Educational Research (0837)

Assignment No.1
Student Name: SHAKEEL AHMED Tutor Name: AHMAD ALI SAMAR
Program: M.ED STE Semester: Autumn 2019
Roll No: BY652899 Region: D.G. Khan
Mobile No: 03002724548 E.mail: [email protected]

Q No.1 Explain briefly each source of knowledge and discuss which source is more
important and why?

Answer:

In mathematics, it is known that 2 + 2 = 4, but there is also knowing how to add two numbers,
and knowing a person (e.g., knowing other persons,[12] or knowing oneself), place (e.g., one's
hometown), thing (e.g., cars), or activity (e.g., addition). Some philosophers think there is an
important distinction between "knowing that" (know a concept), "knowing how" (understand an
operation), and "acquaintance-knowledge" (know by relation), with epistemology being
primarily concerned with the first of these.

Knowledge

Human body needs nutritious food for its healthy existence. Human mind also need nutritious
food for their healthy and brilliant functioning. Hence Knowledge is considered as the food of
mind. The definition of knowledge is ongoing debate among the philosophers in the field of
epistemology. According to Plato Knowledge is justified true belief. Knowledge can be defined as
a familiarity awareness or understanding of someone or something such as facts, information,
descriptions or skills, which is acquired through experiences or education by perceiving,
discovering or learning. Any new information acquired by an organism through formal, informal
or non formal way of inquiry can be termed as knowledge. Knowledge make individuals more
strength and confident in their activity. The activity of research builds new knowledge, theory or
formulates generalization.

Ways/Source of Acquiring Knowledge

Curious to know about new things is the main motivating factor for searching new knowledge.
When a person feel disequilibrium regarding any matter of content, s/he start search for reaching
valid conclusion regarding the matter of doubt. The process of clarification leads them to
equilibration in their cognition. For the purpose of getting new information the human beings are
using following ways to accumulate new knowledge.
Sensory Perception

Senses are the gate ways of knowledge. Five senses help an individual to get primary information
regarding any object, individual or events and so forth. For example, students can see an
experiment conducted by the teacher, hear the explanation, touch the object or product, smell the
output, taste the product etc. Through this five activity (five sense organs) or any one activity
(single sense organ) students are able to construct and verify information regarding the
experiment conducted. Hence sensory perceptions are the one important source or means of
acquiring knowledge. In the case of a researcher, the sensory perceptions are important to them to
collect information and verify the authenticity and originality of acquired knowledge.

Logical Reasoning

Logical reasoning is another way of acquiring Knowledge. It is related to brainy functioning.

Ignorance and blind believes made man as a sleeping brains, later, curiosity and search for cause
and effect relationship paved the way of unfolding natural truths and facts. People become
modern and developed by the way they approached the matters through logical reasoning.
Deductive as well as inductive reasoning are emerged by the time as methods of logical
reasoning. Individuals may infer things through deductive reasoning, abstract thinking, finding
relationship between events and variables and so forth. For example a competent person can make
valid conclusion regarding the nature and consequences of certain events by observing behavior
of individuals or analyzing chain of events, statement and attitude of national leaders and so forth.
Through the logical reasoning a researcher can deduct and infer information regarding the
research problem.

Deductive Reasoning

It is the earlier philosophical method of Logical Reasoning. Categorical syllogism is considered as

the old systematic method of logical reasoning. The famous philosopher Aristotle developed it as
Deductive method of problem solving. Moving from General assumptions to specific application,
that means the general to particular principle (DGP). It can be understood by the explanation of
categorical syllogism given below.

Categorical Syllogism

Syllogistic reasoning is a kind of logical argument that applies deductive reasoning for drawing a
valid conclusion based on two or more propositions. Categorical syllogism consists of three
components; such as Major premise, Minor Premise, Conclusion. It establishes a logical
relationship between them.

Major Premise: it is a self evident assumption, previously established by metaphysical truth or

dogmas. For example all men are mortal
Minor Premise: it is a particular case related to the major premise. For example, Socrates is a
man

Conclusion: based on both premises conclusion and inference could be surly possible. For
example Socrates is mortal

Form the above example we can observe the general assumption in major premise; that is all men
are mortal. Then leads to particular observation in minor premise that Socrates is a man and
concludes that that’s why he is a mortal.

Inductive Reasoning

Later much creative criticism had been raised regarding the process drawing conclusion from
general phenomenon. Because of the reason that there might be some dogmas and myths, baseless
beliefs which had not been empirically proved but believed that, they are true and as well as had
impacted the conclusion. So it leads to creating unreliable and error information to the people.
Hence many centuries later Francis bacon advocated the inductive method of reasoning or
problem solving which had kicked back the limitation of the deductive method. It is the process of
specific observations of phenomenon which leads to generalization. Here individuals arrive to
conclusions after the empirical verification of many individual observations of a common
phenomenon. Hence there is no possibility to adopt any dogmas or myth as a foundation of
knowledge. Here the problem solver ensures the mortality of the human beings or any organism in
particular case. For example a person analyzing the life history of great personalities, such as
Mahathma Gandhi, Nehru, Maulana Abul kalam azad, Abrahaam Lincon and so forth. S/he could
be reach a conclusion that even though these personalities had a strong back up of the political
power they could not overcome the death. And there is no organism can be found on earth alive
after a reasonable length of period. Hence it is concluded that every organism with soul or life
should breathe its last after a while.

Authority

There are several occasions where a researcher needs authoritative knowledge. All official
information can be termed as authoritative knowledge. One can get information from concern
authority regarding their concerned. Right to information act is a good example for the same. If
any individual need authentic information regarding any authority s/he can file a query regarding
his information concerned through RTI to concerned authority. This process ensures an
information seeker to get authentic knowledge from authority. For example if a researcher needs
information regarding the enrollment, dropout rate, literacy rate, budget allocation to different
educational sector, s/he can be collect information from the concern authority regarding the
above. The information provided by the concerned authority would be the knowledge from
authority or authoritative knowledge.
Traditions

Traditions are another important source of knowledge. Much social related knowledge are
preserved and transmitted through traditions. For example social skills, values, social functions
are entirely routed in traditions of the society. Traditions have local as well as national impact. A
researcher can get information regarding the indigenous treatment system, folklore arts, skilled
based traditional social class are available from social traditions. There much information which
is largely depends on traditions.

Experience

Personal as well as professional experience of an individual contributes much in his knowledge.

Personal experience in family, society, and neighborhood taught humans many lessons regarding
the behavior, adjustment, social dealings, patience and so forth. Professional experiences make an
individual perfectly professional. Knowledge of matters regarding to be performed or not to be do
in personal as well as professional situation create through experiences. Learning by doing is also
come under this category.

Naturalistic Inquiry

Thirst for knowledge is the uniqueness of human being. When s/he wants to solve a certain
problem or confront a curious situation. S/he starts searching for the solution of the problem in
naturalistic way. The final solution will be found out by getting new information regarding the
problem through the inquiry. For example a researcher felt a problem of why the students of
backward areas are less enrolled in higher education. The researcher may formulate possible
reasons and possibilities of the problem. Empirically collect information from the original
sources, s/he may go to the community location and approach the concerned subject of the study
and their social situation. Through this inquiry process the researcher get much valuable
information and thereby infer the solution of the problem. The knowledge construction through
this process can be termed as naturalistic Inquiry.

Trial and Error

Trial and error is one of the ways of acquiring new knowledge. The term trial and error is
contributed by famous psychologist E.L. Thorndike. Individuals learn more things through trial
and error process. Knowledge related to practical, professional, skilled and semi skilled
professions are largely depends on this source of knowledge. For example knowledge of use of
computer, smart phone, driving, playing cricket, football, teaching etc can be acquired through
trial and error.

Scientific approach

Knowledge can be created or accumulated through various means. Scientific approach is very
important means of knowledge acquisition. Scientific approach ensures the reliability and
rationality of the information or knowledge acquired. The knowledge constructed through
scientific approach has following features.

1. Body of Knowledge

2. Universal application

3. Empirically proved

4. Experimental

5. Measurable

6. Observable

7. Trustworthiness

8. Objectivity

9. Validity

10. Reliability

11. Predictability

Scientific Method in Developing Knowledge

Scientific method ensures the reliability and validity of the knowledge constructed through its
process. The adoption of the scientific method eliminates the biasness as well as the fake
information regarding the matter of concern. John Dewey (1938) identified the following steps for
scientific method which constitute the elements of deductive and inductive reasoning.

1. Identification and definition of problems

2. Formulation of hypotheses

3. Collection, organization and Analysis of data

4. Formulation of conclusion

5. Verification, Rejection, or Modification of hypotheses

Intuition

Knowledge revealed from insight is another means of knowledge acquisition. Archimedes’s

Principles, Lord Buddha are the living examples of acquired knowledge through intuitions. Many
of the life situations we also had experienced intuitive knowledge to solve our life problems.
Intuitive knowledge can be acquired through following process.

1. Preparation

In this step all available information regarding the problem to be solved must be

assembled and analyzed in depth. Continuous attempts are made to found out solutions

and the process is set aside.

2. Incubation

No intentional attempt mad e to solve the problem. It come to mind while playing,

cooking or at bathroom and so forth.

3. Illumination

Illumination is the process of intuiting many ideas in the mind of the problem solver

unexpectedly. It may be the result of preparation as well as the relaxed mood of

incubation period. The script writers, poets, writers, scientist are getting ideas or

knowledge in this manner.

4. Verification

After receiving the idea the problem solver should verify or test the validity and

reliability of the information empirically.

The level of attaining knowledge through intuition must be depends on the motivation as

well as the intelligence level of problem solver.

Learning

Learning from the original sources is another method of acquiring knowledge. In modern era Lot
of information are available at finger tips. Learning can be done through online as well as off line
mode. One can depend the formal classroom as well as non formal way of learning for acquiring
knowledge. Stream wise systematic knowledge are disseminating in formal classrooms. For
example, the subjects like engineering, medicine, education, psychology, statistics and so forth are
studying in formal classrooms. If an individual is not able to attend the regular classroom for his
educational purpose he can avail knowledge through distance learning. However there are many
doors are opens for accessing knowledge throughout the world. Learner can search primary
sources or secondary sources of information for accumulating knowledge. Learning can be done
selectively as per the requirements of the knowledge seeker.

Research

Research is another way of acquiring knowledge. It is the dependable as well as means of

acquiring reliable knowledge of concerned. That is why research is called as search for truth or
developing knowledge, theory. From the human history, As result of research a series invention
has been taken place from the dawn of human generation. It directly impacted the lifestyles of
human beings. Hence, nowadays days several authority people are depend on research to collect
necessary knowledge of their issues are concerned.

Epistemic Awareness:
Epistemology is the branch of philosophy defined as “the study of human knowledge.” Like
epistemology TOK involves questioning our sources and the nature and accuracy of our
knowledge in the hope that we will develop a more informed understanding of what we know
and don't know. That is, enabling us to become more epistemically aware.

It is important because accurate knowledge of our two worlds - the real world and the inner
world - correctly informs us of the conditions we must cope with. To know facts is to survive;
not to know, or to assess one's environment wrongly, is to lose the fight for survival.

We face two serious epistemological problems.

1. How can we determine which facts are true? As human beings living in the 21st Century
we are surrounded by a wealth of information but not all of it is trustworthy, so we must find
a way to double check fact-claims. We must learn somehow to screen out the fictions but let
in the facts. On what criteria can we decide what are facts and what are false claims?

2. How can we determine which facts are important? However, it is not enough to simply
determine which facts are true, we must also consider which facts are useful. A correct
catalogue of the size and shape of every blade of grass on my lawn may well be factually true
but it will not be as useful as knowing that my lawn is on fire and about to engulf my house.
Given the overwhelming number of facts available to us, what criteria can we use for
deciding what is more important, what less?

Almost everything that we know originates from four basic sources:

 Senses (possibly the most important)
 Authority (knowledge from other sources, hopefully experts)
 Reason
 Intuition
The Senses
Information from the senses is called empirical knowledge and empiricists believe that the
fundamental source of all knowledge is our senses. Our senses are exploratory organs; we use
them all to become acquainted with the world we live in. We learn that candy is sweet, and so
are sugar, jam, and maple syrup. Lemons are not, and onions are not. The sun is bright and
blinding. Glowing coals in the fireplace are beautiful if you don't touch them. Sounds soothe,
warn, or frighten us. Through millions of single sense-events we build a fabric of empirical
information which helps us interpret, survive in, and control the world about us.

We have a number of different kinds of senses:

 The objective senses that tell us about the world: sight, sound, smell, touch and taste
 The visceral senses, in our mouths and gut that give us the sense of stomach ache
 The proprioceptive senses, in our muscles that tell us if our fist is clenched or not
 The balance senses, mostly in our ears that tell us if we are … um … balanced

However, our senses present us with a serious credibility problem. Before we start the TOK
course most of us are naïve realists people who simply accept what their senses are telling them
as the truth … but is there any way we can actually be sure about this? Can we really trust what
our senses seem to tell us?

Unfortunately the answer must be a reluctant no. Our senses do not give us a "true picture" of the
real world; they give us useful picture – a picture that is designed to help us move around,
survive in and take advantage of our world. To take a simple example: if you think about it we
know that the chairs we sit on are not actually not solid: they are made of atoms which are
actually more space than anything else. Yet our senses tell us that they are solid. Why? Because
in terms of day to day survival there is no point knowing about atoms: you need to know that a
chair will hold you up if you sit on it and that a rock will hurt if it falls on you: a sensitive
awareness of the arrangement of the sub-atomic particles of a boulder as it plummets towards
you will not do your survival chances any good.

Authority:
Other people are continual sources of information. Such information, however, is always second-
hand knowledge - or third-, fourth-, or nth-hand knowledge. It is all "hearsay." The farther it is
removed from our own personal experience, the more caution we must exercise before accepting
a fact-claim.
All of our historical knowledge is acquired in this way as is most of our knowledge of the
sciences. We can't experience the past or personally repeat every experiment, so we must trust
the specialists and accept, though not blindly, the discoveries they record for us. They key thing
with knowledge from authority is that it can be double-checked and the work of scientists and
historians is continually being ‘double checked’ as other workers in the same field (even
sometimes us in our classrooms) repeat their experiments or investigations. A healthy cynicism
of sources, the development of the skills required to check facts and an awareness of which
sources are more or less reliable is a good way to ensure that the knowledge we receive from
authority is as good as it can be.

Reason:
Reasoning might be defined as the process of using known facts to arrive at new facts. In this
way Reason can help us arrive at new facts or new knowledge BUT only as long as the original
facts we put into the process are correct and the process itself is reliable.

Imagine you are travelling in Japan and you know that the exchange rate is 200 yen to a dollar,
you can easily work out that an 800 yen sushi meal will actually cost you $4. This is new
knowledge (you didn’t know it before) but … it only works if your original facts are right (i.e.
you’ve got the correct exchange rate and are correct about the cost of the meal) and if the process
is right (you can do multiplication / division properly)

Reasoning generally comes in two forms: deduction and induction. Deduction is the kind of
reasoning usually used in Maths and is the more certain of the two as it involves ‘drawing out’
valid conclusions from previously known facts – e.g. All cats are animals, Jack is a cat, so Jack is
an animal. Induction, on the other hand, is usually used in Science and is less certain as it
involves jumping from some things you have observed to making universal statements about all
things – e.g. I drop this pencil and it falls, so it is likely all dropped pencils (and indeed things)
will fall. Notice that both forms are usually dependent on sensation to give us the initial facts or
ideas in the first place.

The problem with reasoning is that deduction (the most certain form of reasoning) can never
teach us anything new because all the information is there in the facts at the start, while induction
(the thing that can give us what seems like new knowledge) can’t ever give us anything certain,
only things that are likely to be the case.

Intuition:
Although the word intuition has connotations of the mystical or unscientific, when carefully
defined it can be considered a source of knowledge. Intuition refers to insights or bits of
knowledge which suddenly ‘pop’ into consciousness as our deeper subconscious chugs away
working on data that we have collected earlier. We have all probably had the experience where
the answer to a question we were previously thinking about but have currently forgotten has
suddenly popped into our minds for no reason. This is intuition and, as such, like reason, it too is
dependent on our senses to provide the raw material on which the subconscious works.

Sometimes intuition seems to be a ‘feeling’. We often say something like "I have the feeling he's
not telling the truth," without being sure of why. The psychologist Jung suggested that actually
this is actually a form of unconscious reasoning where your subconscious picks up on the tell-
tale signs of lying (sweating, nervous movements, etc) that are too subtle for your conscious
mind to notice and processes them resulting in the ‘feeling’ that this person is untrustworthy.

The problem with intuition however, is that most of our intuitions are wrong and they need
careful double checking before they are trusted.

Other Sources:
 Faith often accompanied by supernatural revelation;
 Instinct;
 Racial Memory / the Collective Unconscious – another idea of Jung’s, that we have
cultural memories that we can all inherit and share without actually experiencing the thing
that caused the memory in the first place;
 Extrasensory Perception;
 Anamnesis ("recollection") or the remembrance of things from a past life;
 Spiritualism and the Occult, such as Ouija boards, tarot cards, etc.

Q NO.2 Define research. Explain the important characteristics of research.

Answer:

The systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts
and reach new conclusions.

Research has been defined in a number of different ways, and while there are similarities, there
does not appear to be a single, all-encompassing definition that is embraced by all who engage in
it.

One definition of research is used by the OECD, "Any creative systematic activity undertaken in
order to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of man, culture and society, and
the use of this knowledge to devise new applications."[5]

Another definition of research is given by John W. Creswell, who states that "research is a
process of steps used to collect and analyze information to increase our understanding of a topic
or issue". It consists of three steps: pose a question, collect data to answer the question, and
present an answer to the question.[6]

The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines research in more detail as "studious inquiry or
examination; especially : investigation or experimentation aimed at the discovery and
interpretation of facts, revision of accepted theories or laws in the light of new facts, or practical
application of such new or revised theories or laws"[4]

Research is a process of collecting, analyzing and interpreting information to answer questions.

But to qualify as research, the process must have certain characteristics: it must, as far as
possible, be systematic, controlled, rigorous, valid and verifiable, empirical and critical.
 Definition
More than hundreds of definitions of research have been available in written form in different
books, encyclopedias, dictionaries and in the research literature. These definitions may have a
difference in the wordings, but meanings are similar. Online encyclopedia Wikipedia defines
research in the following words: research is a search for knowledge, or as any systematic
investigation, with an open mind, to establish novel facts, usually using scientific methods.
There are other definitions of research which also state that research is the seeking of knowledge
in systematic, organized manner. The system that a researcher follows to find out the facts that
are hidden and not known to people, determines the validity, genuineness and reliability of
research. A research is biased or fake if there is no validity or reliability in the research process.
To undertake researches in different fields, there are a variety of procedures and tools set by
experienced researchers. The reliability of these tools have been checked over a period of time
and are therefore approved to be fit for undertaking research. With the advancement in research
processes each day new methods, tools and procedures are developed and each tool or procedure
is suitable for one form of research but has limitations for another form of research.

Characteristics of Research
Certain terms are very commonly used in research and the success of any research depends on
these terms. These terms determine whether a research is free of biases, prejudices, and
subjective errors or not. They are called the characteristics of research.

1. Reliability
Reliability is a subjective term which can not be measured precisely, but today there are
instruments which can estimate the reliability of any research. Reliability is the repeatability of
any research, research instrument, tool or procedure. If any research yields similar results each
time it is undertaken with similar population and with similar procedures, it is called to be a
reliable research. Suppose a research is conducted on the effects of single parenting on the
class performance of the children. If the results conclude that it causes low grades in class,
these results should have to be reliable for another sample taken from a similar population.
More the results are similar; more reliability is present in the research.
2. Validity
Validity is the strength with which we can make research conclusions, assumptions or
propositions true or false. Validity determines the applicability of the research. Validity of the
research instrument can be defined as the suitability of the research instrument to the research
problem or how accurately the instrument measures the problem. Some researchers say that
validity and reliability are co-related, but the validity is much more important than reliability.
Without validity, research goes in the wrong direction. To keep the research on-track define
your concepts in the best possible manner so that no error occur during the measurement.
3. Accuracy
Accuracy is also the degree to which each research process, instrument, and tool is related to
each other. Accuracy also measures whether research tools have been selected in best possible
manner and research procedures suits the research problem or not. For example if a research
 has to be conducted on the trans-gender people, several data collection tools can be used
depending on the research problems but if you find that population less cooperative the best
way is to observe them rather than submitting questionnaire because in questionnaire either
they will give biased responses or they will not return the questionnaires at all. So choosing
the best data collection tool improves the accuracy of research.
.4.Credibility

Credibility comprises the objective and subjective components of the believability of a source or
message. Credibility dates back to Aristotle theory of Rhetoric. Aristotle defines rhetoric as the
ability to see what is possibly persuasive in every situation. He divided the means of persuasion
into three categories, namely Ethos (the source's credibility), Pathos (the emotional or
motivational appeals), and Logos (the logic used to support a claim), which he believed have the
capacity to influence the receiver of a message. According to Aristotle, the term “Ethos” deals
with the character of the speaker. The intent of the speaker is to appear credible. In fact, the
speaker's ethos is a rhetorical strategy employed by an orator whose purpose is to "inspire trust in
his audience.” Credibility has two key components: trustworthiness and expertise, which both
have objective and subjective components. Trustworthiness is based more on subjective factors,
but can include objective measurements such as established reliability. Expertise can be similarly
subjectively perceived, but also includes relatively objective characteristics of the source or
message (e.g., credentials, certification or information quality).[1] Secondary components of
credibility include source dynamism (charisma) and physical attractiveness.

Credibility online has become an important topic since the mid-1990s. This is because the web
has increasingly become an information resource. The Credibility and Digital Media Project @
UCSB[2] highlights recent and ongoing work in this area, including recent consideration of digital
media, youth, and credibility. In addition, the Persuasive Technology Lab[3] at Stanford
University has studied web credibility and proposed the principal components of online
credibility and a general theory called Prominence-Interpretation Theory.[4]

5.Generalization

Generalization is the extent to which a research findings can be applied to larger population.
When a researcher conducts a study he/she chooses a target population and from this population
he takes a small sample to conduct the research. This sample is representative of the whole
population so the findings should also be. If research findings can be applied to any sample from
the population, the results of the research are said to be generalizable.

1. Empirical nature of research means that the research has been conducted following rigorous
scientific methods and procedures. Each step in the research has been tested for accuracy and
is based on real life experiences. Quantitative research is easier to prove scientifically than
qualitative research. In qualitative research biases and prejudice are easy to occur.
2. Systematic approach is the only approach to carry on a research. No research can be conducted
haphazardly. Each step must follow other. There are set of procedures that have been tested
over a period of time and are thus suitable to use in research. Each research, therefore, should
follow a procedure.
3. Controlled in real life experience there are many factors that affect an outcome. A single event
is often a result of several factors. When similar event is tested in research, due to the broader
nature of factors that effect that event, some factors are taken as controlled factors while others
are tested for a possible effect. The controlled factors or variables should have to be controlled
rigorously. In pure sciences, it is very easy to control such elements because experiments are
conducted in the laboratory but in social sciences it becomes difficult to control these factors
because of the nature of research.
Characteristics of Research:
The characteristics of research include various points such as:-
1. Research should be controlled-
It should be controlled because of the relation between two or more variables are affected by
each other (whether it is internal or external). If the research is not controllable, then it will not
be able to design a particular research report.
2. Research should be rigorous-
It should be rigorous because it helps to follow the procedures to find out the answers related
questions which are relevant and appropriate in nature. The research information consists of two
types of sciences such as physical and social sciences. These two sciences are also varied from
each other.
3. Research should be systematic-
Research should be systematic because if a researcher wants to do a perfect research design or
process then it will have to evaluate or obtained the necessary information from the market in a
systematic manner. It takes various steps to do a perfect or systematic research process and all
the steps of procedures are interlinked to each other.
4. Research should be valid-
It means the information which is collected by the researcher can be the correct and verifiable by
yourself (i.e, researcher himself). If our collected information is fair or valid, then our research
will also be ethical in nature.
5. Research should be empirical-
This means that any conclusion drawn is totally based upon ethical or hard evidence gathered
information collected from observations and real-life experiences.
6. The foundation of knowledge-
Research is the foundation of knowledge for the purpose of knowledge and an important source
for providing guidelines or norms for solving different social, business, or governmental
problems. It is a variety of formal training which enables us to understand the new developments
in one’s field in an efficient way.
 Q NO.3 How can educational research be used to improve the system of education?
Support your answer with arguments.

Answer:

In the context of the debate about what works and why, there is a wide range of benefits to
researching your own practice, whether directly feeding into improvement through action
research or, more broadly, gaining understanding and knowledge on themes of interest and
relevance. This is why research is embedded into initial teacher education. As research becomes
embedded in your practice you can gain a range of benefits. Research can:

1. help you find solutions to particular problems arising in your classroom or school
2. underpin professional learning of knowledge, skills and understanding
3. connect you with sources of information and networks of professional support
4. clarify purposes, processes and priorities when introducing change – for example,
to curriculum, pedagogy or assessment

5. improve understanding of your professional and policy context, organisationally,

locally and nationally, enabling you to teach and lead more strategically and effectively
6. develop your agency, influence, self-efficacy and voice within your own school and more
widely within the profession.

Each of these can involve investigation using evidence from your own setting, along with wider
research evidence.

1 Introduction

Over the last few years, there has been an increase in interest in European countries in the issue
of how evidence is used to inform educational policy, and how these processes might be
improved. Evidence informed policy and practice in education is one of the immediate
priorities of the European Commission as described in, for example, the ET2020 strategic
framework (European Commission 2009).

A growing interest in strengthening the link between research and educational policymaking
has been reported in a number of European countries. There is evidence, for example, that in
Denmark research has become more widely used in deciding policy (Bugge Bertramsen 2007).
In the Netherlands, evidence-based strategies are present in the national policy agenda, and a
new unit within the Ministry of Education Culture and Science, called the “Knowledge
Chamber” (Kenniskamer), has been created with the aim of producing properly researched
information which can be used by policy makers (Stegeman 2007), while in Finland the role of
evaluation has assumed a greater importance within public administration (Jakku-
Sihvonen 2007).

However, there is still a clear perception that in the field of education and research the
evidence base for policies is much less substantial than for other areas covered by the Lisbon
 Strategy, such as economic growth (GDP) or the labour market (employment). It has been
observed that, in contrast with technological or medical research, in education research there is
a low level of R&D expenditure and success in knowledge production, and a correspondingly
slow rate in the dissemination and implementation of research (European Commission 2007).

Most of the attention in the literature on the impact of research for policymaking focuses on
research production. The research will not impact useless users are willing and able to benefit
from its findings. The capacity of users is therefore a significant, but largely uninvestigated
issue (Lavis et al. 2003).

The potential range of people and organizations interested in research in education is wide.
They include all the teachers, students, administrators and policy-makers who are directly
involved in education and governments as key bodies responsible for the educational system.
Beyond that, almost every group in society—parents, employers, workers and their
organizations, and the non-profit sector—has an interest in education in one way or another
and thus, stands to benefit from research (Levin 2004).

A number of issues have been identified, concerning the limited impact of the knowledge
produced by educational research:
 Relevance and quality. Recent writing on educational research has argued that short-term,
small-scale “consultancy-style” funding and the “turbulence” of higher education and higher
education policy encourage “reductionist, even myopic, research into higher education”
(Scott 2000). Higher education research is thus regarded as “weakly institutionalized”
(Scott 2000) and as lacking “stability and quality” (Teichler 2000). As Locke (2009) has put it,
‘On the one hand, efforts to make higher education research more relevant to decision-makers
may render it less rigorous in the eyes of academic peers, and therefore even less likely to
result in publication in prestigious journals. On the other, attempts to build a firmer intellectual
foundation, a more critical and sharper analytical edge and a stronger institutional base within
higher education itself, all risk eroding its influence on national policy making and institutional
practice.’ (Locke 2009).
 Lower levels of education research funding compared to other policy fields
(OECD 2000, 2003).
 Diversity of educational research and researchers. As a field of enquiry rather than a discipline
in its own right, ‘educational research relies on different disciplines and therefore may follow
very different methodologies to reach different or even contradictory results on the same
issues’ (European Commission 2007: 15).

Difficulties in the process of knowledge transfer from research into policy are not unique to
education. A recent report from the MASIS project (Monitoring Policy and Research Activities
on Science in Society in Europe) on the knowledge transfer between research and policy in
fields other than education suggest that a number of structural, contextual and cultural
circumstances play a key role.
However, many of the challenges for research-policy transfer relate to the communication
mechanisms and practices used (Bultitude et al. 2012; Cherney et al. 2012). Studies in
educational research and practice indicate that policy-makers often perceive the use of
technical and complex language in research reports as barriers (Vanderlinde and Van
Braaka 2010). As has emerged in a series of interviews and surveys undertaken in 2008 by EC-
DG Research with European policymakers, senior advisers and knowledge transfer specialists,
among the main factors hindering the take-up of research-based evidence by policy-makers
reported by the three groups are differing time scales and imperatives for communication
between policy-makers and researchers, the absence of appropriate channels for
communicating between both groups and filters for translating results (European
Commission 2008).

These remarks essentially point towards the process linking research findings to educational
policy-making, and indicate the need to re-examine the role of the networks connecting
educational research and decision-making (Levin 2004; Saunders 2007; Sebba 2007).

OECD has coined the term “brokerage” to define “the processes by which information is
mediated between stakeholders”; the processes include formal and informal mechanisms, and,
in some instances, agencies specifically set up to carry out this function. The 2007 EC Staff
Working Document employs the term “knowledge mediation” as synonym of “brokerage”,
defined as ‘the translation and the dissemination of knowledge and findings of research so that
they can inform and influence the policymaking dimension’ (European Commission 2007: 6).
Mediation can take an “active” or an “interactive form”, providing resources directly
accessible to decision-makers (e.g. databases and websites) or mechanisms that actively
engage the decision makers in the process, for example through forms of partnership
(European Commission 2007: 42).

The dimension of “knowledge mediation” or “brokerage” for educational research has been
flagged up by both EC and OECD as the weakest link in the research-policy transfer.

According to a survey conducted by the EIPEE project (Evidence-informed Policy-making in

Education in Europe) in 2011, of 269 identified examples of linking activities in education in
30 of the 32 target countries in Europe, only 10 % of the activities identified occurred at the
mediation level, compared with 67 % predominantly concerned with producing research
(Gough et al. 2011).

In most Member States, web portals, databases and conferences exist to act as a
communication channel between research results and policy-makers. These instruments are
usually the responsibility of public education authorities or research institutions. The EC
experts, however, are still waiting for conclusions about their actual dissemination and
therefore their relevance and usefulness (European Commission 2007: 46).
 A number of countries are seeking to achieve a closer and more stable relationship between
research and policy through new forms of partnership between the communities. Some
Member States have created regional institutions to create a consensual approach to policy
development at local level (e.g. DE, ES, FR, IT). Brokerage agencies have been established in
Denmark, Netherlands and United Kingdom with the aim of providing independent reviews,
creating agreed methods of evaluation, and presenting the research results in ways which fit
better with the needs of end-users. New research/analysis units have been developed within
education ministries in, for example, Malta, the Netherlands, Spain, France, and the UK, and
‘policy-facing research centres’ in Finland, Austria, and Denmark (European
Commission 2007: 46–51).

Furthermore, the correlation between the presence of brokerage arrangements and the extent to
which research-based knowledge has a real impact on decision-making is found to be
particularly weak in Romania and Albania. Though brokerage arrangements are in place, the de
facto impact of the scientific evidence on decision-making processes appears to be modest
(MASIS 2012). In Romania, implementation and regulation mechanisms have not led to
planned, systematic and predictable outcomes in the long run. For example the problems
within Romanian scientific research have been addressed in numerous articles, many of them
appearing in the Science Policy Review. Kappel and Ignat (2012) claim that, in Romania,
research faces particular difficulties.
 In Romania, both theoretical and applied research do not engage in dialogue with each other.
Rather, they are based on flows of communication, information or knowledge that takes the
form of a vertical transfer from science to technology.
 There is no need to examine the process of technological transfer;
 Issues about the quality of applied research are still unaddressed in Romania, and aspects of
research relating to design and micro- production are not financed by the state.

Moreover, Lupei (2012) identifies further problems in the field of Romanian research: “In spite
of some positive aspects, such as the elaboration of Romanian research strategy in line with the
European Union framework and national research-development plans, the outcomes are below
expectations”.

Although it ranks very low, research results have improved in the last 5–6 years. There has
been a growth in investment in infrastructure and an increase in the number of publications and
patents (although it is still small compared to other former socialist countries).

The aim of this paper is to identify the major issues linked to the use of educational research,
and the relationship between research in education and education policy insofar as they emerge
through the attitudes and preoccupations of education researchers and policy makers. Does
research influence educational policy? In what way? How well? In order to answer these
questions, we focus first on research production, trying to identify the researchers’ perception
about the quality and the potential of their research for the policy making process. Secondly,
we analyze the policy makers’ attitudes towards research products and transfer. Finally, we
 discuss the obstacles and opportunities of research transfer to policy making, and offer some
suggestions as to how it can be improved.

2 Methods

A qualitative approach, through the use of in-depth interviews, was adopted (Denzin and
Lincoln 2005). The interview guideline was validated by pilot testing, evaluation and
consultation with senior professional colleagues.

2.1 Method and Instrument

The use of interviews meant that data could be collected directly from the key figures within
the university and policy making field. The interviews were conducted over a period of
6 months with the questions being determined by the nature of the research objectives and the
theoretical framework identified in the introduction.

Internal validity was ensured by the selection of informants using the following criteria: length
of experience in their position, type of institutional body (individual or collective), training and
academic standing. This ensured that our interviewees conformed to a wide variety of profiles.
The interviews took between 40 and 50 min and were conducted at each participant’s
workplace. The selection of the respondent sample was based on their representativeness,
established using non-probability criteria and using the theoretical sampling of Flick ( 2004). In
order to act as a control on the consistency of the responses, 6 of the participants were
interviewed a second time.

The present study used interviews organized with two different key figures involved in the
process of disseminating educational research results for policy-making: decision-makers and
researchers. For decision-makers, a semi-structured interview was employed. The participants
were asked about the following topics:

 their perceptions of the impact of educational research in the interviewees’ department or

institution in the last 2–3 years
 their perceptions about the areas in which recently performed research was most widely used
 their opinion regarding factors that favour/inhibit the use of research in decision making.

Data from researchers were collected through structured interviews that included open-ended
questions. The questions examined the functioning of the research system in Romania, the
characteristics of research production, research dissemination, obstacles and opportunities
regarding research in education, and its transfer into the policy making sphere. The questions
also focused on the involvement of key social groups and the structures and processes which
serve to enhance the use of the research results in education.
 2.2 Participants

Interviews were conducted at four public universities in Romania: University of Bucharest

(UB), Alexandru Ioan Cuza University in Iasi (UAIC), the Babes Bolyai University of Cluj
(UBB) and Transylvania University of Brasov (UTB). These are ones of the most important
universities across Romania, according to the classification of the universities in the Romanian
higher education system. 1 UB, UAIC and UBB are the first three universities according to “the
advanced research and teaching” classification and UTB is the first one according to the
“research and teaching based universities” classification.

We also interviewed key figures involved into policy making from the national educational
agencies and the Ministry of Education. The participants were:

1.
Academics performing research and engaged in decision-making in universities, departments
or faculties. This category comprised in-depth interviews with university vice-rectors in charge
of quality assurance, faculty deans and heads of departments.

2.
Leading analysts of higher education governance and management. This comprised interviews
with senior academics and experts in higher education management, as well as academics
currently engaged in senior managerial roles, such as chancellor or vice-chancellor.

3.
Researchers. In this category we interviewed researchers working at university level and at
research centres’ level. The participants’ profiles are detailed in Table 1.

Table 1

Participants’ description

Code Participants’ profile

Researcher Policy- Institution type

maker

Interview 1 x x Higher education institution

(I1)

Interview 2 x x Professional association

(I2)

Interview 3 x National agency in pre-university

(I3) educational system
 Code Participants’ profile

Researcher Policy- Institution type

maker

Interview 4 x National agency in accreditation and

(I4) certification system

Interview 5 x Higher education institution

(I5)

Interview 6 x x Higher education institution

(I6)

Interview 7 x x Ministry of Education

(I7)

Interview 8 x x Higher education institution

(I8)

Interview 9 x x Ministry of Education

(I9)

Interview 10 x x Higher education institution

(I10)

Interview 11 x Higher education institution

(I11)

Interview 12 x x Higher education institution

(I12)

Interview 13 x x Higher education institution

(I13)

2.3 Data Analysis

Data from the interviews were analyzed and systematized using Maxqda 11 software. A
preliminary report was drafted, identifying the key themes that emerged from the interviews, as
well as any issues or themes that could be considered contentious. This report then formed the
basis for the second phase of data collection, involving a group of nine academics. These
participants were selected on the basis of their expertise in management in the context of
higher education in Europe.
 The data analysis was conducted on three levels. At the preliminary level the key units of
meaning were identified. The second level of analysis involved the identification of single
units of meaning through an axial coding system linking the dimensions of analysis with a set
of complex significance topics. The third level of analysis extended the process of synthesis in
order to extract the textual units.

The strategy used to ensure internal validity was the selection of informants using a criteria
system incorporating such aspects as: experience in management positions, type of institution
(individual or collective), training, academic standing, and so on. This ensured that there was
variety in our informants’ profiles.

3 Results and Discussion

3.1 The Research in Higher Education in Romania

Over the past few years, the Romanian Higher Education System has developed an interest in
scientific research, covering all fields of study, except educational practices and policies. Both
researchers and policy-makers welcome the recent governmental focus on financing research
activity, as well as on upgrading it to a high standard so as to gain a high position in the
academic rankings of world universities. The impetus for this derives from the most recent
assessment of Romanian universities, an important criterion being the quality of the scientific
outcomes.

In an attempt to define the context of research in Romania, participants showed an interest in

the issue and identified the factors preventing the efficient production and transfer of research.
Insufficient financing and low quality research evaluation criteria are offered as possible
causes.

A key observation is the growing interest in research shown by those willing to take part in this
kind of activity: There is a favourable context for research in Romania and, like any crisis
situation, it fosters innovation. On the contrary, as far as financing is concerned, research
activity must be reconsidered to be the backbone of any developing university. For the past
year and a half, I have noticed a real interest in research on the part of academics and teaching
staff preparing for their teaching grade I.” (I6)

In spite of this favourable period, research activity faces structural and organizational
difficulties. For instance, one of the researchers, a vice-rector, declared: At the moment, in
Romania, research is struggling. There are numerous legal and administrative barriers within
the institution. People are extraordinary, but they are not given enough freedom to exercise
their initiative. (I8)

The questions to be posed are what are the causes leading to such a situation, and what can be
done to improve the links between scientific research and decision-making processes in
 education? To answer these questions, we identify aspects of academic research and the
transfer strategies used.

5 Conclusions

Considering the participants’ opinion, we provide some guidelines for researchers and policy-
makers in the field of education. These tentative guidelines are illustrated according to three
levels:

5.1 At the Micro or Researcher’s Level

The results of our research may have implications for various levels. Firstly, researchers’
responsibilities for research production and transfer are highlighted. As professionals,
researchers must provide good results and contribute to the development of improved
performance in education. Another key observation relates to the training system within the
field of Romanian research. In order to obtain good results, applicable to educational policies,
solid expertise and a new academic researcher’s profile are needed, so that the balance between
teaching, research and administrative tasks can be reconsidered.

5.2 At an Intervention—Organizational Level

Our research paves the way for an in-depth analysis of organizational factors likely to affect
research production and transfer: engagement—interpreted as the attitude of organizations and
their members towards research, the political and managerial context likely to promote and
favour research transfer, and the financial context needed to foster quality results. Moreover,
these institutional mechanisms may facilitate the production and transfer of research. Thus,
there is a growing need for a clearer academic mission, focused on high quality research, well
developed transparency and social responsibility mechanisms, as well as including the “third
mission” as an academic priority. A key observation is that academic management needs to
promote efficient research structures and their corresponding social transfer.

5.3 At the Macro Systemic Level of Educational Policies

The role of research is analyzed, and the focus shifts from the symbolic use of research results
to a policy based on evidence. Likewise, the transparency policies promoted by Romanian
higher education system are still vague and incoherent. Policy-makers are responsible for
engaging as active partners in research production and use. The political implications may
address the QA mechanisms likely to assess and approve research results. This should
stimulate the transfer of research locally, regionally and internationally. Moreover, “mapping”
mechanisms must be implemented, as well as there being fair opportunities to access research
funds and infrastructures.
The links between the two contexts, at both formal and informal levels, may add value to the
linkage between research production and its transfer and use. Thus, it may improve the sense
of responsibility of the parties, as long as this is based on equality and mutual respect and
shared responsibilities.

Over the past century, the focus of education has changed from building students’ literacy and
numeracy skills to preparing them to find and evaluate information, express themselves clearly,
and think critically and collaboratively to solve complex problems. So how do we make sure that
educational practice reflects this shift?

Given the expanding expectations of the education system, the rapid pace at which
information is generated, and the realities of the job market, educational practice must
reflect what science says about how people learn and in which environments they learn best,
so many more students can get over the higher bar that’s been set.

This may seem obvious – we can best teach students by understanding how they learn and
applying that understanding to teaching. But despite recent demands for evidence- and
research-based tools and curricula, much of the science about how people learn does not
influence teaching practice or reach entrepreneurs and developers of learning tools.

As such, educators, researchers, and developers are missing opportunities and insights that
can not only improve the quality of their work, but student outcomes. Here are three steps
we can take to make sure research is being put to work in schools.

Improving how research is communicated to practitioners

One of the key reasons for the gap between the learning science and practice is that research
is not published in a manner that is readily accessible to the broader education community.
The media and other organizations, such as Education Week and KQED Mind/shift, do
communicate promising research findings to the public and translate these findings into
actionable information for practitioners. Communication between researchers and educators
allows teacher perspectives to help learning scientists develop more relevant research
questions. But media outlets are not always reliable messengers and communicating
research this way creates a one-way conversation. Because researchers also benefit from
improved understanding of the teaching practice, two-way communication between these
groups allows teachers’ perspectives and expertise to help learning scientists develop more
relevant research questions.

Connecting research to the classroom

Another significant obstacle in applying research findings to practice: what is shown to
improve learning outcomes in controlled research environments does not always “work” in
real-world settings. Performing very controlled experiments allows researchers to isolate
one aspect of learning or cognition, or the effect of a certain intervention. This is very useful
for scientists, but not particularly helpful for practitioners, who are left to determine how to
implement research findings in complex and highly variable classrooms.

For example, simply knowing about the spacing effect – the well-documented finding, first
described by psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus in 1885, that long-term retention is
improved when learning events occur over time – only goes so far. It doesn’t tell an
educator how long each lesson should last, how much time to allow between lessons, or how
to use the concept with curriculum that is often organized to teach one topic at a
time.Educators need support to try learning science principles in their schools, and the skills
to determine whether changes or applications are successful.

Ideally, there would be a professional niche to fill this gap, translating scientific findings
into practical and effective teaching and learning practices. To date, this task has primarily
fallen onto already overloaded practitioners. (In contrast to the medical field, where
clinicians are not expected to read through countless journal articles in order to make
informed treatment decisions).

To overcome this challenge, teachers and curriculum directors need support and resources to
find and evaluate learning science principles to try out in their schools, and the skills
necessary to determine whether changes or applications are successful. Further, an online
community of practitioners and researchers would help educators document these important
processes, and get valuable feedback from learning science experts.

Adapting research practices to changing technology

The increased use of technology in schools creates both new challenges and opportunities
for connecting research and practice. Only a percentage of products that claim to be
“research-based” go beyond paying lip service to learning science and actually apply
scientific understanding of learning and cognition in meaningful ways. This means it’s even
more crucial to support practitioners in evaluating evidence. Additionally, developers must
embrace their role in bringing scientific understanding of learning into the classroom
through digital tools. In a much-hyped education technology market, efficacy, not
marketing, should drive decisions.

Technology can also help researchers more easily perform studies in both formal and
informal real-world settings. Data generated in online environments allow scientists to
observe and analyze the learning process in new ways, and to better understand learning
differences between individuals. With the rapid pace of ed-tech development, studies that
evaluate digital learning tools should be published quickly and, taking advantage of the
distribution power of the Internet, disseminated widely in order to be relevant.

Despite the challenges, individuals, organizations, and companies are working to improve
teaching and learning through research.
Enthusiastic practitioners seek out research and apply the findings to solve challenges they
face in their classrooms. Developers use findings from cognitive science and learning
analytics to create personalized learning opportunities that engage and motivate kids.
Researchers continue to uncover new information about the mind, brain, and the design of
learning environments, and are beginning to identify promising techniques for improving
student learning.

In a much-hyped education technology market, efficacy, not marketing, should drive

decisions.

These individuals must come together and share best practices and expertise, so we can
build a richer knowledge base on teaching and learning, unlock the potential of technology,
and put this knowledge to work to improve education.

There is no single "correct" way of conducting research in the field of education.

Gary Anderson outlined ten aspects of educational research:[2]

 Educational research attempts to solve a problem.

 Research involves gathering new data from primary or first-hand sources or using existing
data for a new purpose.
 Research is based upon observable experience or empirical evidence.
 Research demands accurate observation and description.
 Research generally employs carefully designed procedures and rigorous analysis.
 Research emphasizes the development of generalizations, principles or theories that will help
in understanding, prediction and/or control.
 Research requires expertise—familiarity with the field; competence in methodology;
technical skill in collecting and analyzing the data.
 Research attempts to find an objective, unbiased solution to the problem and takes great
pains to validate the procedures employed.
 Research is a deliberate and unhurried activity which is directional but often refines the
problem or questions as the research progresses.
 Research is carefully recorded and reported to other persons interested in the problem.
Q No.4 Differentiate among basic, applied and action research and discuss in detail the
need and use of action research.

Answer:

There are different approaches to educational research. One is a basic approach,[1] also referred to
as an academic research approach.[2] Another approach is applied research[1] or a contract
research approach.[2] These approaches have different purposes which influence the nature of the
respective research.

Basic Research

Basic, or academic research focuses on the search for truth[2] or the development of
educational theory.[1] Researchers with this background "design studies that can test, refine,
modify, or develop theories".[1] Generally, these researchers are affiliated with an academic
institution and are performing this research as part of their graduate or doctoral work.

Applied Research

The pursuit of information that can be directly applied to practice is aptly known as applied or
contractual research.[1] Researchers in this field are trying to find solutions to existing educational
problems. The approach is much more utilitarian as it strives to find information that will directly
influence practice.[2] Applied researchers are commissioned by a sponsor and are responsible for
addressing the needs presented by their employer.[2] The goal of this research is "to determine the
applicability of educational theory and principles by testing hypotheses within specific settings".
[1]

Action Research

According to Stephen Corey (1953)

“Action Research must be taken up by those who may have to change the way they do think as a
result of the study singly and in groups. They must use their imagination and creativity
constructively to identify the practices that must be changed to meet the needs and demands of
modern life, courageously try out those practices that give better promise and methodically and
systematically gather evidence to test their worth.”

Mouly is of the opinion that

Action Research is an “on the spot research aimed at the solution of an immediate classroom
problem.”

Kurt Lewin says,

“Action Research is applying scientific thinking to real life problems (classroom problems for
teachers) and represents a great improvement over teacher’s subjective judgments and their
limited personal experiences.”
According to Hammersley, 1993 (p.237)...

Action researches are small scale and narrowly focussed researches undertaken by teachers in a
given context. It has also been refered to as research into practice by practitioners, for
practitioners.

Comparison of basic and applied research[edit]

The following are several defining characteristics written by Gary Anderson to compare basic
(academic) and applied (contract) research.[2]

Basic (Academic) Research Applied (Contract) Research

Is sponsored by an agency committed to the Is sponsored by an agency with a vested

1
general advancement of knowledge. interest in the results.

Results are the property of society and the

2 Results become the property of the sponsor.
research community.

Studies rely on the established reputations of Studies follow explicit terms of reference
3 the researchers and are totally under their developed by the sponsor to serve the
control. sponsor's needs.

Budget allocations are generally based on Budget accountability is directly related to

4 global proposals and accounting is left to the the sponsor and relates to agreed terms of
researchers. reference, time frames and methodologies.

The conduct of research is based on 'good The work is contractual between sponsor and
5
faith' between funder and researcher. researcher.

The research produces findings and

conclusions, but rarely recommendations The research includes applied
6
except those related to further research recommendations for action.
needs.

Academic research tends to extend an By its nature, contract research tends to be

7
identifiable scholarly discipline. interdisciplinary.
 Academic research is typically focused on a Contract research frequently analyzes the
8
single set of testable hypotheses. consequences of alternative policy options.

Decision-rules relate to predetermined

Decision-rules relate to theoretically-based
9 conventions and agreements between the
tests of statistical significance.
sponsor and the researcher.

1 Research reports are targeted to other Research reports are intended to be read and
0 specialized researchers in the same field. understood by lay persons.

Characteristic features of Action Research

1. It is situational
2. It is a reflective inquiry
3. It is based on scientific approach
4. It is a scientific way of Solving Problems
5. It is a small scale intervention
6. It is a way to find remedies to overcome obstacles in learning
7. It provides avenues for the teachers to be innovative
8. It is a unified exercise to bridge the gap between theory and practice
9. It is a way to develop self confidence in teachers
10.It is self evaluative

11. The difference between the fundamental or basic research and action research can be
summarized as given below against certain criteria.

Difference Between Basic Research and Action Research

Criteria Basic Research Action Research

Develop and test educational theory To find solutions to problems in a

Objectives
and derive generalizations. specific context.

Intensive training is needed in

Training Limited training is needed.
Research Methodology.

Participating teacher identify

Selection of a A wide range of methods are used to
problems during the teaching-
problem select a problem.
learning processes.
 Highly specific hypotheses are Specific statement of the problem
Hypothesis
developed. serves as hypotheses.

Review of An exhaustive and thorough review of No such thorough review of

Literature literature is required. literature is needed.

Considerably large sample size is Students studying in the class of a

Sample
required. teacher forms sample.

Well thought experimental design is

Experimental developed to maintain comparable Procedures are planned only in
Design conditions and reducing error and general terms.
bias.

Analysis of Simple analysis procedures are

Complex analysis is often called for.
Data usually sufficient.

Conclusions may be in the form of

Conclusions generalizations and developing Findings are local specific.
theories.

Findings are used immediately in

Application of The generalizations have broad the classroom situations by
results applicability participating teachers to improve
their own practices

Need and use of Action Research

Action research has been found out to be the most effective way of ensuring the development of
teachers in their profession. The paper examines the reactions of school teachers to the issue of
action research.

Action research gives you the benefits of research in the classroom without these
obstacles. ... Action research provides qualitative data you can use to adjust your curriculum
content, delivery, and instructional practices to improve student learning. Action research helps
you implement informed change!

Professional Development

Professional development is very vital in the improvement of a tutors craft or teaching practice
and it is significant in improving the learning environment. It focuses on the basic practices that
are vital in education. It ensures the development of skills, practice as well as knowledge all of
which are very important in the learning process.
Action research is vital for the improvement of a learning institution. It is able to help the teacher
in ensuring effective teacher development. Teachers are meant to believe that they are
performing very important work hence no need to burnout as they act as moral educators. Any
form of teacher development should be aimed at uplifting as well as inspiring those involved in
it. It should be geared towards ensuring higher performance among the learners as well as
improving collaboration and teamwork.[2]

Several published lists which are aimed at highlighting professional development. These have
been compiled by researchers and other organizations like the Education Testing Services as well
as the department of education. There have been numerous debates concerning what professional
development involves.

The common ground for all these arguments however lies in the fact that it involves the
enhancement of leadership capabilities, enhancing effective time management, enhancing
thinking skills as well as effective use of resources.[3]

Reflective Practices

Action research has a lot to do with reflection. This involves being attentive to knowledge and
believes. It dates back to the days of Buddha and Plato. It goes beyond examination and thinking.
It is an active process that aims at gaining deeper understanding as well as ensuring
improvement.

Reflection can be defined as an out-of-body experience whereby an analysis of the actions is

made and they are viewed in the thinking as well as decision-making context. It is governed by
intention which implies that it is not passive. Teachers therefore need to use reflection while
trying to improve the student’s contextual learning as well as during the adapting process, the
application as well as their evaluation of their knowledge.[4]

Reflection can be in various forms for instance, on-line chats or discussion groups. It helps in
bringing out different perspectives and various solutions to a given issue. It is crucial in
narrowing down the gap that exists between theory and practice. The major reflection types
include technical, practical as well as critical analysis.

Technical reflection for instance mainly deals with the ensuring of the attainment of goals and it
puts a lot of emphasis on efficiency. Practical reflection on the other hand mainly focuses on the
attainment of goals and the means or strategies involved in the attainment of the same.

Here effectiveness as well as goal justification is significant. In critical reflection, the goals and
the means to the same are analyzed in accordance with the justice or morality context. The
purpose and growth are put into account in this case. Reflection practices are able to fit into more
of these types at the same time. Many models have been suggested over the effective
professional development in the past some of which are short-term while others are long-term.
Action research is just one of them.
Action Research in Professional Development

Action Research can be termed as the study of the learning environment like the school or
classroom with the intention of improving the teaching. It is scientific and systematic, involving
inquiry and contextual professional development. The process is reflective and it is usually
motivated by growth and improvement in teaching.

There are various steps involved in action research. They basically involve the identification of
the problem, determining the needs or methods of data collection, collection and analysis of data,
creation of an action plan, description of the use of the findings, report as well as the future plan.
The process is usually cyclical. The steps are vital in ensuring professionalism, completeness as
well as validity of the action research. It usually requires regular observation.[5]

Analysis of the Situation

Teachers who do not employ action research in their teaching are less likely to meet the desired
goals in their teaching and they might not be able to witness professional development. Some of
them might encounter challenges which could be solved by carrying out action research, but
because of ignorance, they might not be in a position to effectively tackle the problem. The
reflective practices carried out by most of them can only be effective if it is coupled with action
research.

According to the training done, it is quite evident that the action research process is systematic
and it has to be carried out using the appropriate procedures and techniques like coming up with
a research plan, outlining research questions, setting timeline with the intention of reviewing the
information, implementing the action research project data collection as well as analysis and the
sharing of the same.

Action research might in some cases involve experimenting of the possible solutions to the
existing problem. In Mary’s case for instance, she had to try motivational tactics in trying to
make her students handle their assignments and hand them in at the appropriate time. She tried
the tactic of rewarding the students who handed in all their assignments on time.

Action research is very vital in determining those factors that might greatly influence the
attitudes of the students and hence in the long run affect their performance. The teacher might for
instance be forced to adapt new tactics while teaching so as to ensure effectiveness in the long
run. When effectively done, action research is able to turn the teaching process from a
cumbersome and tedious activity to an enjoyable one. It is therefore an important vehicle of
change.
Action research is vital in clearing out any confusing issues that might emerge in the teaching
process. Questions are formulated and answers to the same are formulated. Discussions might be
held in some cases so as to enhance clarity of the issues at hand.

Frequent meetings held while carrying out the action process are vital in offering encouragement,
excitement as well as mentorship opportunities to the participants. Interviews are usually crucial
in the process of data collection. A reflection held at the end of the process is also significant.
Action research is vital in enhancing accountability, awareness as well as ensuring that the
teaching is done in a systematic manner. It enhances sharing and professionalism of the teacher.

Awareness

Action research helps the teachers in being reflective. Through reflection, they are able to know
whether there past practices or lessons were effective. It enables the researcher to rely on facts
rather than trial and error. Its process of discovery is structured and one has to rely on facts from
the experiment rather than depending on his/her memory.

These facts can be kept for future reference as well as improvement. The formal steps carried out
during the action plan are very significant especially when one is informing his/her colleagues
about the same. The data collected is usually important. Action research helps the teacher to
reflect on his/her teaching process and enable the person to avoid prejudgments or depending on
making guesses.

It helps in avoiding wrong and misguided judgments. This is vital for every teacher. It helps one
to be more serous, reflective and attentive. It enables one to one to look at the results and make
an analysis of the same without depending on assumptions.[9] One is able to get the actual
concept of what is going on rather than relying on his/her impression of what is going on.

The reflective practices are particularly significant in the teaching process. One is able to get
substantive evidence of whatever is occurring rather than relying on abstract concept. It is
important in establishing a connection between the teacher and the student. The teacher becomes
attentive to whatever happens within the classroom rather than brushing everything else aside. It
helps in eliminating biases as the teacher is able to depend on facts rather than speculations.

By carrying out action research, the teacher comes up with specific solutions to improving the
teaching as well as ensuring the overall improvement in the performances of the students. The
action research has formal and systematic processes which ensure that ideas and results that
come up during the reflection are not lost or forgotten.

The process ensures that the issue at hand is kept on the mind the possible solutions formulated
as opposed to mere reflection which only involves the thoughts which are likely to be forgotten
within a short time. It helps the teacher in changing his/her perceptions about the occurrences
within the classroom. It helps in bringing out abstract questions or concepts into ones that can be
substantiated or concrete.
 Q No.5 Differentiate between historical and experimental research and discuss the process
of experimental research.

Answer:

Historical research can also mean gathering data from situations that have already occurred and
performing statistical analysis on this data just as we would in a traditional experiment. The one
key difference between this type of research and the type described in the first paragraph
concerns the manipulation of data.

Historical Research

Historical research describes what happened in the past. The process involves investigating,
recording, analyzing and interpreting the events of the past for the p u r p o s e o f d i s c o v e r i
n g generaliza t i o n s t h at are helpful i n understanding the past, understanding the present and
to a limited extent in anticipating the future. The different types of historical. research are
Bibliographic research, Legal research, studying the history of ideas and studying the history of
institutions and organisations. Historical research has great value in the field of educational
research because it is necessary to know and understand educational achievements and trends of
the past in order to gain perspective on present and future directions.

Experimental Research

The experimental research describes what will be when certain variables are carefully controlled
or manipulated. The focus is on variable relationship whenever an independent variable can be
manipulated an experimental' approach can be used^*. Experimental method provides for much
control and therefore establishes a systematic and logical i association between manipulated
factors and observed effects. The four essential characteristicas of experimental research are
control, manipulation, observation and replication. Control refers to the extent to which different
factors in an experiment are accounted for. Manipulation refers to a deliberate operation of the
conditions by the researcher. Observations by the process in which one or more persons observe
what is occuring in spme real life situation and they classify and record pertinent happenings
according to some planned scheme. It is used to evaluate the overt behaviour of individual in
controlled and uncontrolled situation. Replication is a matter of conducting a number of sub
experiments within the framework of an overall experimental design.

Process of Experimental Research

Experimental research can be roughly divided into five phases:

 Identifying a research problem. ...

 Planning an experimental research study. ...
 Conducting the experiment. ...
 Analyzing the data. ...
 Writing the paper/presentation describing the findings.
Methods

Experimental research can be roughly divided into five phases:

1. Identifying a research problem

The process starts by clearly identifying the problem you want to study and considering what
possible methods will affect a solution. Then you choose the method you want to test, and
formulate a hypothesis to predict the outcome of the test.

For example, you may want to improve student essays, but you don't believe that teacher
feedback is enough. You hypothesize that some possible methods for writing improvement
include peer workshopping, or reading more example essays. Favoring the former, your
experiment would try to determine if peer workshopping improves writing in high school
seniors. You state your hypothesis: peer workshopping prior to turning in a final draft will
improve the quality of the student's essay.

2.Planning an experimental research study

The next step is to devise an experiment to test your hypothesis. In doing so, you must consider
several factors. For example, how generalizable do you want your end results to be? Do you
want to generalize about the entire population of high school seniors everywhere, or just the
particular population of seniors at your specific school? This will determine how simple or
complex the experiment will be. The amount of time funding you have will also determine the
size of your experiment.

Continuing the example from step one, you may want a small study at one school involving three
teachers, each teaching two sections of the same course. The treatment in this experiment is peer
workshopping. Each of the three teachers will assign the same essay assignment to both classes;
the treatment group will participate in peer workshopping, while the control group will receive
only teacher comments on their drafts.

3.Conducting the experiment

At the start of an experiment, the control and treatment groups must be selected. Whereas the
"hard" sciences have the luxury of attempting to create truly equal groups, educators often find
themselves forced to conduct their experiments based on self-selected groups, rather than on
randomization. As was highlighted in the Basic Concepts section, this makes the study a quasi-
experiment, since the researchers cannot control all of the variables.

For the peer workshopping experiment, let's say that it involves six classes and three teachers
with a sample of students randomly selected from all the classes. Each teacher will have a class
for a control group and a class for a treatment group. The essay assignment is given and the
teachers are briefed not to change any of their teaching methods other than the use of peer
workshopping. You may see here that this is an effort to control a possible variable: teaching
style variance.

4.Analyzing the data

The fourth step is to collect and analyze the data. This is not solely a step where you collect the
papers, read them, and say your methods were a success. You must show how successful. You
must devise a scale by which you will evaluate the data you receive, therefore you must decide
what indicators will be, and will not be, important.

Continuing our example, the teachers' grades are first recorded, then the essays are evaluated for
a change in sentence complexity, syntactical and grammatical errors, and overall length. Any
statistical analysis is done at this time if you choose to do any. Notice here that the researcher has
made judgments on what signals improved writing. It is not simply a matter of improved teacher
grades, but a matter of what the researcher believes constitutes improved use of the language.

5.Writing the paper/presentation describing the findings

Once you have completed the experiment, you will want to share findings by publishing
academic paper (or presentations). These papers usually have the following format, but it is not
necessary to follow it strictly. Sections can be combined or not included, depending on the
structure of the experiment, and the journal to which you submit your paper.

 Abstract: Summarize the project: its aims, participants, basic methodology, results, and a
brief interpretation.
 Introduction: Set the context of the experiment.
 Review of Literature: Provide a review of the literature in the specific area of study to
show what work has been done. Should lead directly to the author's purpose for the study.
 Statement of Purpose: Present the problem to be studied.
 Participants: Describe in detail participants involved in the study; e.g., how many, etc.
Provide as much information as possible.
 Materials and Procedures: Clearly describe materials and procedures. Provide enough
information so that the experiment can be replicated, but not so much information that it
becomes unreadable. Include how participants were chosen, the tasks assigned them, how
they were conducted, how data were evaluated, etc.
 Results: Present the data in an organized fashion. If it is quantifiable, it is analyzed
through statistical means. Avoid interpretation at this time.
 Discussion: After presenting the results, interpret what has happened in the experiment.
Base the discussion only on the data collected and as objective an interpretation as
possible. Hypothesizing is possible here.
 Limitations: Discuss factors that affect the results. Here, you can speculate how much
generalization, or more likely, transferability, is possible based on results. This section is
important for quasi-experimentation, since a quasi-experiment cannot control all of the
 variables that might affect the outcome of a study. You would discuss what variables you
could not control.
 Conclusion: Synthesize all of the above sections.
 References: Document works cited in the correct format for the field.