Educational Research Chapter 22 Evaluating a Research Report Gay, Mills, and Airasian.

Educational Research

Chapter 22Evaluating a Research Report

Gay, Mills, and Airasian

Topics Discussed in this Chapter Gathering information General evaluation criteria Design specific evaluation criteria

Qualitative research in general Observational research Historical research Survey – Questionnaire and Interview Correlational – Relationship and Prediction Causal-Comparative Experimental

Gathering Information Necessity of knowing what was

done Examples

What 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

Gathering Information - Quantitative

Introduction Problem

Provide a general statement of the problem that includes the variables and the relationships between them

State the importance of the study Review of the Literature

List the major issues identified in the review Hypothesis

State the specific hypothesis or hypotheses being investigated

Objectives 1.1, 1.2, & 1.3


Method Participants

Identify the population and sample Describe the sampling and/or assignment

procedures Identify the size of the total sample and

of each group if applicable Describe the general characteristics of

the subjectsObjective 1.4


Method (continued) Instruments

List the specific instruments used in the study

Describe the evidence of validity provided for each instrument

Describe the reliability evidence cited for each instrument

Describe the information needed to interpret the scores for each instrument

Objective 1.5

Gathering Information - Quantitative Method (continued)

Design and Procedures Identify the specific type of research design Identify any threats to internal validity Identify any threats to external validity

Results Identify the specific analyses being used

A comparison between the mean scores for a control and experimental group

A correlation between students’ math attitudes and achievement

A survey of parental attitudes toward an extended school year

Objective 1.6


Method (continued) Results (continued)

Identify any descriptive statistics used and summarize the results

Identify the specific statistical test of significance, report the test statistic itself, and report its level of significance

The experimental group means were significantly higher (t = 5.68, p = .023) than those for the control group

There was a significant (t = 14.91, p = .001) positive relationship between students’ attitudes and achievement Objective 1.7


Discussion Identify the specific conclusions of the

researchers Discuss the implications described by

the researchers

Objective 1.8

Gathering Information – Qualitative

Introduction Research topic

Provide a statement of the general issue, topic, or question being investigated

Describe any reformulation of the topic on the basis of the ongoing interactive nature of the collection, analysis, and synthesis of data

Discuss the importance of the topicObjective 1.1


Introduction (continued) Review of the literature

Describe the nature of the review of the literature

List the major issues identified in the review of the literature

Objective 1.2


Method Site and participant selection

Describe the strategies used to gain entry to the site

Describe the site Identify the participant(s) and list the

sampling strategies used to select them Describe the characteristics of the

participant(s)

Objective 1.4

Gathering Information – Qualitative Method (continued)

Data collection and analysis Describe the researcher’s role in the study Report the data collection strategies used Identify any instruments or protocols used by the

researchers Identify 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 collection Describe the strategies used to classify and

interpret data

Objectives 1.5 & 1.7


Method (continued) Research approach and procedures

Identify the research approach Briefly describe the procedures used Identify any ethical issues related to the

study Results

Report the findings Describe the researcher’s

interpretation of the findingsObjectives 1.6 & 1.7


Discussion Report the researcher’s conclusions State the relationship between the

conclusions and the initial problem

Objective 1.8

Focus of General Evaluation Criteria See the evaluation criteria in the text

and on the web site Introduction

Problem Review of the related literature Hypotheses

Methods Participants Instruments Research design and procedures

Objectives 1.1 – 1.8

Focus of General Evaluation Criteria

Results Discussion Abstract or summary

Objectives 1.1 – 1.8

Type-Specific Evaluation Criteria Descriptive research

Questionnaire studies Are questionnaire validation procedures described? Was the questionnaire pretested? Are 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?

Objective 2.1

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?

Objective 2.1


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?

Objective 2.1


Correlational research Relationships

Were variables carefully selected? Is the rationale for variable selection

described? Are conclusions and recommendations based

on values of correlation coefficients corrected for attenuation or restriction in range?

Do the conclusions avoid suggesting causal relationships between variables?

Objective 2.2


Correlational research Prediction

Is a rationale given for selection of predictor variables?

Is the criterion variable well defined? Was the resulting prediction equation

validated with at least one other group?

Objective 2.2


Causal-comparative research Are 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 causal relationships that were identified

discussed with due caution? Are plausible alternative hypotheses

discussed?Objective 2.3


Experimental research Was an appropriate experimental design

selected? Is a rationale given for the design selected? Are sources of invalidity associated with the

design identified and discussed? 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? Objective 2.4


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 possible reactive arrangements

controlled? Were tables clear and pertinent to the research

results? Were the results generalized to the appropriate

group?Objective 2.4


Single-subject research Are the data time constrained? Is a baseline established prior to

moving into the intervention phase? Is the length of the treatment sufficient

to represent the behavior within the phase?

Is the design appropriate to the question being asked? Objective 2.5


Single-subject research (continued) If a multiple-baseline design is used,

are conditions met to move across baselines?

If a withdrawal design is used, are limitations to this design addressed?

Does the researcher manipulate only one variable at a time?

Is the study replicable?Objective 2.5


Interview studies Were 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?Objectives 2.6 – 2.9


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? Did the researcher specify how the responses to

semi-structured and unstructured items were quantified? Objectives 2.6 – 2.9


Narrative Research Did the researcher provide a rationale for the

use of narrative research? Is there a rationale for the selection of

individuals to study the chosen phenomenon? Did the researcher describe data collection

methods with particular attention to interviewing?

Did the researcher describe appropriate strategies for analysis and interpretation?

Objective 2.6


Ethnographic research Did the written account (i.e., the ethnography)

capture the social, cultural, and economic themes that emerged from the study?

Did the researcher spend a “full cycle” in the field studying the phenomenon?

Mixed methods research Does 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?

Objectives 2.7 & 2.8


Mixed methods research (continued) Does the study include a classification of the type of

mixed methods research design? 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?

Objective 2.8


Action research Did the teacher’s area of focus involve

teaching and learning and focus on the teacher’s own practice?

Did the teacher state questions that were answerable given his or her expertise, time and resources?

Was the area of focus within the teacher’s locus of control?

Was the area of focus something about which the teacher was passionate?

Objective 2.9


Action research (continued) Was the area of focus something the

researcher wanted to change or improve? Did the teacher provide an action plan

detailing the impact of the research findings on practice?

Objective 2.9

Validity and Reliability Threats to internal validity in qualitative

studies Did 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?

Objective 2.10


studies (continued) Were the interview questions pretested? Were efforts made to ensure intra-observer agreement

by training interview teams in coding procedures? Were efforts made to cross-check results by

conducting interviews with multiple groups? Did the researcher interview key informants to verify

field observations? Were participants demographically screened to ensure

that they were representative of the larger population?

Objective 2.10


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? Were dependent and independent variables

repeatedly tested to validate results?

Objective 2.10

Validity and Reliability Threats to external validity in qualitative

studies Were construct effects addressed adequately? Were both new and adapted instruments pretested to

ensure they were appropriate for the study? Did the researcher fully describe participants’ relevant

characteristics? Does the report address researcher interaction effects

by documenting the researcher’s activities? Were all observations and interviews conducted in a

variety of fully described settings with multiple trained observers?

Objective 2.10

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?

Were observations and interviews documented using multiple means?

Is the interviewer’s training documented?

Objective 2.10

Validity and Reliability Threats to reliability in qualitative

studies Is 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?

Objective 2.10

Educational Research Chapter 22 Evaluating a Research Report Gay, Mills, and Airasian.

Documents

qualitative research

airasian slide

research approach

researchers objective

literature objective

research report gay

participants objective

topic objective