Presentation on theme: "Evaluating a Research Report"— Presentation transcript:
1 Evaluating a Research Report Educational ResearchChapter 22Evaluating a Research ReportGay, Mills, and Airasian10th Edition
2 Topics Discussed in this Chapter Gathering informationGeneral evaluation criteriaDesign specific evaluation criteriaQualitative research in generalObservational researchHistorical researchSurvey – Questionnaire and InterviewCorrelational – Relationship and PredictionCausal-ComparativeExperimental
3 Gathering Information Necessity of knowing what was doneExamplesWhat was the problem?Who were the subjects?What research design was used?What were the results and conclusions?What are the implications of the research?Basic formats to collect information for quantitative and qualitative research
4 Gathering Information - Quantitative IntroductionProblemProvide a general statement of the problem that includes the variables and the relationships between themState the importance of the studyReview of the LiteratureList the major issues identified in the reviewHypothesisState the specific hypothesis or hypotheses being investigated
5 Gathering Information - Quantitative MethodParticipantsIdentify the population and sampleDescribe the sampling and/or assignment proceduresIdentify the size of the total sample and of each group if applicableDescribe the general characteristics of the subjects
6 Gathering Information - Quantitative Method (continued)InstrumentsList the specific instruments used in the studyDescribe the evidence of validity provided for each instrumentDescribe the reliability evidence cited for each instrumentDescribe the information needed to interpret the scores for each instrument
7 Gathering Information - Quantitative Method (continued)Design and ProceduresIdentify the specific type of research designIdentify any threats to internal validityIdentify any threats to external validityResultsIdentify the specific analyses being usedA comparison between the mean scores for a control and experimental groupA correlation between students’ math attitudes and achievementA survey of parental attitudes toward an extended school year
8 Gathering Information - Quantitative Method (continued)Results (continued)Identify any descriptive statistics used and summarize the resultsIdentify the specific statistical test of significance, report the test statistic itself, and report its level of significanceThe experimental group means were significantly higher (t = 5.68, p = .023) than those for the control groupThere was a significant (r2 = 0.91, p = .001) positive relationship between students’ attitudes and achievement
9 Gathering Information - Quantitative DiscussionIdentify the specific conclusions of the researchersDiscuss the implications described by the researchers
10 Gathering Information – Qualitative IntroductionResearch topicProvide a statement of the general issue, topic, or question being investigatedDescribe any reformulation of the topic on the basis of the ongoing interactive nature of the collection, analysis, and synthesis of dataDiscuss the importance of the topic
11 Gathering Information – Qualitative Introduction (continued)Review of the literatureDescribe the nature of the review of the literatureList the major issues identified in the review of the literature
12 Gathering Information – Qualitative MethodSite and participant selectionDescribe the strategies used to gain entry to the siteDescribe the siteIdentify the participant(s) and list the sampling strategies used to select themDescribe the characteristics of the participant(s)
13 Gathering Information – Qualitative Method (continued)Data collection and analysisDescribe the researcher’s role in the studyReport the data collection strategies usedIdentify any instruments or protocols used by the researchersIdentify any threats to the quality of the data (i.e., observer bias and observer effect)Describe the strategies used to enhance validity and reduce bias in data collectionDescribe the strategies used to classify and interpret data
14 Gathering Information – Qualitative Method (continued)Research approach and proceduresIdentify the research approachBriefly describe the procedures usedIdentify any ethical issues related to the studyResultsReport the findingsDescribe the researcher’s interpretation of the findings
15 Gathering Information – Qualitative DiscussionReport the researcher’s conclusionsState the relationship between the conclusions and the initial problem
16 Focus of General Evaluation Criteria See the evaluation criteria in the text and on the web siteIntroductionProblemReview of the related literatureHypothesesMethodsParticipantsInstrumentsResearch design and procedures
17 Focus of General Evaluation Criteria ResultsDiscussionAbstract or summary
18 Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Descriptive researchQuestionnaire studiesAre pilot study procedures and results described?Are directions to questionnaire respondents clear?Does each item in the questionnaire relate to one of the objectives of the study?Does each questionnaire item deal with a single concept?When necessary, is a point of reference given for questionnaire scales?
19 Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Descriptive research (continued)Questionnaire studies (continued)Are leading questions avoided in the questionnaire?Are there sufficient alternatives for each questionnaire item?Does the cover letter explain the purpose and importance of the study and give the potential respondent a good reason to co-operate?If appropriate, is confidentiality or anonymity assured in the cover letter?
20 Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Descriptive research (continued)Questionnaire studies (continued)What is the percentage of returns and how does this affect the study results?Are follow-up activities to increase returns described?If the response rate was low, was any attempt made to determine any major differences between respondents and non-respondents?Are data analyzed in groups or clusters rather than a series of many single variable analyses?
21 Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Correlational researchRelationshipsWere variables carefully selected?Is the rationale for variable selection described?Do the conclusions avoid suggesting causal relationships between variables?
22 Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Causal-comparative researchAre the characteristics or experiences that differentiate the groups clearly defined or described?Are critical extraneous variables identified?Were any control procedures applied to equate the groups on extraneous variables?Are plausible alternative hypotheses discussed?
23 Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Experimental researchWas an appropriate experimental design selected?Is a rationale given for the design selected?Is the method of group formation described?Was the experimental group formed in the same way as the control group?Were groups randomly formed and the use of existing groups avoided?
24 Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Experimental research (continued)Were treatments randomly assigned to groups?Were critical extraneous variables identified?Were any control procedures applied to equate groups on extraneous variables?Were the results generalized to the appropriate group?
25 Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Interview studiesWere the interview procedures pretested?Are pilot study procedures and results described?Does each item in the interview guide relate to a specific objective of the study?When necessary, is a point of reference given in the guide for interview items?Are leading questions avoided in the interview guide?Is the language and complexity of the questions appropriate for the participants?
26 Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Interview studies (continued)Does the interview guide indicate the type and amount of prompting and probing that was permitted?Are the qualifications and special training of the interviewers described?Is the method used to record responses described?Did the researcher use the most reliable, unbiased method of recording responses?
27 Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Mixed methods researchDoes the study use at least one quantitative and one qualitative research method?Does the study include a rationale for using a mixed methods research design?Does the study include a classification of the type of mixed methods research design?
28 Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Mixed methods research (continued)Was the study feasible given the amount of data to be collected and concomitant issues of resources, time, and expertise?Does the study include both quantitative and qualitative research questions?Does the study clearly identify qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques?Does the study use appropriate data analysis techniques for the type of mixed methods design?
29 Validity and Reliability Threats to internal validity in qualitative studiesDid the researcher effectively deal with problems of history and maturation by documenting historical changes over time?Did the researcher effectively deal with problems of mortality by using a large enough sample?Was the researcher in the field long enough to effectively minimize observer effects?Did the researcher take the time to become familiar and comfortable with participants?
30 Validity and Reliability Threats to internal validity in qualitative studies (continued)Were the interview questions pretested?Did the researcher interview key informants to verify field observations?Were participants demographically screened to ensure that they were representative of the larger population?
31 Validity and Reliability Threats to internal validity in qualitative studies (continued)Was the data collected using different media to facilitate cross-validation?Were participants allowed to evaluate the researcher results before publication?Is sufficient data presented to support findings and conclusions?
32 Validity and Reliability Threats to reliability in qualitative studies (continued)Is the researcher’s relationship with the group and setting fully described?Is all field documentation comprehensive, fully cross-referenced and annotated, and rigorously detailed?
33 Validity and Reliability Threats to reliability in qualitative studiesIs construction, planning, and testing of all instruments documented?Are key informants fully described, including information on groups they represent and their community status?Are sampling techniques fully documented as being sufficient for the study?