Workshop Slides on Research Proposal and Procedure 190415

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


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


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


9


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


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


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



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



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


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 …."


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?


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


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


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


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


CONTINUED

24

E-book is available


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


CONTINUED

26

Sampling procedure


27

Errors associated with sampling


28

Sampling techniques


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


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


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


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


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


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


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.


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.


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]

Date post:	16-Jul-2015
Category:	Education
Upload:	hiram-ting
View:	183 times
Download:	5 times

Workshop Slides on Research Proposal and Procedure 190415

Education