Home1st Semester

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

byAsad Hussain-August 23, 20190 Comments

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

BEd 1.5 Year First Semester

BEd 2.5 Year Fourth Semester

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

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

Understanding Characterization from experience and observation

Analysis Hypothesis: a proposed explanation

Synthesis Deduction: prediction from the hypothesis

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:

Descriptive research

Analytical research

Fundamental research

Conceptual research

Empirical research

One time research or longitudinal research

Field-setting research or laboratory research or simulation research

Clinical or diagnostic research

Exploratory research

Historical research

Conclusion oriented research

Case study research

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: