From research methods to methodical researcher: Addressing dissertation students’ preparation for independent inquiry Michael Hast School of Management.

From research methods to methodical researcher:

Addressing dissertation students’ preparation for independent inquiry

Michael Hast

School of Management and Social Sciences

Introduction

• Research as important personal discovery experience for undergraduates (Hunter et al., 2007)

Introduction

• Research methods integral part of most undergraduate degree programmes (Todd et al., 2004)▫ Success depends on motivations, course contents and

how these contents are taught (Mutz & Daniel, 2013)

• But students do not feel sufficiently prepared to carry out independent research projects (Allin, 2010)▫ Students excluded from academic world of research

(Jenkins & Healey, 2011)

Strongly disagree

Disagree Neither Agree Strongly agree

02468

10121416

Below Slightly below

Right Slightly above

Above02468

10121416

Introduction

• Overall satisfaction

• Pitch of teaching

Introduction

• Students have to fall back on what they have already learnt, re-evaluate knowledge and skills▫ Engage with own learning, understand what is known

and what needs to be known (Pritchard, 2009)

• Important to understand effect the dissonance between theory and practice may have ▫ Are students adequately prepared to enter the stage

of applying their research methods knowledge?▫What is necessary for their inclusion in the research

community?

Present research

• How well does the research methods module prepare students for their dissertation?

• How confident do students feel about carrying out research?

• How well do dissertation students feel the module has helped them?

Key findings: Theory

• Second-years▫ Satisfied with how theory was explained to them▫ Felt well prepared▫ Expressed being “more aware of the different

methods for researching and their strengths and weaknesses”

• Third-years▫ Equally high agreement rates about module ▫Heightened awareness of “various ways that data

could be collected”▫ But helpful to have “examples of different data

collection that had been used in real research projects”

Key findings: Practice

• Second-years▫ Some positives, e.g. being “more aware now of the

problems surrounding research such as ethics”▫ But lack of awareness of how to actively carry out

research when in the field▫ Proposed incorporating “real research practice” as

well as “relevant examples e.g. of past students … and the problems they had, how they overcame them”

• Third-years▫Generally positive perception of practical

preparedness▫However, “there could have been more of an

emphasis to pilot research methods”

Key findings: Assessment

• Second-years▫Research proposal was appropriate▫ Appreciation for usefulness of seeing “the similar

layout between the proposal and the dissertation and how to approach such a piece of work”

• Third-years▫ Proposal “prepared a foundation … to work from”▫Useful to approaching dissertation as a whole piece

– “it was obviously helpful in terms of getting a rough idea of what had to be done in the third year”

Key findings: Dissertation

• Second-years felt prepared but expressed lack of confidence in approaching research

• Third-years reported similar perceptions▫ “A good experience writing a dissertation”▫ Easy to relate “the theory … to the appropriate

responses from participants”▫ But difficult to “produce the right questions”▫Hard to “transcribe the data and find meaning”▫ “The methodology section was quite daunting”▫Difficult finding “appropriate structure to

communicate … findings”

Discussion

• Appropriate preparation crucial, particularly where range of paradigms and methods is available (Healey, 2005)▫ But emphasis on talking about research (Ryan et al.,

2014)

• Hands on experience with research to gain appropriate confidence in becoming independent researchers▫Makes learning experiences more meaningful (Edwards et

al., 2007)▫ Active incorporation of students into practice of a

community (Brew, 2003)

Conclusion

• Lessons to be learnt▫Research methods in particular▫Module evaluations in general, where one module

has direct impact on another

• Listening to students in designing and evaluating modules▫ The student voice (O’Neill & McMahon, 2012)▫ Staff and students working together in design

process (Sandover et al., 2012)▫ League table ratings (Swain, 2010)

ReferencesAllin, L. (2010). Linking research, teaching and learning within the discipline: Evaluating student learning

through “real life” research in sports development. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 9, 92-100.

Brew, A. (2003). Teaching and research: New relationships and their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 22, 3-18.

Edwards, A., Jones, S.M., Wapstra, E., & Richardson, A.M.M. (2007). Engaging students through authentic research experiences. UniServe Science Teaching and Learning Research Proceedings, 168-171.

Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching to benefit student learning. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 29, 183-201.

Hunter, A.-B., Laursen, S.L., & Seymour, E. (2007). Becoming a scientist: The role of undergraduate research in students’ cognitive, personal, and professional development. Science Education, 91, 36-74.

Jenkins, A., & Healey, M. (2011). Navigating between teaching, learning and inquiry: Developing students as researchers. The International HETL Review, 1, 35-43.

Mutz, R., & Daniel, H.-D. (2013). University and student segmentation: Multilevel latent-class analysis of students’ attitudes towards research methods and statistics. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 280-304.

O’Neill, G., & McMahon, S. (2012). Giving student groups a stronger voice: Using participatory research and action (PRA) to initiate change to a curriculum. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 2, 161-171.

Pritchard, A. (2009). Ways of learning: Learning theories and learning styles in the classroom. Oxford: Routledge.

Ryan, M., Saunders, C., Rainsford, E., & Thompson, E. (2014). Improving research methods teaching and learning in politics and international relations: A ‘reality show’ approach. Learning and Teaching in Politics and International Studies, 34, 85-97.

Sandover, S., Partridge, L., Dunne, E., & Burkill, S. (2012). Undergraduate researchers change learning and teaching: A case study in Australia and the United Kingdom. CUR Quarterly, 33, 33-39.

Swain, H. (2010, June 08). Universities that put students first come top. The Guardian. Retrieved June 28, 2013, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/jun/08/university-league-tables-climbers

Todd, M., Bannister, P., & Clegg, S. (2004). Independent inquiry and the undergraduate dissertation: Perceptions and experiences of final-year social science students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29, 335-355.

Questions?