Section 1- surveys – design and application
Preparation (150 words)
In preparation discuss theoretical understanding of survey, such as discussing what is survey, how to design it and how to apply the understanding of surveys in order to create one.
Participation(150 words)
In participation link the theoretical understanding from preparation, and discuss how to used it in order to design a survey question.
Reflection(100 words)
reflect on the theoretical and practical understanding of designing a survey, and discuss.
Section 2- Interviews:
Preparation 150 words:
Participation (150 words)
Reflection (100 words)
Section 3-
UNOBTRUSIVE RESEARCH
Preparation 150 words:
Participation (150 words)
Reflection (100 words)
Follow the above steps (section 1) for the other two sections.
Please use thefollowing references for referencing.
Total 1200 words
Research_Methods_The_Basics_----_(2_RESEARCH_THEORY).pdf 2 RESEARCH THEORY Research is about acquiring knowledge and developing understanding, collecting facts and interpreting them to build up a picture of the world around us, and even within us. It is fairly obvious then, that we should hold a view on what knowledge is and how we can make sense of our surroundings. These views will be based on the philosophical stance that we take. Despite this, some people maintain that a study of the philosophy of the natural or human sciences is irrelevant to researchers. They remark that the study of philosophy consists of learning about how theory after theory has been erected, only to be torn down by the subsequent one, and that it has little bearing on the day-to-day practice of research and only causes confusion. So why should you find it necessary to know something about philosophy as a background to your research? Because everyone is a philosopher – everyone has a concept of the world. In fact, the alternative to having a philosophy is not having no philosophy but having a bad philosophy. The ‘unphilosophical’ person has an unconscious philosophy, which they apply in their practice – whether of science or politics or daily life (Collier, 1994: 16). All philosophical positions and their attendant methodologies, explicitly or implicitly, hold a view about reality. This view, in turn, will determine what can be regarded as legitimate knowledge. Philosophy works by making arguments explicit. You need to develop Walliman, Nicholas. Research Methods: The Basics, Taylor & Francis Group, 2010. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwsau/detail.action?docID=667795. Created from uwsau on 2018-05-19 05:35:13. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 0. T ay lo r & F ra nc is G ro up . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . RESEARCH THEORY AND PRACTICE16 sensitivity towards philosophical issues so that you can evaluate research critically. It will help you to discern the underlying, and perhaps contentious, assumptions upon which research reports are based even when these are not explicit, and thus enable you to judge the appropriateness of the methods that have been employed and the validity of the conclusions reached. Obviously, you will also have to consider these aspects in regard to your own research work. Your research, and how you carry it out, is deeply influenced by the theory or philosophy that underpins it. There are different ways of going about doing research depend- ing on your assumptions about what actually exists in reality and what we can know (metaphysics) and how we can acquire knowledge (epistemology). METAPHYSICS AND EPISTEMOLOGY Metaphysics is concerned with questions such as what it is to be, who we are, what is knowledge, what are things, what is time and space. At one extreme there is: Idealism, that advocates that reality is all in the mind, that everything that exists is in some way dependent on the activity of the mind. Hence, as phenomena are reliant on mental and social factors they are therefore in a state of constant change e.g. music is not just sound, it is an emotional experience. and at the other extreme is: Materialism (or reductionism), that insists that only physi- cal things and their interactions exist and that our minds and consciousness are wholly due to the active operation of materi- als. Hence, phenomena are independent of social factors and are therefore stable e.g. music is just vibrations in the air. As you can imagine, these are opposite ends of a spectrum, with many intermediate positions being held that balance the importance of the mind and material things in different degrees. Epistemology is the theory of knowledge, especially about its val- idation and the methods used. It deals with how we know things Walliman, Nicholas. Research Methods: The Basics, Taylor & Francis Group, 2010. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwsau/detail.action?docID=667795. Created from uwsau on 2018-05-19 05:35:13. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 0. T ay lo r & F ra nc is G ro up . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . RESEARCH THEORY 17 and what we can regard as acceptable knowledge in a discipline. It is concerned with the reliability of our senses and the power of the mind. As for the methods of acquiring knowledge, there are two basic approaches: 1 empiricism – knowledge gained by sensory experience (using inductive reasoning); 2 rationalism – knowledge gained by reasoning (using deductive reasoning). The relative merits of these approaches have been argued ever since the Ancient Greeks – Aristotle advocating the first and Plato the second. INDUCTIVE AND DEDUCTIVE REASONING The reasoning behind the empirical and rationalist approaches to gain- ing knowledge also start from opposite ends of a spectrum. Although it is not possible to apply either extreme in a practical way, it is useful to characterize the distinct differences in the two opposing approaches. A more practical approach that goes a long way to overcome the short- comings of each is the hypothetico-deductive method, which uses the features of each in a pragmatic way, in fact, the method used in much scientific enquiry and hence also called ‘scientific method’. INDUCTIVE REASONING – THE EMPIRICIST’S APPROACH Inductive reasoning starts from specific observations or sensory experiences and then develops a general conclusion from them. This simple example gives and indication of the line of reasoning: All the giraffes that I have seen (Repeated observations) have very long necks. Therefore I conclude that all (Conclusion) giraffes have long necks. Induction was the earliest and, even now, the commonest popular form of scientific activity. We use it every day in our normal lives as we learn from our surroundings and experiences. We come to conclu- sions from what we have experienced and then generalize from them, that is, set them up as a rule or belief. The Elizabethan philosopher Walliman, Nicholas. Research Methods: The Basics, Taylor & Francis Group, 2010. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwsau/detail.action?docID=667795. Created from uwsau on 2018-05-19 05:35:13. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 0. T ay lo r & F ra nc is G ro up . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . RESEARCH THEORY AND PRACTICE18 Francis Bacon stated that one should consult nature, and not rely on the writings of ancient philosophers such as Aristotle or on the Bible. The scientific revolution in the seventeenth century was based on this approach, led by such scientists as Galileo and Newton (remem- ber the apple that fell on his head from the tree that lead to his theory of gravity? Nice story anyway!). Mendel’s discovery of genetics and Darwin’s theory of evolution are perhaps the most famous generali- zations in the form of theories that are, even by them, claimed to be developed through inductive reasoning. However there are problems with induction. The first is the question of how many observations must be made before we can reasonably draw a conclusion that is reliable enough to general- ize from; and the second is how many situations and under which conditions should the observations be made so that true conclu- sions can be reached? These problems do not stop us from using inductive reasoning every day quite successfully without even thinking about it. But we should be aware that what might at first seem obvious may not be so reliable with making further investigations. Therefore, in order to be able to rely on the conclusions we come to by using inductive reasoning, we should ensure that we make a large number of observations, we repeat them under a large range of circumstances and conditions and that no observations contradict the generalization we have made from the repeated observations. DEDUCTIVE REASONING – THE RATIONALIST’S APPROACH Deductive reasoning begins with general statements (premises) and, through logical argument, comes to a specific conclusion. Again, a simple example will provide a guide to how this works: All living things (General statement – first premise) will eventually die. This animal is a living thing. (Inference – second premise) Therefore, this animal (Conclusion) will eventually die. This is the simplest form of deductive argument, and is call a syllogism. As you can see it consists of a general statement (called the first premise), Walliman, Nicholas. Research Methods: The Basics, Taylor & Francis Group, 2010. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwsau/detail.action?docID=667795. Created from uwsau on 2018-05-19 05:35:13. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 0. T ay lo r & F ra nc is G ro up . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . RESEARCH THEORY 19 followed a more specific statement inferred from this (the second premise), and then a conclusion which follows on logically from the two statements Deduction, as with many philosophical ideas, was first discussed as a way of reasoning by the Ancient Greeks, in particular, Plato. Enquiry is guided by the theory which precedes it. Theories are spec- ulative answers to perceived problems, and are tested by observation and experiment. Whilst it is possible to confirm the possible truth of a theory through observations which support it, theory can be falsi- fied and totally rejected by making observations which are incon- sistent with its statement. In this way, science is seen to proceed by trial and error: when one theory is rejected, another is proposed and tested, and thus the fittest theory survives. In order for a theory to be tested, it must be expressed as a state- ment called a hypothesis. The essential nature of a hypothesis is that it must be falsifiable. This means that it must be logically pos- sible to make true observational statements which conflict with the hypothesis, and thus can falsify it. However, the process of falsifica- tion leads to a devastating result of total rejection of a theory, requir- ing a completely new start. Another problem with deductive reasoning is that the truth of the conclusions depends very much on the truth of the premise on