what constitute excellence in research

WHAT CONSTITUTES EXCELLENCE IN RESEARCH

KAMARIAH ABU BAKARKAMARIAH ABU BAKARUniversiti Putra MalaysiaUniversiti Putra Malaysia

Colloquium Graduate Students: USM

13.12.2005

WHAT IS RESEARCH?• A PROCESS – (THE NATURE OF THE

PROCESS)– FORMAL, SYSTEMATIC, INTENSIVE PROCESS OF

SCIENTIFIC METHOD – BEST– CAREFUL INQUIRY OR EXAMINATION – RUMMEL– SYSTEMATIC, CONTROLLED, EMPIRICAL AND

CRITICAL INVESTIGATION – KERLINGER– UNUSUALLY STUBBORN AND PERSISTING

EFFORT TO THINK STRAIGHT – HAMLIN (‘RESEARCH WITHOUT IMPORTANT IDEAS IS BUSY WORK’)

– SYSTEMATIC PROCESS OF COLLECTING, ANALYZING INFORMATION TO INCREASE UNDERSTANDING OF CONCERNED PHENOMENON – LEEDY & ORMROD


13.12.2005

AIM OF RESEARCH

• DISCOVER NEW INFORMATION OR RELATIONSHIPS; TO EXPAND AND TO VERIFY EXISTING KNOWLEDGE – RUMMEL

• GATHERS NEW KNOWLEDGE; DISCOVER GENERAL PRINCIPLES – BEST

• PROVIDE NEW KNOWLEDGE – COOK• INVESTIGATION OF HYPOTHETICAL

PROPOSITIONS ABOUT THE PRESUMED RELATIONS AMONG NATURAL PHENOMENA - KERLINGER


13.12.2005

WHAT CONSTITUTES EXCELLENCE IN RESEARCH?

IT IS A VERY DIFFICULT ISSUE TO QUANTIFY AND I AM NOT EVEN GOING TO TRY. THE BEST I CAN SAY IS THAT WHEN YOU SEE IT, YOU KNOW IT, BUT IT IS HARD TO DESCRIBE, LET ALONE TO QUANTIFY IT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT AT LEAST IN EDUCATION, EXCELLENCE IS RESEARCH THAT PROVIDES ESSENTIAL KNOWEDGE THAT ALLOWS US TO MAKE UNIMAGINABLE IMAGINABLE, THE PURSUIT OF DISCOVERY AND IS JUSTIFIED BY ITS UTILITY.


13.12.2005

HOW CAN WE FOSTER EXCELLENCE IN RESEARCH?

THREE ISSUES NEED TO BE CONSIDERED:

• EXCELLENT RESEARCHERS

• EXCELLENT MANAGEMENT

• ADEQUATE FUNDING


13.12.2005

HOW DO WE GET EXCELLENT RESEARCHERS?

• NEED TO HAVE EXCELLENT MENTORING AND TRAINING

• NEED TENACITY, PERSEVERANCE AND COURAGE

• NEED INSIGHT, CRITICAL THINKING AND CREATIVITY

• NEED SUFFICIENT MONEY


13.12.2005

ADOPTION OF EXCELLENT MANAGEMENT

• FOR LECTURERS/SUPERVISORS:– CHOOSE OUTSTANDING PEOPLE AND GIVE THEM

INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM (IDEAL)– SHOW GENUINE INTEREST IN EVERYONE’S WORK,

GET EVERYONE EXCITED– FACILITATE THE INTERCHANGE OF IDEAS, HAVE NO

SECRECY (BE TRANSPARENT)– ENGENDER A HAPPY ENVIRONMENT WHERE

PEOPLE’S MORALE IS KEPT HIGH

• FOR GRADUATE STUDENTS:– MANAGE YOUR RESEARCH– MANAGE YOUR SUPERVISOR, COMMITTEE

MEMBERS– MANAGE YOUR LIFE


13.12.2005

GRADUATE STUDENT SUPERVISION

MAIN PURPOSE SHOULD BE TO PROVIDE STUDENTS WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN HOW TO (BEST) PRACTICE WHAT THEY HAVE LEARNED

IT IS NECESSARY FOR STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE TO BE EFFECTIVELY MONITORED AND EVALUATED IN ORDER TO CHECK THAT ADEQUATE STANDARDS ARE BEING REACHED FROM FACULTIES’ PERSPECTIVES AS WELL AS STUDENTS’


13.12.2005

GRADUATE STUDENT SUPERVISORS

RESPONSIBLE TO GIVE EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK TO STUDENTS. FEEDBACK IS THE PROCESS OF RELAYING OBSERVATIONS, IMPRESSIONS, FEELINGS OR OTHER EVALUATIVE INFORMATION ABOUT STUDENTS’ BEHAVIOUR FOR THEIR OWN USE AND LEARNING

BE ROLE MODEL, DEMONSTRATE SKILLS TO ENSURE STUDENTS EVOLVE INTO CLEAR-THINKING, SENSITIVE PRACTITIONERS


13.12.2005

SUPERVISORS

SHOULD NOT LET THESIS / DISSERTATION WRITING BE A FEARFUL EXPERIENCE FOR YOUR STUDENTS

NOT YOUR ROLE TO “BAWL A STUDENT OUT” AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY

SHOULD ATTEMPT TO BE POSITIVE WHEN ENGAGING WITH AND ASSESSING

STUDENTS’ WORK


13.12.2005

GRADUATE SUPERVISION

UNITED KINGDOM►RUDD’S STUDY (1985) INTO

POSTGRADUATE FAILURE REVEALED THAT 40%-50% OF CANDIDATES FAILED TO SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE DISSERTATION

►DUNKERLEY AND WEEKS (1994) FOUND THAT, OUT OF 1,969 POSTGRADUATE CANDIDATES, 46% WITHDREW


13.12.2005


NORTH AMERICA

►BASED ON 4 STUDIES MADE: RESULTS SHOWED THAT 50% OF STUDENTS ENTERING POST GRADUATE PROGRAMMES DROPPED OUT BEFORE FINISHING THEIR THESES OR DISSERTATION


13.12.2005


QUALITY OF SUPERVISION PROCESS HAS OFTEN BEEN HIGHLIGHTED AS ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS FOR FAILURE OF POSTGRADUATES TO COMPLETE THEIR RESEARCH


13.12.2005

SUPERVISORS’ CONTRIBUTIONS TO GRADUATE STUDENTS’

EXCELLENCE IN RESEARCH

TWO FACTORS:COMMITMENT TO SUPERVISORY

WORK IN TERMS OF TIME AND EMOTION.

ABSTRACTION IN TERMS OF THINKING SKILLS


13.12.2005

LEVELS OF SUPERVISORS’ COMMITMENT

LOW MODERATE HIGH

LITTLE CONCERN FOR SUPERVISEE

SOME CONCERN FOR SUPERVISEE

HIGH CONCERN FOR SUPERVISEE

LITTLE TIME OR ENERGY EXPENDED

ENERGY EXPENDED SPORADICALLY OR ONLY IN CERTAIN AREAS

EXTRA TIME AND ENERGY EXPENDED

PRIMARY CONCERN WITH KEEPING ONE’S JOB

PRIMARY CONCERN VARIES ACCORDING TO CIRCUMSTANCES

PRIMARY CONCERN WITH DOING MORE FOR OTHERS


13.12.2005

LEVELS OF SUPERVISORS’ ABSTRACT THINKING

LOW MODERATE HIGH

CONFUSED ABOUT THE PROBLEM

CAN DEFINE THE PROBLEM

CAN THINK OF THE PROBLEM FROM MANY PERSPECTIVES

DO NOT KNOW WHAT CAN BE DONE

CAN THINK OF ONE OR TWO POSSIBLE RESPONSES TO THE PROBLEM

CAN GENERATE MANY ALTERNATIVE PLANS

“SHOW ME” HAVE TROUBLE THINKING THROUGH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

CAN CHOOSE A PLAN & THINK THROUGH EACH STEP


13.12.2005

FOUR TYPES OF SUPERVISORS

QUADRANT III

(ANALYTICAL OBSERVERS)

QUADRANT IV

(PROFESSIONALS)

QUADRANT I

(SUPERVISOR DROPOUTS)

QUADRANT II

(UNFOCUSED WORKERS)

LEVEL OF COMMITMENT

LEVEL

OF

ABSTRACT


13.12.2005

TYPES OF SUPERVISORS

QUADRANT I: SUPERVISOR DROPOUTS• LOW LEVEL OF COMMITMENT AND

LOW LEVEL OF ABSTRACTION• HAVE LITTLE MOTIVATION FOR

IMPROVING COMPETENCIES• DO NOT SEE ANY REASONS FOR

IMPROVEMENT• BLAME CAUSES OF DIFFICULTIES ON

OTHERS


13.12.2005


QUADRANT II: UNFOCUSED WORKERS• HIGH LEVEL OF COMMITMENT BUT

LOW LEVEL OF ABSTRACTION• ARE ENTHUSIASTIC, ENERGETIC, AND

FULL OF GOOD INTENTIONS• WORK HARD BUT LACK ABILITY TO

THINK PROBLEMS THROUGH• INVOLVED IN MULTIPLE PROJECTS

BUT EASILY CONFUSED


13.12.2005


QUADRANT III: ANALYTICAL OBSERVERS• HAVE LOW LEVEL OF COMMITMENT BUT

HIGH LEVEL OF ABSTRACTION• ARE INTELLIGENT, HIGHLY VERBAL

PEOPLE, FULL OF GREAT IDEAS BUT IDEAS OFTEN DO NOT RESULT IN ANY ACTION

• KNOW WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE BUT UNWILLING TO COMMIT TIME & ENERGY


13.12.2005


QUADRANT IV: PROFESSIONALS• HAVE HIGH LEVEL OF COMMITMENT

AND HIGH LEVEL OF ABSTRACTION• COMMITTED TO CONTINUALLY

IMPROVE THEMSELVES & SUPERVISEES

• MORE EFFECTIVE, REGARDED AS INFORMAL LEADERS TO WHOM OTHERS GO TO SEEK HELP


13.12.2005

SKILLS NEEDED FOR SUCCESSFUL SUPERVISORS

1. BE DYNAMIC AND HAVE ABILITY TO INSPIRE STUDENTS

2. ABLE TO MOTIVATE STUDENTS3. ABLE TO DIRECT STUDENTS TO AND

THROUGH THE RIGHT DIRECTION4. NEED TO HAVE CONCEPTUAL AND

TECHNICAL COMPETENCE5. NEED AN OPEN MIND, ALWAYS SEARCH

OUTSIDE THE EVERYDAY ROUTINE FOR A BETTER METHOD, A NEW POLICY, AN IMPROVED WAY OF DOING THINGS


13.12.2005


6. ABLE TO DISCOVER WHAT THE PROBLEM IS IN TIMES OF TROUBLE (ABLE TO GET TO THE HEART OF THE PROBLEM, TO DISCOVER THE REAL COURSE, AND TO TAKE ACTION TO CURE THE PROBLEM)

7. ABLE TO THINK8. ABLE TO EXPRESS HIMSELF / HERSELF

CLEARLY9. SHOULD POSSESS MORAL INTEGRITY10. ABLE TO ORGANIZE


13.12.2005


11. ABLE TO RESOLVE CONFLICTS WITH GOOD JUDGEMENT, UNDERSTANDING AND OPENNESS (FOCUS ON SOLVING THE CONFLICT)

12. ABLE TO LISTEN, RECOGNIZE AND UNDERSTAND INDIVIDUAL’S PROBLEM AND ABILITY

13. ABLE TO BE SENSITIVE TO NEEDS OF OTHERS

14. ABLE TO MAINTAIN FRIENDLY ATTITUDE15. ABLE TO MAINTAIN ENTHUSIASM


13.12.2005


• PHASE 1:– PROBLEM FORMULATION RESEARCH

PROPOSAL - PROBLEM STATEMENT, OBJECTIVES, RESEARCH QUESTIONS, HYPOTHESES, SIGNIFICANCE; LITERATURE REVIEW; PLANNED METHODOLOGY

• PHASE 2:– MECHANICS – PROCESS OF IMPLEMENTING THE

PLANNED METHODOLOGY; ANALYSIS OF DATA; REPORTING THE RESEARCH


13.12.2005


• PHASE 3: SYNTHESES - RELEVANCY OF RESEARCH– CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEDGE IN EDUCATION– CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS IMPROVED

PRACTICES – CONTRIBUTION AS BASIS FOR POLICY CHANGE– CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS NATION BUILDING– CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS CAPACITY BUILDING


13.12.2005

TRADEOFF BETWEEN RELEVANCE AND RIGOR IN RESEARCH

• STAW (1985) - FROM A RESEARCH PERSPECTIVE, RELEVANCE MEANS THE IMPORTANCE OF A FINDING OR IDEA TO THE ADVANCEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE. WE OFTEN JUDGE THE RELEVANCE OF A WORK AGAINST THE RESEARCH ALREADY CONDUCTED.

• RESEARCH THAT IS LITERATURE DRIVEN FOCUSES MORE ON FINDING GAPS IN EXISTING THEORIES RATHER THAN FRESH LOOKS AT ORGANIZATIONS. ‘DEVIANT’ IDEAS ARE USUALLY SCREENED OUT, THOUGHT UNACCEPTABLE.

• RIGOR IS THE STRENGTH OF INFERENCE MADE POSSIBLE BY THE GIVEN RESEARCH STUDY. ITS MORE THAN THE QUANTITATIVE NATURE AND STATISTICAL POWER OF THE STUDY.


13.12.2005

IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

• RESEARCH IS ONLY ONE OF THE INFLUENCES ON POLICY FORMATION AND PRACTICE, AND ANY IMPACT IS LIKELY TO BE INDIRECT RATHER THAN DIRECT THROUGH A VARIETY OF TRANSMISSION MECHANISMS AND INTERMEDIARIES

• ACTION AND DECISIONS OF POLICY-MAKERS AND PRACTITIONERS ARE SOMETIMES INSUFFICIENTLY INFORMED BY RESEARCH

• RESULTS FROM RESEARCH EFFORT THAT IS PREDOMINANTLY SUPPLY (RESEARCHER) DRIVEN: RESEARCH AGENDA TENDS TO BE BACKWARD RATHER THAN FORWARD LOOKING – FOLLOWING POLICY NOT PROMPTING IT


13.12.2005

ETHICS IN RESEARCH

• EXCELLENT RESEARCH IMPLEMENTS ETHICS IN RESEARCH

• EACH RESEARCHER HAS A PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR IMPLEMENTING ETHICS IN RELATION TO ANY SCHOLARLY WORK WITH WHICH HE OR SHE IS ASSOCIATED AND FOR HELPING HIS OR HER ASSOCIATES IN CONTINUING EFFORTS TO AVOID ANY ACTIVITY WHICH MIGHT BE CONSIDERED IN VIOLATION OF THIS POLICY.


13.12.2005

AWFUL REPUTATION OF EDUCATION RESEARCH

• POOR UNDERSTANDING OF RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

• DISHONESTY

• CENSORSHIP


13.12.2005

(1) FABRICATION, FALSIFICATION, PLAGIARISM, OR OTHER PRACTICES THAT SERIOUSLY DEVIATE FROM THOSE THAT ARE COMMONLY ACCEPTED WITHIN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY FOR PROPOSING, CONDUCTING, OR REPORTING RESEARCH;

(2) MATERIAL FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENTS FOR PROTECTION OF RESEARCHERS, HUMAN SUBJECTS, OR THE PUBLIC OR FOR INSURING THE WELFARE OF LABORATORY ANIMALS;

(3) FAILURE TO MEET OTHER MATERIAL LEGAL REQUIREMENTS GOVERNING RESEARCH

MISCONDUCT IN RESEARCH DOES NOT INCLUDE HONEST ERROR OR HONEST DIFFERENCES IN INTERPRETATIONS OR JUDGMENTS OF DATA

MISCONDUCT IN RESEARCH


13.12.2005

EXCELLENCE IN RESEARCH

• REQUIRES EXCELLENT RESEARCHERS• EXCELLENT RESEARCH PROJECTS THAT

WILL BE ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE TOWARDS EXPANDING THE FRONTIER OF KNOWLEDGE IN EDUCATION, TOWARDS IMPROVED PRACTICES, TOWARDS NATION BUILDING, TOWARDS CAPACITY BUILDING, AND AS BASIS FOR POLICY CHANGE IN EDUCATION

• FREE FROM ANY FORM OF MICONDUCT


13.12.2005

QUOTATION FROM BEST

FOR A RESEARCH TO BE EXCELLENT, THE RESEARCHER SHOULD BE

“……A SCHOLARLY PERSON OF THE HIGHEST INTEGRITY”


13.12.2005


13.12.2005

• EXCLUDED FROM THE DEFINITION OF MISCONDUCT IN RESEARCH AND FROM THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ETHICS COMMITTEE ARE: 1) HONEST ERROR OR HONEST DIFFERENCES IN INTERPRETATIONS OR JUDGMENTS OF DATA. 2) DEVIATIONS FROM GRANT OR CONTRACT MANAGEMENT POLICIES RESULTING FROM WEAKNESS IN INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS OR DISAGREEMENT WITH GRANTOR AGENCIES. 3) CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS, SUCH AS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST OR HARASSMENT OF RESEARCH PERSONNEL.

what constitute excellence in research

Documents