THINKING ABOUT RESEARCH

AND RESEARCH QUALITY IN

YOUR ACADEMIC WORK.

Presentation for the annual Oxford-Cambridge

Exchange
Pam Sammons and Linda Bakkum
WHAT IS RESEARCH?
 Research is a disciplined attempt to address questions or solve problems
through the collection and analysis of primary data for the purpose of
description, explanation, generalization and prediction (Anderson 1998, p 6)

 The nature of the subject matter determines what kind of research is valid
or relevant (Pring 2000, p 6)

 Reasoning: deductive (Aristotle) formal steps of logic

 inductive (Bacon) empirical evidence for verification

 Inductive-deductive moving from observations to hypotheses then back to

implications (backwards & forwards).

 Subjective belief must be checked against objective reality, research is self-

correcting.
WHAT IS DISTINCTIVE ABOUT EDUCATIONAL
RESEARCH?
• The distancing of theory from practice is associated with public and policy
scepticism about value of educational research

• Need for clarity in defining key terms identified from your literature review
and as used in your study e.g. ‘good’ ‘effective’ c’ompetent’ teacher, what it
means to be an ‘educated’ person

• Need to attend to the ‘logic of the discourse’ the rules implicit in the use of
particular words and those to which they are logically related

• For Dewey “education concerned the development of the distinctively human

capacities of ‘knowing’ ‘understanding, ‘judging’; ‘behaving intelligently’
“(Pring 2000, p 12)

• What that makes your study distinctive in relation to the field of education?
KEY FEATURES OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
• The attempt to make sense of the activities, policies and institutions which, through the
organisation of learning, help to transform the capacities of people to live a fuller, more
distinctively human life.

• The distinctive focus of educational research must be upon the quality of learning and
thereby teaching

• Much writing sets up a false dichotomy between different research traditions

• Variety in approaches to educational research is desirable, depending on questions explored

and philosophical position

• Is it the ‘real’ world that we observe – or one interpreted through my own personal &
subjective scheme of things?

• What is the connection between language and the world language is used to describe? After
Pring (2000)

• All links to notion of clarity in writing and argument &

demonstrating critical engagement with substantive, theoretical &
methodological literature
WHAT IS...?
 A research design is “an integrated statement of and
justification for the technical decisions involved in
planning a research project” (Blaikie, “Designing
Social Research”, p. 15).

 A research project is a temporary organisation that

is created with the purpose of carrying out systematic
and rigorous enquiry to address a particular problem
arising from a gap in knowledge (a theoretical puzzle,
a pragmatic need etc).
FEATURES OF QUALITY IN (EDUCATION)
RESEARCH
 Rigour of research process
 Trustworthiness

 Reliability/ validity

 Usefulness – implications for research

methodology, for policy &/practice in education
 Originality

 Contribution to theory?

How can you demonstrate rigour in

these areas in your study?
WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATIONAL
RESEARCH?
A “second order activity” which explores

 the beliefs about the nature of (social) reality or of a

phenomenon (including self and other – “what exists,
what it looks like, what units make it up and how
these units interact with each other”) - ontology
 the beliefs about the nature of educational research
knowledge (and its relationships to other kinds of
knowledge) - epistemology
 the beliefs about principles and values (including the
right, the good and the virtuous) in the practice of
educational research - axiology

(see D. Bridges, 2003, p. 15; N.Blaikie, 2000, p. 8)

WHAT IS/ARE YOUR...
...Ontological position?
...beliefs about epistemology?
•Positivist ? •Constructivism
•Post-positivist? •Pragmatic?
•Critical Theory

HOW DOES THIS AFFECT YOUR CHOICE OF:

• RESEARCH AIMS & QUESTIONS?
• RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODOLOGY?

Quantitative?
Qualitative?
Mixed Methods?
QUANTITATIVE VERSUS QUALITATIVE

 Some researchers have argued that it may be

appropriate to think of Qualitative & Quantitative as
being on a continuum Gray and Densten (1998),
Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003
 ‘Qualitative and quantitative choices viewed as polar
opposites may be viewed as a ‘false dualism’ (Frazer
1995)

 Can you clarify & justify your own view and

approach in your study?
 How has your view evolved over the course of your
PhD research?
Pragmatism as the Foundation for MM Research

Pragmatism supports the use of both QUAL & QUAN

methods in the same study & rejects the either/or
incompatibility thesis

It considers the research questions to be more

important than either the method or paradigm that
underlies the method – the dictatorship of the RQ

Pragmatism
avoids the use of metaphysical concepts eg ‘truth’
‘reality’

Pragmatism presents a very practical & applied

philosophy
After Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003 p 20-21
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
 The ‘big’ research question: one over-arching
question
 The sub-questions which help to guide your enquiry

Characteristics of Good Research Questions

 Clarity  Awareness of political
 Empirical focus implications
 Accessible evidence  Related to previous
research
 Manageable
 Significant
 Awareness of
assumptions  Ethical

 Awareness of implicit  Practical use (relevant)

values  ‘fun’ (interesting to you)

source: Ingrid Lunt.

CLARITY
 The question(s) in your study should be
answerable i.e can be illuminated or addressed
by your methodology (you are looking to find the
answer to a genuine question)
 The question should be intelligible to the reader
who may not be an ‘expert’ in your topic
(understandable)
 The questions should offer the prospect of
making an ‘original contribution to knowledge’ in
some way (methodologically theoretically
empirically etc)
 Are the terms clearly defined?
 Are the questions precise?

source: Ingrid Lunt.

EMPIRICAL FOCUS
 Require that you generate data to answer question
 Lead you to determine methods of enquiry and data
collection
 NB it is usually most appropriate for methods to
follow questions; different types of questions will lead
to different approaches to research and methods of
data collection, but this is not always the case
source: Ingrid Lunt.

Reflect on your own Research aims/RQs:

 How have they evolved over the course of your study
 How far have they driven your choice of design &
methodology and the specific methods you are using?
SIGNIFICANT
 Is there a clear rationale for the question?
 So what?

 Does this question matter?

 Why is it of interest and to whom?

source: Ingrid Lunt.

POSSIBLE AIMS & OBJECTIVES
 Description: what does it look like (what, when,
where, who)?
 Explanation: why did it happen?
 Prediction: what is to be expected?
 Understanding: how is it grasped in human
experience?
 Interpretation: what does it mean?
 Prescription: how ought it be?
 Change and emancipation: how can it be
transformed for the better?
 Critique and disruption: what are the limitations
and hidden assumptions? How can these assumptions
be challenged/ interrupted?

 Etc. (e.g., exploration, demonstration, classification)

 AIMS AND CLAIMS KINDS OF RESEARCH EXAMPLES OF
QUESTION RESEARCH
Explanatory What is the relationship Survey, experiment
between?
Explanatory What happens if . . . ? Experiment, participatory
Descriptive research, action research
Prescriptive

Descriptive ‘What’ and ‘why’? Mixed methods research

Explanatory

Explanatory What happened in the past/ Historical research

Descriptive how to make sense of the
past?
Understanding How can we understand a Ethnographic and
Interpretative situation? interpretive/
Case study

Critique How to disrupt convention Critical approaches

Emancipatory and empower participants?

As by Alis Oancea.
SOME INFLUENCES ON SOCIAL RESEARCH
Values
• These can affect choice of
research topic, formulation of
research questions, choice of
methods, choice of research
design and instruments,
ethics, sample & process of
data collection, interpretation
of data and findings,
conclusions, reporting and
dissemination
• Need be self-reflective, and to
exhibit reflexivity about the
part played by the
researcher’s own values and
their potential influence on
research process and
outcomes
Practical Considerations
• Existing knowledge base on
topic, is this a new topic of
interest? (generation or
testing of theory more
appropriate?), resources
available,
availability/interest of
participants
• All social research is a
coming together of the ideal
and the feasible
As by Alis Oancea.
ROLE OF VALUES & OF RESEARCHER
• The value determined nature of enquiry in anti- positivist
research such as Critical theory and Constructivism,
Advocacy and activism encouraged, researcher
transformative intellectual or passionate participant

• What can be known is mediated by interaction between

investigator and subject of investigation

• For constructivists there are multiple realities, that depend

on the individuals or groups holding constructions,
constructions may change/be altered and thus so can
‘realities’

• Researcher and subject are interactively linked and

findings are created through hermeneutical and dialectical
techniques and are relative

• Aims to critique & transform (critical theory) or to

understand & reconstruct, subject to continuous revisions.
HOW VALUES MAY INFLUENCE SOCIAL
RESEARCH

• Choice of research area

• Formulation of research questions
• Choice of method
• Formulation of research design & data collection
techniques
• Implementation of data collection
• Interpretation of data
• Conclusions drawn
BODIES OF KNOWLEDGE
• Theories, propositions and explanations
accumulated through enquiry, criticism,
argument and counter argument. What has
survived testing and criticism…public property.
Their credentials depend upon their being open
to public challenge and refutation.

• Any body of knowledge can only be provisional

and is open to further challenge through
criticism.. The link between knowledge &
certainty is broken.

• Disciplined, critical and reflective thinking is the

mark of educational research, at odds with
unquestioning ‘common sense’ beliefs.
 POINTS TO ESTABLISH IN EXAMINING DIFFERENT
RESEARCH APPROACHES & IN CRITICAL READING OF
RESEARCH

• Research assumptions - are they explicit?

• Aims – explanation or understanding
• The subjective-objective dimension
• Role and definitions of theory
• Doing research/reading research
• Theoretical and empirical domains
• Values and interpretation
• Use of findings/ audience
• Stages in the development of enquiry
ISSUES IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Generalisability Validity Reliability

 Enriching  Dependability,
 Often concerns: consistency,
understanding and
honesty, credibility, comprehensiveness,
generating theory
richness, ‘checkability’, empathy,
 Fuzzy authenticity, depth, uniqueness,
Generalisations scope, subjectivity, explanatory and
descriptive potential,
 Falsification strength of feeling, confirmability,
 Using extreme capturing “neutrality”,
(most/least likely to uniqueness, applicability,
fit theory), atypical, idiographic transferability
and critical cases statements, fidelity
to participants’ As by Alis Oancea.
accounts
STRATEGIES FOR...
Generalisability Reliability

 Careful, sometimes  Good preparation for

strategic selection of fieldwork
cases  Piloting and peer and
 Intense participation participant debriefing
and effort to develop  Justification of decisions (e.g.
valid and rich transcription; recording; types
descriptions of questions; extent of
‘mapping’ and ‘summarising’
 Challenging theories, in case presentation etc.)
conventional wisdom,  Awareness of transcriber
and prior assumptions selectivity and other
 Letting the case “talk limitations
back” – sensitivity to  Independent audits and audit
diversity, uniqueness, trails
history and context  Multiple coders
As by Alis Oancea.
STRATEGIES FOR VALIDITY

 Prolonged engagement  Making

in the field contrast/comparisons
 Persistent observation  Ruling out spurious
 Rich and thick relations
description  Following up surprises
 Leaving an audit trail  Using extreme cases
 Reflexive diaries  Assessing rival
 Respondent validation explanations
 Peer debriefing  Triangulation

 Checking for researcher  Back translation

effects
As by Alis Oancea.
SOME ISSUES IN QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

Generalisability Validity Reliability

Can findings be  Fundamentally

 
generalised outside
the sample?
 Importance of
sample
 Role of confidence
 Concept of statistical
Measurement
concerned with the
valididy, face validity,
reliability of
concurrent validity
measures.
predictive validity,
construct validity,  Stability
convergent validity  Dependability
 Replicability
intervals Internal reliability


probability 
 Inter-observer
consistency
STRATEGIES FOR...

Generalisability Validity Reliability

Careful sample  Test – Retest

  Appropriate
selection. instrumentation,  Chronbach Alpha
 Random selection  Appropriate treatment  Multiple coders
can be useful because of statistical data  Consider the
of known properties. consistency of your
 Careful sampling
 Be cautious with observations.
 At best strive to
making inferences. Controllable,
minimize invalidity 

and maximize validity predictable, consistent,

replicable.
(Cohen et al. 2007)
MIXED METHODS APPROACHES
Issues
 All the same problems as
with Quant and Qual!
But also:
 Design choice
 Data synthesis
 Can your data inform one
another?
 Two separate studies?
 Quant and Qual findings dont
match?
 Skill and confidence in both
research approaches?
 Should be more than the sum
of its parts.
Strategies
 Careful design of each (Qual
and Quant) component.
 Think about how your data
might be used to inform one
another.
 Explore what the combined
set of findings indicate.
 If not confident with a
particular method, hit the
books, ask for help!
 A Dynamic Conceptual Model for MM research
• QUAN MIXED METHOD QUAL
• Sphere of Concepts (abstract operations) Purposes Questions
• Deductive Qs ............................................ Inductive Qs
• Objective purpose ............................................ Subjective purpose
• Value neutral ............................................ Value informed
• Politically neutral ............................................. Transformative
• Experiential sphere (concrete observations & operations) Data
Observation
• Numerical data .............................................. Narrative data
• Structured process .............................................. Emergent process
• Statistical analysis ............................................... Content analysis
• Sphere of Influence (abstract explanations & understandings)
Theories Explanations Inferences
• Deductive logic ............................................... Inductive logic
• Objective inference ............................................... Subjective inference
• Value neutral ............................................... Value involved
• Politically neutral ............................................... Transformative
•
after Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003
 MM Designs characterised by
 Multiple positions along each attribute traditionally assumed to
distinguish QUAN & QUAL eg they have both confirmatory and
exploratory research questions
 They are near the end of one continuum on one attribute ( eg inductive
questions but near the other end of the continuum on another attribute
eg statistical analysis)

Multiple Method Designs (more than 1 method or more than 1 world view
A. Multi method designs ( more than 1 method but restricted to within
1 world view (eg Quan/Quan or Qual/Qual)
B. Mixed methods designs (use of QUAL & QUAN)
 Mixed method research (occurs only in methods stage of a study)
 Mixed model research (can occur in all stages of a study )

after Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003

 MM Designs characterised by
• Multiple positions along each attribute traditionally assumed to distinguish
QUAN & QUAL eg they have both confirmatory & exploratory research
questions
• They are near the end of one continuum on one attribute ( eg inductive questions
but near the other end of the continuum on another attribute eg statistical
analysis )

1. Multiple Method Designs (more than 1 method or more than 1 world view)
A. Multi method designs ( more than 1 method but restricted to within 1 world view
eg Quan/Quan or Qual/Qual)
B. Mixed methods Designs (use of Quan & Qual methods/data collection/analysis
strategies)
1. Mixed Method research (occurs in the methods stage of study only)
2. Mixed Model research (can occur in all stages of a study)
– Concurrent Mixed Method design one kind of question simultaneously
addressed by collecting & analysing QUAN & QUAL data then one type
inference made from both sources
– Concurrent mixed Model 2 strands of research with both types of question,
both types of data & both types of analysis then both types of inferences are
pulled together to create meta-inferences at the end
after Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003
 Purpose /
Purpose / Question Question

Data Collection Data Collection

Data Analysis Data Analysis

Inference
Inference

Meta - Inference

Concurrent Mixed Model Design (Fig 26.6 p688)

 Purpose /
Purpose / Question Question

Data Collection Data Collection

Data Analysis Data Analysis

Inference
Inference

Meta - Inference

Sequential Mixed Model Design (Fig 26.8 p688)

 Purpose /
Purpose / Question Question

Data Collection Data Collection

Data Analysis
Data Analysis

Inference
Inference

Meta - Inference

Fully Integrated Mixed Model Design (Fig 26.11)

 Yourresearch will be informed by your
readings.

 Critical
reading of the literature is a
major part of good research!
HOW TO READ RESEARCH ARTICLES CRITICALLY (AN
APPRECIATION OF STRENGTHS &
WEAKNESSES/LIMITATIONS)

 Identify research aims/questions?

 Identify nature/type of study (scholarly review,
empirical work, new or secondary analysis)
 Identify ontological position, epistemological &
methodological assumptions
 Is researcher’s value position explicit?
 Identify location, date, sample, methods used
 Examine use of theory, deductive? Inductive?
 Are analysis methods clearly explained ?
 Are conclusions appropriately supported by evidence ?
 What are the implications for policy/practice?
.
FINAL COMMENTS
 No study can be ‘perfect’
 Research rigour is about clarity of research process
throughout
 Justifying your choices, design, interpretations, conclusions
 Persuasion of arguments re original contribution
 Awareness of strengths & limitations
 How your research fits into existing body of knowledge
 Implications for policy practice, future directions for research

 Your viva involves an oral ‘defence’ a justification

of the rigour of your research to probe your
understanding and ‘ownership’ of your study

 It is helpful to practice thinking, talking about and

presenting your study with special attention to
demonstrating rigour