a statistical analysis such as a chisquared test may be required. If the evidence has falsified the hypothesis, a new hypothesis is required; if the experiment supports the hypothesis but the evidence is not strong enough for high confidence, other predictions from the hypothesis must be tested. Once a hypothesis is strongly supported by evidence, a new question can be asked to provide further insight on the same topic. Evidence from other scientists and experience are frequently incorporated at any stage in the process. Depending on the complexity of the experiment, many iterations may be required to gather sufficient evidence to answer a question with confidence, or to build up many answers to highly specific questions in order to answer a single broader question.

Characterizations

The scientific method depends upon increasingly sophisticated characterizations of the subjects of investigation. For example, Benjamin Franklin conjectured, correctly, that St. Elmo's fire was electrical in nature, but it has taken a long series of experiments and theoretical changes to establish this. While seeking the pertinent properties of the subjects, careful thought may also entail some definitions and observations; the observations often demand careful measurements and/or counting.

The systematic, careful collection of measurements or counts of relevant quantities is often the critical difference between pseudo-sciences, such as alchemy, and science, such as chemistry or biology. Scientific measurements are usually tabulated, graphed, or mapped, and statistical manipulations, such as correlation and regression, performed on them. The measurements might be made in a controlled setting, such as a laboratory, or made on more or less inaccessible or unmanipulatable objects such as stars or human populations. The measurements often require specialized scientific instruments such as thermometers, spectroscopes, particle accelerators, or voltmeters, and the progress of a scientific field is usually intimately tied to their invention and improvement.

I am not accustomed to saying anything with certainty after only one or two observations.

— Andreas Vesalius, (1546)

.

Hypothesis development

A hypothesis is a suggested explanation of a phenomenon, or alternately a reasoned proposal suggesting a possible correlation between or among a set of phenomena. Normally hypotheses have the form of a mathematical model. Sometimes, but not always, they can also be formulated asexistential statements, stating that some particular instance of the phenomenon being studied has

some characteristic and causal explanations, which have the general form of universal statements, stating that every instance of the phenomenon has a particular characteristic.

Scientists are free to use whatever resources they have – their own creativity, ideas from other fields, inductive reasoning,Bayesian inference, and so on – to imagine possible explanations for a phenomenon under study. Albert Einstein once observed that "there is no logical bridge between phenomena and their theoretical principles." Charles Sanders Peirce, borrowing a page from Aristotle described the incipient stages of inquiry, instigated by the "irritation of doubt" to venture a plausible guess, as abductive reasoning. The history of science is filled with stories of scientists claiming a "flash of inspiration", or a hunch, which then motivated them to look for evidence to support or refute their idea. Michael Polanyi made such creativity the centerpiece of his discussion of methodology.

William Glen observes that the success of a hypothesis, or its service to science, lies not simply in its perceived "truth", or power to displace, subsume or reduce a predecessor idea, but perhaps more in its ability to stimulate the research that will illuminate ... bald suppositions and areas of vagueness.

In general scientists tend to look for theories that are "elegant" or "beautiful". In contrast to the usual English use of these terms, they here refer to a theory in accordance with the known facts, which is nevertheless relatively simple and easy to handle. Occam's Razor serves as a rule of thumb for choosing the most desirable amongst a group of equally explanatory hypotheses.

To minimize the confirmation bias which results from entertaining a single hypothesis, strong

inference emphasizes the need for entertaining multiple alternative hypotheses. Paying special attention to the generation of explanations, Peirce outlined the scientific method as a coordination of three kinds of inference in a purposeful cycle aimed at settling doubts, as follows (in §III–IV in "A Neglected Argument"except as otherwise noted):

1. Abduction (or retroduction). Guessing, inference to explanatory hypotheses for selection of those best worth trying. From abduction, Peirce distinguishes induction as inferring, on the basis of tests, the proportion of truth in the hypothesis. Every inquiry, whether into ideas, brute facts, or norms and laws, arises from surprising observations in one or more of those realms (and for example at any stage of an inquiry already underway). All explanatory content of theories comes from abduction, which guesses a new or outside idea so as to account in a simple, economical way for a surprising or complicative phenomenon. Oftenest, even a well-prepared mind guesses wrong. But the modicum of success of our guesses far exceeds that of sheer luck and seems born of attunement to nature by instincts developed or inherent, especially insofar as best guesses are optimally plausible and simple in the sense, said Peirce, of the "facile and natural", as by Galileo's natural light of reason and as distinct from "logical simplicity". Abduction is the most fertile but least secure mode of inference. Its

general rationale is inductive: it succeeds often enough and, without it, there is no hope of sufficiently

expediting inquiry (often multi-generational) toward new truths. Coordinative method leads from abducing a plausible hypothesis to judging it for its testabilityand for how its trial would economize inquiry itself. Peirce calls his pragmatism "the logic of abduction"His pragmatic maxim is: "Consider what effects that might conceivably have practical bearings you conceive the objects of your conception to have. Then, your conception of those effects is the whole of your conception of the object". His pragmatism is a method of reducing conceptual confusions fruitfully by equating the meaning of any conception with the conceivable practical implications of its object's conceived effects – a method of experimentational mental reflection hospitable to forming hypotheses and conducive to testing them. It favors efficiency. The hypothesis, being insecure, needs to have practical implications leading at least to mental tests and, in science, lending themselves to scientific tests. A simple but unlikely guess, if uncostly to test for falsity, may belong first in line for testing. A guess is intrinsically worth testing if it has instinctive plausibility or reasoned objective probability, while subjective likelihood, though reasoned, can be misleadingly seductive. Guesses can be chosen for trial strategically, for their caution (for which Peirce gave as example the game of Twenty Questions), breadth, and incomplexity. One can hope to discover only that which time would reveal through a learner's sufficient experience anyway, so the point is to expedite it; the economy of research is what demands the leap, so to speak, of abduction and governs its art.

2. Deduction. Two stages:

i. Explication. Unclearly premissed, but deductive, analysis of the hypothesis in order to render its parts as clear as possible.

ii. Demonstration: Deductive Argumentation, Euclidean in procedure. Explicit deduction of hypothesis's consequences as predictions, for induction to test, about evidence to be found.  Corollarial or, if needed, theorematic.

3. Induction. The long-run validity of the rule of induction is deducible from the principle (presuppositional to reasoning in general) that the real is only the object of the final opinion to which adequate investigation would lead;anything to which no such process would ever lead would not be real. Induction involving ongoing tests or observations follows a method which, sufficiently persisted in, will diminish its error below any predesignate degree. Three stages:

• Classification. Unclearly premissed, but inductive, classing of objects of experience under general ideas.
• Probation: direct inductive argumentation. Crude (the enumeration of instances) or gradual (new estimate of proportion of truth in the hypothesis after each test). Gradual induction is qualitative or quantitative; if qualitative, then dependent on weightings of qualities or characters; if quantitative, then dependent on measurements, or on statistics, or on countings.
• Sentential Induction. "...which, by inductive reasonings, appraises the different probations singly, then their combinations, then makes self-appraisal of these very appraisals themselves, and passes final judgment on the whole result".

Science of complex systems

Science applied to complex systems can involve elements such as transdisciplinarity, systems

theory and scientific modelling. The Santa Fe Institute studies such systems; Murray Gell-Mann interconnects these topics with message passing.

In general, the scientific method may be difficult to apply stringently to diverse, interconnected systems and large data sets. In particular, practices used within Big data, such as predictive analytics, may be considered to be at odds with the scientific method.

Documentation and replication

Sometimes experimenters may make systematic errors during their experiments, veer from standard methods and practices (Pathological science) for various reasons, or, in rare cases, deliberately report false results. Occasionally because of this then, other scientists might attempt to repeat the experiments in order to duplicate the results.

Archiving

Researchers sometimes practice scientific data archiving, such as in compliance with the policies of government funding agencies and scientific journals. In these cases, detailed records of their experimental procedures, raw data, statistical analyses and source code can be preserved in order to provide evidence of the methodology and practice of the procedure and assist in any potential future attempts to reproduce the result. These procedural records may also assist in the conception of new experiments to test the hypothesis, and may prove useful to engineers who might examine the potential practical applications of a discovery.

Data sharing

When additional information is needed before a study can be reproduced, the author of the study might be asked to provide it. They might provide it, or if the author refuses to share data, appeals can be made to the journal editors who published the study or to the institution which funded the research.

Limitations

Since it is impossible for a scientist to record everything that took place in an experiment, facts selected for their apparent relevance are reported. This may lead, unavoidably, to problems later if some supposedly irrelevant feature is questioned. For example, Heinrich Hertz did not report the size of the room used to test Maxwell's equations, which later turned out to account for a small deviation in the results. The problem is that parts of the theory itself need to be assumed in order to select and report the experimental conditions. The observations are hence sometimes described as being 'theory-laden'.

Dimensions of practice

The primary constraints on contemporary science are:

• Publication, i.e. Peer review
• Resources (mostly funding)

It has not always been like this: in the old days of the "gentleman scientist" funding (and to a lesser extent publication) were far weaker constraints.

Both of these constraints indirectly require scientific method – work that violates the constraints will be difficult to publish and difficult to get funded. Journals require submitted papers to conform to "good scientific practice" and to a degree this can be enforced by peer review. Originality, importance and interest are more important – see for example the author guidelines for Nature.

Smaldino and McElreath 2016 have noted that our need to reward scientific understanding is being nullified by poor research design and poor data analysis, which is leading to false-positive findings.

Role of chance in discovery Somewhere between 33% and 50% of all scientific discoveries are estimated to have been stumbled upon, rather than sought out. This may explain why scientists so often express that they were lucky. Louis Pasteur is credited with the famous saying that "Luck favours the prepared mind", but some psychologists have begun to study what it means to be 'prepared for luck' in the scientific context. Research is showing that scientists are taught various heuristics that tend to harness chance and the unexpected. This is what Nassim Nicholas Taleb calls "Anti-fragility"; while some systems of investigation are fragile in the face of human error, human

bias, and randomness, the scientific method is more than resistant or tough – it actually benefits from such randomness in many ways (it is anti-fragile). Taleb believes that the more anti-fragile the system, the more it will flourish in the real world.

Psychologist Kevin Dunbar says the process of discovery often starts with researchers finding bugs in their experiments. These unexpected results lead researchers to try to fix what they think is an error in their method. Eventually, the researcher decides the error is too persistent and systematic to be a coincidence. The highly controlled, cautious and curious aspects of the scientific method are thus what make it well suited for identifying such persistent systematic errors. At this point, the researcher will begin to think of theoretical explanations for the error, often seeking the help of colleagues across different domains of expertise.

Relationship with mathematics

Science is the process of gathering, comparing, and evaluating proposed models against observables. A model can be a simulation, mathematical or chemical formula, or set of proposed steps. Science is like mathematics in that researchers in both disciplines try to distinguish what is known from what is unknown at each stage of discovery. Models, in both science and mathematics, need to be internally consistent and also ought to be falsifiable (capable of disproof). In mathematics, a statement need not yet be proven; at such a stage, that statement would be called a conjecture. But when a statement has attained mathematical proof, that statement gains a kind of immortality which is highly prized by mathematicians, and for which some mathematicians devote their lives.

Mathematical work and scientific work can inspire each other. For example, the technical concept of time arose in science, and timelessness was a hallmark of a mathematical topic. But today, the Poincaré conjecture has been proven using time as a mathematical concept in which objects can flow .

Nevertheless, the connection between mathematics and reality (and so science to the extent it describes reality) remains obscure. Eugene Wigner's paper, The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences, is a very well known account of the issue from a Nobel Prize-winning physicist. In fact, some observers (including some well known mathematicians such as Gregory Chaitin, and others such as Lakoff and Núñez) have suggested that mathematics is the result of practitioner bias and human limitation (including cultural ones), somewhat like the post-modernist view of science.

George Pólya's work on problem solving, the construction of mathematical proofs, and heuristic show that the mathematical method and the scientific method differ in detail, while nevertheless resembling each other in using iterative or recursive steps.

Mathematical method Scientific method

1. Understanding Characterization from experience and observation
2. Analysis Hypothesis: a proposed explanation
3. Synthesis Deduction: prediction from the hypothesis
4. Review/Extend Test and experiment

In Pólya's view, understanding involves restating unfamiliar definitions in your own words, resorting to geometrical figures, and questioning what we know and do not know already; analysis, which Pólya takes from Pappus, involves free and heuristic construction of plausible arguments, working backward from the goal, and devising a plan for constructing the proof; synthesis is the strict Euclidean exposition of step-by-step details of the proof; review involves reconsidering and re-examining the result and the path taken to it.

Gauss, when asked how he came about his theorems, once replied "durch planmässiges Tattonieren"

(through systematic palpable experimentation). Imre Lakatos argued that mathematicians actually use contradiction, criticism and revision as principles for improving their work. In like manner to science, where truth is sought, but certainty is not found, in Proofs and refutations (1976), what Lakatos tried to establish was that no theorem of informal mathematics is final or perfect. This means that we should not think that a theorem is ultimately true, only that no counter example has yet been found. Once a counterexample, i.e. an entity contradicting/not explained by the theorem is found, we adjust the theorem, possibly extending the domain of its validity. This is a continuous way our knowledge

accumulates, through the logic and process of proofs and refutations. (If axioms are given for a  branch of mathematics, however, Lakatos claimed that proofs from those axioms were tautological, i.e. logically true, by rewriting them, as did Poincaré (Proofs and Refutations, 1976).)

Lakatos proposed an account of mathematical knowledge based on Polya's idea of heuristics. In Proofs and Refutations, Lakatos gave several basic rules for finding proofs and counterexamples to conjectures. He thought that mathematical 'thought experiments' are a valid way to discover mathematical conjectures and proofs.

Relationship with statistics

The scientific method has been extremely successful in bringing the world out of medieval thinking, especially once it was combined with industrial processes. However, when the scientific method employs statistics as part of its arsenal, there are mathematical and practical issues that can have a deleterious effect on the reliability of the output of scientific methods. This is described in a popular 2005 scientific paper "Why Most Published  Research Findings Are False" by John Ioannidis.

The particular points raised are statistical ("The smaller the studies conducted in a scientific field, the less likely the research findings are to be true" and "The greater the flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes in a scientific field, the less likely the research findings are to be true.") and economical ("The greater the financial and other interests and prejudices in a scientific field, the less likely the research findings are to be true" and "The hotter a scientific field (with more scientific teams involved), the less likely the research findings are to be true.") Hence: "

Research process

 Most research findings are false for most research designs and for most fields" and "As shown, the majority of modern biomedical research is operating in areas with very low pre- and poststudy probability for true findings." However: "Nevertheless, most new discoveries will continue to stem from hypothesis-generating research with low or very low pre-study odds," which means that *new* discoveries will come from research that, when that research started, had low or very low odds (a low or very low chance) of succeeding. Hence, if the scientific method is used to expand the frontiers of knowledge, research into areas that are outside the mainstream will yield most new discoveries with various steps in the research process

1. Define the Problem

Identifying a compelling research question is the first step to a successful research project. What issue,

problem, or topic are you interested in exploring?

This worksheet will guide you through the process of developing your research question.

This video and powerpoint are additional resources to help you develop a research question.

2. Review the Literature

The purpose of conducting research is to "fill in the gaps" of our knowledge about a particular field or subject, to identify a new problem, or to "test" a new solution or recommendation for an existing issue or phenomenon. To frame your research project, and to ensure that your research question has not already been examined, you must conduct a literature review.

3. Formulate a Hypothesis or a Problem Statement

Depending on your research question and methodology, you will be required to formulate a research hypothesis OR a problem statement based on your research question. A research hypothesis is an educated prediction that provides an explanation for an observable (measurable) event or condition.

A problem statement is both a reiteration of the problem that the study will address and the justification for studying the problem.

4. Select a Research Design

Deciding what you will research will help to determine how you will design your research project.

Will it be qualitative or quantitative? What methodology and design will you choose? What methods - techniques and tools - will you use to collect, analyze, and interpret your data?

5. Carry Out the Research

Now you can finally conduct your research! For many, this is the most enjoyable part of the process; but, it's also the step that requires the greatest attention to detail to ensure that your research design and methods are followed accurately - to generate good data - and that the research is conducted ethically. 

6. Interpret Your Results

Once your experiment has concluded and/or data have been collected, it is time to analyze the data using methods determined by your research methodology and design. Next, you must interpret the results. It is important that your interpretetation is supported by the evidence. Avoid spurious conclusions of causality or correlation.

7. Report the Research Findings

The purpose of research is to share knowledge. Once your research has concluded, it is important to share your results. You might write an article for publication, prepare a white paper, or present your research at a conference either as part of a panel discussion or a poster presentation. 

8. Repeat

Research is an iterative process. New knowledge leads to more questions, further research, and the generation of more new knowledge

*********************************************************************************

Q2: Describe different types of research by method .Why and where we use these types (Descriptive, historical, and co relational research to discuss the educational phenomena?

Answer :

Research Methods/Types of Research:

Research can be classified in many different ways on the basis of the methodology of research, the knowledge it creates, the user group, the research problem it investigates etc.

Basic research

This research is conducted largely for the enhancement of knowledge, and is research which does not have immediate commercial potential. The research which is done for human welfare, animal welfare and plant kingdom welfare. It is called basic, pure, fundamental research. The main motivation here is to expand man's knowledge, not to create or invent something. According to Travers, “Basic Research is designed to add to an organized body of scientific knowledge and does not necessarily produce results of immediate practical value.” Such a research is time and cost intensive (Example: An experimental research that may not be or will be helpful in the human progress). It is used to solve a problem by adding to the field of application of a discipline.

Applied Research

Applied research is designed to solve practical problems of the modern world, rather than to acquire knowledge for knowledge's sake. The goal of applied research is to improve the human condition. It focuses on analysis and solving social and real life problems. This research is generally conducted on a large scale basis and is expensive. As such, it is often conducted with the support of some financing agency like the national government, public corporation, world bank, UNICEF, UGC, Etc. According to Hunt, “applied research is an investigation for ways of using scientific knowledge to solve practical problems” for example:- improve agriculture crop production, treat or cure a specific disease, improve the energy efficiency of homes, offices, how can communication among workers in large companies be improved.

Problem oriented research

Research is done by industry apex body for sorting out problems faced by all the companies. Eg:- WTO does problem oriented research for developing countries, in India agriculture and processed food export development authority (APEDA) conduct regular research for the benefit of agri-industry.

• As the name indicates, Problem identifying researches are undertaken to know the exact nature of problem that is required to be solved.
• Here, one clarification is needed when we use the term ‘Problem’, it is not a problem in true sense. It is usually a decision making dilemma or it is a need to tackle a particular business situation.
• It could be a difficulty or an opportunity. For e.g.:-Revenue of Mobile company has decreased by 25% in the last year. The cause of the problem can be any one of the following:
• Poor quality of the product. • Lack of continuous availability. • Not so effective advertising campaign. • High price. • Poor calibre / lack of motivation in sales people/marketing team. • Tough competition from imported brands. • Depressed economic conditions
• In the same case, suppose the prime cause of problem is poor advertising campaign & secondary cause is higher pricing. • To tackle the problem of poor advertising, we have to answer questions like, what can be the new advertising campaign, who can be the brand ambassador, which media, which channel, at what time & during which programme advertisements will be broadcast.

Problem solving

This type of research is done by an individual company for the problem faced by it. Marketing research and market research are the applied research. For eg:- videocon international conducts research to study customer satisfaction level, it will be problem solving research. In short, the main aim of problem solving research is to discover some solution for some pressing practical problem.

Quantitative Research

This research is based on numeric figures or numbers. Quantitative research aim to measure the quantity or amount and compares it with past records and tries to project for future period. In social sciences, “quantitative research refers to the systematic empirical investigation of quantitative properties and phenomena and their relationships”. The objective of quantitative research is to develop and employ mathematical models, theories or hypothesis pertaining to phenomena. The process of measurement is central to quantitative research because it provides fundamental connection between empirical observation and mathematical expression of quantitative relationships. Statistics is the most widely used branch of mathematics in quantitative research. Statistical methods are used extensively with in fields such as economics and commerce.

In sum, the research using the normative approach conducts why may be called quantitative research as the inferences from it are largely based on quantitative data. Moreover, objectivity is the primary guard so that the research may be replicated by others, if necessary.

Qualitative Research

Qualitative research presents a non-quantitative type of analysis. Qualitative research is collecting, analyzing and interpreting data by observing what people do and say. Qualitative research refers to the meanings, definitions, characteristics, symbols, metaphors, and description of things. Qualitative research is much more subjective and uses very different methods of collecting information,mainly individual, in-depth interviews and focus groups.

The nature of this type of research is exploratory and open ended. Small number of people are interviewed in depth and or a relatively small number of focus groups are conducted. Qualitative research can be further classified in the following type.

I. Phenomenology:-a form of research in which the researcher attempts to understand how one or more individuals experience a phenomenon. Eg:-we might interview 20 victims of bhopal tragedy.

II. Ethnography:- this type of research focuses on describing the culture of a group of people. A culture is the shared attributes, values, norms, practices, language, and material things of a group of people. Eg:-the researcher might decide to go and live with the tribal in Andaman island and study the culture and the educational practices.

III. Case study:-is a form of qualitative research that is focused on providing a detailed account of one or more cases. Eg:-we may study a classroom that was given a new curriculum for technology use.

IV. Grounded theory:- it is an inductive type of research,based or grounded in the observations of data from which it was developed; it uses a variety of data sources, including quantitative data, review of records, interviews, observation and surveys

V. Historical research:-it allows one to discuss past and present events in the context of the present condition, and allows one to reflect and provide possible answers to current issues and problems. Eg:-the lending pattern of business in the 19th century.

In addition to the above, we also have the descriptive research. Fundamental research, of which this is based on establishing various theories

Also the research is classified into:

1. Descriptive research
2. Analytical research
3. Fundamental research
4. Conceptual research
5. Empirical research
6. One time research or longitudinal research
7. Field-setting research or laboratory research or simulation research
8. Clinical or diagnostic research
9. Exploratory research
10. Historical research
11. Conclusion oriented research
12. Case study research
13. Short term research

Descriptive research is defined as a research method that describes the characteristics of the population or phenomenon that is being studied. This methodology focuses more on the “what” of the research subject rather than the “why” of the research subject.In other words, descriptive research primarily focuses on describing the nature of a demographic segment, without focusing on “why” a certain phenomenon occurs. In other words, it “describes” the subject of the research, without covering “why” it happens. For example, an apparel brand that wants to understand the fashion purchasing trends among New York buyers will conduct a demographic survey of this region, gather population data and then conduct descriptive research on this demographic segment. The research will then uncover details on “what is the purchasing pattern of New York buyers”, but not cover any investigative details on “why” the patterns exeunt. Because for the apparel brand trying to break into this market, understanding the nature of their market is the objective of the study.

Characteristics of Descriptive Research: The term descriptive research then, refers to research

questions, design of the research and data analysis that would be conducted on that topic. It is called an observational research method because none of the variables that are part of the research study are influenced in any capacity.

Some distinctive characteristics of descriptive research are:

Quantitative research: Descriptive research is a quantitative research method that attempts to collect

quantifiable information to be used for statistical analysis of the population sample. It is an popular market research tool that allows to collect and describe the nature of the demographic segment.

1. Uncontrolled variables: In descriptive research, none of the variables are influenced in any way. This uses observational methods to conduct the research. Hence, the nature of the variables or their behavior is not in the hands of the researcher.

2. Cross-sectional studies: Descriptive research is generally a cross-sectional study where different sections belonging to the same group are studied.

3. Basis for further research: The data collected and analyzed from descriptive research can then be further researched using different research techniques. The data also can help point towards the types of research methods are to be used for the subsequent research.

The 3 Basic Types of Descriptive Research Methods

One of the goals of science is description (other goals include prediction and explanation). Descriptive research methods are pretty much as they sound — they describe situations. They do not make accurate predictions, and they do not determine cause and effect.

There are three main types of descriptive methods: observational methods, case-study methods and survey methods. This article will briefly describe each of these methods, their advantages, and their drawbacks. This may help you better understand research findings, whether reported in the mainstream media, or when reading a research study on your own.

Observational Method

With the observational method animal and human behavior is closely observed. There are two main categories of the observational method — naturalistic observation and laboratory observation.

The biggest advantage of the naturalistic method of research is that researchers view participants in their natural environments. This leads to greater ecological validity than laboratory observation, proponents say. Ecological validity refers to the extent to which research can be used in real-life situations.Proponents of laboratory observation often suggest that due to more control in the laboratory, the results found when using laboratory observation are more meaningful than those obtained with naturalistic observation. Laboratory observations are usually less time-consuming and cheaper than naturalistic observations. Of course, both naturalistic and laboratory observation are important in regard to the advancement of scientific knowledge.

Case Study Method

Case study research involves an in-depth study of an individual or group of indviduals. Case studies often lead to testable hypotheses and allow us to study rare phenomena. Case studies should not be used to determine cause and effect, and they have limited use for making accurate predictions.

There are two serious problems with case studies — expectancy effects and atypical individuals. Expectancy effects include the experimenter’s underlying biases that might affect the actions taken while conducting research. These biases can lead to misrepresenting participants’ descriptions. Describing atypical individuals may lead to poor generalizations and detract from external validity.

Survey Method

In survey method research, participants answer questions administered through interviews or questionnaires. After participants answer the questions, researchers describe the responses given. In order for the survey to be both reliable and valid it is important that the questions are constructed properly. Questions should be written so they are clear and easy to comprehend.

Another consideration when designing questions is whether to include open-ended, closed-ended, partially open-ended, or rating-scale questions. Advantages and disadvantages can be found with each type: Open-ended questions allow for a greater variety of responses from participants but are difficult to analyze statistically because the data must be coded or reduced in some manner. Closed-ended questions are easy to analyze statistically, but they seriously limit the responses that participants can give. Many researchers prefer to use a Likert-type scale because it’s very easy to analyze statistically. In addition to the methods listed above some individuals also include qualitative (as a distinct method) and archival methods when discussing descriptive research methods.

It is important to emphasize that descriptive research methods can only describe a set of observations or the data collected. It cannot draw conclusions from that data about which way the relationship goes — Does A cause B,

or does B cause A?

Unfortunately, in many studies published today, researchers forget this fundamental limitation of their research and suggest their data can actually demonstrate or “suggest” causal relationships. Nothing could be further from the truth

CORRELATION RESEARCH

To carried out to help explain important human behaviours or to predict likely outcomes. Purposes of

correlational research Explanatory studies It is to clarify out understanding of important phenomena by identifying relationship among variables. Always investigate a number of variables they believe are related to a more complex variables such as motivation or learning. Types of correlational research.

Selecting a problem Choosing a sample Selecting or developing instrument Determining procedures Collecting and analyzing data Interpreting result Basic steps.

Teacher about to study the causes of the amount of descriptive behaviours display in class. Student having difficulty in mathematic subject. Teacher about to study the causes of student does not perform in the subject.

Example

What? Investigator attempt to determine the cause or consequences of differences that already exist between or among group of individuals. Sometimes viewed, along with correlational

Historical research

The searches had been carried out the next step was to build up a picture of the situation in each region for each of the three years using the “6 - I” model as a framework. This was done by combining the results of the searches ordered by category, sub-category and year for each of the two regions and the national situation. This data was used as a basis to describe developments in that region during 1985 to 2005. As with the first round of data collection further refinement took place during the writing up process, duplications and overlaps were identified and articles were reassigned to different categories as appropriate. The data collection process is summarised in Table 5. Stage Method Analysis First Round Interviews with significant Data coded using NVivo with figures working in each region. 6-I model used as overall conceptual framework. Second Round

Regional newspapers scanned Data coded using Access for relevant articles for years database with 6-I model used as 1985, 1995 and 2005. overall conceptual framework. National & regional reports Data used to supplement and produced by Government, confirm data from newspaper economic development bodies, articles. NGO’s and Statistics New Zealand collected for period from 1985 to 2005. Historical source material consists of primary and secondary sources. Historians select the events and people that they consider important. By doing so they don’t so much recreate the past as rediscover it, and to some extent colour it with their own set of value judgements. The historical researcher’s most important role is to choose reliable sources, in order to create reliable narratives about the past (Howell et al. 2001). There needs to be a systematic approach to gathering data, as collecting only the most compelling evidence can result in material that is unrepresentative (Wenger et al. 2000). Utilising the authoritative source only is not a wise approach. Evidence should be collected from a wide range of sources, each of which will have their own strengths and weaknesses (Tosh 2000). Any source material collected should be subjected to both external and internal criticism. The authenticity of the evidence is determined by external criticism, whereas credibility is established by internal criticism (Shafer 1980). The use of external criticism involves establishing whether a document can be traced back to the purported originator, establishing whether it is consistent with known facts, and studying the form of the document (Tosh 2000). Internal criticism consists of trying to establish the author’s meaning and making a judgement as to the inten tions and prejudices of the writer (Tosh 2000).

Context 2 criticism consists of trying to establish the author's meaning and making a judgement as to the intentions and prejudices of the writer (Tosh 2000). An overview of the two techniques is shown as . Regional newspapers are an authentic primary source. ...

Citations

• It easily leads to a distorted understanding of the subject matter and, perhaps, to a subjective attitude of superiority. Some believe this could be balanced with 'empathy' which would aid in imagining how events were experienced, and would also color history more appealing and interesting to others (cf.Toland and Yoong 2013;LévesqueLévesque 2008, Mason et al. 1997a). Historical empathy was argued by historians in the midnineteenth century: however, answers/facts/evidence are not sought from empathy but from historical sources. ...

... An example of this type of focusing question can be found in Jaana Porra, Rudy Hirschheim and Michael S. Parks (2006): " What significant changes did the Texaco IT function face over its existence? " However, these types of open-ended questions often provide descriptions only and, ultimately, do not satisfy the historian, whose main task is to explain past events and development and whose main focus is the question of Why (see alsoHepsø et al. 2009;Toland and Yoong 2013;Bryant et al. 2013). The historian looks after the causes of events, the change that occurred, and the many consequences, both intended and unintended. ... ... Toland and Yoong (2013) comment that an important technique of historical research is to " listen for silences, " but, as a matter of fact, an argument from silence—argumentum ex silentio—is generally regarded as unreliable by historians. IS historians need to be aware of the questionable credibility of some sources (Toland and Yoong 2013). The credibility of a source depends on which questions are about to be addressed.

*********************************************************************************

Q Discuss the concept of educational research ,also examine the need and importance of research in education ?

Answer: 

Research

Research is an in depth inquiry in to a problem which need an amicable solution. Every invention in the world happens as a result of a scientific enquiry. See the example of Isaac Newton when the apple falls on his head, he started the question with why? He searched for truth, reason or discover to new knowledge. He applied commonsense in his enquiry. The continuous search resulted in solving his problem. Finally he built a theory named as Gravitation force theory with empirically proved body of knowledge. Hence research can be termed as the search for truth or discovery of new things or builds body of knowledge regarding a phenomenon. Research is a systematic, scientific, objective activity, which includes the collection relevant information, and careful analysis of data, recording and reporting of valid conclusion, that may lead to creation of new knowledge, development of theory, principles, and generalization. The developed theory, Knowledge, principles or generalization may help the researcher or concerned authority to predict occurrences of certain possible events

and thereby make possible to ultimate control of unwanted events. Research also means that the process of testing the validity of assumptions and formulated hypotheses. When we come to the educational research it is the process of scientific inquiry to solve the problems of educational sector of a country. It includes theoretical elaboration, quality enhancement matters, policy draft and implication, classroom dimension and so forth. It involves a continuous enquiry in search of knowledge, advancement, problem solving methodology and an attempt to realize the truth from an objective point of view based on factual understanding and systematic study.

Scope Educational Research

Education is considered as a vital tool for social as well as national development. It has significant role in evaluating the human development of a country. When we assessing the development of a person, society, community or a Nation, the educational attributes, such as educational qualifications, number of educated person in the society or community, number of educational institution in the state or country (elementary, secondary, higher, professional educational sector) with respects to its population, rate of enrollment, retention, quality of education provided, equity and equality for educational opportunity and so forth are considered as the prime criteria for consideration. Hence every nation in the world has been giving emphasis to the development educational sector of their country. Many innovative programmes and projects are preparing by the policy makers as well as the academic bodies across the world to improve their educational quantity as well as the quality.. Educational Researches are the main input as well as the output to bring such change in the educational sector. Research findings identify the shortcomings, strength and weakness of the educational sector of the country and it recommends implementing such and such programme for the development of their educational sector. Educational research also helps to evaluate the effectiveness as well as the impact of particular programmes and project which has been undertaken by any governmental or non governmental agencies. Hence the breadth and width of the educational research is unlimited. It has a scope to conduct research in any area of education which has a chance to contribute knowledge for the development of education of a society, community and Nation as well.

Purpose of Educational Research

The Educational research has enormous purposes. Some important purposes are presented as  following.

• To identify truth regarding Enrolment, retention, dropout, quality of Education and so forth
• To build new knowledge regarding the methodology, pedagogy or other core subject areas
• Adding of existing stock of knowledge related to educational field
• To solve a problem related to classroom, institution, administrative level, policy level
• Invention of new teaching methods, curriculum transaction strategies, effective grouping
• technique and so forth
• Realizing the exact problem of educational sector
• Assess the Effect of New methodology of teaching
• Identify and assess the ICT enabled classroom and teaching
• To understand the teachers knowledge on latest evaluation techniques
• To identify the hindrances to achieve universalization of education

Characteristics of a good research

While analyzing the discussions of eminent educationalists and social scientists, we can draw the following characteristics of a good research.

1. Research is directed towards the solution of a problem
2. Research is a continuous enquiry in search of knowledge
3. Research emphasis the development of generalization, principles, theories
4. Research is based upon observable experiences and empirical evidences
5. Research rejects revelation and dogmas as methods of establishing knowledge
6. Research employs in depth review of related literature
7. Research depends on valid and reliable data gathering procedure
8. Research demands accurate observations and descriptions
9. Research applies systematic and scientific procedure for the study
10. Research involves gathering of new data from first hand sources (primary) or existing data secondary sources) for a new purposes
11. Research is based on carefully designed procedure with rigorous analysis
12. Research requires expertise
13. Research is a objective, logical process and eliminate personal bias
14. Research involve the quest for answer to unsolved problems
15. Possibility for Replication
16. Research is characterized by patient and unhurried activity
17. Research is carefully recorded and reported
18. Research sometimes required courage 
19. Quantitative Research involves hypotheses testing using suitable statistical techniques
20. Qualitative Research involve objective thick description on thin data

Replication

Research is considered as process of searching for new knowledge. However, there will be some administrative or academic urgency to deliberately repeat the previous study using same procedure with another sample, in a new setting and at different time. This process is called replication. It is the fusion of words of repetition and duplication. Replication is used to conform the validity of the conclusion drawn by the previous studies which are under questioned from different academic as well as political corner. Besides, replication is also necessary to understand the trend, progress, development among generations in particular area. For example, a researcher can replicate the study conducted by a researcher on the problem of ICT awareness and use among the secondary school teachers. The result may evidence that what progress has been made in the areas of ICT among the

secondary school teachers while the time has passed after the earlier study.

Importance :

Educational research is important because it is conducted in order to provide trustworthy information regarding educational problems and their solutions. There are many things that need to be considered when looking at what educational research is for example some thought needs to be put into looking at current paradigms, what counts as evidence in educational research, maintaining quality, and the role of peer review in validating new knowledge in educational research.

There are many different approaches to educational research which are shaped by many different research paradigms. Koul (2008) states that “the various research paradigms have different criteria for ontology and epistemology to maintain quality standards. The ontology and epistemology of a research paradigm influence researchers applying the quality standards, methodology and methods (para. 1).

What is a Paradigm:

The use of this fashionable word came about from the philosopher of science, Thomas Kuhn. The word comes from the Greek work paradeigma which translates literally as ‘pattern’. It is used in social science to describe an entire way of looking at the world (Davidson & Tolich, 1999). It can be viewed as a basic set of beliefs held by an individual that represent a worldview which defines “the nature of the “world”, the individual’s place in it and the range of possible relationships to that world and its parts” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 200) A paradigm relates to a particular set of philosophical assumptions about what the world is made of and how it works. One way to consider a paradigm is as a collection of ontological and epistemological assumptions (Davidson & Tolich, 1999). Inquiry paradigms define for inquirers what it is they are about, and what falls within and outside the limits of legitimate inquiry. (http://prk.dreamwidth.org/60977.html)

Examining paradigms define for inquirers what paradigms are about and what fall within in and outside the limits of that paradigm?

Denzin and Lincon (1998) state that there are three fundamental questions that need to be addressed in order to complete research. These questions are; the epistemological question, the ontological question, and the methodological question it is important to note that however one answers a question it effects how they answer the other two. The epistemological question is asking what the form and nature of reality is and, what can be known about it? Denzin and Lincoln (1998) uses the example of if a ‘real’ world is assumed, then what can be known about it are “how things really are” or “how things really work” where as other questions like matters of aesthetic or moral significance, fall outside the realm of legitimate scientific inquiry. (pp. 201)

Questions for analysing paradigms

Research paradigms

Positivism

Epistemological questions

Nature of knowledge

Knowledge can be described in a systematic way

Knowledge consists of verified hypotheses that can be regarded as facts or laws.

Probabilistic – i.e. holds true for large groups of people or occurs in many situations

Knowledge is accurate and certain

Role of theory

Theories are:

Normative

Present ‘models’

General propositions explaining causal relationships between variables

Theory building/testing

Postulate a theories that can be tested in order to confirm or reject

Prove a theory from observable phenomena / behaviour

Test theories in a controlled setting, empirically supporting or falsifying hypotheses through process  of experimentation

Role of research

Uncover reality i.e. natural laws

Scientifically explain / describe, predict and control phenomena

Research findings are true if:

Can be observed an measured

Can be replicated and are generalizable

Role of common sense

None – only deductive reasoning

(Voce, 2004 pp. ??)

The Ontological Question:

Ontology is defined by … as…

What is the nature of the relationship between the knower or would be knower and what can be known? Denzin & Lincoln (1998) continue with their example of reality being assumed because one has already answered the epistolocial question the posture of the knower must be one of objective detachment or value freedom in order to discover these thing….. What is the nature of the relationship between the knower or would be knower and what can be known? The

answer that can be given to this question is constrained by the answer already given to the ontological question; that is, not just any relationship can now be postulated. So if, for example, a “real” reality is assumed, then the posture of the knower must be one of objective detachment or value freedom in order to discover “how things really are” and “how things really work” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 201).

Questions for analysing paradigms

Research paradigms

Positivism

Ontological

Questions

Nature of reality

An objective, true reality exists which is governed by unchangeable natural cause-effect laws

Consists of stable pre-existing patterns or order that can be discovered

Reality is not time- nor context-bound

Reality can be generalised

Nature of human beings

Rational

Shaped by external factors (same cause has the same effect on everyone) i.e. mechanical model / behaviourist approach. Under certain conditions people will probably engage in a specified behaviour (Voce, 2004)

The Methodological Question:

Methodology is defined by the free dictionary as “a body of practices, procedures, and rules used by those who work in a discipline or engage in an inquiry; a set of working methods”

Therefore the methodological question surrounds how the inquirer goes about finding out what they believe can be known? Depending on what answers have already been given to the above questions they will constrain the answer to this one, whether the methods are qualitative or quantitave. “The methodological question cannot be reduced to a question of methods; methods must be fitted to a predetermined methodology” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 201)

How can the inquirer (would be knower) go about finding out whatever he or she believes can be known? The answer that can be given to this question in constrained by answers already given to the first two questions; that is, not just any methodology is appropriate. For example, a “real” reality pursued by an “objective” inquirer mandates control of possible confounding factors, whether the methods are qualitative (e.g. observational) or quantitative (e.g. analysis of covariance). The methodological question cannot be reduced to a question of methods; methods must be fitted to a predetermined methodology (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 201).

Questions for analysing paradigms

Research paradigms

Positivism

Methodological questions

Role of researcher

Objective, independent from the subject

Investigator often controls the investigated

Role of values

Science is value-free

Values have no place in research – must eliminate all bias

Methods

Empirical

Structured and replicable observation

Quantification / measurement

Experimental – directly manipulate variables and observe

Type of studies

Survey studies

Verification of hypotheses

Statistical analysis

Quantitative descriptive studies

What is Positivism:

“Knowledge is based not on unchallengeable, rock-solid foundations, but rather upon human conjectures” (Phillips & Burbules, 2000).

Positivism is an epistemological perception which states that only knowledge which is based on sensory experience and positive verification is authentic knowledge. More simply worded, positivism is the view that all true knowledge is scientific, and that all things are ultimately measureable.

Positivism emerged from the success of the scientific approach in natural sciences such as physics, chemistry, and biology. The impetus for this came from the overwhelming success of science in understanding and solving problems in the natural world.

The ontology of positivism is realism; an apprehend able reality that is assumed to exist, driven by immutable natural laws and mechanisms. Knowledge of the “ways things are” is conventionally summarised in the form of time- and context-free generalizations, some of which take the form of cause-effect laws. Research can, in principle, converge on the “true” state of affairs. The basic posture of the paradigm is argued to be both reductionist and deterministic (Hesse, 1980, cited in Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 204). The epistemology of positivism is dualist and objectivist; meaning the investigator and the investigated “object” are assumed to be independent entities, and the investigator to be capable of studying the object without influencing it or being influenced by it. When influence in either direction (threats to validity) is recognised, or even suspected, various strategies are followed to reduce or eliminate it. Inquiry takes place as through a oneway

mirror. Values biases are prevented from influencing outcomes, so long as the prescribed procedures are rigorously followed. Replicable findings are, in fact, “true” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 204).

The methodology of positivism is experimental and manipulative. Questions and/or hypotheses are stated in propositional form and subjected to empirical tests to verify them; possible confounding conditions must be carefully controlled (manipulated) to prevent outcomes from being improperly influenced (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 204).

Originally conceptualised by Auguste Comte in the early 19th Century (Pickering, 1993), positivism has been greatly criticised, including by positivist themselves. A number of the concerns raised have influenced the epistemological position taken within this research; particularly that knowledge is a social variable, knowing one is the subject of a study, changes in one’s behaviour, and the notion of subjectivity and value orientation.

What is Social Construction of Reality/ Post-Positivism:

The Social Construction Reality/ Post-positivism paradigm include the following paradigms: interpretive, critical, feminist, and postmodern paradigm. I think interpretive paradigm is the paradigm that most education research is based on at the University of Waikato. The social construction of reality assumes that knowledge is subjective and unique therefore researchers

undertake “systematic and painstaking analysis of social episodes” (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2007, pp. 19). This is a less reductionist approach to research recognizing the importance of context and aiming to represent how participants view their world. Rather than seeking generalisations this paradigm accepts that “reality is multilayered and complex” (Cohen et al, 2007, pp. 21) therefore data collected are open to multiple interpretations. This approach is more speculative based on the assumption that theory is emergent therefore the researcher should not be seeking evidence purely to support a predetermined hypothesis.

Post-positivism is a meta-theoretical stance that analyses and adjusts positivism in light of the criticisms which positivism, as a scientific paradigm, has received. Post-positivism offers primary amendments to the positivist paradigm. Firstly, that the absolute separation of the knower and the known is not assumed; and secondly, that a single, shared reality which excludes all others is not assumed to be a true basis for reasoning. It is critical to note that post-positivism is not a rejection of the scientific paradigm, but seeks to amend the criticisms associated with positivism (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Zammito, 2004).

Post-positivism states that knowledge is based not on unchallengeable, rock-solid foundations, but rather on human conjectures (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Zammito, 2004). Epistemologically speaking post-positivism works on the position that facts and law deduced through research are probably true (Guba & Lincoln, 2005) in light of evidence provided (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Zammito, 2004). Post-positivism of this type is common place in social science for conceptual and practical reasons (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Zammito, 2004).

What are the differences between the two Meta-Paradigms:

Based on the literature, the most fundamental differences between both paradigms are how they search for the truth and define validity and reliability. The positivist paradigm seeks and finds them in a (perceived) value free and objective evidence based world and the constructivists in a subjective, contextual and interpretive world

Research as creating new knowledge:

Positivism and Post-positivism create knowledge by a process of accretion, with each fact (or probable fact) serving as a kind of building block that, when placed into its proper niche, adds to the growing “edifice of knowledge”. When the facts take the form of generalisation or cause-effect linkages, they may be used most efficiently for prediction and control. Generalisations may then be made, with predicable confidence, to a population of settings (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 212).

What counts as evidence in Educational Research:

What counts as evidence in educational research depends on what is being asked. If one is looking at

effectiveness of direct impact then there would be a different type of key evidence compared to if the question was in relation to the nature of a problem, or how some intervention worked or how a naturally occurring process takes place. Basically the kinds of evidence that will count will depend on the nature of the proposition. Anyone that is interested in the ‘evidence’ needs to remember that the evidence is always connected to what was being asked or the proposition. One cannot take for granted that it is true one needs to still ask: how is the connection made possible? And what values, assumptions and conventions are behind that kind of connection?

Maintaining quality in Educational Research:

The quality standards related to the post/positivist paradigm are validity and reliability. This is because the focus of this is to discover the ‘truth’ using empirical investigation. Anderson and Arsenault (1998) write that “validity refers to the extent to which what we measure reflects what we expected to measure [which] has two forms: internal and external (pp. 257). Related to the research, the term internal validity refers to how the findings meet the expected results. While, external validity refers to being able to generalise the findings to other situations and contexts. Therefore, an experiment is valid if the results are appropriate to the manipulated independent variable and if they are able to be generalised to individuals or contexts other than the experiment’s setting (Gay & Airasian 2000, pp. 371).

Because the focus of this paradigm is to find out the ‘truth’, reliability is an important indicator for the consistency of the research findings. Anderson and Arsenault (1998) state that “reliability refers to the extent that an instrument will yield the same results each time it is administered” (pp. 256) an example of this is, if you were to administer a survey the larger the source of the data you collect the more it will be reliable as the results become more generalised the more it will give the same results the next time you did it.

Furthermore, trustworthiness is a foundational criteria to maintaining quality. Trustworthiness can be broken down into four quality standards these being, credibility using multiple methods and perspectives and member checking, transferablility by providing rich data and thick descriptions, dependability by having a detailed audit trail, and comformability can be achieved by giving readers clear track of data and interpretations. (Anderson and Arsenault 1998)

Peer Review….

Research shows the benefits of Peer review doesn’t only improve the language that authors use and they way their ideas are presented, but also alerts them to statistical and scientific errors in their research, inappropriate methodology, or accuracies in referencing which they can then correct before the publication. (Taylor and Francis Author Services, 2010) An example of this is when one submits his/her work to an international journal for anonymous refereeing by unknown peers, they read they article critically and then suggest for it to be accepted, rejected, or most often revised and improved before it is published. Without this external ‘seal of approval’ many scientists “would consider any results as preliminary, potentially flawed” (Gannon, 2001).:

Educational research with its characteristics is influenced by four major paradigms. Each paradigm has its own epistemology, ontology, and quality standards which influence the researchers to find the truth and see the reality. The important point is that knowing the nature of each paradigm which can help the researchers to conduct their research process. Researchers can conduct the research within and across paradigms which is called multi-paradigmatic research paradigms (Taylor, 2008).

The nature of educational research is analogous with the nature of research itself, which is systematic, reliable and valid to find the “truth”, investigates knowledge, and solves problems. Moreover, educational research process involves steps to collect the information in order to investigate problems and knowledge. However, the educational research is more complex because it can use various approaches and strategies to solve problems in educational setting. It also can involve many disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, behaviour, and history. In addition, educational research is important because of contributing knowledge development, practical improvement, and policy information. Therefore, educators can use those research findings to improve their competences and teaching and learning process (Yulirahmawati, 2008).

*********************************************************************************

Q.4 What is experiment and how you will conduct experimental research ,what will be the threats to internel and externel validity to minimize these threats ?

Answer : 

Non-Experimental & Experimental Research

Alright! It's time to learn something using research by … performing a non-experimental study?

Wait, wait, and wait! Is it possible to have a non-experimental study? Is that sort of like sugar free candy? Is it something that you're supposed to have that is replaced by something that makes you scratch your head? Before we discuss research designs, though, you need a brief walkthrough of some of the terms I am going to throw at you.

A predictor variable is the portion of the experiment that is being manipulated to see if it has an effect on the dependent variable. For example, do people eat more Gouda or cheddar cheese? The predictor variable in this is the type of cheese. Now, every time you eat cheese, you'll think about predictor variables. When I say subjects, I just mean the people in the experiment or the people being studied.

Experimental research is when a researcher is able to manipulate the predictor variable and subjects to identify a cause-and-effect relationship. This typically requires the research to be conducted in a lab, with one group being placed in an experimental group, or the ones being manipulated, while the other is placed in a placebo group, or inert condition or non-manipulated group. A laboratory-based experiment gives a high level of control and reliability.

Non-experimental research is the label given to a study when a researcher cannot control, manipulate or alter the predictor variable or subjects, but instead, relies on interpretation, observation or interactions to come to a conclusion. Typically, this means the non-experimental researcher must rely on correlations, surveys or case studies, and cannot demonstrate a true cause-and-effect relationship. Non-experimental research tends to have a high level of external validity, meaning it can be generalized to a larger population Experimental and non-experimental research design

By The U.S. Food and Drug Administration [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Experimental research design Experimental research designs are based on a clear hypothesis, the purpose of the research is to confirm or refute the validity of the hypothesis. Experimental research designs have an independent variable, a dependent variable, and a control group. Most of the experiments are conducted in a laboratory in a controlled environment. The purpose of the experiment is to find out the causation and experimental studies are causal studies. These studies answer what, why and even how questions in the research. The experimenter can manipulate the variables and he has a control group and a placebo. The control group receives the treatment that

the experimenter wants to test and the placebo group is tested without any treatment. The change in the results of both groups are compared. The experimenter repeats the test in the same environment more than one time to get most valid results. There are basically three different types of experiments: controlled experiments, quasi experiments, and field experiments.

Methodology

The experimenter determines two groups to perform an experiment: one group is called the experimental group and the other group is called a placebo group. The experimental group gets the treatment and the placebo does not get any treatment. The experimental group is similar to the control group except that the control group does not get any treatment while the experimental group gets the treatment. The experimenter repeats the test twice or thrice to increase the validity of the results.

Non-experimental research design

Non-experimental research designs are carried out in natural settings, it does not involve manipulation of the situation, event, circumstances or people. Survey, case studies, correlational studies comparative studies and descriptive studies are some of the examples of non-experimental research design. Longitudinal studies are also non-experimental research and the purpose of these studies is to study a situation, people or phenomenon over a period of time to observe the change.

A correlation can be established using non-experimental research design but causation cannot be established. To establish causation, the researcher should be able to say that the result is the outcome of the observed variable and not something else. They do not have a control group and the research design is highly flexible. Due to the absence of the control group the researcher cannot ascertain that the final results are the direct effect of the variable that has been studied. The non-experimental research design study the phenomenon, people or situation in a natural setting without manipulating it, therefore, the findings can be applied to a wide audience.

Methodology

In a non-experimental research, the researcher does not manipulate the variables to be tested and therefore he cannot ascertain the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable. A causation is established in some of the non experimental studies but not in all of them. The causation is established by determining that a certain variable has an impact on another variable. It can also compare the results of two or more groups or people on one or more variables

Steps in Experimental Research

The basic steps involved in conducting experimental research will be presented in this module.

Learning Objectives:

• List the steps that are used in conducting experimental research.
• Describe each step involved in the process.

The following YouTube vide, Experimental Design, offers a visual representation of the process of conducting experimental research and serves as introduction to the steps discussed in this module.

The following list of steps explains the process of conducting experimental research in more detail. Researchers should follow these steps in order to ensure the integrity of the process.

1. Select a topic. This involves simply identifying an area of interest or general subject.
2. Identify the research problem. Given the topic or subject, the researcher must now identify specific problems or questions that relate to the subject. The researcher may be familiar with subject and may already know the problem they want to research. If the researcher is new to the topic, it may be helpful to examine literature and previous studies, as well as talk to other researchers. The problem selected should be important to the field and be of significance to others in the discipline.
3. Conduct a literature search. Once the research problem is identified, a literature search should be conducted before proceeding to design the experiment. It is helpful to know what studies have been performed, the designs, the instruments used, the procedures and the findings. This information will guide the researcher and help them create a project that extends or compliments existing research.
4. Construct a hypothesis. In this step, the researcher states the research question as a hypothesis.  This provides the basis for all other decisions in the process and therefore, it is a critical step.
5. Determine the design of the research. The researcher should review the hypothesis and verify that an experimental design is the appropriate research design needed to answer the question. Additional information regarding different types of experimental research design will be covered in the next module.
6. Determine the research methods. In this step, the researcher will identify and plan the details necessary to conduct the research. This includes identifying the test subjects, materials, data collection instruments and methods, and the procedures for the conducting the experiment.
7. Conduct the research and test the hypothesis. The experimental procedures will be carried out in this phase.
8. Analyze the data. Experimental research data lends itself to a variety of potential statistical analyses. The appropriate analysis is determined by the research question and the type of data.
9. Formulate conclusions. Review the data and determine if it confirms or disproves the hypothesis.

Method Advantages Disadvantages

Survey

Advantages: Many people can be included. If given to a random sample of the population, a survey’s results can be generalized to the population.

Disadvantages:Large surveys are expensive and time consuming. Although much information is gathered, this information is relatively superficial.

Experiments

Advantages: If random assignment is used, experiments provide fairly convincing

data on cause and effect. 

Disadvantages:Because experiments do not involve random samples of the population and most often involve college students, their results cannot readily be generalized to the population.

Observation (field research)

Advantages: Observational studies may provide rich, detailed information about the people who are observed.

Disadvantages:Because observation studies do not involve random samples of the population, their results cannot readily be generalized to the population. 

Existing data

Advantages: Because existing data have already been gathered, the researcher does not

have to spend the time and money to gather data.

Disadvantages:The data set that is being analyzed may not contain data on all the variables in which a sociologist is interested or may contain data on variables that are not measured in ways the sociologist prefers.

Surveys

The survey is the most common method by which sociologists gather their data. The Gallup poll is perhaps the most well-known example of a survey and, like all surveys, gathers its data with the help of a questionnaire that is given to a group of respondents. The Gallup poll is an example of a survey conducted by a private organization, but sociologists do their own surveys, as does the government and many organizations in addition to Gallup. Many surveys are administered to respondents who are randomly chosen and thus constitute a random sample. In a random sample, everyone in the population (whether it be the whole US population or just the population of a state or city, all the college students in a state or city or all the students at just one college, etc.) has the same chance of being included in the survey. The beauty of a random sample is that it allows us to generalize the results of the sample to the population from which the sample comes. This means that we can be fairly sure of the behavior and attitudes of the whole US population by knowing the behavior and

attitudes of just four hundred people randomly chosen from that population.

Some surveys are face-to-face surveys, in which interviewers meet with respondents to ask them questions. This type of survey can yield much information, because interviewers typically will spend at least an hour asking their questions, and a high response rate (the percentage of all people in the sample who agree to be interviewed), which is important to be able to generalize the survey’s results to the entire population. On the downside, this type of survey can be very expensive and time consuming to conduct.

Because of these drawbacks, sociologists and other researchers have turned to telephone surveys. Most Gallup polls are conducted over the telephone. Computers do random-digit dialing, which results in a random sample of all telephone numbers being selected. Although the response rate and the number of questions asked are both lower than in face-to-face surveys (people can just hang up the phone at the outset or let their answering machine take the call), the ease and low expense of telephone surveys are making them increasingly popular. Surveys done over the Internet are also becoming more popular, as they can reach many people at very low expense. A major problem with web surveys is that their results cannot necessarily be generalized to the entire population because not everyone has access to the Internet.

Surveys are used in the study of social problems to gather information about the behavior and attitudes of people regarding one or more problems. For example, many surveys ask people about their use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs or about their experiences of being unemployed or in poor health. Many of the chapters in this book will present evidence gathered by surveys carried out by sociologists and other social scientists, various governmental agencies, and private research and public interest firms. 

Experiments

Experiments are the primary form of research in the natural and physical sciences, but in the social sciences they are for the most part found only in psychology. Some sociologists still use experiments, however, and they remain a powerful tool of social research.

The major advantage of experiments, whether they are done in the natural and physical sciences or in the social sciences, is that the researcher can be fairly sure of a cause-and-effect relationship because of the way the experiment is set up. Although many different experimental designs exist, the typical experiment consists of an experimental group and a control group, with subjects randomly assigned to either group. The researcher does something to the experimental group that is not done to the control group. If the two groups differ later in some variable, then it is safe to say that the condition to which the experimental group was subjected was responsible

for the difference that resulted.

Most experiments take place in the laboratory, which for psychologists may be a room with a one-way mirror, but some experiments occur in the field, or in a natural setting (field experiments). In Minneapolis, Minnesota, in the early 1980s, sociologists were involved in a much-discussed field experiment sponsored by the federal government. The researchers wanted to see whether arresting men for domestic violence made it less likely that they would commit such violence again. To test this hypothesis, the researchers had police do one of the following after arriving at the scene of a domestic dispute: They either arrested the suspect, separated him from his wife or partner for several hours, or warned him to stop but did not arrest or separate him. The researchers then determined the percentage of men in each group who committed repeated domestic violence during the next six months and found that those who were arrested had the lowest rate of recidivism, or repeat offending

(Sherman & Berk, 1984). This finding led many jurisdictions across the United States to adopt a policy of mandatory arrest for domestic violence suspects. However, replications of the Minneapolis experiment in other cities found that arrest sometimes reduced recidivism for domestic violence but also sometimes increased it, depending on which city was being studied and on certain characteristics of the suspects, including whether they were employed at the time of their arrest (Sherman, 1992).

As the Minneapolis study suggests, perhaps the most important problem with experiments is that their results are not generalizable beyond the specific subjects studied. The subjects in most psychology experiments, for example, are college students, who obviously are not typical of average Americans: They are younger, more educated, and more likely to be middle class. Despite this problem, experiments in psychology and other social sciences have given us very valuable insights into the sources of attitudes and behavior. Scholars of social problems are increasingly using field experiments to study the effectiveness of various policies and programs aimed at addressing social problems. We will examine the results of several such experiments in the chapters ahead.

Observational Studies

Observational research, also called field research, is a staple of sociology. Sociologists have long gone into the field to observe people and social settings, and the result has been many rich descriptions and analyses of behavior in juvenile gangs, bars, urban street corners, and even whole communities.

Observational studies consist of both participant observation and nonparticipant observation. Their names describe how they differ. In participant observation, the researcher is part of the group that she or he is studying, spends time with the group, and might even live with people in the group. Several classical social problems studies of this type exist, many of them involving people in urban neighborhoods (Liebow, 1967; Liebow, 1993; Whyte, 1943). In nonparticipant observation, the researcher observes a group of people but does not otherwise interact with them. If you went to your local shopping mall to observe, say, whether people walking with children looked happier than people without children, you would be engaging in nonparticipant observation.

Similar to experiments, observational studies cannot automatically be generalized to other settings or members of the population. But in many ways they provide a richer account of people’s lives than surveys do, and they remain an important method of research on social problems.

Existing Data

Sometimes sociologists do not gather their own data but instead analyze existing data that someone else has gathered. The US Census Bureau, for example, gathers data on all kinds of areas relevant to the lives of Americans, and many sociologists analyze census data on such social problems as poverty, unemployment, and illness. Sociologists interested in crime and the criminal justice system may analyze data from court records, while medical sociologists often analyze data from patient records at hospitals. Analysis of existing data such as these is called secondary data analysis. Its advantage to sociologists is that someone else has already spent the time and money to gather the data. A disadvantage is that the data set being analyzed may not contain data on all the topics in which a sociologist may be interested or may contain data on topics that are not measured in ways the sociologist might prefer.

The Scientific Method and Objectivity

This section began by stressing the need for sound research in the study of social problems. But what are the elements of sound research? At a minimum, such research should follow the rules of the scientific method. As you probably learned in high school and/or college science classes, these rules—formulating hypotheses, gathering and testing data, drawing conclusions, and so forth—help guarantee that research yields the most accurate and reliable conclusions possible.

An overriding principle of the scientific method is that research should be conducted as objectivelyas possible. Researchers are often passionate about their work, but they must take care not to let the findings they expect and even hope to uncover affect how they do their research. This in turn means that they must not conduct their research in a manner that helps achieve the results they expect to find. Such bias can happen unconsciously, and the scientific method helps reduce the potential for this bias as much as possible.

This potential is arguably greater in the social sciences than in the natural and physical sciences. The political views of chemists and physicists typically do not affect how an experiment is performed and how the outcome of the experiment is interpreted. In contrast, researchers in the social sciences, and perhaps particularly insociology, often have strong feelings about the topics they are studying. Their social and political beliefs may thus influence how they perform their research on these topics and how they interpret the results of this research. Following the scientific method helps reduce this possible influence.

*********************************************************************************

Q.5 Define descriptive research and what are the major forms? Strengthen your answer with the example of Case Studies, Casual Comparative studies and correlation

Answer :

 Descriptive research is defined as a research method that describes the characteristics of the population or phenomenon that is being studied. This methodology focuses more on the “what” of the research subject rather than the “why” of the research subject.In other words, descriptive research primarily focuses on describing the nature of a demographic segment, without focusing on “why” a certain phenomenon occurs. In other words, it “describes” the subject of the research, without covering “why” it happens. For example, an apparel brand that wants to understand the fashion purchasing trends among New York buyers will conduct a demographic survey of this region, gather population data and then conduct descriptive research on this demographic segment. The research will then uncover details on “what is the purchasing pattern of New York buyers”, but not cover any investigative details on “why” the patterns exeunt. Because for the apparel brand trying to break into this market, understanding the nature of their market is the objective of the study.

Characteristics of Descriptive Research: The term descriptive research then, refers to research questions, design of the research and data analysis that would be conducted on that topic. It is called an observational research method because none of the variables that are part of the research study are influenced in any capacity.

Some distinctive characteristics of descriptive research are:

Quantitative research: Descriptive research is a quantitative research method that attempts to collect

quantifiable information to be used for statistical analysis of the population sample. It is an popular market research tool that allows to collect and describe the nature of the demographic segment.

4. Uncontrolled variables: In descriptive research, none of the variables are influenced in any way. This uses observational methods to conduct the research. Hence, the nature of the variables or their behavior is not in the hands of the researcher.

5. Cross-sectional studies: Descriptive research is generally a cross-sectional study where different sections belonging to the same group are studied.

6. Basis for further research: The data collected and analyzed from descriptive research can then be further researched using different research techniques. The data also can help point towards the types of research methods are to be used for the subsequent research.

The 3 Basic Types of Descriptive Research Methods

One of the goals of science is description (other goals include prediction and explanation). Descriptive research methods are pretty much as they sound — they describesituations. They do not make accurate predictions, and they do not determine cause and effect.

There are three main types of descriptive methods: observational methods, case-study methods and survey methods. This article will briefly describe each of these methods, their advantages, and their drawbacks. This may help you better understand research findings, whether reported in the mainstream media, or when reading a research study on your own.

Observational Method

With the observational method animal and human behavior is closely observed. There are two main categories of the observational method — naturalistic observation and laboratory observation.

The biggest advantage of the naturalistic method of research is that researchers view participants in their natural environments. This leads to greater ecological validity than laboratory observation, proponents say. Ecological validity refers to the extent to which research can be used in real-life situations. Proponents of laboratory observation often suggest that due to more control in the laboratory, the results found when using laboratory observation are more meaningful than those obtained with naturalistic observation.

Laboratory observations are usually less time-consuming and cheaper than naturalistic observations. Of course, both naturalistic and laboratory observation are important in regard to the advancement of scientific knowledge.

Case Study Method

Case study research involves an in-depth study of an individual or group of indviduals. Case studies often lead to testable hypotheses and allow us to study rare phenomena. Case studies should not be used to determine cause and effect, and they have limited use for making accurate predictions.

There are two serious problems with case studies — expectancy effects and atypical individuals. Expectancy effects include the experimenter’s underlying biases that might affect the actions taken while conducting research. These biases can lead to misrepresenting participants’ descriptions. Describing atypical individuals may lead to poor generalizations and detract from external validity.

Survey Method

In survey method research, participants answer questions administered through interviews or questionnaires. After participants answer the questions, researchers describe the responses given. In order for the survey to be both reliable and valid it is important that the questions are constructed properly. Questions should be written so they are clear and easy to comprehend.

Another consideration when designing questions is whether to include open-ended, closed-ended, partially open-ended, or rating-scale questions. Advantages and disadvantages can be found with each type: Open-ended questions allow for a greater variety of responses from participants but are difficult to analyze statistically because the data must be coded or reduced in some manner. Closed-ended questions are easy to analyze statistically, but they seriously limit the responses that participants can give. Many researchers prefer to use a Likert-type scale because it’s very easy to analyze statistically.

In addition to the methods listed above some individuals also include qualitative (as a distinct method) and archival methods when discussing descriptive research methods.

It is important to emphasize that descriptive research methods can only describe a set of observations or the data collected. It cannot draw conclusions from that data about which way the relationship goes — Does A cause B,

or does B cause A?

Unfortunately, in many studies published today, researchers forget this fundamental limitation of their research and suggest their data can actually demonstrate or “suggest” causal relationships. Nothing could be further from the truth

A causal-comparative design is a research design that seeks to find relationships between independent and dependent variables after an action or event has already occurred. ... Many similarities exist between causalcomparative research and correlation research.

"An important difference between causal-comparative and correlation researches that causal-comparative studies involve two or more groups and one independent variable, while correlation studies involve two or more variables and one group." ... b) manipulates at least one independent variable.

CORRELATION RESEARCH

To carried out to help explain important human behaviours or to predict likely outcomes. Purposes of

correlational research Explanatory studies It is to clarify out understanding of important phenomena by identifying relationship among variables. Always investigate a number of variables they believe are related to a more complex variables such as motivation or learning.

Types of correlational research

Selecting a problem Choosing a sample Selecting or developing instrument Determining procedures Collecting and analyzing data Interpreting result Basic steps

Teacher about to study the causes of the amount of descriptive behaviours display in class. Student having difficulty in mathematic subject. Teacher about to study the causes of student does not perform in the subject.

Example

What? Investigator attempt to determine the cause or consequences of differences that already exist between or among group of individuals. Sometimes viewed, along with correlational research, as a form of associational research, since both describe conditions that already exist.

CAUSAL COMPARATIVE RESEARCH

That two groups of individuals differ on some variable ( such as teaching style) and then interrupt to determine the reason for, or the result of this difference. Example

Group Differences 

The group difference variable in a causal comparative study is: Either a variable that cannot be manipulated (such as ethnicity) or one that might have been manipulated but for one reasons or another has not been (such as teaching style) Example: in the effects of a new diet on very young children It is about one of the type of research method that using comparison between cause and effect.

Comparisons

can establish whether something can be explained by the same causes or not. The difference can be a conclusion but not for the cause of difference. Interpretation of this kind of method is limited because these studies are of value in identified possible causes of observed variation in the behaviour pattern of students. This kind of research can be used in prediction about problem such as, the different achievements of student in the class. If it about teaching methods, it can be research either it is related with art multimedia method or the self-learning methods.

Case Study Method.

Case studies are in-depth investigations of a single person, group, event or community. Typically, data are gathered from a variety of sources and by using several different methods (e.g. observations & interviews) Case studies are in-depth investigations of a single person, group, event or community. Typically, data are gathered from a variety of sources and by using several different methods (e.g. observations &interviews). The research may also continue for an extended period of time, so processes and developments can be studied as they happen. The case study research method originated in clinical medicine (the case history, i.e. the patient’s personal history).The case study method often involves simply observing what happens to, or reconstructing ‘the case history’ of a single participant or group of individuals (such as a school class or a specific social group), i.e. the idiographic approach. Case studies allow a researcher to investigate a topic in far more detail

than might be possible if they were trying to deal with a large number of research participants (homothetic approach) with the aim of ‘averaging’. The case study is not itself a research method, but researchers select methods of data collection and analysis that will generate material suitable for case studies. Amongst the sources of data the psychologist is likely to turn to when carrying out a case study are observations of a person’s daily routine, unstructured interviews with the participant herself (and with people who know her), diaries, personal notes (e.g. letters, photographs, notes) or

official document (e.g. case notes, clinical notes, appraisal reports). Most of this information is likely to be qualitative (i.e. verbal description rather than measurement) but the psychologist might collect numerical data as well. The data collected can be analyzed using different theories (e.g. grounded theory, interpretative phenomenological analysis, text interpretation, e.g. thematic coding) etc. All the approaches mentioned here use preconceived categories in the analysis and they are ideographic in their approach, i.e. they focus on the individual case without reference to a comparison group.

Case studies are widely used in psychology and amongst the best known were the ones carried out by Sigmund Freud. He conducted very detailed investigations into the private lives of his patients in an attempt to both understand and help them overcome their illnesses. Freud's most famous case studies include Little Hans (1909a) and The Rat Man (1909b). Even today case histories are one of the main methods of investigation in abnormal psychology and psychiatry. For students of these disciplines they can give a vivid insight into what those who suffer from mental illness often have to endure. Case studies are often conducted in clinical medicine and involve collecting and reporting descriptive information about a particular person or specific environment, such as a school. In psychology, case studies are often confined to the study of a particular individual. The information is mainly biographical and relates to events in the individual's past (i.e. retrospective), as well as to

significant events which are currently occurring in his or her everyday life.In order to produce a fairly detailed and comprehensive profile of the person, the psychologist may use various types of accessible data, such as medical records, employer's reports, school reports or psychological test results. The interview is also an extremely effective procedure for obtaining information about an individual, and it may be used to collect comments from the person's friends, parents, employer, work mates and others who have a good knowledge of the person, as well as to obtain facts from the person him or herself. This makes it clear that the case study is a method that should only be used by a psychologist, therapist or psychiatrist, i.e. someone with a professional qualification. There is an ethical issue of competence. Only someone qualified to diagnose and treat a person can conduct a formal case study relating to atypical (i.e. abnormal) behavior or atypical development. The

procedure used in a case study means that the researcher provides a description of the behavior. This comes from interviews and other sources, such as observation. The client also reports detail of events from his or her point of view. The researcher then writes up the information from both sources above as the case study, and interprets the information. Interpreting the information means the researcher decides what to include or leave out. A good case study should always make clear which information is factual description and which is an inference or the opinion of the researcher.

*********************************************************************************