AT LEAST 250 WORDS EACH RESPONSE, AT LEAST 1 REFERENCE EACH RESPONSE, PLEASE SEPARATE EACH RESPONSE
How can a weak literature review diminish a research proposal?
The Literature Review becomes the catalyst for the entire thesis. It demonstrates that the individual has knowledge of the field. The Literature Review is more than reporting what has been read and understood. Instead, it needs to be read critically and to be written in such a way that it shows the person has a feel for that particular area. The person would need to know what the most important issues are and their relevance to their work, they would need to know the controversies, what’s neglected, and have the anticipation of where it’s being taken (Fink, 2014).
If all of these requirements are not followed, it would stand to reason that the Literature Review would diminish the research proposal.
Why is the Literature Review a needed piece of a research proposal?
The goal of a research proposal is to present and justify the need to study a research problem and to present the practical ways in which the proposed study should be conducted. The design elements and procedures for conducting the research are governed by standards within the predominant discipline in which the problem resides, so guidelines for research proposals are more exacting and less formal than a general project proposal. Research proposals contain extensive literature reviews. They must provide persuasive evidence that a need exists for the proposed study. In addition to providing a rationale, a proposal describes detailed methodology for conducting the research consistent with requirements of the professional or academic field and a statement on anticipated outcomes and/or benefits derived from the study’s completion (Krathwohl, 2005).
Once the data has been collected and you are moving into the completion of the research report, how will you continue to pull from your literature review in the results and discussion section of your report?
The purpose of the discussion is to interpret and describe the significance of your findings in light of what was already known about the research problem being investigated, and to explain any new understanding or insights about the problem after you’ve taken the findings into consideration. The discussion will always connect to the introduction by way of the research questions or hypotheses you posed and the literature you reviewed, but it does not simply repeat or rearrange the introduction; the discussion should always explain how your study has moved the reader’s understanding of the research problem forward from where you left them at the end of the introduction (Annesley, 2010).
What did you find to be the most valuable task in the research or writing process?
In Research, the most valuable task I learned was that Internal Validity is all about control. External Validity is all about naturalness and generalizability. Therefore, if I had a preference, it would be dependent on the purpose of the study. If a study needs to have a large amount of applicability, I would favor External Validity. If a study needs to be replicated or evaluated to determine if there are any other variables that may be producing the results, I would prefer internal validity. Therefore, it is difficult to choose just one, because so much is dependent upon context (Jiménez-Buedo, & Miller, 2010).
What strengths and weaknesses did you find in yourself through the research and writing process that you covered in this course?
Research is multifaceted and therefore all of it still confuses me. I have read so much in this class; it was like reading a foreign language. I have never liked research and I am sure I never will. I apologize for the negativity, but, I just do not like research. When I have to take a research class, I have an overwhelming sense of dread and typically will need to get medication from the doctor to get me through the class.
My biggest weakness is Abstract and Introduction. Throughout my academic career, I have been taught to use an Abstract in all Dropbox assignments. I did not learn about Introduction until this class. I am still unclear when to use an Abstract and when to use an Introduction. I am also struggling with how to write a Conclusion.
My biggest strength is passing this class:) I was able to do so by reaching out to Dr. Crockett many, many times. It takes a lot of strength and courage to reach out and ask questions from your Instructor. I have learned throughout my time at Argosy is that all of the Instructors want you to succeed. If you have a question, reach out to the Instructor and get clarity on what is needed. There have been times when I did and still did not understand. It was not comfortable to tell them that, but by doing so, they explained it in a way that I did understand.
How do you see yourself applying the skills you have gained through this course in your future career in human services research?
I would say writing would be a skill I would most use. In the M4 A1 Discussion we learned about using First-person, personal pronouns, technical writing, Academic writing, etc. This assignment helped me tremendously with improving my writing skills.
Annesley, Thomas M. (2010). “The Discussion Section:Your Closing Argument.” Clinical Chemistry 56: 1671-1674.
Fink, Arlene. (2014). Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper. Fourth edition. Thousand Oaks, CA.
Jiménez-Buedo, Maria & Miller, Luis M. (2010). Why a Trade-off? The Relationship between the External and Internal Validity of Experiments. Experiments in the Social Sciences: The relationship between External and Internal Validity. THEORIA: An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science. Vol 25, No 3. Retrieved from philsci-archive.pitt.edu/…/jimenezbuedomiller_version_why_a_trade_off_philsci.pdf
Krathwohl, David R. (2005). How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
A literature review should indicate how each scholarly document contributes to the reach question being presented. Examining how each article supports or contradicts the other is useful in understanding why there is a gap in research. May perform study to provide research to fill a gap. It can explain why new data is required to answer question and improve the current position. Evaluations of existing research can provide new perspectives or interpretations, sometimes by just making the positions clearer (Ridley, 2012; USC 2017).
A strong research proposal must provide a research question that is based on a problem that must be addressed. Literature reviews state a research question applicable to current research and gives an account of some related research that has been performed. Literature reviews may be conducted to address a perceived gap in the literature or to see if current positions can be clarified or improved through additional research. Scholarly research material must be reviewed to report findings from research.
Experimental works will be assessed to determine the significance and credibility by examining the use of theoretical and methodological approaches, reviewing the participants, addressing ethical processes, critiquing and presenting related findings with strengths and weaknesses, and by acknowledging limitations. Suggestions for new research and methods of addressing any issues like weaknesses and gaps or improving a position are all conveyed. If this system is not followed it could weaken the credibility of the research (Ridley, 2012; USC, 2017).
In the results and discussion sections of the review, the issues will be discussed, resolutions to problems will be provided. Rationales established by examining information and combining some research will provide perspectives and themes that influenced some findings and those will be presented. Implications for how these findings will benefit other disciplines will be presented. Also, research will be stated to explain how these findings can be used to fill an identified gap or findings addressing an issue was not clear in the data or from previous research.
Stating these evidence-based findings and even presenting more questions might encourage other researchers to consider the research question presented or evoke reasons to perform their own research with new relevant inquiries (Ridley, 2012; USC, 2017).
Learning new vocabulary pertaining to research was most valuable because it was easier to understand why a specific methodology was applied. Also, that the question that was being addresses had been asked and suggestions made but there still was not appropriate action being taken to implement procedures to execute them in every day practices.
Strengths consist of feeling positive about research, understanding its value, and acquiring tools to perform research. Gaining knowledge about conducting research, critique existing research, how to write research, and perform research from initiation to conclusion. These processes include learning how to use scholarly materials including peer-reviews, using key word searches, learning how to critique articles, synthesis information, electronically store references, and evaluate sources to find most relevant information.
Weaknesses include feeling overwhelmed and lacking confidence, not having time to organized; not being able to critique data and extract points, discerning which information is most relevant. That involve not being able to understand a lot of research articles but supposedly that improves with practice. But, only if the proper procedures are adhered to consistently. In other words, follow the process all the time to ensure every aspect of the process is covered. Not allowing enough time to perform research can reduce changes of producing an effectiveness review (Ridley, 2012).
If asked to engage in research when employed the challenge would be accepted because more time would be allotted to completed task; otherwise engaging in research would probably not occur.
Ridley, D. (2012). The Literature Review. (2nd Edition). Save Publications, Limited.
University of Southern California (USC). (2017). Discussion. Organizing Your Social Science
Research Paper. Research Guides. Retrieve from