HomeHome  PortalPortal  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  

Share | 
 

 Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
eyesee

avatar

Posts : 182
Points : 447
Join date : 2009-06-18

PostSubject: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Sun Aug 09, 2009 9:42 pm

How do you know if a piece of research work is good or not? how are they evaluated? (1500words)
Back to top Go down
View user profile
ermilyn anne magaway

avatar

Posts : 22
Points : 32
Join date : 2009-06-19
Age : 29
Location : Sitio Bulakan Brgy. Aquino Agdao Davao City

PostSubject: Assignment 5   Tue Aug 25, 2009 1:09 am

Read this data that I have gathered while surfing the net, I think it make sense for us to know when a research work is good or not, below are the list fo some points to remember and opposites of the datum below is for us to know that a research work is not good, right?


1.Picking a topic, an idea: your idea or topic must be ambitious. Do not merely aim to get your papers accepted. Aim to have a lasting impact on you field.

2.Questions as your guide:

What is your message? What point are you making? Most papers should make a single point.
Why is this message important? Why should the reader take his precious time to read your paper?
How are you going to make your point? What experiments can you run? What theorems can you prove?
Has this point been made before? How is your contribution different from what has been said a thousand times before?

3. What a good paper should contain

A sexy start: tell the reader early why he should read your paper. Don’t summarize, sell! A good abstract answers the question why should I read this paper?, it does not summarize the paper. Convince us early that your paper is important. Starting out the paper by a punch line is important. For example, the Kent Beck recipe for a good 4-sentence abstract is: (1) state the problem (2) say why it is interesting (3) say what your solution achieves (4) say what follows from your solution.
You should clearly say what your contribution is. Reviewers are lazy, they do not want to have to figure out what your message is. Spend some time telling us exactly what your contribution is. Spell it out, do not assume we will read the paper carefully.
A review of related work in the introduction: you can relate your own contribution to all of the related work.
A large reference section: people like to be cited, so make sure you cite every paper that might have some relevance.
Experimental evidence: you need to confront your idea with the real-world and report on how well it fares. Compare explicitly your results with the best results elsewhere.
Acknowledgment the limitations of your work.
Relevant and non-obvious theoretical results: it is easier for people to build on your work if there is some theory and it helps give people confidence in your work.
Pictures! Really, even if you feel silly doing it or that you think you can’t draw. A picture can help tremendously in communicating difficult ideas.
Original examples over original data sets.
A conclusion telling us about future work and summarizing (again) the strong points of the paper.

4.Good pedagogy and style: means, you don't have to used acronym or abbreaviatons, you spelling must be correct, use examples, short sentences.

5.Words you can do without: using adverbs such as “very”, temporal words such as “now”,”next” are a sign of bad structure.

Above are guidelines on how to have a good paper, you need to have an ambitious topic and a good start and wonderful end.


I think for me this big citation below can be used as the basis on how research work are to be evaluated.

1. Reusability: The core idea should be relatively simple, so that other researchers can easily understand it and especially so that they can easily use it in their own research. This factor might also be called simplicity, elegance, or fertility, but I think reusability best captures what I mean. I will cite your paper if I can reuse your ideas in my own research.

2. Originality: The core idea should be original. A pioneering paper may face more challenges during reviewing (which is inherently conservative) than an incremental paper, but the most cited papers are pioneering papers. I will cite your paper if I use an idea and your paper is one of the oldest references I can find for that idea.

3. Effectiveness: There should be some experimental evidence that the core idea works better than past ideas or better than reasonable baselines. Reviewers care deeply about this. I will want to use your idea if you can show me that it works on tasks that I care about.

4. Venue: If all else is equal, a paper in a respected conference or journal will be cited more than a paper in a less respected venue. I prefer to cite respected conferences and journals, hoping that the respect for my citations will increase the respect for my own paper.

5. Accessibility: If all else is equal, online papers will be more cited. I will cite your paper if I can read it without walking to the library.

6. Timeliness: Turbo codes, a class of error correction codes, were invented in 1993. These codes approach the theoretical maximum performance (the Shannon limit). It turns out that they are similar to a class of codes called LDPC codes, invented in 1963, but ignored until the invention of Turbo codes. The LDPC codes were ignored because the hardware of the 1960s was not good enough to make LDPC codes practical. This illustrates the importance of timeliness for maximizing citation counts. I will cite your paper if I can use your ideas now.

7. Positivity: Negative results are not as popular as positive results, although there have recently been some efforts to correct this. I will cite your paper if you show me what I can do, instead of telling me what cannot be done.



http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/rules-to-write-a-good-research-paper/
http://apperceptual.wordpress.com/2008/02/11/how-to-maximize-citations/
Back to top Go down
View user profile
hannah rhea hernandez

avatar

Posts : 27
Points : 35
Join date : 2009-06-19
Age : 28
Location : Davao City

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:24 pm

Experts have varying opinions on what are the criteria to define a good research works but over all it points out on the same idea and that is “a research is good if it presents new problems and develops a solution which would be beneficial to all”. The main purpose of research is to distinguish a way or ways to solve a particular problem. And if this condition will be met then we can say that it is a good research work provided also that it is up to date, the complexity of the problem and its solution doesn’t compromise the proper structure of a research paper.

Whatever may be the types of research works and studies, one thing that is important is that they all meet on the common ground of scientific method employed by them. One expects that the purpose of the research should be clearly defined and common concepts be used. The research procedure used should be described in sufficient detail to permit another researcher to repeat the research for further advancement, keeping the continuity of what has already been attained. Also, the procedural design of the research should be carefully planned to yield results that are as objectives as possible.

Also, the researcher should report with complete frankness, flaws in procedural design and estimate their effects upon the findings. The analysis of data should be sufficiently adequate to reveal its significance and the methods of analysis used should be appropriate. The validity and reliability of the data should be checked carefully.
Conclusions should be confined to those justified by the data of the research and limited to those for which the data provide an adequate basis.
And lastly, greater confidence in research is warranted if the researcher is experienced, has a good reputation in research and is a person of integrity.


In other words, we can state the qualities of a good research is that its systematic, logical , empirical and replicable.

By systematic, it means that research is structured with specified steps to be taken in a specified sequence in accordance with the well defined set of rules. Systematic characteristic of the research does not rule out creative thinking but it certainly does reject the use of guessing and intuition arriving at conclusions.

By logical, this implies that research is guided by the rules of logical reasoning and the logical process of induction and deduction are of great value in carrying out research. Induction is the process of reasoning from a part to the whole whereas deduction is the process of reasoning from the premise. In fact, logical reasoning makes research more meaningful in the context of decision making.

As for empirical, it implies that research is related basically to one or more aspects of a real situation and deals with concrete data that provides a basis for external validity to research results.

And lastly, good research work is replicable which refers to the characteristic allows research to be verified by replicating the study and thereby building a sound basis for decisions.

As for evaluation, once the research paper passed the criteria given above what is left is to evaluate how the paper is written.

Most of the time when evaluating, panel is brought in to judge a research work. They test your evidences or results of your study, question on your hypothesis and methodology. All of these are already discussed on the criteria given above. What is left now is judging on how your paper was written. The questions below are likely to be used as criteria in this matter.

• Sources: Does the paper use the right kinds of scholarly or popular-scholarly sources to support its claims?
While no number of sources can be called automatically "enough," the assignment requires that you find sources of sufficient quality to support what you say you know about your topic.

• Is the paper based on at least some recent article-length sources?

Articles are the sources of the most recent and most tightly focused analysis on your topic. Students who rely on books because OLLI is easier to use, or because books appear to have "more on the topic," are still thinking at a pre-college level. They do not understand how quickly book-length manuscripts become outdated, and how books' much larger theses can make it difficult for students to extract useful support from them without misunderstanding what they are borrowing. But then nowadays, student rely so much on the Internet and thus results to what we call “copy and paste technology”. This is now done like a common practice but then it should not be done since this is illegal. Even if you credit the authors whose works you are using, it will still be weighed against you seeing that you have not consider revising terms and phrases. If you want your work to be published in top-tier journals, quoting works of others are almost prohibited.

• Does it use at least one scholarly source, or does it contain a well-written endnote or footnote which explains exactly why there are no scholarly sources available on this topic?

You can use popular-scholarly journals and scholarly reference works to give you a "ladder of expertise" so that you can read professional scholars' work.

• If the topic requires it, are the sources recent enough to be persuasive?
Due to the fast changing things nowadays, books/articles/sources becomes outdated quickly. Conclusions based on out of date evidence fail to persuade. Students who want to succeed in these majors must become persistent enough researchers to seek out the most recent and authoritative sources on their topics.

• Thesis:
Is the paper organized by an independent thesis which at least uses reasoning and/or evidence from one article to contribute substantively to the reasoning and/or evidence in any other article, thus avoiding mere summary of the research? Is the thesis carefully composed to avoid claiming absolute knowledge if its evidence supports only possible or probable conclusions? Is the thesis supported by logically sound reasoning?

These questions are asking whether the author has moved beyond the stage of merely reporting what others say, and into the stage of being able to think creatively about the topic. Early attempts to do this may be tentative and uncertain. To protect your reputation for careful thinking, make sure you distinguish clearly among certain, probable, and possible conclusions. Be content to claim your conclusions are "possibly" correct unless you can eliminate many of the contending conclusions to claim they are "probably' correct. Do not claim your conclusions "certainly" explain the evidence unless you have eliminated all alternative explanations. Logical fallacies often arise because writers unconsciously struggle to force their research to support to their earliest intuitions, guesses, hunches, or hypotheses about what is true. (Think of how often you heard high-school writers say "I'm going to do some research to get sources that support my thesis.") Beware your own prejudices about what you think the evidence will reveal before you've impartially examined it. Let the evidence speak and you can hardly go far wrong.

• Audience:
Does the paper address a scholarly audience and correctly estimate the level of knowledge that audience can be expected to possess? Does it avoid telling experts obvious things, like defining terms of art or basic concepts, providing needless "background," and identifying experts to each other with unnecessary specificity (e.g., "the biologist Lewis Thomas" in a paper addressed to biologists)? Does it always specify the source of generalizations about evidence by correct citations of scholarship?

• Mechanics and Documentation:
Does the paper use standard academic English usage and sentence construction, coherent and well-ordered paragraphs, logical paragraph transition, and a fully functional title, introduction, and conclusion? Does the paper accurately and consistently use a documentation style appropriate to the discipline (MLA, APA, CBE, or U. Chicago), or does it at least use MLA style accurately and consistently? Does it have the proper style, conventions, and organization of words, facts, and subjects? Is too much jargon used that the study can not be understood by its selected audience?

Failure to write grammatically when making a scholarly claim automatically exposes the writer to suspicion that the basic thinking underlying the paper is faulty, too. This is especially difficult for student writers because when the mind must concentrate on difficult, newly learned concepts and methods, grammar and syntax almost always deteriorate. Be especially careful when using terms of art and jargon from the discipline you're just entering. As an "apprentice," you may make mistakes that a more experienced scholar would not make, and they're the kind of mistakes that damage your authority, so you should pay special attention to those peculiar kinds of words and phrases. Double your efforts to proofread your final draft in order to catch these old errors that will come back when you least want them to appear. You can prevent one typical source of dangerous errors if you start your paper's first draft with a list of sources as you accumulate them in your research, properly formatted in the documentation style appropriate for your topic's discipline. This is far to important to leave for the last five minutes of the writing process, and if you develop the habit of doing it early you will save yourself countless disappointments in later papers. Just build the paper on top of that source list, and add to it every time you develop a new source, and you can spend your last hours polishing your prose rather than worrying about documentation format.

One you passed all these criteria then your research work is deemed of praise and recognition.



credits to:
http://faculty.goucher.edu/eng105sanders/research_paper_evaluation_criter.htm
http://www.reportbd.com/articles/57/1/Criteria-Qualities-of-Good-Scientific-Research/Page1.html


Last edited by hannah rhea hernandez on Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:25 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://woophie.blogspot.com
Cherryannmontejo

avatar

Posts : 44
Points : 50
Join date : 2009-06-23
Age : 27

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Sun Aug 30, 2009 2:38 pm

How do you know if a piece of research work is good or not? How are they evaluated?

A piece of research is evaluated through its quality. Title itself explains what would be the research is all about. By one look at it, we can say how good a piece of research is. I keep on hearing that one research will be considered good if it benefits the needs and interest of one individual. Yes, it can be considered as it is but somehow having much with its content and relevance is a good piece of work, too.

Actually, there are lots of ways and several guidelines on evaluating if a piece of research work is good or not. Each organization has its own various ways in evaluating according to a specific area. Some professionals are already very well acquainted when it comes to criticizing or assessing a research work and some don’t even have a hint on how it can be evaluated.

In my own viewpoint, considering the fact that I am already introduced with some things regarding methods of research, one piece of research is good if questions are answered and research process are explained. According to the article I’ve read, “Whatever may be the types of research works and studies, one thing that is more important is that they all meet on the common ground of scientific method employed by them.”

As what I have said a while ago, by simply reading the title, we can already determine what the topic is all about. It should be concise but gives a good indicator of what the report is all about. On the other hand, the title itself will be considered of no use if the research topic will not arouse the curiosity and interest of the reader. It should be significant and adds additional knowledge. Like what I have experienced, research that introduces new idea is much better than making repetition of the existing studies. I remembered a friend who always tells me that a good problem defines a good piece of research.

Methods for gathering reliable information to answer a question or support an experimental hypothesis should also be reliable and enough to convey appropriate information. It denotes the principles that guide research and experimentation and also the philosophic bases of those principles. Data gathering should be as efficient as possible. Having this can result to a good research outcome. Data gathered should also be studied and analyzed. If the analysis was statistical in nature, statistical procedures must be suitable and properly applied to the data. The research should present its findings based on the results and the data gathered should not be manipulated by the one who’s doing it. One piece of research is considered good if it provides brief and dependable resources. It proves that the researcher has done lots of readings. There are many separate disciplines that differ greatly in terms of the subject matter and the possible ways of studying that subject matter. In science, no single path to discovery exists and no one clear cut descriptions can be given that accounts for all the ways in which scientific truth is pursued.

Presentation of the research paper is also important. It should be presented as for the readers to understand it. Use of charts, statistics or tables and the correct use of terms must be understandable to others since not people are capable of understanding it especially if the subject matter is not their field of expertise. In doing research, lots of revisions are needed to ensure that uses of words are appropriate. Clarity of presentation which includes the sequencing and coherence of arguments is also important in evaluating a piece of work especially in research. Grammars used in the paper should also be correct. Some grammarians are more concerned with determining how the meaningful arrangement of the basic word and sentence building can best be described.

If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a conclusion. Life is the art of drawing sufficient conclusions from insufficient premises. In research, I really do not want to use the word true because there are only opinions some of which are preferable to others. Opinion formed after considering the relevant facts or evidences is a part that brings something to a close. Since it’s purely opinions of the researchers’ side, it must also give the reader the appreciation of what the study has revealed. Yes, reasoning draws a conclusion and makes us grant the conclusion, but it does not make the conclusion certain, nor does it remove doubt.

Such agreement of a conclusion with an actual observation does not itself prove the correctness of the hypothesis from which the conclusion is derived. It simply renders the premise that much more plausible. The ultimate test of the validity of a scientific hypothesis is its consistency with the totality of other aspects of the scientific framework. This inner consistency constitutes the basis for the concept of causality in science, according to which every effect is assumed to be linked with a cause.
-----
How are they evaluated? It says that one research must be efficient, experimental, rational and replicable. The purpose of the research should be clearly defined and common concepts must be used. The procedure used in the research should be described in sufficient detail to permit another researcher to repeat the research for further advancement, keeping the continuity of what has already been attained.

Procedural design of the research should be carefully planned to yield results that are as objectives as possible. The researcher should report with complete frankness, flaws in procedural design and estimate their effects upon the findings. The analysis of data should be sufficiently adequate to reveal its significance and the methods of analysis used should be appropriate. It should attempts to fairly present all perspective. It should discuss critical assumptions made in the analysis such as why a particular data set or analysis method is used. Indicates how results change with different data and analysis and identify contrary findings.

The validity and reliability of the data should be checked carefully. Conclusions should be confined to those justified by the data of the research and limited to those for which the data provide an adequate basis. Greater confidence in research is warranted if the researcher is experienced, has a good reputation in research and is a person of integrity.



http://www.reportbd.com/articles/57/1/Criteria-Qualities-of-Good-Scientific-Research/Page1.html
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://authenticallyblack.blogspot.com/
Karren D. Adarna

avatar

Posts : 31
Points : 33
Join date : 2009-06-20

PostSubject: assignment 5   Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:07 pm

How do you know if a piece of research work is good or not? How are they evaluated?


Let us first answer the first question, how do you know if the piece of research is good or not? Since the main reason why we do research is to discover more knowledge in order to gain more understanding, I think a piece of research can be considered good if its output benefits us or gives us knowledge and its significance as well as objectives is well stated and demonstrated. A piece of research can be considered good it possesses the qualities that a good research must have.

These qualities are being set so we can decide and judge the research fairly. And what are these qualities? As I searched using Internet, some of the qualities that a research must possess in order for it to be considered as good are the following; it should be well informed, thorough , intelligent , systematic (covering all the relevant points in the most logical and reader-friendly order possible). It means that research is structured with specified steps to be taken in a specified sequence in accordance with the well defined set of rules. Systematic characteristic of the research does not rule out creative thinking but it certainly does reject the use of guessing and intuition arriving at conclusions. Research must also allow verification (for example, by citing all sources carefully). It must be logical, this implies that research is guided by the rules of logical reasoning and the logical process of induction and deduction are of great value in carrying out research. Induction is the process of reasoning from a part to the whole whereas deduction is the process of reasoning from the premise. In fact, logical reasoning makes research more meaningful in the context of decision making. Good Research must also be empirical: It implies that research is related basically to one or more aspects of a real situation and deals with concrete data that provides a basis for external validity to research results. And lastly, in order for a certain research to be considered as good, it must be replicable: This characteristic allows research to be verified by replicating the study and thereby building a sound basis for decisions. Whatever may be the types of research works and studies, one thing that is important is that they all meet on the common ground of scientific method employed by them. I believe that if the research will fit to the qualities being mentioned above, and as I was saying, if its significance is highly related to the interests of people, then we can say that that piece of research is said to be good. However, these qualities are just based on my readings and there could also a lot more than these so I did not close it to these qualities only.

On the other hand, if the piece of research does not fit the qualities that I have mentioned above and maybe it is so significant and its contents are not defined well. If the research topic does not clearly addresses its purpose and concepts to the reader and does not contributes a great and favorable benefits to the society, then it may not be considered good. Also, make sure you double-check the information by making sure it is accurate a true. Sometimes sources may lack in accuracy, therefore you should confirm the information you received by checking more than one dependable source.

Now, going to the second question, how is research evaluated? There are many ways that a piece of research is evaluated. There even exists an organization called the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics which assists and give standards for researches. As for the research, it is evaluated from the first step on doing it until the last. The evaluation must start from the research plan. Questions like “do the stated objectives refer to the management decision the study is supposed to support? Do the objectives spell out what information will be gleaned from the research findings and how this information will help management make these decisions” must be addressed. Another thing to consider is its connection to the target audience. It is important to understand how the target audience will be identified and reached. Another thing is the research design; in general, research studies are classified as either qualitative or quantitative. Qualitative research usually takes the form of focus groups. Focus group research helps illuminate how the target audience thinks about and makes decisions about the subject of interest. The data collection method must be assessed also. Data collection methods differ for qualitative and quantitative research studies. Qualitative research relies on focus groups or in-depth personal interviews. Both have similar goals and use a similar method.

If the purpose of the research should be clearly defined and the research procedure used is described in sufficient detail to permit another researcher to repeat the research for further advancement, keeping the continuity of what has already been attained, then the research must said to be good and will have a good evaluation result. To evaluate a piece of research, you have to make sure you read extensively on what you will include from your research. And try to prove yourself that the research makes sense with the topic and the sources from which the information was received. The analysis of data should be sufficiently adequate to reveal its significance and the methods of analysis used should be appropriate. The validity and reliability of the data should be checked carefully. And finally, Greater confidence in research is warranted if the researcher is experienced, has a good reputation in research and is a person of integrity.

To sum it up, a piece of research is said to be good if its output benefits us or gives us knowledge and its significance as well as objectives is well stated and demonstrated and it is evaluated according to what it is, how it is done and what is its output.



http://www.reportbd.com/articles/57/1/Criteria-Qualities-of-Good-Scientific-Research/Page1.html

http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gsu.edu%2F~wwwprl%2FSRC%2FHow%2520to%2520Evaluate%2520a%2520Research%2520Proposal.doc&ei=TcOgSq_TIcGIkQXzwcCBBA&rct=j&q=how+to+evalaute+a+piece+of+research%3F&usg=AFQjCNG7TycrkzN_aV2TgDWdrtNAbX4PHw

http://www.ehow.com/how_2109938_evaluate-your-research.html




Last edited by Karren D. Adarna on Mon Sep 07, 2009 11:33 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Kate Mariel Dizon

avatar

Posts : 58
Points : 71
Join date : 2009-06-19
Age : 25
Location : Davao City, Philippines

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:54 pm

There are tons of research papers being made, written and published but only a selected few are truly captivating and worthy of praise. So how do we know whether a particular research paper is well- or poorly-written? I did my research and I was given several, and some even varying, results. Clearly, there are different criteria used to evaluate a research paper so I will make my answer so that it will be a summary and synthesis of everything I have read.

The things to look for in a research paper in order to deem it good or bad, according to my readings, are the following:

1. Choice of Topic
2. Statement of goals and objectives
3. Documentation and reliability and integration of literature
4. Methods, strategies, approaches used must be appropriate
5. Content and Organization
6. Style of writing
7. Conventions and Format of Paper
8. Presentation

To further explain, let us take each one separately. Let us begin with the choice of topic. If you are given a theme for your research, then it is important that your topic adheres to this theme. The theme “Green Computing” in our CS Research Methods this semester is a concrete example of this. Since we were given a theme, we are encouraged to develop topics around this theme. As one of the criteria for evaluation, your research topic must, at first glance, be interesting and not too broad or not too narrow. It has to be broad enough to include what must be included and narrow enough to exclude what must be excluded.

Another criterion for evaluation is the statement of goals or objectives. A research paper is considered good is the objectives are clearly stated and adheres to the topic. Also, from what we learned in class, objectives must follow the S.M.A.R.T. (sometimes S.M.A.R.T.E.R.) principle – Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, and Time-bounded. There are several variations of the meaning of S.M.A.R.T. but they do not necessarily differ too much from each other. The objectives must clearly define the milestones of the paper. As a convention, there is a general objective and, usually recommended, a maximum of five specific objectives.

During evaluation, one must also look at the documentation or the resources of the paper. This, I think, in particular pertains, but is not limited, to the Review of Related Literature. The resources of the paper are very important because they will prove the validity of your paper. Thus, your sources need to be reliable, as well. Your points must be supported by several sources, not just one. The paper must also demonstrate a synthesis as you combine your ideas with your documented sources and as you combine the ideas from varied sources. According to one of my readings, the integration of the sources must be “graceful”. All sources and references must be cited using a proper citation format.

One must also look at the methods, strategies and approaches used in the research. In my understanding, this refers to the paper’s methodology. You have to consider if the methodology employed in the paper was appropriate for the type of research. Speaking from my experience way back in high school when we had a final defense, the methodology, in my opinion, was the most difficult part to defend. The panel asked us why we chose the approach we did, why not other approaches, and other questions along those lines. Our defense went smoothly before that part came up but when it did, we started stuttering a little. Going back to the main point, when evaluating the methods, strategies and approaches used in a research, you must have a list of sources or references that will support your choice of approach. This is still tied to the literature of your study.

Next, in a more general evaluation of a research paper, is the content and organization. The paper, overall, must be motivated and the ideas must be sound. The facts, examples, definitions, and terminologies must all be appropriate. The depth of the topic coverage is also an important factor in evaluating a paper. Finally, and probably the most difficult thing for students like us to stay away from, is plagiarism. A good research paper is not plagiarized. When you mention the works from other authors, be sure to give them proper credit and cite them in the references. It is important that we eliminate this plagiarism habit of ours because it might destroy us in the future. Try to minimize using the “copy-paste” technology. Good organization is also a plus factor in research paper evaluation. You know that a paper is well-organized if it showcases the central idea and has a clear focus on the paper’s purpose, content, and order. Even if a research paper is a formal piece of work, just like normal books or novels, the paper’s pacing must be well-controlled.

The style of writing refers to three primary factors: voice, choice of words, and sentence fluency. This is closely related to the organization of the paper. In particular, the voice of the paper refers to how the writer speaks to the reader. In other words, the paper must be engaging to the reader. In fact, choosing a good “voice” in writing the paper will prevent your readers from becoming bored with what you have written. I do not mean to say that the paper should be all “light and fluffy”, rather, the voice must be research appropriate. The choice of words is also an important thing to look at. The words should convey what must be conveyed in a clear, precise, yet interesting way. A good research paper use specific and accurate words. Some evaluators also look at the sentence fluency. Sentences should have an easy flow, rhythm and cadence.

Since research papers are formal papers, an important factor to be evaluated is the convention or standard employed in the paper. In my understanding, this refers to the very fundamentals of writing, such as proper capitalization, punctuation, spelling, grammar, and usage. I know that not all of us are well-versed in the English language so I think it is best to have a dictionary or thesaurus while writing your research paper and have a grammarian check your work for you. Not all errors may be corrected, but they should be minimized, at the very least, to the point where they are almost unnoticeable. A well-written paper is not made overnight in a single go. It will take a lot of rewrites to get it to become satisfactory and ready to be presented to the evaluators. A research paper also follows a standards format of the contents. Usually that is, the first chapter is the Introduction or the Background of the study; the second chapter is the Review of Related Literature and framework; the third chapter is the methodology; the fourth chapter is the Results and Discussion; and the fifth chapter is the Conclusion and Recommendations. However, I have also seen various papers that do not follow the standard format but are still good.

The last, but not least, on my list of things to be evaluated in a research paper is the presentation. A research paper may be written flawlessly but it would still be useless if it is presented in a crappy way. In presenting your research paper, you have to take into consideration the audience you are presenting it to and match their level. You have to think about the style of your presentation is appropriate for what you are presenting. A very important aspect to consider is the approach you use to attract the audience. Do not expect that everyone in your audience is interested in the topic you are presenting. If this is case, which usually is, then you have to make sure that your presentation will get their attention even if your topic is of no particular interest to them. I have also noticed that some people tend to deliver their presentations either too fast or too slow. Just like how the pacing of your paper is important, the pacing of your presentation is also a key factor to making a good paper. You should try to control the speed of your presentation so that the audience will not be left behind by your swiftness or bored to tears by your slowness. The latter is usually the case, based on my experience. Finally, your appearance will also be evaluated during presentation. It is recommended to wear semi-formal or business attire when presenting your research paper. Keep in mind the saying, “Dress to impress”. You have to dress in a way that people will take you and your research seriously. I have observed that dressing properly gives you an aura of experience and professionalism.

Those are the major factors to consider in a research paper evaluation. Let me emphasize that before producing a good research paper, you will have to spend time, money, and effort rewriting the whole paper several times.

Evaluating a research paper is not an easy task, too. You have to be objective when evaluating, or else it will become unjust and biased. However, to make things easier, a rubric may be devised. This way, the points to be evaluated are clearly laid out and organized. So for our research paper this time, let us use the criteria given above to perform an initial evaluation of our work so that we can improve it before presenting it to other people.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://katemarieldizon.blogspot.com/
mariechelle alcoriza

avatar

Posts : 36
Points : 50
Join date : 2009-06-20
Age : 28
Location : Davao City

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Tue Sep 08, 2009 12:05 pm

Assign5
How do we know if a research is good or not? How are they evaluated?

The question is tough (hehe). Anyway, based from my readings, I have come up with the factors to be considered for the evaluation of a good research paper.

According to Simon Peyton James of Microsoft Research, Cambridge, he stated that writing papers is a skill, it is a skill that is worth learning. Well for me, it’s true, it is in writing that we can express our great ideas and also if it is backed up with evidences and documents that would support our ideas. Also, a good writer should also be a good reader. Am I out of the topic? Hehehe, I get carried away.

As Simon Peyton said that papers communicate ideas, is one of the factors that need to be considered in evaluating a research. A good research should infect the mind of the reader with his idea like a virus in our computers. As the saying goes, great ideas are worthless if you only keep it by yourself. That is why we write papers and do research right?

Another factor would be the presentation of the idea. The researcher should figure out what is his idea. The researcher should make certain that the readers will have no doubt on what the idea is. In other words, the researcher should state the main purpose of the research. We may somehow relate it with the “ping” or a ring of a bell, in which the research should just have on ping or one clear and sharp idea. In presenting an idea, the researcher should explain it as if he/she was speaking to someone. He/she should convey his/her perception towards the readers that even if the readers skip the details, they can still take something important from what they have read about.

The researcher should also state the purpose of the paper, he/ she should present a situational analysis that would state the problem, of course, and he/she should make it an interesting and unsolved problem, then after stating it. He/she can now present his idea, should explain his idea properly stating on how to solve the said problem. Example, in the abstract of his research, by just reading his papers abstract, the reader would know and would understand what his research all about. According to Kent Beck, the abstract should contain four sentences. The first one is that the researcher should state the problem first, and then he would say why it is an interesting problem. Next, the researcher should state what does his solution achieves and should say what is next or what follows from the presented solution. Another example would be in the introduction of the paper, the researcher can use example or examples to introduce the problem.
In addition, another factor that is needed for the evaluation is the relevance of the research to the readers. When we say relevant, it simply means that it has importance to people or it has a great impact on the lives of the people. A reader would give his time and attention to one thing if he/she can relate into or it has something that took his/her interest with. For example, as an information Technology student, our research is all about Green Computing. For me, the topic is really interesting that it pertains to the impact of technology to out Mother Nature and that we should provide ways to minimize and lessen the impact of it to the environment. Knowing that one of the major contributors to global warming is the technology itself that we use everyday.
It’s really hard to come up with a topic but after a while, we have come up with an idea which turned into an approved research topic.
In addition, the research should also be evaluated by the appropriateness of the methodology used to come up with the results. Another factor would be whether the idea or the research is proved to be rationally consistent; this one pertains to the results of the study or the research that was made. Perhaps the results that came off from a survey, does the mean, median and mode correct. Does the questionnaire used for the survey was validated by an expert, does it go through a series of validation. Stuffs like that. One thing that I have kept in mind was that, every research or in everything that we do, we should take into consideration the standards or the guidelines presented by some organizations. There are some simple guidelines that we should follow and I think the most basic and the most important one is citing the references and acknowledge them properly in your research. Since if without them, you cannot come up with a topic that could improve not just your life but also the lives of other people.

read more...

references:

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/simonpj/papers/giving-a-talk/giving-a-talk.htm
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/simonpj/papers/giving-a-talk/writing-a-paper.zip
Back to top Go down
View user profile
SherylCaguimbaga



Posts : 23
Points : 25
Join date : 2009-06-22
Age : 27

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:05 pm

There are lots of research papers that can be called “research work”, but not all research papers can be considered “good.” Same as the statement, many can write but not all are good writers that can write good articles. So, how do we know if a piece of research work is good or bad? When we buy a book or a magazine or anything that is read, we usually read first the title and then the summary that can be found usually at the front or back of the manuscript. A good title really catches our attention especially when it is related to our interest; likewise the summary. There are also cases that the manuscript’s title is eye catchy but when you read its content or summary, in a few paragraphs or even in a few sentences you start to dislike it and then you decide not read the entire paper. There are also cases like after reading the manuscript, you don’t like to read it again, not anymore because you didn’t like the story, it was dreadful, it was boring, it was not good.

One of the criteria of a good research work is the title and how it is stated. A title that can catch people’s attention is really good since they will have the interest to read the entire paper. This kind of title can be considered as the research paper’s great asset.

A research paper is divided into sections. It was mentioned in one of the articles that I have read that important sections should be included while the other sections can be included as necessary. What are these important sections? These important sections are the usual sections that can be seen in a research paper (e.g. title, introduction, significance of the study, objectives, review of related literature, analytical framework/methodology, expected outputs, work plan, budget, results, discussion, conclusion and so on.) The sections should be organized based on the standard format to present information clearly and concisely. It is important to understand the difference among the sections and it is very important also to put information in the appropriate location. The information should be clean and well organized so that readers can understand what they are reading and what it is all about.

A research can also be considered as good if it is in the paper the researcher’s motivation for doing the research, the design and execution, and the meaning of the results, and if it is written in a style that is exceedingly clear. Paragraphs are coherent and well ordered; there is a logical paragraph transition, and a fully functional title, introduction and conclusion. All the questions raised in the paper are answered most importantly the problem. The originality of the work is also very important. However, if it is a replication of the previous study, it should be in a different setting or with a different population.

The research paper is well presented which refers to the way it is documented, written, or printed; the author uses American English words that are understandable. Figures are correctly gathered and calculated. It is also good if the author uses illustrations in the paper for clarity and since it is easier to comprehend. Presentation of the charts and data sheets in the paper is also good but it must be accompanied with each corresponding interpretations. Say for example, the author of the research paper conducted a survey and made a comparison among the data he gathered or between the previous data and the recent data. It needs mathematical equations and calculations. The readers were not there when the survey was conducted and so in order for the readers to really understand what the illustration is for, how the author come up with the illustration and what it is all about, its interpretation must be at the top of it or below of it. It is good to have reusability of the research work in which others can explore the unexpected and contradictory findings of the research and challenge them to continue the study and improve it more.

Based on the detailed research proposal format, a good research work addresses the current need of a particular group, people, country, or the environment and intends to solve the problem. The objective is adequate enough to address the stated problem, it is clear and as to what the proposal is to achieve and is attainable within the time frame and indicated resources. The review of literature is complete enough to cover related researches and activities conducted for the last ten years. The research is guided by analytical framework and that all variables to be measured and evaluated are included in the methodology. Related technology which is protected by any of the intellectual rights scheme like patent, trademark, copyright, etc is indicated. The activities are consistent with the objectives and expected outputs and leads to the attainment of the expected outputs. The budget is reasonable and appropriate, consistent with the proposed work plan, indicates counterpart funds if available.

When writing a research paper, the researcher should also consider the following: the audience, style and tone, should avoid plagiarism, and the organization of the ideas and information. It is the purpose of the researcher to inform the audience about the research and particular issues. Therefore, the researcher is recommended to know about the audience and their positions and can be included in the considerations in writing the paper.

There should have enough resources for the researcher to gather more information. In that way, he can have enough evidences and logical reasons that can support his research, its claims and can contribute substantively. It is also recommended that sources should be recent enough to be persuasive. And it should be based on at least some recent article-length sources. The Communications of the ACM (CACM), Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), latest IT news from www.idg.net, the science and/or technology sections in major newspapers from www.nytimes.com are just some of the possible sources. And in the paper, correct citations must be allowed. The documentation style should be accurately and consistently used and is appropriate to the discipline. The researcher can refer/consult to the following: MLA, APA, CBE, or U-Chicago.

Hypotheses of the problem and/or research questions should be stated clearly and completely. It is also a must to define the terms. The researcher should provide operational definition for the important terms. When acronyms are used in some sections of the paper, it is also important to define those acronyms so that readers will not get confused. Based from my experience, when I was reading a scientific paper, the author of the said paper failed to define the unfamiliar terms and the acronyms that were used in the paper. It is also one of the reasons that readers will not understand what the paper and the author is trying to imply and what the subject is all about.

The research design which is the overall plan for conducting the research should also be considered; what type of research design that was used. There are types of research design (e.g. experimental, quasi-experimental, non-experimental) but the researcher can only use the design that is appropriate for the problem. The collection of data is done by the procedures developed in design. According to the “Tomorrow’s Professor SM Mailing List” in its article “Writing a paper that will get published,” the two elements that most often leading to rejection is poorly planned study design and lack of detail in methods. Analytical methods that are controlled by theoretical assumption are no longer acceptable.

Researchers should remember to pay attention to issues of plagiarism. To avoid errors in this regard, the department of biology at George Mason University recommends reading a section from a source and then restating in writing what you remember of the main points and then citing the source of the information in the text.

Based on the previous assignment that was to look for three published scientific papers, what I noticed is that most of the papers composed only four to five pages or more than that but not over ten. The authors of the paper were really trying to make it short but not to the point that it could hardly be understood. They were trying to present the information concisely and clearly. For me, the way the authors presented the information in the paper was good. It was concise and clear enough to understand. It was written direct to the point. When this kind of style is used, readers will not get bored in reading the paper.

The title, objective of the study, significance, methodology and the conclusion I think are the highlights of a research paper. Firstly, it is because the title is read first. It can be an advantage to a research paper when the title captivates the people to read the entire paper. Secondly, the objective of the study reflects the overall content of the paper, the interest of the researcher and also the expected output. Thirdly, the significance of the study describes how important the study is, the benefits that it can provide and the people that shall be benefited. Fourthly, the methodology describes how the study is done including the research design used by the researcher and the procedures. It is important because it determines the reliability of the given information and the output. Lastly, the conclusion is also very important because it answers the problem of the study and also the objective of the study. It describes the achievement of the study whether the study succeeded and whether the expected output has been achieved.


References:

1. “The Problem: The Heart of the Research Process”, Week 2 Lecture 2, ISYS3015 Analytical Methods for IS Professionals, School of IT, The University of Sydney, Thursday, Mar. 19, 2004.
http://www.ug.it.usyd.edu.au/~isys3015/s1_2004/lecture_notes/Problem.ppt
2. “Research Paper Evaluation Criteria”
http://faculty.goucher.edu/eng105sanders/research_paper_evaluation_criter.htm
3. “Tomorrow's Professor Msg.#316 WRITING A PAPER THAT WILL GET PUBLISHED”. Tomorrow’s ProfessorSM Mailing List, 15[7]:30, Apr. 2, 2001
http://ctl.stanford.edu/Tomprof/postings/316.html
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Mary Grace E. Gabayeron

avatar

Posts : 11
Points : 13
Join date : 2009-06-20
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Thu Sep 24, 2009 3:49 pm

Research - well, I think it the most challenging part in the curriculum a student may face. Working on a research makes students lessen the time spent for gimmicks, to play online games like DOTA specifically to the guys and other student activities. It is sad to know but it is the fact. It will be the time to reflect, to be observant, to be attentive, to be positive, to be courageous, be serious and time to travel – but that is if you have to. It may transform one into something such as a geek. But that is just too exaggerated to think. Laughing

There are a lot of daily routines to be changed in order to complete your research, especially the ones like me who doesn’t know how to manage their time (laugh). Aside from being tied up to the changes made in ones daily routines, the first thing that makes research so hard is to have a topic. Yes, a topic; which is up until now, I still don’t have one. I hope I can find a good one. But before that, let us go back to where we have left in. Yes, choosing a topic for research is quite frustrating and sometimes, when you had your topic, it is disappointing to know that you cannot have a grasp of what it is all about and go back to where everything started – from scratch. Well, if you luckily have a topic, then, it’s time to start the research! pale

“Writing research just for the sake of passing is just a waste of time and a waste of effort.” This is what I have learned from our instructor every time he meets us for the Research course. Actually, I have learned a lot from him (credits for sir!!!) cheers . So, from the phrase above, one can think of how to know that a research is good or not? I know that not all is that serious in doing the research, but there are times that a student prefers to know which is good and bad for the research because, practically, research counts a significant portion on the student’s grades, so it means that a good research means a higher grade. Who among the research students do not want a good grade in research? But others really want to discover something new, something good and something that will be useful for the generations to come.
Before we discuss and differentiate a good research from a bad one, let us first investigate what are the advantages or the goals of research in the lives of the graduating students. According to the article that I have read, research is assigned so that students can (1) become familiar with scholarly research, which is a central skill for college success, especially career success as well. (2) Students can gain expert knowledge on a particular subject which is related to the course and (3) for the students to learn how to synthesize and report on a secondary research in such a way that it can be available for the others. Knowing these three goals, the student may wonder how to create a good research.
Creating a good research involves not only skills and attitude but it also involves tools and guidelines. Now I understand why our instructor required us to read those one hundred articles about green computing and encouraged us to read more not only articles of those kinds but also on how to make a research paper. Ah, How I wish I could turn back time and try to finish reading those one hundred articles. If I only knew that I can use it for the times like this, then I should have read it. But I know it is my fault. Why I’m in a great regret right now? It is because one of the guidelines in making a good research is extensive reading. Due to extensive reading, one may fully understand what the subject is all about and with this; one can formulate a topic to be researched. From another article that I have read, states that the first step in creating a good research requires that a student understands the assignment requirements and the topic for the research paper. With this reading is highly recommended.

After the student understands the topic of the research, the student can begin his research. Bear in mind that the topic for the research makes sense and not just for the sake of passing. But I know that a topic cannot be approved if it doesn’t make any sense at all. It would be a useless research after all. Once the topic is set up, it is time to gather information. For some of us, students, the simplest tool to have research is the internet. Yes, we can gain much knowledge on the internet due to its wide range and that we can gain information from people around the world. The question is, does the information we get from the internet all valid and correct? We are not sure, right? Then it just proves that the internet is not an effective place to gather information. Not all information found in the internet is appropriate for a college-level research. Majority of the scholarly materials are found in libraries. Make use of the libraries and leaf the pages of the variety of academic materials. If books and the internet are not enough for the research, try to reach out to others. Try setting up an interview with someone who is familiar with the subject. In this case you can gain information out of real persons you meet face to face. In addition, a good research paper writer requires that the writer keep detailed research notes that remind the student of the details he or she had discovered through his or her research. So, it is just right to have a personal memo or notebook for us, students to jot down what we had read, learned and researched on that notebook for us not to miss necessary points in our research.

In order not to be troubled on how to arrange the information you had gathered, an outline for the research is a good tool to use. Student should deal time for making outlines before beginning the actual drafting of the paper. Using outline can group relevant information or ideas into one and can make the flow of the paper smooth. After the student completed his or her research outline, he or she can now begin the writing process. But that doesn’t ends there. One of the most lessons in writing a research paper is how to determine which quotes, paraphrases, and pieces of information to include and which is to set aside. Setting quotes in research papers can make your research credible due to lots of sources you had. These are the general guidelines in setting quotes. First, only quote when the way the writer put the words cannot be changed without changing the meaning of the passage. Second, quote when what the writer said is exceptionally important or insightful. Paraphrasing must always be cited properly and information that does little to contribute to the topic must be omitted. A good research must be double checked and is subjected to proofreading. It is just normal to write a draft and write it once more until there are no flaws to be found. There should be more time in drafting. With this, the student may be able to improve what he or she have written when they are being reviewed and checked by the adviser or by professional writers.

After beating the demons of sleepless nights due to typing drafts, the glory of finishing the research comes your way. Seems so easy but is not that simple.

Now, let’s sum up how to determine that a research paper is good. As long as the student followed what was stated above, it is quite sure that he or she can produce a good research paper. To differentiate a good research paper from a bad one, a good research paper is well-researched, well-written and well-developed. It is also focused, direct and it makes the reader care about the subject. A good research paper also follows style guidelines, is properly documented and stylistically polished. On the other hand, an ordinary research paper is poorly researched and developed, it is loaded with formatting and grammatical errors, unclear and wandering, does not engage to the readers, poorly cited and stylistically weak and may result to a lesser grade.

The difference between a good and an ordinary research paper can be linked to how the student handles himself or herself about analyzing, revising and engaging. Most students can make a good research paper if and only if they take everything by heart. He or she must be completely armed with the skill, the tools, information, courage and determination to finish the research he or she began.

In addition in terms of how a good research is evaluated, well, I think, the grade that the student gets after submission of the research paper says it all.



References:
How to Evaluate Your Research
By kris777
eHow Community Member
http://www.ehow.com/how_2109938_evaluate-your-research.html

How to Write a Good Research Paper
http://www.essaytown.com/writing/how-to-write-a-good-research-paper

Good Research Paper
http://www.essaytown.com/writing/good-research-paper
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://gabayeron13.blogspot.com/
angel mae b. brua

avatar

Posts : 38
Points : 46
Join date : 2009-06-23
Age : 28
Location : Davao City

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Sat Sep 26, 2009 5:17 pm

The first question stated of how do I know if the research work is good or not. This question is intended foe me as well. Since we are doing research now. For me, research is somehow like searching or studying a specific idea based from the past or creating your own idea as well. A good research is not based on the perspective of the researcher alone, it should be validated and studied for a period of time. Because of this, based on my understanding alone, a good research work is not only based on the researchers own idea of creating the research. It should be validated and the work should answer the question of why do such research. Meaning, a good research work answers the question of the researcher or in other words it provides a conclusion.

From the second question, how are they being evaluated, here is my answer. I will now base my answer on the answers provided by Ann. Since we gather the same section. First is the reusability. Reusability in the sense that the research work alone is not intended to end there. Research alone is rising every year. Meaning the research is usable for a long period of time and not intended to end. Everyday, we are doing research works. In creating a research, the work must be understandable to the next one using it. That’s one of the criteria in evaluating research work. Next is originality. Research, mostly, is based on past ideas. In creating research, the research that is done within your time should perhaps have the same idea from past. But not really having the same concepts cause it can be said to be plagarism. “The core idea should be original. A pioneering paper may face more challenges during reviewing (which is inherently conservative) than an incremental paper, but the most cited papers are pioneering papers. I will cite your paper if I use an idea of your paper is one of the oldest references I can find for that idea.” On real basis, the mean point of the second criteria is dealing on own’s idea. Researcher have their own idea, each researcher have their own idea. Next is effectiveness. “There should be some experiment evidence that the core idea works better than th past ideas or better than reasonable baselines. Reviewers care deeply about this, I will want to use your idea if you can show me that it works on tasks that I care about.” Research is not on papers alone, it should become helpful in such a way that it would provide some solutions to the first question on the first part of doing the research. Next is the timeliness. The urgency of the topic why is it being done now, not yesterday, and not tomorrow. While no number of sources can be called automatically "enough," the assignment requires that you find sources of sufficient quality to support what you say you know about your topic. Scholarly sources are preferable, but in some disciplines the popular-scholarly source can be used for support if corroborated by scholarly sources. See me for advice about this. In the end, though, one of the most complex and subtle measures of your readiness for upper-division college writing will be your ability to match source quantity and quality to the strength of claims made by your thesis and the demands your readers are likely to make.Articles are the sources of the most recent and most tightly focused analysis on your topic. Students who rely on books because OLLI is easier to use, or because books appear to have "more on the topic," are still thinking at a pre-college level. They do not understand how quickly book-length manuscripts become outdated, and how books' much larger theses can make it difficult for students to extract useful support from them without misunderstanding what they are borrowing. Take seriously the task of reading scholarship in your field. The popular works available will not give you the authority to say things that will persuade your professors. You can use popular-scholarly journals and scholarly reference works to give you a "ladder of expertise" so that you can read professional scholars' work, but you eventually will have to join the dialogue they are conducting several times each year in their field's scholarly journals. You can learn a lot from "negative success" at reading scholarly work, too. If you are trying your hardest, using all the aids available (including asking teachers in the subject for help), and you still cannot read the scholarship near the end of your first year of study, you probably should rethink your intended major. Scholarship in the social and natural sciences becomes outdated quickly. Conclusions based on out of date evidence fail to persuade. Students who want to succeed in these majors must become persistent enough researchers to seek out the most recent and authoritative sources on their topics. Humanities sources have undergone immense theoretical upheavals in the last decades of the Twentieth Century, and for many fields, secondary scholarship written much before 1980 can be suspect or unacceptable because its analytical methods are controlled by theoretical assumptions that are no longer acceptable. The fields cannot engage in wholesale book-burning and web-site erasure to eliminate these problematic sources, but an early part of Humanities' majors' upper-division work involves becoming familiar with the currently acceptable theories and analytical methods, and with the sources from earlier scholars work which are still acceptable.




http://faculty.goucher.edu/eng105sanders/research_paper_evaluation_criter.htm
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.gelaneam.blogspot.com
George Dan Gil



Posts : 30
Points : 34
Join date : 2009-06-23

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:23 am

How do you know if a piece of research work is good or not? How are they evaluated?

Whether good or bad, researchers should be persistent with their works if they want to success. Evaluating your research is not that easy because you will have to follow principles and standards and provide correct evaluation of your work.

Defining your topic
Begin by clearly mapping out the concepts you want to research. This will help you identify the key terms and concepts you should use when searching electronic databases and print research resources.
a. Clarify your understanding of the topic by asking yourself the following questions:
• What level of research does your assignment require? Is it a brief class presentation or are you preparing to write a research paper with a bibliography and footnotes?
• What do you already know about your topic?
• What are the main issues?
• Does your topic deal with historical or current events?
• Has your lecturer required that you consult certain types of materials such as popular or scholarly journals, newspapers, or a particular database?
b. Do some background reading to familiarize yourself with the topic
• This will also provide you with relevant keywords or synonyms to use during database searching. Some key resources that will help you gather this information are:
• Subject Dictionaries and Thesauri:
• Dictionaries provide an alphabetical list of definitions of words, phrases, theories, terminology or people which can help you clarify basic information. Thesauri contain subject headings which list preferred research terms, usually produced to support a research tool.
c. Map out the concepts you wish to search
• Use the information you have collected to create a concept map. A concept map is an easy method of devising a strategy for finding information in print and electronic research resources.

Selecting and Using the Best Research Resources
• Resources for Basic Research
• Resources for Advanced Research

RESOURCES FOR BASIC RESEARCH
Information for assignments or for research which does not require in-depth study can usually be found in books or articles in Desk Copy or Short Loan Collections.
Use Voyager, the Library Catalogue to find:
• books and journal titles held at the University of Auckland, using key words or concepts you have identified in your concept map.
• material recommended to you by lecturers and reading lists.
• annual reviews on your subject.
• bibliographies of books and articles on a particular topic.
Online help is available within Voyager, but here are a few tips to enhance your searching:
• If you know the material you want is on Short Loan or Desk Copy, try the Course Material search option on Voyager.
• When you find the record of a relevant book, click on the subject headings next to LC Subject Heading(s) to find similar books.
• Once you have found a useful book on the library shelf, check its contents to see if it has a bibliography - this will refer you to other books and articles.
• Use our guide on Interpreting References.
RESOURCES FOR ADVANCED RESEARCH
• To find coverage of all the relevant research literature on a particular subject, you need more than Voyager. Indexing Publications, Abstracting Journals, and Electronic Databases are the major research tools you should use to locate articles, conference papers, etc. relevant to your field. They all provide basic descriptions of articles and enough information for you to see if this material is held by the Library.

Locating the Information You Have Identified
Check Voyager to see if the Library has the items you found during your searches. Once you find the items on Voyager, note the item's Location, Call Number and Status.
• If you cannot find an item which should be available, ask Library Staff.
• If Voyager shows the item is already charged out, fill in the information at the bottom of the screen to recall the book for yourself.
Material from other University of Auckland campuses
If you have located material on Voyager which is available but held at another campus, use the Requests button in Voyager and fill in the online form to ask for that item to be delivered to your nearest University of Auckland Library.
Material from outside the University of Auckland
Interlibrary Loan and Document Delivery Service is generally available to postgraduate students and staff of the University of Auckland. Undergraduate students may apply if they can provide the signature of their lecturer or tutor on the printed application form. An electronic application form is available.

Evaluating resources
Print resources
Sometimes, we have the tendency to believe anything we see in print. Critical thinking is a necessary skill to develop as you read through all the information you've found on your topic.
Most research publications go through an external editing or peer review process that helps verify the authority and accuracy of the information presented. Reputable newspapers and magazines also check their facts, but you will also want to consider such issues as objectivity, currency of your information, and how thoroughly your topic is covered.
Internet Resources
The majority of Internet resources lack this kind of peer review or even simple fact checking, which means that you, the user, must thoroughly evaluate anything you encounter on the Internet before deciding whether you should use it in your research.
• Evaluating Web Sites, provides standard criteria for evaluating web sites.

We can identify if a research work is good or not if it can pass the evaluation process that will be given. Many standards and principles should be followed to pass the evaluation process.

We should know what evaluation is and why we have to evaluate our research topics. Evaluation is a methodological area that is closely related to, but distinguishable from more traditional social research. Evaluation utilizes many of the same methodologies used in traditional social research, but because evaluation takes place within a political and organizational context, it requires group skills, management ability, political dexterity, sensitivity to multiple stakeholders and other skills that social research in general does not rely on as much. Here we introduce the idea of evaluation and some of the major terms and issues in the field.

Evaluation is the systematic assessment of the worth or merit of some object
This definition is hardly perfect. There are many types of evaluations that do not necessarily result in an assessment of worth or merit -- descriptive studies, implementation analyses, and formative evaluations, to name a few. Better perhaps is a definition that emphasizes the information-processing and feedback functions of evaluation. For instance, one might say:

Evaluation is the systematic acquisition and assessment of information to provide useful feedback about some object
Both definitions agree that evaluation is a systematic endeavor and both use the deliberately ambiguous term 'object' which could refer to a program, policy, technology, person, need, activity, and so on. The latter definition emphasizes acquiring and assessing information rather than assessing worth or merit because all evaluation work involves collecting and sifting through data, making judgments about the validity of the information and of inferences we derive from it, whether or not an assessment of worth or merit results.

The generic goal of most evaluations is to provide "useful feedback" to a variety of audiences including sponsors, donors, client-groups, administrators, staff, and other relevant constituencies. Most often, feedback is perceived as "useful" if it aids in decision-making. But the relationship between an evaluation and its impact is not a simple one -- studies that seem critical sometimes fail to influence short-term decisions, and studies that initially seem to have no influence can have a delayed impact when more congenial conditions arise. Despite this, there is broad consensus that the major goal of evaluation should be to influence decision-making or policy formulation through the provision of empirically-driven feedback.

These are the common used questions in evaluating research:

What is the definition and scope of the problem or issue, or what's the question?
Formulating and conceptualizing methods might be used including brainstorming, focus groups, nominal group techniques, Delphi methods, brainwriting, stakeholder analysis, synectics, lateral thinking, input-output analysis, and concept mapping.

Where is the problem and how big or serious is it?
The most common method used here is "needs assessment" which can include: analysis of existing data sources, and the use of sample surveys, interviews of constituent populations, qualitative research, expert testimony, and focus groups.

How should the program or technology be delivered to address the problem?
Some of the methods already listed apply here, as do detailing methodologies like simulation techniques, or multivariate methods like multiattribute utility theory or exploratory causal modeling; decision-making methods; and project planning and implementation methods like flow charting, PERT/CPM, and project scheduling.

How well is the program or technology delivered?
Qualitative and quantitative monitoring techniques, the use of management information systems, and implementation assessment would be appropriate methodologies here.
The questions and methods addressed under summative evaluation include:
What type of evaluation is feasible?
Evaluability assessment can be used here, as well as standard approaches for selecting an appropriate evaluation design.

What was the effectiveness of the program or technology?
One would choose from observational and correlational methods for demonstrating whether desired effects occurred, and quasi-experimental and experimental designs for determining whether observed effects can reasonably be attributed to the intervention and not to other sources.

What is the net impact of the program?
Econometric methods for assessing cost effectiveness and cost/benefits would apply here, along with qualitative methods that enable us to summarize the full range of intended and unintended impacts.



By following these steps we can identify if our research work is good or bad. Evaluation can play a very important role in criticizing and defining your research work and also will lead you to success.


http://www.library.auckland.ac.nz/instruct/research.htm
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/intreval.htm
Back to top Go down
View user profile
ronie_biloy

avatar

Posts : 30
Points : 39
Join date : 2009-06-19
Age : 28
Location : davao city

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:44 pm

How do you know if a piece of research work is good or not? how are they evaluated? (1500words)

In my own point of view, a research work is considered good if it tries to answer or solve a problem; otherwise it is useless. Though many are trying to do some researches or research works out of curiosity and are trying to prove something new or contradict the old ways or beliefs, which I think also are not bad, but I consider it as a not so good research work. I do believe that the main purpose of research is that, one must try to solve something and one must have to discover a solution to a problem. So, I must say that a good research work possesses a good research problem and well defined objectives. I certainly believe that, before delving into the research paper which I consider as a documentation of the research work, one must have to prioritize first the very core of the study before taking any glance on the correct formatting of the research paper. Now, If one’s topic is worth contributing to the community or has a big contribution for the development of the public, then this is now the time that we must have to consider the way the researcher or proponent had presented his/her research paper. How he or she performed the study. Also, a thorough review on the content of the paper must have to be done, a thorough examination on how he/she tried to convince the society that his/her proposal is worthy of the attention of the reviewing public. Of course, every section of the paper must have to be well constructed like the statement of the problem, the review of related literature, the purpose of the study and the methodology.

They say “You can design the greatest experiment on earth but if you cannot write a good report then nobody will take your results seriously” which I strongly believe. A good report of the results is a big factor in order for one research to be recognized. According to my searches, this is from Experiments-resources.com, there are several sections that must have to be met or a research paper must contain, these are: TITLE, INTRODUCTION, METHOD, RESULTS, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, REFERENCES.

The title must not be too long but must describe exactly what your experiment is about. For example, “Mold Growth” tells us nothing whereas “The Effect Of Temperature On Mold Growth” let everybody know what the experiment is about.

In the introduction section it is important to give the reasons why one picked the experiment and show the background research one did for it. Also, one must have to assume that somebody reading your experiment may know nothing about the subject so you must give them a quick summary. You could let them know a little about ‘The Life Cycle of Mold’ or ‘The History of Pendulums’. There is one problem; how do you keep your introduction short while trying to teach somebody about your subject? This is where you use references, sometimes called citations. For every piece of information included, you should let the reader know where it came from. Whether from books, magazines, the internet or your teacher, if you include your references, somebody interested in your subject can easily read them and find out more. Finally, you should include your hypothesis statement. This is what you are trying to prove or disprove. For example ‘Mold grows quicker at higher temperatures’ or ‘Expensive brands of paper towel absorb more water than cheaper ones’ are testable hypotheses.

Next is the methodology section, here you must describe exactly the equipment and methods you used. What you must remember is that somebody might want to test your results so you must make sure that they are able to perform exactly the same experiment with exactly the same equipment. It is a good idea to include a list of all the equipment you used and step by step instructions on what you did.

Next is the results section, here you describe what you found. In this section, you should not discuss what your results mean; only what you found. You must try to be exact and give numbers instead of just observations. Use graphs and tables as they are easier for people to understand easily. Be careful not to put in lots of graphs just for the sake of it. Every graph and table should be clear and referred to in the text and then the discussion section, this is where you interpret your results and try to explain what they mean. This is called significance. You should point out whether your hypothesis is proved, disproved or inconclusive, if you are not sure one way or the other. If your hypothesis is proved, great, but the world of science does not stay still. Here you should speculate where science goes next or what experiments you could do next. For example, in the case of the mold bread experiment, after testing the effect of temperature, you could check whether the amount of light has an effect on the rate of growth. If your hypothesis was wrong or unproven, this is not a problem. There is no right and wrong in science, only answers. Even if your hypothesis was wrong, the world of science has still learned something. In the discussion you must describe why the experiment did not give the results you expected. Maybe your initial hypothesis was wrong, but maybe there were some flaws in your experimental design or method. You should describe why it might be wrong or what changes you would make if you were to repeat the experiment again. Be honest. Nobody is going to punish you for having these problems, only for not understanding why. Even great scientists like Charles Darwin and Stephen Hawking have had flaws in their theories so you are in good company if your experiment did not work out exactly how you planned!

Finally, the conclusion, it says that it is always a good idea to write a short summary at the end of the report to make everything a little clearer to the reader.

In the bibliography section, it says that it is a good practice to list the books, magazines and websites from where you found out your background research when writing a research paper. This makes sure that somebody who is interested in your subject can find out a little more. For a book, you should include the name of the author, the title, the date it was written and the page numbers of where you found the information. For magazines you should include the name of the author, the title of the magazine, the issue number and/or date, and the name of the article. For a website you should put the exact website address and the date you looked at it. Not every science report or article insists that you have a bibliography but if you want to follow a career as a scientist it is a good idea to get used to it now.

Well then if the said research work contains all the said factors above then I could say that the work is worth a million dollar (hehehe).Basketball Basketball Basketball



Back to top Go down
View user profile
Mary Rossini Diamante

avatar

Posts : 15
Points : 17
Join date : 2009-06-27
Age : 27

PostSubject: Assignment 5   Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:00 pm

Various criteria are set to how a research study should be properly assessed. There are different standards on how to define and identify if a research work is good. It varies accordingly to reviewers of diverse analysis and method of evaluation.

There are different kinds of research works, however the decisive factor for evaluation are comparable in ways. According to answers.com, a good research is well-informed, thorough, intelligent, and systematic, allows for the possibility that one may be mistaken and allows for verification. A good research should be knowledgeable with its subject. It should also be detailed with information regarding the focus of the study. The research must take on specific methods; it must be organized and ordered. Moreover, it should be falsifiable and should considerably be confirmed and be verified.

The study should be able to answer and support all questions related to the topic. It should contain sufficient information and resources to back up the study. If it takes on statistical matters, it must be precise and accurate. Figures and diagrams have to be explained and elaborated in manners that it can be understood. The terminologies to be used should be simple and clear.

Taken from the reportbd.com (2009), a research should satisfy the certain criteria. The purpose of the research should be clearly defined and common concepts be used. The research procedure used should be described in sufficient detail to permit another researcher to repeat the research for further advancement, keeping the continuity of what has already been attained. The procedural design of the research should be carefully planned to yield results that are as objectives as possible. The researcher should report with complete frankness, flaws in procedural design and estimate their effects upon the findings. The analysis of data should be sufficiently adequate to reveal its significance and the methods of analysis used should be appropriate. The validity and reliability of the data should be checked carefully. Conclusions should be confined to those justified by the data of the research and limited to those for which the data provide an adequate basis. Greater confidence in research is warranted if the researcher is experienced, has a good reputation in research and is a person of integrity.

According to faculty.goucher.edu (2009), how the research paper is evaluated is based on four (4) criteria. These are sources, thesis, audience and mechanics and documentation. This article is mainly intended for the research paper evaluation of students. With regard to the sources, it inquires if the paper uses the right kinds of scholarly or popular-scholarly sources to support its claims? It refers to the consideration if the resources used in supporting the paper are intellectual and logical enough. Is the paper based on at least some recent article-length sources? Articles are the sources of the most recent and most tightly focused analysis on your topic. Having updated source of information are also significant. Gathering latest information and updates on related topic should be observed. Are the sources recent enough to be persuasive? Scholarship in the social and natural sciences becomes outdated quickly. Conclusions based on out of date evidence fail to persuade. Students who want to succeed in these majors must become persistent enough researchers to seek out the most recent and authoritative sources on their topics. Humanities sources have undergone immense theoretical upheavals in the last decades of the Twentieth Century, and for many fields, secondary scholarship written much before 1980 can be suspect or unacceptable because its analytical methods are controlled by theoretical assumptions that are no longer acceptable. The fields cannot engage in wholesale book-burning and web-site erasure to eliminate these problematic sources, but an early part of Humanities' majors' upper-division work involves becoming familiar with the currently acceptable theories and analytical methods, and with the sources from earlier scholars work which are still acceptable.

Next is about thesis. Is the paper organized by an independent thesis which at least uses reasoning and/or evidence from one article to contribute substantively to the reasoning and/or evidence in any other article, thus avoiding mere summary of the research? Is the thesis carefully composed to avoid claiming absolute knowledge if its evidence supports only possible or probable conclusions? Is the thesis supported by logically sound reasoning?
These questions are asking whether the author has moved beyond the stage of merely reporting what others say, and into the stage of being able to think creatively about the topic. Early attempts to do this may be tentative and uncertain. To protect your reputation for careful thinking, make sure you distinguish clearly among certain, probable, and possible conclusions. Be content to claim your conclusions are "possibly" correct unless you can eliminate many of the contending conclusions to claim they are "probably' correct. Do not claim your conclusions "certainly" explain the evidence unless you have eliminated all alternative explanations. Logical fallacies often arise because writers unconsciously struggle to force their research to support to their earliest intuitions, guesses, hunches, or hypotheses about what is true. (Think of how often you heard high-school writers say "I'm going to do some research to get sources that support my thesis.") Beware your own prejudices about what you think the evidence will reveal before you've impartially examined it. Let the evidence speak and you can hardly go far wrong.

III. Audience: Does the paper address a scholarly audience and correctly estimate the level of knowledge that audience can be expected to possess? Does it avoid telling experts obvious things, like defining terms of art or basic concepts, providing needless "background," and identifying experts to each other with unnecessary specificity (e.g., "the biologist Lewis Thomas" in a paper addressed to biologists)? Does it always specify the source of generalizations about evidence by correct citations of scholarship?

IV. Mechanics and Documentation: Does the paper use standard academic English usage and sentence construction, coherent and well-ordered paragraphs, logical paragraph transition, and a fully functional title, introduction, and conclusion? Does the paper accurately and consistently use a documentation style appropriate to the discipline (MLA, APA, CBE, or U. Chicago), or does it at least use MLA style accurately and consistently?

Be especially careful when using terms of art and jargon from the discipline you're just entering. As an "apprentice," you may make mistakes that a more experienced scholar would not make, and they're the kind of mistakes that damage your authority, so you should pay special attention to those peculiar kinds of words and phrases.
Double your efforts to proofread your final draft in order to catch these old errors that will come back when you least want them to appear. You can prevent one typical source of dangerous errors if you start your paper's first draft with a list of sources as you accumulate them in your research, properly formatted in the documentation style appropriate for your topic's discipline. This is far to important to leave for the last five minutes of the writing process, and if you develop the habit of doing it early you will save yourself countless disappointments in later papers. Just build the paper on top of that source list, and add to it every time you develop a new source, and you can spend your last hours polishing your prose rather than worrying about documentation format.

The citations I have itemized are some references of how a research work is evaluated. As I have mentioned, there are various ways of evaluating a research work and it usually varies on the critic or reviewer. To further analyze and weigh up the appropriate procedures of evaluation, additional comprehension of the range should be performed.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_qualities_of_good_research
http://www.reportbd.com/articles/57/1/Criteria-Qualities-of-Good-Scientific-Research/Page1.html
http://faculty.goucher.edu/eng105sanders/research_paper_evaluation_criter.htm
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Melgar John Gascal

avatar

Posts : 13
Points : 16
Join date : 2009-06-19
Age : 28

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Wed Sep 30, 2009 3:44 pm

How do we know if a research topic is good or bad?

According to Ms. Mary Whisner, research is good when you get the right answer. Certainly getting the right answer should be an element, but does this statement cover it all? One problem is that a researcher might luck out, like the batter who happens to get a good hit with bad form. For instance, if a researcher forgets to check the pocket part of an annotated code and doesn’t update cases or statutes in any way, he or she might still get the right answer by the good fortune of having a statute that hasn’t been amended and cases that haven’t been appealed or overruled. So getting the right answer is not in itself enough to say that the research was good.


A good research document empowers readers to reach their own conclusions by including:

• A well-defined question.
• Description of the context and existing information about an issue.
• Consideration of various perspectives.
• Presentation of evidence, with data and analysis in a format that can be replicated by others.
• Discussion of critical assumptions, contrary findings, and alternative interpretations.
• Cautious conclusions and discussion of their implications.
• Adequate references, including original sources, alternative perspectives, and criticism.

Good research requires judgment (or discernment) and honesty. It carefully evaluates information sources. It acknowledges possible errors, limitations and contradictory evidence. It identifies excluded factors that may be important. It describes key decisions researchers faced when structuring their analysis and explains the choices made. For example, if various data sets are available, or impacts can be measured in several ways, the different options are discussed. Sometime, multiple analysis is performed using alternative approaches and their results compared. Good research is cautious about drawing conclusions, careful to identify uncertainties and avoids exaggerated claims. It demands multiple types of evidence to prove a point. It does not assume that association (things occur together) proves causation (one thing causes another). Bad research often contains jumps in logic, spurious arguments, and non-sequiturs (“it does not follow”).
Bad research does not necessarily use inaccurate data. There are ways to manipulate and misrepresent legitimate statistics to support a particular conclusion. Questions can be defined, data selected and analysis structured to reach a desired outcome. Alternative perspectives and data can be ignored or distorted.

In other words, we can state the qualities of a good research as under:

1. Good Research is Systematic: It means that research is structured with specified steps to be taken in a specified sequence in accordance with the well defined set of rules. Systematic characteristic of the research does not rule out creative thinking but it certainly does reject the use of guessing and intuition arriving at conclusions.

2. Good Research is Logical: This implies that research is guided by the rules of logical reasoning and the logical process of induction and deduction are of great value in carrying out research. Induction is the process of reasoning from a part to the whole whereas deduction is the process of reasoning from the premise. In fact, logical reasoning makes research more meaningful in the context of decision making.

3. Good Research is Empirical: It implies that research is related basically to one or more aspects of a real situation and deals with concrete data that provides a basis for external validity to research results.

4. Good Research is Replicable: This characteristic allows research to be verified by replicating the study and thereby building a sound basis for decisions.


The guidelines below are intended to help evaluate the quality of research documents.

Desirable Practices
1. Attempts to fairly present all perspectives.
2. Provides context information suitable for the intended audience. This can be done with a literature review that summarizes current knowledge, or by referencing relevant documents or websites that offer a comprehensive and balanced overview.
3. Carefully defines research questions and their links to broader issues.
4. Provides accurate data and analysis in a format that can be accessed and replicated by others. Quantitative data should be presented in tables and graphs, and available in database or spreadsheet form on request.
5. Discusses critical assumptions made in the analysis, such as why a particular data set or analysis method is used. Indicates how results change with different data and analysis. Identifies contrary findings.
6. Presents results in ways that highlight critical findings. Graphs and examples are particularly helpful for this.
7. Discusses the logical links between research results, conclusions and implications.
Discusses alternative interpretations, including those with which the researcher disagrees.
8. Describes analysis limitations and cautions. Does not exaggerate implications.
9. Is respectful to people with other perspectives.
10. Provides adequate references.
11. Indicates funding sources, particularly any that may benefit from research results.

Undesirable Practices

1. Issues are defined in ideological terms. “Straw men” reflecting exaggerated or extreme perspectives are use to characterize a debate.
2. Research questions are designed to reach a particular conclusion.
3. Alternative perspectives or contrary findings are ignored or suppressed.
4. Data and analysis methods are biased.
5. Conclusions are based on faulty logic.
6. Limitations of analysis are ignored and the implications of results are exaggerated.
7. Key data and analysis details are unavailable for review by others.
8. Researchers are unqualified and unfamiliar with specialized issues.
9. People with differing perspectives are insulted and ridiculed.
10. Citations are primarily from special interest groups or popular media, rather than from peer reviewed professional and academic organizations.

References:

http://www.vtpi.org/resqual.pdf
http://www.aallnet.org/products/pub_llj_v98n04/2006-42.pdf
http://www.reportbd.com/articles/57/1/Criteria-Qualities-of-Good-Scientific-Research/Page1.html
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://glamerj.blogspot.com
John Deo Luengo

avatar

Posts : 20
Points : 22
Join date : 2009-06-20
Age : 28
Location : Davao City

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Wed Sep 30, 2009 7:04 pm

The primary purpose of having a research is to resolve or find a solution to a problem. If it doesn’t, it is worthless. According to one of the answers in the Yahoo! Answers, the research topic needs to be beneficial to some group. Research should be as thorough as necessary, and satisfy the parameters that you set yourself, it should be original or add new knowledge or set a valid challenge to previously accepted theories, it should be cost effective, the range of subjects studied should be sufficiently representative to justify your conclusions about a group of people, it should be possible within time, finance, experience, location and many more. Another thing, your research must be understood by other persons. It must be precise and complete.

According to the article I’ve read, here are the criteria of a good research. First, the purpose of the research should be clearly defined and common concepts be used. It is already self-explanatory. Second, the research procedure used should be described in sufficient detail to permit another researcher to repeat the research for further advancement, keeping the continuity of what has already been attained. Third, the procedural design of the research should be carefully planned to yield results that are as objectives as possible. Fourth, the researcher should report with complete frankness, flaws in procedural design and estimate their effects upon the findings. Fifth, the analysis of data should be sufficiently adequate to reveal its significance and the methods of analysis used should be appropriate. The validity and reliability of the data should be checked carefully. Sixth, conclusions should be confined to those justified by the data of the research and limited to those for which the data provide an adequate basis. Seventh, greater confidence in research is warranted if the researcher is experienced, has a good reputation in research and is a person of integrity.

According to the same article, the qualities of a good research are it must be systematic, logical, empirical and replicable. Systematic means that research is structured with specified steps to be taken in a specified sequence in accordance with the well defined set of rules. Systematic characteristic of the research does not rule out creative thinking but it certainly does reject the use of guessing and intuition arriving at conclusions.
Logical means that this implies that research is guided by the rules of logical reasoning and the logical process of induction and deduction are of great value in carrying out research. Induction is the process of reasoning from a part to the whole whereas deduction is the process of reasoning from the premise. In fact, logical reasoning makes research more meaningful in the context of decision making. Empirical means that it implies that research is related basically to one or more aspects of a real situation and deals with concrete data that provides a basis for external validity to research results. Lastly, Replicable means that this characteristic allows research to be verified by replicating the study and thereby building a sound basis for decisions.

Another article shows the fifteen steps to good research. First thing to to do is to define and articulate a research question (formulate a research hypothesis). Second, researcher must identify possible sources of information in many types and formats. It is good that you have concrete sources of information to justify your research hypothesis. Third, the researcher judge the scope of the project. Fourth, before proceeding to next essential steps, reevaluate the research question based on the nature and extent of information available and the parameters of the research project. Fifth, select the most appropriate investigative methods (surveys, interviews, experiments) and research tools (periodical indexes, databases, websites). Choose the most effective method for testing your hypothesis. Sixth, Plan the research project. Seventh, retrieve information using a variety of methods (draw on a repertoire of skills). Eighth, refine the search strategy as necessary. Nineth, write and organize useful notes and keep track of sources. Tenth, evaluate sources using appropriate criteria. Eleventh, synthesize, analyze and integrate information sources and prior knowledge. Twelfth, revise hypothesis as necessary. Thirteenth, use information effectively for a specific purpose. Fourth, understand such issues as plagiarism, ownership of information (implications of copyright to some extent), and costs of information. Respect the authors of all the readings you include for the justifications of your research so remember the fifth step. Fifteenth, cite properly and give credit for sources of ideas. Following these fifteen steps then you could have a good research.

Based on the things mentioned on the articles, we can determine whether we done a good research.

Another thing, not all sources of information for your research is enough. Researcher must find sources of sufficient quality to support what you say you know about his or her topic. Scholarly sources are preferable, but in some disciplines the popular-scholarly source can be used for support if corroborated by scholarly sources. Research must at least some recent artcle-length sources. Articles are the sources of the most recent and most tightly focused analysis on your topic. Students who rely on books because OLLI is easier to use, or because books appear to have "more on the topic," are still thinking at a pre-college level. They do not understand how quickly book-length manuscripts become outdated, and how books' much larger theses can make it difficult for students to extract useful support from them without misunderstanding what they are borrowing. use at least one scholarly source, or does it contain a well-written endnote or footnote which explains exactly why there are no scholarly sources available on this topic. Take seriously the task of reading scholarship in your field. The popular works available will not give you the authority to say things that will persuade your professors. You can use popular-scholarly journals and scholarly reference works to give you a "ladder of expertise" so that you can read professional scholars' work, but you eventually will have to join the dialogue they are conducting several times each year in their field's scholarly journals. You can learn a lot from "negative success" at reading scholarly work, too. If you are trying your hardest, using all the aids available (including asking teachers in the subject for help), and you still cannot read the scholarship near the end of your first year of study, you probably should rethink your intended major. If the topic requires it, the sources are recent enough to be persuasive. Scholarship in the social and natural sciences becomes outdated quickly. Conclusions based on out of date evidence fail to persuade. Students who want to succeed in these majors must become persistent enough researchers to seek out the most recent and authoritative sources on their topics. Humanities sources have undergone immense theoretical upheavals in the last decades of the Twentieth Century, and for many fields, secondary scholarship written much before 1980 can be suspect or unacceptable because its analytical methods are controlled by theoretical assumptions that are no longer acceptable. The fields cannot engage in wholesale book-burning and web-site erasure to eliminate these problematic sources, but an early part of Humanities' majors' upper-division work involves becoming familiar with the currently acceptable theories and analytical methods, and with the sources from earlier scholars work which are still acceptable.

Research requires critical thinking and follows a step by step procedures. To make your research effective, following the procedures is essential.

References:
http://www.reportbd.com/articles/57/1/Criteria-Qualities-of-Good-Scientific-Research/Page1.html
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070621085815AAR3eQB
http://www.library.georgetown.edu/tutorials/research-guides/15-steps
http://faculty.goucher.edu/eng105sanders/research_paper_evaluation_criter.htm
Back to top Go down
View user profile
ymrebmomville

avatar

Posts : 47
Points : 52
Join date : 2009-06-24
Age : 27
Location : Heaven

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:05 pm

In making a research, there is a standard guidelines and procedures. We read, we decide and we propose. Sometimes, not all paper works are accepted, few are rejected. Every other step in our work are structurally criticized and evaluated. Making research is not easy, we risk time and effort. That is why we need to think a hundred times first and plan.
In my own opinion, one of the important things that a research must consider is its purpose to society. Can people benefit in this research? Although it is a contribution to knowledge,is it usable?

According to Youngstown State University in there Research and Argument: Tools for Teachers and Students, there five technical components or guide to evaluate a research paper. First is the content. The questions in the validity if the content is valid are as follows: Is clear and independent thinking demonstrated within the paper? Are the main ideas within the paper original, or do they seem to be borrowed from the writer's sources? Does the writer have a clear purpose or thesis? Does that thesis remain the focal point of the paper, or does the paper seem to wander from point to point? Are all the ideas completely developed? Is the subject explored fully and in-depth enough to convey that the author has thought out her/his subject in its entirety? Is there enough supporting information? Is the supporting information specific and obviously not common knowledge?Followed by evidence.

The questions in the validity if the evidence is valid are as follows: Does the evidence come from valid sources? That is, are the sources written by reputable authors and published by reputable companies or organizations rather than obscure ones? Is the evidence appropriate to the argument being presented? Does the evidence included clearly further the development of the paper's thesis? Are all quotes properly introduced and worked smoothly into the text? Is all evidence pulled from a source and all evidence that is not common knowledge correctly cited within the text? Are those citations correctly documented in a bibliography or works cited page?

Then the organization. The questions in the validity if the organization is valid are as follows: Is the paper organized in the most effective way possible? (Are there places where organization changes might have been beneficial obvious to the reader?) Is reading made difficult by the organization? Are the most important points given the most emphasis? Are lesser points, accordingly, given less emphasis? Are there any places where major points get too little attention and minor points too much? Is the paper coherently organized and linked together? Are transitions from paragraph to paragraph and from point to point smooth? Is each paragraph and point fully developed? Then the style.

The questions in the validity if the style is valid are as follows: Has the audience been taken into account? Does the writer seem to be addressing his/her audience with the appropriate tone, purpose, etc.? Are sentences varied in length and style? Does the writer avoid being too choppy and short or too long and confusing? Is the vocabulary used original and precise or is it vague and overused? And then the grammar and mechanics. The questions in the validity if the grammar and mechanics is valid are as follows: Does the paper seem carefully edited? Does it seem as though it was not edited or edited very little? Do errors in punctuation, spelling, sentence structure, or grammar detract attention from the main point of the paper?

There are still factors that should be addressed in order to validate if the research topic valid. First we must consider the research topic. A good research paper should also have a good research topic. The research paper is worthless of the topic alone is worthless too. Next is the content of the research. Basically, the research paper should have an introduction, review of related literature, a methodology, and a conclusion or the expected output. Sometimes, research is done with groups that there were times that the content of the paper doesn’t have any connections at all. Have done that before. Then the information of the paper should be précised and absolute. Research paper should real so that after implementation, there will be no other questions to be asked. Meaning, the research paper contents should be credible. Credibility is one of the factors that the research paper is in good value. A research paper should contain the clear topic of the author and should be authentic and not just copied from other researchers. If it related to another research that is already publish, the author should somehow feed his research new and development to the previous one. The topic as well as its discussion should be carefully thought of. A paper is also considered in good quality if his review of related literature is good enough to support his ideas presented on the paper. Citation of different reviews and sources should be valid and be taken into consideration. Reasonable informant should be the origin of the reviews and not just from people who are not reputable.

The citations should be correctly documented in a bibliography or works cited page. Most of the papers are so extremely created that most of its content are hard to understand. The organization as well as the system of how it is presented should also be apprehensible to others. The paper could include flowcharts or any diagram that can be comprehended by readers. The views and thoughts of the author should be centralized to the main topic and must support it proper organization of his words. Lastly, a paper could not be considered as good if its language grammar and procedure is not suitable and good. The paper should undergo a lot of editing to ensure the appropriate use word construction and to check minimum incorrect terms.

Based on what have been discussed, it is not easy to create a research paper. Its time conducive and efforts and readings are done correctly. To have a good research paper, you should then first identify the value of being credible. This is not about just passing the subject or what. This is about the facts you have discussed to let other people learn from what you have then learned.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://freedailyarticles.com/
Ronic.Concepcion

avatar

Posts : 34
Points : 48
Join date : 2009-06-24

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:12 pm

How do researchers know if his work is good or bad?

Right now, we are doing our research paper only up to workplan. Since this research paper is compromised only with 4 or 5 chapters. Let me first answer this question with what I have encountered during consultation of my classmates, since that we haven’t been consulted since.

First, in the introduction of the study, our instructor, as the research evaluator, the first thing he would notice is the first sentence of the paragraph. It should a statement that states what your study all about is. Next, is that the introduction should have a global, local, and national issues about your study. About the related literature, he will now then evaluate if the number of pages you have searched have the same ratio with the paper you present. Same with the methodology and on the last chapters. Based on their experienced, the evaluator will check about the content of the paper and the credibility of the paper.

According to Youngstown State University in there Research and Argument: Tools for Teachers and Students, there five technical components or guide to evaluate a research paper. First is the content. The questions in the validity if the content is valid are as follows: Is clear and independent thinking demonstrated within the paper? Are the main ideas within the paper original, or do they seem to be borrowed from the writer's sources? Does the writer have a clear purpose or thesis? Does that thesis remain the focal point of the paper, or does the paper seem to wander from point to point? Are all the ideas completely developed? Is the subject explored fully and in-depth enough to convey that the author has thought out her/his subject in its entirety? Is there enough supporting information? Is the supporting information specific and obviously not common knowledge?Followed by evidence. The questions in the validity if the evidence is valid are as follows: Does the evidence come from valid sources? That is, are the sources written by reputable authors and published by reputable companies or organizations rather than obscure ones? Is the evidence appropriate to the argument being presented? Does the evidence included clearly further the development of the paper's thesis? Are all quotes properly introduced and worked smoothly into the text? Is all evidence pulled from a source and all evidence that is not common knowledge correctly cited within the text? Are those citations correctly documented in a bibliography or works cited page? Then the organization. The questions in the validity if the organization is valid are as follows: Is the paper organized in the most effective way possible? (Are there places where organization changes might have been beneficial obvious to the reader?) Is reading made difficult by the organization? Are the most important points given the most emphasis? Are lesser points, accordingly, given less emphasis? Are there any places where major points get too little attention and minor points too much? Is the paper coherently organized and linked together? Are transitions from paragraph to paragraph and from point to point smooth? Is each paragraph and point fully developed? Then the style. The questions in the validity if the style is valid are as follows: Has the audience been taken into account? Does the writer seem to be addressing his/her audience with the appropriate tone, purpose, etc.? Are sentences varied in length and style? Does the writer avoid being too choppy and short or too long and confusing? Is the vocabulary used original and precise or is it vague and overused? And then the grammar and mechanics. The questions in the validity if the grammar and mechanics is valid are as follows: Does the paper seem carefully edited? Does it seem as though it was not edited or edited very little? Do errors in punctuation, spelling, sentence structure, or grammar detract attention from the main point of the paper?

Significance and Originality of Ideas which includes topic, references chosen and personal opinions and the Quality of Concepts and Contribution to Field which includes evaluation of analysis, its originality. All of these things must be achieved in order or we can say that the research topic is good. The uniqueness of a research topic is the basic foundation for the researcher to come up with a good research topic and will hit the minds of the readers or those who will apply that topic.

According to Todd Litman, "Good research reflects a sincere desire to determine what is overall true, based on all available information, as opposed to bad research that starts with a conclusion and identifies supporting factoids (individual facts taken out of context). This means that a good research is conducted to prove that a certain phenomena is true or false but we need available information in order for us to support our findings. This is one characteristics of a good research.

A research is good if it satisfies all the requirements needed in passing an evaluation of research. In evaluating a research, all parts of the research like every chapter's contents are individually scrutinized. For example, the review of related literature, it should contain like the justification of the research and many more. Another example is the significance of the study, it should contain all the necessary benefits and importance of why the research is done.

A good research paper must answer the following question in order for their research paper to be said as valid. Creating research paper is not that simple as it is. It should be credible and the references you used should be complete. But on our part right now, it just something that we should do in order to pass the subject. But according to our instructor, if that’s what we aim, he can give us grades that are already passed. Then again, he wants us to aim big. To connect it with our previous assignment, research topic is a factor for our brighter future on the later basis. After we graduate, soon, that would become a tool that we can be hired. Validation of research paper is not that in just a nick of time, it’s time consuming and effortful.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.mylair.tk
Sherwin S. Gaum

avatar

Posts : 30
Points : 34
Join date : 2009-06-23

PostSubject: assign 5   Mon Oct 05, 2009 2:45 pm

How do you know if a piece of research work is good or not? How are they evaluated? (1500words)

Knowing that a piece of research work is good or not is important, for the reason that it will help the researcher know if that research has relevance to the targeted readers or spectators. By this, questions will rise – How will you know that a piece of research work is good or not? How can it be evaluated?

It is said that in a research work, title itself shows what the research is all about. In other words, the title itself let somebody see what you want to convey or express through your research. And in order to have a title for your research, you must have a topic. A topic which is a personal interest to you but still has a universal appeal and can also be a great help for others.
In my own point of view, having a good research title and topic can also be considered as one of the steps through a good research work.

Another steps or guidelines through a good research besides having a good topic and title are: establishing an outline, using the right methodologies, researcher’s consistency, considering the readers, using tables, images and diagrams, conclusion, and including citations.

Establishing an outline can be a great help in having a good research work. Here, you will have an organized outline of your plans on how you will work or what will you do to carry out the research. Also through establishing an outline, you can formulate new ideas for the improvement of the research and it can also help constructing the content relevant to the field of the research.

Researcher’s consistency is important in knowing that a piece of research work is good or not. Consistency here means the consistency of the researcher in writing, the flow of ideas, and the style of the argument. And in writing the research, it is suggested to be simple and convincing.

Considering the reader is one of the factors in having a good research work. The readers are the ones the researcher wants to convey the message or the research to. If the researcher is unable to convey what he/she really wants to convey then the research would be meaningless.

The usage of tables, images, and diagrams is effective in conveying the message to the readers. Tables can be used in summarizing data or comparing different aspects. The usage of these three with an appropriate description can not only support the content of the research but also it can also help to catch the attention of the readers.

In concluding a research work it should be an effective conclusion. It should be concluded keeping in mind the beginning of the research for the reason not to be out of the field of the topic. Through this conclusion, it will carry out the real meaning of the whole research.

In the end of the research work, it is right for the researcher to include citation to acknowledge the content which is partially or entirely referenced. Through this, it will increase the authentication of the research work.

As a summary of this, in order to know if a piece of research work is good or not is based on how a researcher writes his/her research paper. If he/she has a good start – the topic and the title and has a good ending – the way he/she concluded the research.

A research work can be evaluated if it is good or not through evaluating its purpose and checking the contents validity and credibility.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
PrincessLerit



Posts : 21
Points : 30
Join date : 2009-06-23
Age : 28
Location : Panabo City

PostSubject: assign 5   Tue Oct 06, 2009 9:45 am

How do you know if a piece of research work is good or not? How are they evaluated? (1500words)

There are a lot of researches conducted by different people. If it’s not for a cure for a certain virus, it’s about how to lessen the burden of the people by making things high-tech or we can also say that it helps the people as well as the environment like what green computing is up to. But how do we really know if a piece of research is good and when is it not? Can we say that it is good if it actually solve a man’s problem? And if it is not, is it a bad one? These questions are exactly what are playing in my mind right now and I’ll try to answer it my way (tongue out).
In my point of view, research is somewhat searching a certain thing “again” for it to be more effective or realistic it could also mean an organized study or shall we say a methodical investigation into a subject in order to discover facts, to establish or revise a theory, or to develop a plan of action based on the facts discovered (according to Encarta). Most of the research is made to lessen the burden of every individual. It is a means of making an answer to every human’s dilemma that walks on earth. And in fact, it is a solution to everyone’s problem.
I can say that a research is good if it actually address a certain group of people’s (or even not) problem. If it solves or lessens or even an advancement of a certain technology, then we can say that it is a good research (well, I’m not sure about this but let me continue…). A research will be nothing if it doesn’t address certain people for it to solve their dilemmas. Because if it is not, then what’s the use of research anyway? Is it for fun..? (Grinning) Well, I think not. It’s not a realistic to do – making a research for fun - to think that lots of money will be spent if you just do it that way. But who knows maybe there is someone who makes it for fun or shall we say it’s his/her hobby (having a hobby is also a means of having fun, right?). We can never tell. Hmmn, I hope it doesn’t look like I contradicted myself (laugh).
I was thinking if there was a judging portion to be able to identify if a research paper is a good one or not aside from the fact that it can solve someone’s problem (confused). I guess maybe that’s why there is an evaluation made in every research paper (enlighten). One thing also, I was a bit confused if all research paper published were evaluated (ahh maybe that explains why most of the researches found in the internet are prone to be false because they were not evaluated [enlighten again]). But how are they being evaluated? Do they have any criteria for basis? Hmmn… It seems I have to search some answers for it. Might as well as google it (laugh).
Evaluating a research paper is somewhat a process to determine how good the paper is. I think there were standards on evaluating a research paper and even in publishing it. Based on what I have read most of the research that being published in the internet are prone to be false (that’s what I stated a while ago). So basically, my first statement does not cater on publishing it on the internet (but I think not all since there are top-tier journals who published researches in the internet). If that’s the case then I think there’s no way a student can identify which research paper is true and which is false, or can they? Most of us know that majority of the published writings on the internet don’t come from reliable source and if it is, you have to do a lot of hard work to find one (well, it’s based on my experience. I don’t know if you guys have also encountered the same problem with mine when it comes to this.)
If we say “evaluate”, it could mean that we consider or examine a certain thing in order to judge its value, quality, importance, extent, or condition. So going back to a research paper, we can say that a research paper is good if it pass the evaluation. I mean, if all in all the research paper has a great impact on the current situation and it helps a lot of people then maybe – just maybe we can categorize it as a good one. As far as I remember about the article I read about research paper is that (I read this a long time ago when I was looking on how to wrote a research paper [tongue out] I just thought this reading could help), a research should have a great impact on the current situation or current thread. How will you know that the research you’re working will be a great help if you don’t know what’s new? As I have said in my recent posts, the formulated problem and the suggested solution may be available already. Then the research you’re currently working might be useless. So basically, it has a lot to do with the current situation or technology which can benefit the consumers. For us to be able to decide of what the topic will be proposing we’ll go in depth (tongue out). The content of the research should have reliable sources and should not be based on some hearsay. There are a lot of sources in the internet but take note that not all the information found there are true. And if you only find the sources only in the internet then you must find a reliable one. Well, that’s what sad thing about making a research in a technical way because there is only little information and sometimes do not have some that we found in the books. We all know that the most reliable source are came from the books and because sometimes the topic we’ve chosen is in current thread then it is hard for us to find some information in the books or magazines then we have no choice but to look for it in the internet. Although it is not hard to search a certain article that could support the research we have but the question of is it reliable enough to be a source is still a question to be asked.
So having all the explanation above about making or writing a research topic/ paper, we can say that it is a good research. If it follows the do’s of writing a paper then maybe we can categorize it as a good one (well, it’s just my own point of view feel free to correct me then). Actually, there a lot of published research papers in the internet. As a matter of fact, there a several of research paper found in the web sites that are reliable enough to become a basis for a new research. Although I have stated it (I think a lot of times) that most of the research found in the internet are prone to be false, there are still a lot of research which are reliable especially those research that are being published by the top – tier journals like ACM, CSP and etc. As I have said, most are prone to be false – but take note that not all. So basically, we can still find good one and make it as a basis of a new one, right (I hope I didn’t contradicted myself or didn’t explain it in a way that is so confusing. But I guess I made it so confusing. So please just bear with me guys [tongue out].)?
So, what else should I say or rather write? Is there something else I forgot to mention? Well, I guess it only me who can answer these questions of mine and nothing else (laugh).
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://princessekeanne.blogspot.com
ace sandoval

avatar

Posts : 18
Points : 30
Join date : 2009-06-23
Age : 29
Location : Davao City

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Tue Oct 06, 2009 3:34 pm

How do you know if a piece of research work is good or not? how are they evaluated?

Research is the systematic process of collecting and analyzing information to increase our understanding of the phenomenon under study. It is the function of the researcher to contribute to the understanding of the phenomenon and to communicate that understanding to others.
Evaluation is a methodological area that is closely related to, but distinguishable from more traditional social research. Evaluation utilizes many of the same methodologies used in traditional social research, but because evaluation takes place within a political and organizational context, it requires group skills, management ability, political dexterity, sensitivity to multiple stakeholders and other skills that social research in general does not rely on as much. Here we introduce the idea of evaluation and some of the major terms and issues in the field.

There are many types of evaluations that do not necessarily result in an assessment of worth or merit -- descriptive studies, implementation analyses, and formative evaluations, to name a few. Better perhaps is a definition that emphasizes the information-processing and feedback functions of evaluation.
Both definitions agree that evaluation is a systematic endeavor and both use the deliberately ambiguous term 'object' which could refer to a program, policy, technology, person, need, activity, and so on. The latter definition emphasizes acquiring and assessing information rather than assessing worth or merit because all evaluation work involves collecting and sifting through data, making judgements about the validity of the information and of inferences we derive from it, whether or not an assessment of worth or merit results.

The generic goal of most evaluations is to provide "useful feedback" to a variety of audiences including sponsors, donors, client-groups, administrators, staff, and other relevant constituencies. Most often, feedback is perceived as "useful" if it aids in decision-making. But the relationship between an evaluation and its impact is not a simple one -- studies that seem critical sometimes fail to influence short-term decisions, and studies that initially seem to have no influence can have a delayed impact when more congenial conditions arise. Despite this, there is broad consensus that the major goal of evaluation should be to influence decision-making or policy formulation through the provision of empirically driven feedback.

There are many different types of evaluations depending on the object being evaluated and the purpose of the evaluation. Perhaps the most important basic distinction in evaluation types is that between formative and summative evaluation. Formative evaluations strengthen or improve the object being evaluated -- they help form it by examining the delivery of the program or technology, the quality of its implementation, and the assessment of the organizational context, personnel, procedures, inputs, and so on. Summative evaluations, in contrast, examine the effects or outcomes of some object -- they summarize it by describing what happens subsequent to delivery of the program or technology; assessing whether the object can be said to have caused the outcome; determining the overall impact of the causal factor beyond only the immediate target outcomes; and, estimating the relative costs associated with the object.
Formative evaluation includes several evaluation types:
ท needs assessment determines who needs the program, how great the need is, and what might work to meet the need
ท evaluability assessment determines whether an evaluation is feasible and how stakeholders can help shape its usefulness
ท structured conceptualization helps stakeholders define the program or technology, the target population, and the possible outcomes
ท implementation evaluation monitors the fidelity of the program or technology delivery
ท process evaluation investigates the process of delivering the program or technology, including alternative delivery procedures
Summative evaluation can also be subdivided:
ท outcome evaluations investigate whether the program or technology caused demonstrable effects on specifically defined target outcomes
ท impact evaluation is broader and assesses the overall or net effects -- intended or unintended -- of the program or technology as a whole
ท cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis address questions of efficiency by standardizing outcomes in terms of their dollar costs and values
ท secondary analysis reexamines existing data to address new questions or use methods not previously employed
ท meta-analysis integrates the outcome estimates from multiple studies to arrive at an overall or summary judgement on an evaluation question
15 Steps to Good Research
1. Define and articulate a research question (formulate a research hypothesis).
2. Identify possible sources of information in many types and formats.
3. Judge the scope of the project.
4. Reevaluate the research question based on the nature and extent of information available and the parameters of the research project.
5. Select the most appropriate investigative methods (surveys, interviews, experiments) and research tools (periodical indexes, databases, websites).
6. Plan the research project.
7. Retrieve information using a variety of methods (draw on a repertoire of skills).
8. Refine the search strategy as necessary.
9. Write and organize useful notes and keep track of sources.
10. Evaluate sources using appropriate criteria.
11. Synthesize, analyze and integrate information sources and prior knowledge.
12. Revise hypothesis as necessary.
13. Use information effectively for a specific purpose.
14. Understand such issues as plagiarism, ownership of information (implications of copyright to some extent), and costs of information.
15. Cite properly and give credit for sources of ideas.


According to Simon Peyton Jones.
"How to write a good research paper"
Structure

 Abstract (4 sentences)
 Introduction (1 page)
 The problem (1 page)
 My idea (2 pages)
 The details (5 pages)
 Related work (1-2 pages)
 Conclusions and further work (0.5 pages)
Criteria for a good piece of research
by:Simon Peyton Jones and Alan Bundy
Major criteria

Here are the major criteria against which your proposal will be judged. Read through your case for support repeatedly, and ask whether the answers to the questions below are clear, even to a non-expert.
ท Does the proposal address a well-formulated problem?
ท Is it a research problem, or is it just a routine application of known techniques?
ท Is it an important problem, whose solution will have useful effects?
ท Is special funding necessary to solve the problem, or to solve it quickly enough, or could it be solved using the normal resources of a well-found laboratory?
ท Do the proposers have a good idea on which to base their work? The proposal must explain the idea in sufficient detail to convince the reader that the idea has some substance, and should explain why there is reason to believe that it is indeed a good idea. It is absolutely not enough merely to identify a wish-list of desirable goals (a very common fault). There must be significant technical substance to the proposal.
ท Does the proposal explain clearly what work will be done? Does it explain what results are expected and how they will be evaluated? How would it be possible to judge whether the work was successful?
ท Is there evidence that the proposers know about the work that others have done on the problem? This evidence may take the form of a short review as well as representative references.
ท Do the proposers have a good track record, both of doing good research and of publishing it? A representative selection of relevant publications by the proposers should be cited. Absence of a track record is clearly not a disqualifying characteristic, especially in the case of young researchers, but a consistent failure to publish raises question marks.
Secondary criteria
Some secondary criteria may be applied to separate closely-matched proposals. It is often essentially impossible to distinguish in a truly objective manner among such proposals and it is sad that it is necessary to do so. The criteria are ambiguous and conflict with each other, so the committee simply has to use its best judgement in making its recommendations.
ท An applicant with little existing funding may deserve to be placed ahead of a well- funded one. On the other hand, existing funding provides evidence of a good track record.
ท There is merit in funding a proposal to keep a strong research team together; but it is also important to give priority to new researchers in the field.
ท An attempt is made to maintain a reasonable balance between different research areas, where this is possible.
ท Evidence of industrial interest in a proposal, and of its potential for future exploitation will usually count in its favour. The closer the research is to producing a product the more industrial involvement is required and this should usually include some industrial contribution to the project. The case for support should include some `route to market' plan, ie you should have thought about how the research will eventually become a product --- identifying an industrial partner is usually part of such a plan.
ท A proposal will benefit if it is seen to address recommendations of Technology Foresight. It is worth looking at the relevant Foresight Panel reports and including quotes in your case for support that relate to your proposal.


RESOURCES:
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/intreval.htm
http://www.library.georgetown.edu/tutorials/research-guides/15-steps
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/simonpj/papers/giving-a-talk/writing-a-paper-slides.pdf
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/simonpj/papers/Proposal.html
Back to top Go down
View user profile
charmaine anne quadizar

avatar

Posts : 33
Points : 40
Join date : 2009-06-23
Age : 29
Location : Davao City

PostSubject: assignment 5   Thu Oct 08, 2009 3:09 am

Why do we need to do research? Why it is important? Since high school we have a research subject and that is the only time we knew the meaning of research but in fact we are using research in our daily lives.
Research allows you to pursue your interests, to learn something new, to hone your problem-solving skills and to challenge yourself in new ways. It is just simply to solve a certain problem. How to evaluate a research? And we can say that it is a good research. There are factors and basis that we should consider in evaluating a research. It is very important to evaluate a research so that we could tell that how this research will give impact to his beneficiary. Because we all know that before we conduct a research we should determine the beneficiary of our research not only the impact but the whole thing about the research being conducted.

A good research should have most of these qualities:
In choosing a topic, choose one in which you are interested, and for which there is enough information. If your topic is too broad, you will have difficulty completing your paper. "The Effects of Pollution" is too broad because there are so many effects of pollution. "The Effects of Pollution on Geese in the Northeast Section of Duluth, Minnesota" is too narrow. You are not likely to find much information that is this specific. "The Effects of Pollution in Yosemite National Park" is just about right as a topic.

• address an important problem – from the moment that you will read the title of the research you could say that it addresses to a important problem. And research are done because we want to solve a problem, how could we do research if we don’t have a problem to solve.]

• it should define different theories involved in your topic if any – in maing a research not all the idea and theories are familiar with your user so it is very important that you will define and present all the theories that involved in your research because this could also help your beneficiary and readers to understand more your research project.

• title should be short but complete – in making a research especially technical research it is very important that when you read the title only you will know the objective of the research. And by just the title you can have the idea what the research is all about and because of this you can influence people to support your research

• be novel, building on existing good research – for me this means that when doing a research you should be a novel. Your research should be original and not only build through an existing research. It could be related to other research but it should have its own ideas that can be called the original.

• Use good scientific methods, and best practices in the research area - Scientific method refers to a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.[1] A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses. Methods use in doing research could also be a basis in evaluating how good is the research because when you have good and systematic methods during the development of the research you could have a accurate and true results. Without good scientific methods good and significant results cannot be achieved. The next step in the research process is to choose a research method best suited to meet the objectives of the research study. The researcher can select from a myriad of research design alternatives such as focus groups, individual depth interviews, mail, telephone, in-person or web based surveys. The research process to choose a should be best suited to meet the objectives of the research study.

• Report significant results – the result from the research process that have made should be significant. It is very important that all results should be significant because if not the objective of solving a certain problem will not be achieved. In solving a problem it is very important that your basies are all true and correct.

• have positive benefits/implications in the research area – before we start our research we were ask to present or identify the people who will benefit our research work. It is identified from macro to micro because from that you could say that the research is good because it is for someone or for them and they will really benefit the research. And you cannot appreciate a research project if it does not do anything for everybody. You cannot benefit from it.
• be well communicated in writing and in person – I am thinking about this idea because me as a researcher could not say the I have a good English communication. But I cannot be a hindrance for solving a certain problem because as a researcher you have the right to have a grammarian for you to organize and critic your paper. Not all people are good in communication skills but they have rich in analytical skill. But a good research should be a well communicated in writing and in person so that people could understand your research. And it is a factor that people will appreciate your work if they do understand it.

• Cite properly and give credit for sources of ideas. – in making a research paper we cannot have a accurate output without the help of other related article or literature with regards to the research topic . We use or get ideas from other articles so that we could justify our problem and with that we get ideas from the other authors and in making a good research it is very important that we should give credit from the people where we get the ideas. And with that you cannot be accused for plagiarism. Good research should rely more on findings by other researchers and less on one's own technical data. Confirming or denying previous conclusions automatically gives the new research more credibility

.
Taken from the respondents during the survey made by Tribology & Lubrication Technology on how to evaluate a good research is “The biggest challenge researchers face is lack of access to research data in other universities or companies. Companies tend to disclose only information they don't see fitting into their own businesses. In the lubricants industry, we don't get to see much research data from the major lubricant producers-most of it comes only in the form of sales brochures. It would be interesting to see statistics showing the number of lubricant-related technical publications produced by lubricant manufacturers. It's hard to come up with examples of good research I've seen recently in the lubricants industry, because the data on lubricant research from academia is very often substandard, and major industrial players simply don't publish." This could be applied to some of our research project.
the biggest challenges for good research can be expressed in two ideas. First, researchers need to grasp the concept of rejecting a preconceived idea (regardless of the specialized field) with objectivity. Second, they ought to simplify the hypothesis-testing method as much as possible without compromising the outcome.Tthe earmarks of good research are whether the human race can survive owing to the research or not. Socially, that means whether the research can provide benefits for a significant number of people. In business it means whether the research can lead to profit-and how much.

In overall a good research topic should be accurate form the start of the study until the implementation and deployment of the project. After the study have made it is very important that all the objectives that were presented during the chapters 1 and two should achieved because if the objectives were not achieve it simply means that the research is not a good one. Based on my experience during our consultation to Sir RSG his basis in checking our papers is our objectives. From the review of related literature up to the methodology sir RSG make sure that our objectives were attained and from that a good research is when you finally solved the problem and be able to achieve all the objectives not only one objective but all the objectives that were presented during the presentation of the topic. We gave the general objective and the specific objective and your research should answer and satisfy all the objectives. Making a good research is not easy you should consider a lot of things to be a good one. So in making a research you should give your dedication, time, effort, money and more just for the success of the topic. Because a good research will reflect to the personality of the researcher; both goes along. If you have a good research it will be a credit to you.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.charmisme.blogspot.com
Esalle Joy Jabines

avatar

Posts : 16
Points : 16
Join date : 2009-06-23

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Sun Oct 11, 2009 3:21 pm




All students are required to write research papers at some point during their. In conducting a research, you are basically conducting a search for facts: little tidbits of truth that you will assemble and arrange in an organized way. Your first responsibility as a researcher is to understand the difference between fact and fiction—and also the difference between fact and opinion. In addition, you need to offer a rationale telling why your problem is a good one and what methods you plan to use for gathering and analyzing your data. Furthermore, students' intentions, as reflected in how they phrase their project proposals, can suggest that they are not seeking an answer to a significant question but, rather, are trying to get readers to accept a belief that those students already cherish and wish to propagate. Such intent can be implied when they introduce their project with such a phrase as "My purpose is to prove that. . . ." or "I will demonstrate that. . . ." or "This study will make it clear that. . . ." Therefore, if you know at the outset exactly what conclusions will be drawn at the end of your project, then the project qualifies as propagandizing or salesmanship rather than research.

In determining if a piece of research work is good or not we need to have a checklist of the things we want our research paper would look like or what its content will be. Is the paper too long? Is the paper well organized? Are the design and analysis sound? Do the conclusions follow from the results? Has the author cited all relevant references? Are all the tables and figures necessary? Are the title and abstract fully descriptive of the text? Any ethical concerns with the paper? Are the statistics satisfactory? Is the task you propose for yourself really research, or is it something else?

Will the outcomes of your research be considered significant by the readers for whom your project is intended? A topic that you select may qualify as research, yet still not be considered a suitable thesis or dissertation problem. One reason is that the task you pose for yourself may be too simple, in that it fails to represent the complexity and level of expertise expected of a person who deserves a graduate degree. A second reason is that the answer you hope to derive from your investigation appears to be insignificant, so readers' would respond to your results with "So what?" or "Who cares?" Therefore, in originally presenting your topic, you are obliged to indicate for whom--and why--an answer to your research question is important.

There are some basic characteristics of good research papers that students should be aware of if they are interested in excelling academically. First, a good research paper is written about the subject that a professor assigned or that a student selected as his or her paper subject. There may be a more specific sub-topic that a student addresses in the paper, but good research papers always stay on track with the assignment or subject. The most important rule to remember when writing a paper is to follow the instructions your teacher provides. Teachers always have the prerogative to decide what rules, formats, or procedures they prefer for any paper, so the teacher’s guidelines for any assignment will rule against instructions you find on the Internet or in a style guide.

Next, a good research paper will flow well. This means that ideas will be connected and sensible so that the reader knows exactly what the writer is saying. In order to make a research paper flow well, students should spend some time drafting outlines for their term papers. These outlines should help the student to ensure that he or she includes an appropriate amount of content and that ideas flow well from one to the next. The paper outline is also much easier to revise than a paper draft. Therefore, a sign of a good research paper is that it always begins with a research paper outline before the student creates the first draft.

After the student has created a research paper outline, the student can begin filling the outline in as a first draft. Good papers will not only be drafted once, but they will also be revised several times until the student feels that the paper says exactly what he or she wishes to say in the most concise and congruent manner.

A student can use the same level of research to write either a good paper or a bad paper. The difference between a good paper and a term paper often comes down to basic writing skills. Therefore, many students benefit by working with a professional writer or an on-campus writing center in order to improve their writing skills and effectiveness.
Another thing to be considered in writing a research paper is that be realistic about how much the average reader will take away from an article. Non-experts will retain at most a single message. Make sure you have one, and then repeat it over and over again—at the end of the abstract, in the introduction, in the results, and in the discussion. Include different levels at which your results are significant. This is particularly important for papers that you are trying to get into top tier journals. A good paper is not a random accumulation of facts. Give your paper a narrative structure that links from one finding to another. This can be the logical order of why one experiment was done in response to another, or you can describe from the beginning to the end of a pathway. Build up this structure by writing notes, in any order, and then rearranging them so that there are logical links.

Writing a research paper is more straightforward and concise than other types of writing. Avoid using clever, flowing, or poetic phrases in your science paper. Dramatic or emotional statements sound out of place. Use active verbs. Avoid using passive verbs. For instance, instead of saying “When the lights were turned off, the mice reacted… you could say “The mice reacted when I turned off the lights.” Do not misuse terms. Some words, like "variable" and "significant result" have very specific meanings in the science world. Be careful not to repeat scientific terms in your paper unless you have a clear understanding of what they mean. Make sure it is free of spelling, grammatical, or typographical errors. Also, check to make sure you’ve included every source in your bibliography. Finally, check the original instructions from your teacher to make sure you are following all assigned preferences, like title page directions and placement of page numbers.

Many papers are badly written. To avoid this, good writing is a skill you can learn. It’s a skill that is worth learning because this may result to more papers accepted, ideas will have more impact and you will have better ideas. This also forces us to be clear, focused and crystallises what we don’t understand. Papers are far more durable than programs. Experts are good. Non-experts are also very good. Each reader can only read your paper for the first time once. Explain carefully what you want.

Research source is also a factor that will affect what your paper will be. Sometimes, misinterpretations on facts and fiction will be a problem. One of which is Blogs. As you know, anybody can publish a blog on the Internet. This poses an obvious problem with using a blog as a research source, as there is no way to know the credentials of many bloggers or to get an understanding of the writer’s level of expertise. Many people create blogs to give themselves a forum to express their views and opinions. Next is Personal Web Sites. A web page is much like a blog when it comes to being an unreliable research source. Web pages are created by the public, so you have to be very careful when choosing them as sources. It's sometimes difficult to determine which web sites are created by experts and professionals on a given topic. Wiki web sites can be very informative, but they can also be untrustworthy. Wiki sites allow groups of people to add and edit the information contained on the pages. The question that always arises when it comes to homework and research is whether it’s OK to use Wikipedia as a source of information. Wikipedia is a great site with a lot of fantastic information, and a possible exception to the rule. One thing is for certain: Wikipedia offers a reliable overview of a topic to give you a strong foundation to start with. It also provides a list of resources where you can continue your own research. Students also believe that historical novels are trustworthy, because they state that they are “based on facts.” There is a difference between a factual work and a work that is based on facts. A novel that is based on a single fact can still contain ninety-nine percent fiction. Never use a historical novel as a history resource.
The Internet makes it possible to directly reach people we’d have never thought possible even a decade ago. Google the leading voice in the field you’re writing about: a professor of chemistry at MIT, a leadership guru, a corporate anthropologist at Intel, and so on — chances are you’ll come across an email address, or at least a mailing address. Write to them, explain your project, and ask a few questions. The worst that can happen is they’ll ignore your request
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Jonel Amora

avatar

Posts : 53
Points : 61
Join date : 2009-06-23
Age : 26
Location : Davao City

PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:05 pm

A researcher has its own way of thinking that is why sometimes researches of the same thing end up with different output. On my own point of view a good research work should be easily understood or else your reader may find it too much complicated and would disregard it. A good research work should be supported by legitimate facts. Researcher doing the research should not be biased especially if the output is not what he/she expects to be or else your research work will not be accurate or reliable. As I search trough the net I found some ways on how you evaluate a research work and this one gives a really short yet easy way to evaluate a research work.

A good contribution to a research area should have most of these qualities:
• address an important problem
• be novel, building on existing good research
• use good scientific methods, and best practices in the research area
• report significant results
• have positive benefits/implications in the research area
• be well communicated in writing and in person

The first two items above talks about the general purpose of the research done. If a research work addresses important problems especially current problems that the society is facing then that would be a good start to know if the research work is of good quality. In short, the research should be timely. The next three items probably talks about how the researcher comes up with the result? What methods or practices that he or she used? Does the practices and methods that he or she used appropriate for the research? This part is really crucial for it is where the results are generated. Even though you have a really good research topic, timely and all, it would all mean useless if your ways of finding solutions to the problems are not right. And the last items talks about the researcher’s way of presenting his or her result. If it is presented in a way that is too complex readers would lose the urge to read your findings. After all who wants to read a research work that you don’t understand. Researchers should present their outputs in a way that readers can easily understand it.

According to Linda Finlay researches can be evaluated in 4 C’s
1) Clarity - Does the research make sense? To what extent is the research systematically worked through, coherent and clearly described?
2) Credibility – To what extent do the findings match the evidence and are they convincing? When the author is arguing evidentially, is the evidence marshaled rigorously and opened up for external audit? Are the researcher’s interpretations plausible and justified? Can readers see what the researcher saw even if they disagree with the conclusions drawn by the researcher?
3) Contribution – To what extent does the research add to knowledge of an issue or aspect of human social life? Does it enrich our understanding of the human condition? Is it empowering and/or growth-enhancing? Does it offer guidance for future action or for changing the social world for the better? Does it offer a interesting basis for future research?
4) Communicative resonance – Are the findings sufficiently vivid or powerful to draw readers in? Do the findings resonate with readers’ own experience/understandings? As meanings are elicited in an interpersonal context, have the knowledge claims been tested and argued in dialogue with others, including participants, research supervisors or the wider academic community?

Henwood and Pidgeon identified 7 attributes which characterize a good research.

1. The importance of fit – The themes or analytical categories offered by the researcher should fit the data. The researcher demonstrates this by writing clear, explicit accounts of how these categories were evolved.
2. Integration of theory - The researcher needs to discuss the relationship between units of analysis and the degree to which they can be integrated or generalized (for instance, exploring how themes might be combined moving towards a theory).
3. Reflexivity – The role of the researcher needs to be acknowledged and accounted for in the documentation of the research.
4. Documentation – The researcher needs to provide an audit trail: a comprehensive account of what was done and why.
5. Theoretical sampling and negative case analysis – The researcher needs to continuously develop and modify any emerging theory, exploring cases that do not fit as well as those which might generate new knowledge.
6. Sensitivity to negotiated realities – While participant validation may be necessary, the researcher needs to demonstrate awareness of the research context, power differentials and participant reactions to the research. It is particularly important to explain any differences between the researcher’s interpretations and those of the participant(s).
7. Transferability - The researcher should suggest how the research may have applicability beyond the particular research context.
Lincoln and Guba propose four criteria for ‘naturalistic’ research.
1) Credibility – This concept replaces the idea of internal validity, by which researchers seek to establish confidence in the ‘truth’ of their findings. Instead, Lincoln and Guba focus on the degree to which findings make sense. For instance, they recommend that qualitative researchers use ‘member checks’. Here participants are given their interview transcripts and the research reports so they can agree/disagree with the researcher’s findings. In addition, credibility is built up through prolonged engagement in the field and persistent observation and triangulation of data.
2) Transferability – Transferability replaces the concept of external validity. Instead of aiming for random sampling and probabilistic reasoning, qualitative researchers are encouraged to provide a detailed portrait of the setting in which the research is conducted. The aim here is to give readers enough information for them to judge the applicability of the findings to other settings.
3) Dependability – This concept replaces the idea of reliability. It encourages researchers to provide an audit trail (the documentation of data, methods and decisions about the research) which can be laid open to external scrutiny.
4) Confirmability – Confirmability, replacing the concept of objectivity, also invokes auditing as a means to demonstrate quality. For example, the researcher can offer a self-critically reflexive analysis of the methodology used in the research. In addition, techniques such as triangulation (of data, researcher, and context) can be useful tools of confirmability.

To summarize everything, researches can be evaluated trough its importance. How important the research work is? Since research main purpose is to find solutions to problem it is essential that a research work should meet that purpose. As I’ve stated above a research work should timely. Another criterion is that a research work should be reliable and dependable. How will the reader know is the research is dependable? The reader may check how the research was done. What did the researcher do to get the information? Is the source of information reliable? Does the method used fit the research problem? Those are some of the questions needed to be asked if you want to check the reliability and dependability of a research work. And lastly, a research should be reader friendly. The complete documentation should be provided and the research work should be presented in a way that users easily understand it especially the conclusion or output part.
For the researchers, I have found something for you to be guided before proceeding in making your research.

1. What’s the problem?
2. Who cares about the problem?
3. What have others done?
4. What would you like to do?
5. What can you really do?
6. How are you going to do it?
7. What results did/will you get?
8. Who would/will care about your results?
9. Where will you share your results?
10. What are you going to do afterwards?

Those questions should be satisfied for you to produce a good research work.

Another guideline that I found on the net entitled 15 steps to a good research which is addressed to the researchers are as follows:

1. Define and articulate a research question (formulate a research hypothesis).
2. Identify possible sources of information in many types and formats.
3. Judge the scope of the project.
4. Reevaluate the research question based on the nature and extent of information available and the parameters of the research project.
5. Select the most appropriate investigative methods (surveys, interviews, experiments) and research tools (periodical indexes, databases, websites).
6. Plan the research project.
7. Retrieve information using a variety of methods (draw on a repertoire of skills).
8. Refine the search strategy as necessary.
9. Write and organize useful notes and keep track of sources.
10. Evaluate sources using appropriate criteria.
11. Synthesize, analyze and integrate information sources and prior knowledge.
12. Revise hypothesis as necessary.
13. Use information effectively for a specific purpose.
14. Understand such issues as plagiarism, ownership of information (implications of copyright to some extent), and costs of information.
15. Cite properly and give credit for sources of ideas.

The guidelines given above are provided for researchers to provide a good research work. Researchers should also have the determination and perseverance especially in finding resources in supporting their claims. Researching is not easy and the world becomes what is it now because of the researches that was done so I guess it’s all worth the difficulties.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://jdamora.blogspot.com/
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)   

Back to top Go down
 
Assignment 5 (Due: August 19, 2009, 13:00hrs)
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Amendments to the Revised IRR through GPPB Resolution No. 06-2009
» A Boutique and an assignment against me.
» Transitory Provisions for Revised IRR
» New Baby, New Assignment, Old Dress
» UPDATED[MediaFire]3 Idiots • 2009 • 550MB • X264 DVDRiP • English SubTitles •

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
USEP-IC  :: Methods of Research-
Jump to: