DOCSLIB.ORG

Qualitative Research Design and Methods

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Qualitative Research Design and Methods Workshop on Interdisciplinary Standards for Systematic Qualitative Research Cultural Anthropology, Law and Social Science, Political Science, and Sociology Programs National Science Foundation Report prepared by: Michèle Lamont Harvard University Patricia White National Science Foundation Acknowledgements We wish to thank James Granato, former NSF Political Science Program Director, Joane Nagel, former NSF Sociology Program Director, Stuart Plattner, former NSF Cultural Anthropology Program Director, and Christopher Zorn, former NSF Law and Social Science Program Director, for their help in planning and participation in the workshop, Karen Duke and Michelle Jenkins, NSF Social and Political Sciences Cluster staff members, for their administrative and technical support, Lauren Rivera and Sabrina Pendergrass, graduate assistants for their work with Professor Lamont on workshop and report preparations at Harvard University, Joane Nagel and Kristin Luker, Professor of Sociology and Jurisprudence and Social Policy, University of California, Berkeley for their thoughtful comments on the draft report, and the 23 workshop participants who took on the enormous task of representing their respective disciplines at the workshop through the submission and presentations of short papers prior to the workshop and comment and recommendations during and after the meeting. We also thank the 2007 graduate student cohort of the Department of Sociology at Harvard University and Camonia Long, Howard University graduate student, for their reactions to the report. Workshop Participants & Attendees Michèle Lamont, Harvard University, Jody Miller, University of Missouri, St. Louis Workshop Organizer Joane Nagel, University of Kansas Andrew Bennett, Georgetown University Beth Rubin, University of North Ted Bestor, Harvard University Carolina-Charlotte Kathleen Blee, University of Pittsburgh Gery Ryan, Rand Corporation Don Brenneis, University of California, Susan Silbey, Massachusetts Institute of Santa Cruz Technology John Bowen, Washington University in St. Louis Mario Small, University of Chicago John Comaroff, University of Chicago Kathleen Thelen, Northwestern University David Collier, University of California, Berkeley Lisa Wedeen, University of Chicago Colin Elman, Arizona State University Susan Weller, University of Texas Medical Wendy Espeland, Northwestern University Branch-Galveston Linda Garro,�������������������������� University��������������� of California, Patricia White, (Sociology) National Science Los Angeles Foundation John Gerring, Boston University Alford Young, Jr., University of Michigan James Granato, University of Houston Christopher Zorn, University of South Carolina Wendy Griswold, Northwestern University Jennifer Hochschild, Harvard University Richard Lempert, National Science Foundation Felice Levine, American Education Research Association Workshop on Interdisciplinary Standards for Systematic Qualitative Research Executive Summary On May 19-20, 2005, a workshop on Interdisciplinary Standards for Systematic Qualitative Research was held at the National Science Foundation (NSF) in Arlington, Virginia. The workshop was co- funded by a grant from four NSF Programs—Cultural Anthropology, Law and Social Science, Political Science, and Sociology—to Dr. Michèle Lamont, Harvard University. Professor Lamont was assisted in organizing the workshop by representatives from each discipline who coordinated group reports. The Cultural Anthropology group was co-chaired by Drs. Ted Bestor (Harvard) and Gery Ryan (RAND); Law and Social Science by Dr. John Bowen, (Washington University, in St. Louis); Political Science by Andrew Bennett (George Washington University); and Sociology by Dr. Kathleen Blee (University of Pittsburg). It is well recognized that each of the four disciplines have different research design and evaluation cultures as well as considerable variability in the emphasis on interpretation and explanation, commitment to constructivist and positivist epistemologies, and the degree of perceived consensus about the value and prominence of qualitative research methods. Within this multidisciplinary and multimethods context, twenty-four scholars from the four disciplines were charged to (1) articulate the standards used in their particular field to ensure rigor across the range of qualitative methodological approaches;1* (2) identify common criteria shared across the four disciplines for designing and evaluating research proposals and fostering multidisciplinary collaborations; and (3) develop an agenda for strengthening the tools, training, data, research design, and infrastructure for research using qualitative approaches. Prior to the workshop each participant prepared a short paper addressing the three topics (qualitative research standards, evaluation criteria, and agenda of future opportunities and needs). During the workshop, breakout sessions were held where each disciplinary group was asked to discuss and list the field’s major qualitative research standards. These lists were then shared with the full workshop. Two categories of qualitative research standards were identified—(1) “shared” or key standards relevant to all four disciplines; and (2) standards judged essential by two or three disciplines. Participants also provided recommendations for improving qualitative research, training and infrastructures and identified promising areas of research in the four disciplines that would benefit from study using qualitative research approaches. The workshop report is organized into four sections: Qualitative Research Design and Methods; Standards for Qualitative Research across Disciplines (in Anthropology, Law and Social Science, Political Science and Sociology); Recommendations for Producing Top Notch Qualitative Research; and Promising New Research Areas and Topics. Written commentary prepared by workshop participants is included in the Appendix. What follows is a brief summary of each. 1*Methodological approaches include ethnography, historical and comparative analysis, textual and discourse analysis, focus groups, archival and oral history, observational studies, interpretation of images and cultural materials, and unstructured and semi-structured interviews. Executive Summary Qualitative Research Design and Methods Workshop participants discussed the strengths of qualitative methods, standards qualitative research shares with quantitative research, and standards that are unique only to qualitative research. The major strength of qualitative research was judged to be the rich range of methodological tools available to study meaning, social processes, and group variations. The sample sizes and strategies of qualitative and quantitative approaches to research were contrasted. Qualitative research stresses in-depth contextualization, usually with small sample size. Qualitative research sampling techniques, while nonrandom, are usually attentive to demographic and theoretical dimensions. The combination of small and in-depth samples chosen for theoretical relevancy allows qualitative research findings a degree of significance or generalizability beyond individuals or single cases and provide opportunities to demonstrate rigor in all phases of a qualitative research project. “Shared” Criteria for Designing and Evaluating Qualitative Research Across Disciplines Workshop participants agreed that the four disciplines shared several standards for designing and evaluating high quality qualitative research. All value projects that: • Situate the research in appropriate literature; that is, the study should build upon existing knowledge • Clearly articulate the connection between theory and data • Describe and explain case selection; why particular sites, participants, events, or cases are chosen • Pay attention to alternative explanations and negative cases • Operationalize constructs and describe expected findings • Provide clear and detailed descriptions of both data collection and anticipated data analysis techniques: specify what counts as data, how the researcher will go about obtaining data and analyzing it • Describe the intellectual, social, and political significance of the research • Discuss generalizability or significance beyond the specific cases selected • Specify the limitations of the research and anticipate potential reviewer objections • Discuss the preparation of the researcher for the proposed project in terms of: o Cultural fluency o Language skill o Appropriate methodological/technical training o Knowledge of particular research context Recommendations for Producing Top Notch Qualitative Research Participants established that qualitative research could be enhanced by increased investments in education, training, and infrastructure. For example, NSF could enhance qualitative research through increased funding for students and scholars as well as publicizing its commitment to supporting high quality qualitative proposals. Support for pre-dissertation support, small pilot study grants for faculty, and student training opportunities through professional associations would likely be most effective. Workshop on Interdisciplinary Standards for Systematic Qualitative Research Promising New Research Areas and Topics Each disciplinary working group articulated new and exciting research areas that would benefit immensely from qualitative research or are taking advantage of qualitative research approaches, and in the process opening up new avenues of understanding. Social and cultural anthropological studies of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jackson: Choosing a Methodology: Philosophical Underpinning
    JACKSON: CHOOSING A METHODOLOGY: PHILOSOPHICAL UNDERPINNING Choosing a Methodology: Philosophical Practitioner Research Underpinning In Higher Education Copyright © 2013 University of Cumbria Vol 7 (1) pages 49-62 Elizabeth Jackson University of Cumbria [email protected] Abstract As a university lecturer, I find that a frequent question raised by Masters students concerns the methodology chosen for research and the rationale required in dissertations. This paper unpicks some of the philosophical coherence that can inform choices to be made regarding methodology and a well-thought out rationale that can add to the rigour of a research project. It considers the conceptual framework for research including the ontological and epistemological perspectives that are pertinent in choosing a methodology and subsequently the methods to be used. The discussion is exemplified using a concrete example of a research project in order to contextualise theory within practice. Key words Ontology; epistemology; positionality; relationality; methodology; method. Introduction This paper arises from work with students writing Masters dissertations who frequently express confusion and doubt about how appropriate methodology is chosen for research. It will be argued here that consideration of philosophical underpinning can be crucial for both shaping research design and for explaining approaches taken in order to support credibility of research outcomes. It is beneficial, within the unique context of the research, for the researcher to carefully
    [Show full text]
  • Qualitative Research
    Encyclopedia of Leadership ______________________________________________________________________________ Edited by G. Goethals, G. Sorenson, J. MacGregor Copyright © 2004 SAGE Publications London, Thousand Oaks CA, New Delhi www.sagepublications.com A R T I C L E Qualitative Research Sonia Ospina Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service New York University QUALITATIVE RESEARCH Leadership scholars seeking to answer questions about culture and meaning have found experimental and quantitative methods to be insufficient on their own in explaining the phenomenon they wish to study. As a result, qualitative research has gained momentum as a mode of inquiry. This trend has roots in the development of the New Leadership School, (Conger, 1999; Hunt, 1999), on the recent emergence of an approach to leadership that views it as a relational phenomenon (Fletcher, 2002), and on the increased recognition of the strengths of qualitative inquiry generally. Shank (2002) defines qualitative research as “a form of systematic empirical inquiry into meaning” (p. 5). By systematic he means “planned, ordered and public”, following rules agreed upon by members of the qualitative research community. By empirical, he means that this type of inquiry is grounded in the world of experience. Inquiry into meaning says researchers try to understand how others make sense of their experience. Denzin and Lincoln (2000) claim that qualitative research involves an interpretive and naturalistic approach: “This means that qualitative researchers study things in their
    [Show full text]
  • Mixed Methods Research Approaches:Warrant Consideration Phenomena in Themethodological Thirdmovementon the Humanities Sciences
    IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) Volume 20, Issue 11, Ver. II (Nov. 2015) PP 21-28 e-ISSN: 2279-0837, p-ISSN: 2279-0845. www.iosrjournals.org Mixed Methods Research Approaches:Warrant Consideration Phenomena in theMethodological ThirdMovementon the Humanities Sciences Kamal koohi Assistant Professor of Institute ofSocial Research, University of Tabriz Abstract:Today, Dramatic changes and transformations has happened in theories sociology similar to other areas.We have seen in recent sociological theories emerging paradigms of integrated. Social research methods are not exempt from this rule. Simplification of complex social problems cannot be easily by a deterministic selection approach to both qualitative and quantitative methods. Therefore, since the condition of today's postmodern discourse of diversity technique, Selection mixed research approach is a methodological necessity in the social sciences. Today, the simultaneous use of both quantitative and qualitative methods is justified.As mentioned, the mixed researchapproach qualitative and quantitative methods are combined by each other.The main objective of this paper is to introduce integrated research approach and review of advantage and disadvantage mentioned method. It is expected that using this approach contribute to overcome the shortcomings of positivistic hard and soft humanistic Blumer. Because the main idea of mixed researchapproach is to combine of qualitative and quantitative approaches,more appropriate and comprehensive understanding is obtained of topic. Keywords:Mixed ResearchApproach, Third Movement ofMethodological, Qualitative Method and Quantitative Method. I. Introduction In the present age, significant changes has occurred in sociological theory and paradigm as a researcher thought and action guidance ( the entire process of research ).
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophical Approaches to Qualitative Research
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons School of Social Work: Faculty Publications and Other Works Faculty Publications 2014 Philosophical Approaches to Qualitative Research Julia Pryce [email protected] Renée Spencer Jill Walsh Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/socialwork_facpubs Part of the Social Work Commons Recommended Citation Pryce, Julia; Spencer, Renée; and Walsh, Jill. Philosophical Approaches to Qualitative Research. The Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods, , : 81-98, 2014. Retrieved from Loyola eCommons, School of Social Work: Faculty Publications and Other Works, http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/ 9780199811755.001.0001 This Book Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in School of Social Work: Faculty Publications and Other Works by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. © Oxford University Press, 2014. CHAPTER Philosophical Approaches to 5 Qualitative Research Renée Spencer, Julia M. Pryce, and Jill Walsh Abstract This chapter reviews some of the major overarching philosophical approaches to qualitative inquiry and includes some historical background for each. Taking a “big picture” view, the chapter discusses post-positivism, constructivism, critical theory, feminism, and queer theory and offers a brief history of these
    [Show full text]
  • International Journal of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods
    International Journal of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods Vol.8, No.3, pp.1-23, September 2020 Published by ECRTD-UK ISSN 2056-3620(Print), ISSN 2056-3639(Online) CIRCULAR REASONING FOR THE EVOLUTION OF RESEARCH THROUGH A STRATEGIC CONSTRUCTION OF RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES Dongmyung Park 1 Dyson School of Design Engineering Imperial College London South Kensington London SW7 2DB United Kingdom e-mail: [email protected] Fadzli Irwan Bahrudin Department of Applied Art & Design Kulliyyah of Architecture & Environmental Design International Islamic University Malaysia Selangor 53100 Malaysia e-mail: [email protected] Ji Han Division of Industrial Design University of Liverpool Brownlow Hill Liverpool L69 3GH United Kingdom e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT: In a research process, the inductive and deductive reasoning approach has shortcomings in terms of validity and applicability, respectively. Also, the objective-oriented reasoning approach can output findings with some of the two limitations. That meaning, the reasoning approaches do have flaws as a means of methodically and reliably answering research questions. Hence, they are often coupled together and formed a strong basis for an expansion of knowledge. However, academic discourse on best practice in selecting multiple reasonings for a research project is limited. This paper highlights the concept of a circular reasoning process of which a reasoning approach is complemented with one another for robust research findings. Through a strategic sequence of research methodologies, the circular reasoning process enables the capitalisation of strengths and compensation of weaknesses of inductive, deductive, and objective-oriented reasoning. Notably, an extensive cycle of the circular reasoning process would provide a strong foundation for embarking into new research, as well as expanding current research.
    [Show full text]
  • The Positivist Qualitative Research and the Paradigmatic Disclaimer
    1 Positivist Qualitative Research Beyond qualitative/quantitative structuralism: The positivist qualitative research and the paradigmatic disclaimer Izhak Berkovich Department of Education and Psychology, The Open University of Israel, Ra`anana, Israel Abstract Scholarly discourse concerning the distinction between qualitative and quantitative approach often takes on a binary character. This structuralism undermines the legitimacy of positivist qualitative research, a unique method frequently used in social science research. In the present essay, the author argues that positivist qualitative research should be recognized as a unique form of qualitative research. The essay focuses on three issues: (a) the paradigmatic roots of positivist qualitative research, (b) the components of positivist qualitative research as an empirical research approach, including a typology for mapping various manifestations of partially and fully positivist qualitative research, and (c) incorporating a paradigmatic disclaimer section in articles to improve the quality of qualitative research, positivist and non- positivist alike. Recognizing positivist qualitative research as a distinct and legitimate type can improve qualitative studies in social science. Keywords paradigm; paradigmatic disclaimer; positivism, positivist qualitative research; qualitative research Forthcoming in Quality and Quantity. The final publication is available at link.springer.com via https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0607-3 2 Positivist Qualitative Research 1 Introduction The use of qualitative research in social science has a long and distinguished history (Denzin and Lincoln 2003). The field of social science underwent a "qualitative research revolution" in the 1970s and 1980s (Donmoyer and Galloway 2009, p. 7). In social science and education, qualitative research (and researchers), once disregarded and marginalized by hegemonic quantitative research (and researchers), has become a mainstream research approach (Lichtman 2013, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Qualitative Research in the Post-Modern Era
    Qualitative Research in the Post-Modern Era The authors While this unique and timely overview of the key foundational thinkers is suffi cient reason for any quali- tative researcher, new or experienced, to read this book, the questions and activities at the end of each chapter make it an indispensible text for instructors who teach qualitative research methods courses to use with their students.… The art of making the complex accessible takes great skill, and this book has the potential to truly engage and challenge graduate students without confusing them by overusing jargon…. Graduate instructors who take seriously the task of mentoring the next generation of qualitative research- ers will defi nitely want to use this book to provoke their students into thinking multidimensionally about the research that they read and conduct…. The video clips will speak to millennial generation students in a way that typical qualitative research methods textbooks could never hope to do. I think that this will be a very popular textbook in many universities. Jim Greenlaw Dean of Education University of Ontario Institute of Technology The project was an ambitious undertaking to complete. The sheer energy that has gone into capturing, on video-tape, the top international researchers is commendable. The ability to harness “The Five Contexts” from the works and refl ections of these scholars as a “conceptual framework for conducting, understand- ing and interpreting qualitative research in a variety of disciplines in this postmodern era” is both timely and original.... I think this would be an excellent research text for graduate students in the Social Sciences and Humanities.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring the Usefulness of Structural-Functional Approaches To
    Exploring the usefulness of structural-functional approaches to systematically assess the functionality of governance arrangements for natural resource management planning in two Australian case studies Ruth Margaret Potts (n9222952) Bachelor of Urban and Environmental Planning (Honours 1A) Supervisors: Dr. Karen Vella1, Professor Doug Baker1, Professor Neil Sipe2, and Professor Allan Dale3 1 Queensland University of Technology 2 University of Queensland 3 James Cook University A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctorate of Philosophy Civil Engineering, and the Built Environment, Property and Planning Science and Engineering Faculty Urban and Regional Planning Discipline Queensland University of Technology 26th March 2015 Abstract Natural resources worldwide continue to be degraded despite significant investments in management and conservation activities. The governance arrangements between institutions involved in natural resource management (NRM) are a determinant of the success of NRM activities. While a limited number of theoretically robust evaluative frameworks exist to support analysis and reform of governance arrangements for NRM to improve outcomes, none are currently used to inform or reform Australia’s NRM governance system. Rather, evaluative measures used to analyse NRM in Australia tend to focus on inputs, and outputs, rather than the structures, functions and their interactions to deliver outcomes of governance. The thesis explores structural-functional approaches as a lens for evaluation of complex planning governance systems, and develops the Governance Systems Analysis (GSA) framework. The GSA framework is a theoretically robust, and practice oriented evaluative framework based on structural-functional approaches, planning and policy theories. Using a layered case study approach, this thesis examines the relationship between governance system structures, functions, and NRM planning outcomes, through the lens of structural-functionalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Case Study Methodology in Poststructural Research <Fre
    CJNR 2015, Vol. 47 No 1, 97–114 Rethinking Case Study Methodology in Poststructural Research Shan Mohammed, Elizabeth Peter, Denise Gastaldo, Doris Howell Little consideration has been given to how case study might be used in post- structural research to explore power relations that constitute a phenomenon. Many case study scholars, most notably Robert Yin, adopt a postpositivist perspective that assumes the “truth” can be accessed through applying prescrip- tive and rigid research techniques. Using a discussion of Michel Foucault’s key theoretical ideas and the insights gained through a Foucauldian case study of people with advanced cancer who continue to receive curative treatment, the authors argue for the expansion of case study in poststructural inquiry. They propose that the use of poststructuralist case study is valuable because of the flexibility and comprehensiveness of the methodology, which allows for the exploration of a deeper understanding of the broader discourses that shape a phenomenon, as well as how power/knowledge relations shape the behaviours and perceptions of people. They also introduce the reflexive implications of post- structural case study research. Keywords: case study, qualitative research, advanced cancer, poststructuralism, Foucault, reflexivity © Ingram School of Nursing, McGill University 97 CJNR 2015, Vol. 47 No 1, 97–114 Résumé Repenser la méthode de l’étude de cas à partir du post-structuralisme Shan Mohammed, Elizabeth Peter, Denise Gastaldo, Doris Howell Peu d’attention a été portée à la façon dont la méthode de l’étude de cas peut être utilisée dans le cadre de l’approche post-structuraliste pour étudier les rela- tions de pouvoir qui structurent un phénomène.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Packer's the Science of Qualitative Research
    The Qualitative Report Volume 17 Number 13 Book Review 3 3-26-2012 Thorough and Thought-provoking: A Review of Packer’s The Science of Qualitative Research Oksana Parylo University of Georgia, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr Part of the Quantitative, Qualitative, Comparative, and Historical Methodologies Commons, and the Social Statistics Commons Recommended APA Citation Parylo, O. (2012). Thorough and Thought-provoking: A Review of Packer’s The Science of Qualitative Research. The Qualitative Report, 17(13), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2012.1792 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the The Qualitative Report at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Qualitative Report by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Thorough and Thought-provoking: A Review of Packer’s The Science of Qualitative Research Abstract The conflict between qualitative and quantitative directions in educational research is not new; however, this debate has resurfaced in the accountability era. The Science of Qualitative Research by Martin Packer (2011) is a thought-provoking book that explains why one should engage in qualitative research. Artfully combining history, examples, and his own reflections on the opic,t Packer offers a list of well- grounded arguments that show the importance of and the need for qualitative research. Although this book does not explain how to design and conduct qualitative studies, it makes a good read for all those interested in theories behind modern qualitative work and for those who want to better understand the roots of scientific social esearr ch and common misconceptions about qualitative analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Approaches in Qualitative Educational Research
    Edinburgh Research Explorer Critical approaches in qualitative educational research Citation for published version: Griffiths, M 2009 'Critical approaches in qualitative educational research: The relation of some theoretical and methodological approaches to these issues'. Link: Link to publication record in Edinburgh Research Explorer Document Version: Peer reviewed version Publisher Rights Statement: © Griffiths, M. (2009). Critical Approaches in qualitative educational research. General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy The University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 29. Sep. 2021 CRITICAL APPROACHES IN QUALITATIVE EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH: THE RELATION OF SOME THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO THESE ISSUES Morwenna Griffiths Morwenna Griffiths is the Chair of classroom Learning in the Moray House School of Education at Edinburgh University. Introduction These pages are designed to engage researchers with issues of critical research design and data analysis in a range of educational contexts. ‘Critical research’ is not a tidy category. In these pages it is taken to mean, roughly, research which aims at understanding, uncovering, illuminating, and/or transforming how educational aims, dilemmas, tensions and hopes are related to social divisions and power differentials.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy of Research
    Project Planner Philosophy of Research Title: Philosophy of Research Originally Published: 2017 Publishing Company: SAGE Publications, Inc. City: London, United Kingdom ISBN: 9781526408495 DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781526408495 Contact SAGE Publications at http://www.sagepub.com. This PDF has been generated from SAGE Research Methods. SAGE SAGE Research Methods 2017 SAGE Publications, Ltd. All Rights Reserved. This stage will: • Explain the philosophy of research • Provide an overview of methodology and methods • Explain research traditions and different schools of thought This section deals with the philosophy of research and research methodology. Methodology underpins all the work you do. These are important concepts which need to be understood, but they’re one of the areas people find most challenging, so don’t worry if they don’t sink in right away. Read the section and see which concepts are familiar to you. Identify other things that are new to you—you can return to this section at any time throughout your project. Why Do Research? Research is used to find things out, reaffirm the results of previous work, solve new or existing problems, support existing theories, or develop new theories. A research project may also be an expansion on previous work in the field. In order to test the validity of instruments, procedures, or experiments, research may replicate elements of prior projects, or the project as a whole. The primary purposes of research are documentation, discovery and interpretation, or the research and development of methods and systems for the advancement of knowledge. Research has one fundamental characteristic: It uses scientific methods to produce evidence and results.
    [Show full text]