workshop slides on research proposal and procedure 190415
TRANSCRIPT
Ernest Cyril de Run
Hiram Ting
1
Research Proposal and Procedure:
A Guide to Postgraduate Studies (II)
Kuching Park Hotel, Kuching, Sarawak
April 18-19, 2015
Organized by Sarawak Research Society (SRS)
2
Initial RemarksThese workshop slides are prepared and designed specifically for
the postgraduate candidates in the present workshop. Hence, some
of the points are developed based on experience, not textbook-like
materials, and must be understood with the right context.
Hiram Ting
AcknowledgementGratitude to Prof Thurasamy Ramayah and Prof Ernest Cyril de Run
for providing useful information during the preparation of the
workshop slides.
Research Proposal and Procedure: A Guide to Postgraduate StudiesKuching, 18-19 April, 2015
Workshop OutlineDay One
• Why Do Research
• Introduction to Research Proposal
• Overview of Research Proposal
• Concept, Context & Content
• Selecting Topic(s)
• Research Problem & Objective*
• Identifying Research Gap
• Theoretical & Conceptual
Framework
• Literature Review*
• Research Design/Methodology*
• Expected Results & Contribution
• References and Time Frame
• Sources of Information
• Ten Common Mistakes
3
Day Two
• Literature Review
• What and How Many
• How to Review
• How to Synthesize
• Research Methodology
• Research Paradigm & Design
• Population & Sample
• Instrument Design
• Data Collection and Analysis
• Taxonomy
• How to Start Writing
• How to Present & Defend
• Handling Challenges & Roadblocks
• Post-Research Proposal
• Hands-on Exercise
4
Literature Review
Literature review involves the systematic identification, search, and
analysis of documents containing information related to the research
problem and phenomena under investigation.
As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding
concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are
discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is a piece of discursive (a
series of logical discussion) writing style.
5
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
A Literature Review is NOT an annotated bibliography with a short
descriptive paragraph.
It is NOT a literary survey, an overview of one author or a summary of
a researcher’s life and work (even if your work is biographical, you will
also have secondary sources).
Background information or explanations of important concepts may be
essential but they do NOT constitute the essence of a Literature Review.
E.g. the definition of malaria may be important to a paper tracking
malaria-bearing mosquitoes, but it is NOT the substantive part of a
Literature Review.
It is NOT primarily an argument for the importance of what it is you are
researching. It is crucial to explain what is at stake in your research, and
the Literature Review may explore this aspect, but usually the Literature
Review assumes that the urgency for undertaking the task has already
been established in earlier, introductory parts of your research essay.
6
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
Attributes of critical review (Saunders and Rojon, 2015):
1. Identifies and includes the most relevant research to the topic.
2. Discusses and evaluates research.
3. Identifies recognized experts.
4. Contextualizes and justifies your aim(s) and objective(s).
5. Consider and discuss research that supports and opposes your ideas.
6. Justifies points made logically with valid evidence.
7. Distinguishes between fact and opinion.
8. Includes articles that is published since the start of your research.
9. References all sources fully.
7
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
Specific Reasons for the Review
To identify what has already been done;
To keep current in their field;
To have a better idea and bigger picture about the research; to help in
the planning and correcting of what needs to be done;
To state clearly gaps in the literature and problem statements;
To provide the significance of study and rationale for research;
To identify research strategies and procedures, and also specific
measurements or scales (self-construct, adopt or adapt);
To identify underlying and competing theories, build research
framework, and deepen or broaden existing knowledge;
To ensure relevant variables are not left out;
To help interpret data and discuss findings from the research.
8
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
9
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
What and How Many to Review
Consider and know your research problem.
Identify and determine key concepts and context of your research.
Search for relevant journal articles using concepts + context using
Google Scholar. Recent journal articles and seminar papers are more
preferred than textbooks and conference proceedings.
Go through the first 30 results, and select articles that may be of
relevance based on the titles and the short description provided.
Search for a good thesis with similar topics online or in library.
Scan the selected articles in order to determine if they are relevant. Use
the keywords and references to search for more relevant articles.
There is no fixed number of articles for preparing research proposal.
10
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
How to Review Critically
The Three-Pass Approach: The first pass gives you a general idea about
the paper. The second pass lets you grasp the paper’s content, but not its
details. The third pass helps you understand the paper in depth.
First Pass is a quick scan to get a bird's-eye view of the article and
should take about 5 to 10 minutes. It consists of the following steps:
1. Carefully read the title, abstract, and introduction;
2. Read the section and sub-section headings;
3. Glance any figure of underlying theoretical foundations or table that
shows variables under investigation;
4. Glance over the references, mentally ticking on the ones you'vealready read.
11
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
How to Review Critically (cont.)
Second Pass requires reading of the article with greater care.
However, it is fine if you cannot understand the formula, research
terminologies and the presentation of findings.
It helps to jot down the key points or to make comments in the margins,
as you read (either manually using various techniques or software).
After this pass, you should be able to grasp the content of the article.
You should be able to summarize the main thrust of the article, withsupporting evidence, to someone else.
12
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
How to Review Critically (cont.)
When you review more articles, you will begin to see abundance of
ideas, arguments, past findings and etc. You see similarities but also
disagreements.
You may use summary table or mapping technique.
You can ensure you are analyzing critically by testing out your own
views against those you are reading about: What do you think about the
topic? Then as you read each new study, does the evidence presented
confirm your view, or does it provide a counter-argument that causes
you to question your view?
This does not only help drafting your research proposal, it is also a
training itself to develop your critical reading and thinking skills whichare essential for your continual progress.
13
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
How to Review Critically (cont.)
To provide evidence to help explain the rationale or importance of your
investigation. If not, “so what” about this proposed research?
When you are writing the discussion of findings for your thesis, you
need to relate these back to the background literature. Do your results
confirm what was found before, or challenge it? Why might this be?
When writing your discussion section, you may find that you need to
redraft the focus of your literature review slightly to draw out those
studies that are most important to your findings.
14
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
15
Descriptive
Summarizes what other
people have found without
saying what these findings
mean for your investigation.
Usually a chronological list
of who discovered what, and
when.
Analytical
Synthesizes the work and succinctly passes
judgment on the relative merits of research
conducted in your field.
Reveals limitations or recognizes the
possibility of taking research further,
allowing you to formulate and justify your
aims for your investigation.
Example:
"Green (1975) discovered
…."
"In 1978, Black conducted
experiments and discovered
that …."
"Later Brown (1980)
illustrated this in ……"
Example:
There seems to be general agreement on x,
(see White 1987, Brown 1980, Black 1978,
Green 1975). Although x is largely seen as a
consequence of y (Green, 1975; Brown,
1980) , x and y are also regarded as ….
(Black, 1978). While Green's work has
some limitations in that it …., its main value
lies in …."
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
16
Bad Literature Review:
Richbell et al. (1998) studied about the staffing levels that effect health and
morale of the staff. The aim of their study was to match demand for
policing activities with police resources and resize the number of officers
on shift duties. They used a method heuristically to match demand to staff,
then developed a questionnaire to measure staff satisfaction based on a
statistical approach. The staff performance was measured through the
percentage change of a few factors such as sickness, overtime, number of
arrest and reported crime from the questionnaire between the regular shift
system and the Ottawa shift systems. The result showed that the Ottawa
shift system increases morale, improves health and increases satisfaction in
the workforce. However, their heuristic method was used only to
determine the number of staff.
Discuss why?
Literature ReviewCONTINUED
17
Good Literature Review:
Good Literature Review : Automated storage retrieval systems (AR/RS)
are being introduced into the industry and warehousing at an increasing
rate. Forecasts indicate that this trend will continue for the foreseeable
future (see Roll et al., 1999). Research in the area of AS/RS has followed
several avenues. Early work by Hausman et al. (1965) was concerned with
storage assignment and interleaving policies, based on turnover rates of the
various items. Elsayed (2001) and Elsayed and Stern (2003) compared
algorithms for handling orders in AR/RS. Additional work by Karasawa et
al. (1998), Azadivar (2000), and Perry et al. (2002) deals with design of an
AR/RS and the determination of its throughput by stimulation and
optimization techniques.
Discuss why?
18
Research Methodology
Research Paradigm
Paradigm framework is made up by philosophy, ontology, epistemology
and methodology. Epistemology is the philosophy of knowledge or
how we come to know (Trochim, 2000).
Understanding the differences in epistemology among research
paradigms begins primarily as a philosophical exercise to address the
question of whether there is one knowable reality or that there are
multiple realities (Olson,1995)
The underlying belief system of the researcher (ontological
assumptions) largely defines the choice of method (methodology)
(Dobson, 2002).
19
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
In the positivist paradigm, the object of study is independent of
researchers; knowledge is discovered and verified through direct
observations or measurements of phenomena; facts are established by
taking apart a phenomenon to examine its component parts.
An alternative view, the naturalist or constructivist view, is that
knowledge is established through the meanings attached to the
phenomena studied; researchers interact with the subjects of study to
obtain data; inquiry changes both researcher and subject; and
knowledge is context and time dependent (Coll & Chapman, 2000;
Cousins, 2002).
20
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
Researchers generally align with one of three research paradigms
(Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009): (a) a positivist paradigm (quantitative
researchers), (b) a constructivist paradigm (qualitative researchers), or
(c) a pragmatist paradigm (mixed-methods researchers).
Pragmatism “rejects the either/or choices associated with the paradigm
wars, advocates for the use of mixed methods in research, and
acknowledges that the values of the researcher play a large role in
interpretation of results” (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003, p. 713).
Researchers mix methods in ways that make the most sense given their
research questions, integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches
and data analysis procedures and attempting “to open up inquiry to all
possibilities while tying that search to practical ends” (Maxcy, 2003,
p. 86).
21
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
A qualitative study is defined as an inquiry process of understanding a
social or human problem, based on building a complex, holistic picture,
formed with words, reporting detailed views of informants, and
conducted in a natural setting.
Alternatively a quantitative study is an inquiry into a social or human
problem, based on testing a theory composed of variables, measured
with numbers, and analyzed with statistical procedures, in order to
determine whether the predictive generalizations of the theory hold true
(Creswell, 1994).
22
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
Mixed-methods research is a combination of “elements of qualitative
and quantitative research approaches (e.g., use of qualitative and
quantitative view points, data collection, analysis, inference techniques)
for the purposes of breadth and depth of understanding and
corroboration” (p. 123). Creswell and Plano Clark (2011) described six
possible designs: Convergent Design, Explanatory Design, Exploratory
Design, Embedded Design, Transformative Design, Multiphase Design.
23
Research Methodology
CONTINUED
24
E-book is available
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
Deciding Population and Sample
Despite being methodology, knowing your population and sample, and
overall research carried-out are some of the earliest decisions.
Population is determined not based on geographical locations (unless the
studies are localized), but concepts and contexts.
Probability vs. Non-probability Sampling
Probability Sampling
A sampling technique in which every member of the population has a
known, nonzero probability of selection.
Non-probability Sampling
A sampling technique in which units of the sample are selected on the
basis of personal judgment or convenience.
The probability of any particular member of the population being
chosen is unknown.
25
Research Methodology
CONTINUED
26
Sampling procedure
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
27
Errors associated with sampling
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
28
Sampling techniques
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
Factor of Concerns in Choosing Sample Size
Purpose of Study
Quantitative or qualitative?
Exploratory or Explanatory?
Probability or non-probability? Can we use sample size formula?
Generalization or Saturation? How many is enough?
Complexity of Model
Number of variables, items and indicators (arrows pointing to
endogenous variable)
Types of Analysis
Certain analytical methods require minimum sample size.
Power Analysis
To assess effect size
29
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
Factor of Concerns in Choosing Sample Size (cont.)
Variance (or Heterogeneity)
A heterogeneous population has more variance (a larger standard
deviation) which will require a larger sample.
A homogeneous population has less variance (a smaller standard
deviation) which permits a smaller sample
Magnitude of Error (Confidence Interval)
How precise must the estimate be?
Confidence Level
How much error will be tolerated
30
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
Instrument Design
Proposing the use of the most appropriate instrument is crucial as it will
determine whether the collected data is valid and useful for subsequent
analysis and interpretation.
31
Qualitative Research: Quantitative Research:
Action research
Case study research
Ethnography
Grounded theory
Semiotics
Discourse analysis
Hermeneutics
Narrative and metaphor
Surveys
Laboratory experiments
Simulation
Mathematical modeling
Structured equation modeling
Statistical analysis
Econometrics
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
Instrument Design (cont.)
Notwithstanding research proposal, it is important to know which is
more appropriate and justify with valid reasons. As long as the proposed
method is justifiable, it should be fine. Things may change after
proposal defense and doing more studies.
32
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
Data Collection
Important consideration as they will affect data reliability and validity:
1. Adopt, adapt or self-developed items.
2. The type of respondents you have.
3. Number of items (time needed to complete each data collection)
4. Positive and negative worded statements.
5. Forced scale or randomized the items or section approach.
6. Translation in cross-culture studies
How and when to administer data collection is proposed.
Procedural control can be mentioned to indicate awareness of potential
errors and mistakes.
33
Research MethodologyCONTINUED
Data Analysis
Types of Analysis
1. Parametric (assumption: normal distribution)
2. Non-parametric (distribution free)
Number of Variables Involved
1. Univariate
2. Bivariate
3. Multivariate
Types of Software
1. Qualitative: ATLAS.ti, Nvivo, Leximancer
2. Quantitative: SPSS, AMOS, PLS, Lisrel
Proposed Types of Analysis – Factor Analysis, SEM, Panel Analysis
34
35
36
Taxonomy
37
TaxonomyCONTINUED
38
TaxonomyCONTINUED
About tenses
Opinion is varied on whether when writing about prior research you
should mainly use the present or past tense. When either tense can
communicate equally effectively, we opt for the present for several
reasons. First, it gives the reader a greater sense of immediacy.
Second, when discussing concepts, and in line with our concept-centric
approach to literature reviews, it is logical to use the present tense
because concepts are always here and now. Third, the present tense is
terser and thus faster for the reader to process. There is an exception
to this recommendation. An author’s opinions can change with time.
When attributing a statement or idea to a person, therefore, use the past
tense: .Max Weber may no longer be saying what he once said.
(Starbuck 1999).
Consistency and flow (context-based) are crucial.
Be familiar with research terminologies in your specific disciplines.
39
How to Start Writing
Start writing is always difficult. You cannot write without reading. You
also cannot write without being determined to sit down and do nothing
but writing.
Your research proposal needs to tell an interesting "story" which leads
up to how and why you are doing your investigation. In your literature
review, if you are writing a story which reads like one thing after
another, this is likely to be descriptive. However, if your story is
comparing, contrasting and evaluating the previous literature, you are on
the right track.
“The introduction is the part of the paper that provides readers with the
background information for the research reported in the paper. Its
purpose is to establish a framework for the research, so that readers can
understand how it is related to other research” (Wilkinson, 1991, p. 96).
40
How to Start WritingCONTINUED
In an introduction, the writer should:
• create reader interest in the topic,
• lay the broad foundation for the problem that leads to the study,
• place the study within the larger context of the scholarly literature,
• reach out to a specific audience. (Creswell, 1994, p. 42)
Could you address these four items for your present research?
Again, just write, and you can always make changes later.
41
How to Start WritingCONTINUED
42
Problem statements and gaps in the literature are of major importance in
research. Clearly and succinctly identify and explain the problem within
the framework of the theory or line of inquiry that undergirds the study.
State the problem in terms intelligible to someone who is generally
sophisticated but who is relatively uninformed in the area of your
investigation.
Effective problem statements answer the question “Why does this
research need to be conducted.” If you are unable to answer this
question clearly and succinctly, and without resorting to hyperspeaking
(i.e., focusing on problems of macro or global proportions that certainly
will not be informed or alleviated by the study), then the statement of
the problem will come off as ambiguous and diffuse.
How to Start WritingCONTINUED
43
Literature review is an ongoing process. Always try to write what you
have read and understood. Don’t worry about how good it is at the
initial stage.
A good literature management will help writing as it facilitates
information retrieving process.
What would be the most effective literature management methods for
you? Discuss.
1. Writing notes somewhere, e.g. on the article itself or on your draft.
2. Copy and paste what is relevant, and then paraphrase.
3. Use summary table or mapping.
4. Develop the structure or “skeletons” of your literature review first,
and put literature in gradually.
5. Get ideas from past research proposal.
How to Start WritingCONTINUED
44
The format (sub-headings) of methodology is usually similar for
research in the same disciplines, hence you can follow any template in
the discipline or guideline suggested by your faculty.
Decide what you plan to do, and write. Explanation and justification can
come in later as you will learn more about them when reading more
articles.
Significance of study should reflect your problem statements and
research objectives. For a PhD research, theoretical/conceptual
contribution is more important than contextual and managerial
contribution.
45
How to Present and Defend
Before the Defense:
Discuss with your supervisor – team effort.
Attend some defenses before yours.
Plan out your presentation as a team.
Use bullet points, know where to emphasize.
Do your homework on the important points, make
sure you have citations for each of them.
Try to come out with possible questions and answer
those questions.
Make sure all things that you want to bring with you
are prepared. E.g. pendrive, notes and etc.
Remember to pray.
46
How to Present and DefendCONTINUED
On the Day of the Defense:
Dress well.
Start on time, don’t let your panel wait for you.
Don’t read and teach, but present.
Don’t over elaborate, be cautious with improvisation.
Be confident but not arrogant.
Be animated, project your voice well.
Avoid verbal tics. E.g. I mean… Okay… you see.
Don’t be “defensive”, always respond based on citations.
Record the comments and suggestions.
Show your appreciation for the panellists' help.
47
Reference:
http://www.learnerassociates.net/dissthes/?utm_content=buffer9c35a&ut
m_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Handling Challenges and Roadblocks
Knowing your priorities.
Maintaining interest and momentum.
Building workable relationship with supervisor.
Handling pressure from panelists, reviewers and examiners.
Juggling study, work and family at the same time.
Dealing with unexpected events.
Doing full time or part time.
Having difficulties in reading and writing.
Supporting each other in a group.
48
Post- Research Proposal
How to do a PhD:
1. Choose who you work with carefully.
2. See yourself as a beginner, a learner.
3. Treating your study as a work (but it has to be fun).
4. Start early, make mistakes, e.g. analyze early.
5. Get to know the literature.
6. Don’t obsess over productivity.
7. Give yourself time to think.
8. Be decisive yet adaptable.
9. Be bold to present your ideas and get comments, including criticism.
10. Set aside definite time, be discipline and persistent.
11. Find/Create for yourself the best working environment.
12. Enjoy life, enjoy the challenge.
49
Post- Research ProposalCONTINUED
PhD Survival:
1. Beat your first deadline
2. Get to know people who can make things happen
3. Thank people who do things for you
4. Get to know other people’s research
5. Get really, really good at one thing
6. What you write now, you won’t like in 3 years time
7. Downloading papers doesn’t count as reviewing the literature
8. Publish
9. Make contacts outside your department
10. Write everything down
11. Time goes faster than you think
12. Make mistakes early, don’t aim to be perfectionist
50
51
52
Hands-on Exercise
53
54
Hands-on Exercise: Sketch what research you are interested to do using
the following items (just 1-2 sentences for each item). You can make it up
if you don’t have any:
• Research problems expressed as questions
• Theory or concept used
• Research objectives
• Research paradigm and design
• Proposed methodology
• Expected significance of study
Thank You
55
Ernest Cyril de Run, PhDEmail: [email protected]
Hiram Ting, PhDEmail: [email protected]