Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

8. DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION OF RESEARCH PROJECTS

(REPORT WRITING)

Q. 1: What is scientific writing?

Q. 2: What are the priorities for you if you want to publish your research work?
1. To attract maximum readers
2. Innovative and beneficial knowledge
3. Easy and understandable language
4. Systematic writing and according to time scale
5. Short and concise sentences and paragraphs.
6. Precise, meaningful and attractive title
7. Arranged components and contents of the manuscript.

Common Errors in Writing:

• Incorrect spelling and grammars
•

Analyzing Information
We all know that, if something has been printed does not necessarily mean that it is true. In
particular, most problem-solving efforts or investigations could have been somewhat better
performed, and most reports on such researches could have been somewhat better written.
When anybody reads such reports, they should read critically. That is, you should constantly
bear in mind the possibility of mistakes in the investigation, and failure to express with
absolute clarity the totality of what was done and what has, supposedly, been learned. You
should ask yourself questions along the lines of: "Does this step in the investigation seem
appropriate or reasonable?", "Does this conclusion really follow from the data presented?",
To be somewhat more specific, we can say that research reports can be evaluated on the basis
of two questions: How well was the research done? and, How well has it been reported? The
first question is the more important one; but even the best research will have been done in
vain if it is not reported well enough for other people to be able to understand it, use it, and
build on it. This reading discusses these two questions.

Interpreting information
Attempt to put the information in perspective, e.g., compare results to what you expected,
promised results; management or program staff; any common standards for your products or
services; original goals (especially if you're conducting a program evaluation); indications or
measures of accomplishing outcomes or results (especially if you're conducting an outcomes
or performance evaluation); description of the program's experiences, strengths, weaknesses,
etc. (especially if you're conducting a process evaluation).
• Consider recommendations to help employees improve the program, products or
services; conclusions about program operations or meeting goals, etc.
• Record conclusions and recommendations in a report, and associate interpretations to
justify your conclusions or recommendations.

Evaluating the Research Itself

In examining a report of research with a view toward evaluating how well the research was
done, you will need to consider at least the following questions:

973 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

Was there a well defined and understandable purpose? In a report, the purpose should be
stated explicitly; ideally, it should be expressed in the form of a testable hypothesis.
Were the data that were used truly pertinent to the purpose? Were they the best data that could
have been used for the purpose?
Were the data gathered properly? For example, if sampling was involved, were the data
obtained by an adequately random method? If observations of people were part of the data-
gathering process, were the observations as unobtrusive as possible?
Were the data suitably studied and analyzed? For example, if the analysis was statistical in
nature, were suitable statistical procedures chosen and were they properly applied to the data?
Did the investigator overlook analytic procedures that could have been applied?
Were the reported results based strictly on the outcome of the study or analysis of the data?
Or are there findings that seem unsupported by the analysis?
Does the investigator's interpretation of the results make sense? Does the interpretation
appear to reflect in a reasonable way both the strict results and the overall situation or
problem?
You will simply have to think hard and carefully about the foregoing questions as you review
the research report.

Always start with your research goals / objectives

When analyzing data (whether from questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, or whatever),
always start from review of your research goals, i.e., the reason you undertook the research in
the first place. This will help you organize your data and focus your analysis. For example, if
you wanted to improve a program by identifying its strengths and weaknesses, you can
organize data into variables such as program strengths, weaknesses and suggestions to
improve the program.

Basic analysis of "quantitative" information

(information other than commentary/ qualitative data for ratings, rankings, yes's, no's, etc.):
Make copies of your data and store the master-copy away. Use the copy for making edits,
cutting and pasting, etc.
• Tabulate the information,
• consider computing a mean, or average, for each question.

Basic analysis of "qualitative" information

(commentary/ qualitative data e.g., ratings, rankings, yes's, no's, etc. respondents' verbal
answers in interviews, focus groups, or written commentary on questionnaires):

• Read through all the data.

• Organize comments into similar categories, e.g.,concerns, suggestions, strengths,
weaknesses, similar experiences, program inputs, recommendations, outputs, outcome
indicators, etc.
• Label the categories or themes, e.g., concerns, suggestions, etc.
• Attempt to identify patterns, or associations and causal relationships in the themes,
Keep all commentary for several years after completion in case needed for future
reference.

974 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

Reporting Results
The level and scope of content depends on to whom the report is intended, e.g., to funders /
bankers, employees, clients, customers, the public, etc.
• Be sure beneficiaries have a chance to carefully review and discuss the report.
Translate recommendations to action plans, including who is going to do what about
the research results and by when.
• Funders will likely require a report that includes an executive summary (this is a
summary of conclusions and recommendations, not a listing of what sections of
information are in the report -- that's a table of contents); description of the
organization and the program, product, service, etc., under evaluation; explanation of
the research goals, methods, and analysis procedures; listing of conclusions and
recommendations; and any relevant attachments, e.g., inclusion of research
questionnaires, interview guides, etc. The funder may want the report to be delivered
as a presentation, accompanied by an overview of the report. Or, the funder may want
to review the report alone.
Be sure to record the research plans and activities in a research plan which can be
referenced when a similar research effort is needed in the future.

PREPARING MANUSCRIPTS FOR PUBLICATIONS

(Final report: Assignment No……).
• Select a suitable Research Journal for Publication, every journal describes its scope
(each Student select a different Forestry related journal from the ISI list of current
contents or Login to Web of Knowledge, and download the instructions for authors;
submit by end date: )
• Students also need to know about impact factor of each journal. They should search for
“what is impact factor of a journal?”

• There are detailed guidelines given by the publisher for preparing a manuscript to be
published. Students need to download “instructions for author” pages from journal's
website and prepare their final research report according to format specified for that
journal.

Assessment:
Sources: http://mjl.clarivate.com

Your manuscript complete in all respect will be treated as your final term paper and will be
evaluated/ marked as per guidelines provided above.

Q. 3: What re the sources of knowledge for a reader?

Scientific publications are categorised into following.

Research Reports
Short communications
Research News Letter
Research Articles published in Journals
Research Published in Magzines
Books .

975 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

PREPARING MANUSCRIPT FOR PUBLICATION

First step in preparing a manuscript for publication is to select a research journal closely
related to area or topic of research, and the manuscript will be prepared according to the style
given in the “Instructions for Author(s)” section or weblink of that journal.

List of Forestry Related Journals

NAME OF JOURNALS NAME OF JOURNALS

NAME OF JOURNALS
Floresta: Revista do Centro de General technical report
pesquisas florestais do setor de SRS / Southern Research
Agricultural and Forest
ciencias agrarias da U.F.P. Station (Search/General
Meteriology
technical report)
FOLIA GEOBOTANICA
American Forests
ICFR Bulletin Series Institute
FOREST PATHALOGY for Commercial Forestry
ANNALS OF FOREST
Research (South Africa)
SCIENCE
Forest ecology and
management INT J PLANT SCIENCE
Arbor Age
Forest Finland in Brief INT. FORESTRY REVIEW
AUSTRALIAN FOREST
RESEARCH
Forest genetics International Journal of Forest
AUSTRALIAN FORESTRY Genetics
Quarterly Journal FOREST PLANT BIOLOGY
Irish Timber & Forestry
Australian J. of Ecology Forest Policy and Economics Magazine
Japan Lumber Journal
Australian J.OF SCIENTIFIC FOREST POLICY Treasurer
RESEARCH ISSN 0552-9050.
Journal of Forest Economics
FOREST PRODUCTION
AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL
OF AGRICULTURAL Journal of forest engineering
Forest products abstracts
RESEARCH
Database Search Journal of Forestry
Australian Journal of Botany ISSN: 0022-1201
Forest Products Journal
With Printing Charges Editor:
Australian Journal of W. Keith Mose
Experimental Agriculture FOREST SCIENCE
(Publication / contribution with Journal of Sustainable Forestry
Australian Systematic Botany
Payments)
Journal of Tree Fruit
BAGLADESH J.OF Forestry – An intl J. Of Forest Production
BOTANY Res
Baltic forestry Logging & Sawmilling
FORESTRY CHRONICLE Journal
Canadian Forest Industries Respected Worldwide -
Founded 1925 Malaysian Timber Bulletin
Canadian J. of Forest Research Official Journal of the Canadian
Institute of Forestry NATURE
Frequency: 12 issues per
year
Functional Plant Biology New Forests
Ranking by Eigenfactor: 3/44
European Journal of Wood FUNCTIONAL PLANT
BIOLOGY New Zealand Journal of
and Wood products
Forestry
Experimental Biology Garden & Forest: A Journal
of Horticulture, Landscape Art, New Zealand Pine Int.
FLORA and Forestry
Northern Journal of Applied
Forestry

976 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

NAME OF JOURNALS NAME OF JOURNALS NAME OF JOURNALS

PAKISTAN J. OF BOT. Skog & Forskning University of Joensuu.

Karelian Institute.
Paper and Timber South journal Applied Forestry Publications of Karelian
Institute
PHYSIOLOGICAL SOUTHEASTERN AND
PLANTATION SOUTHERN ETC. USDA FOREST SERVICE
INTERMOUNTAIN
PHYTOPATHOLOGY Southern African Forestry RESEARCH STATION
Journal RESEARCH PAPER
PLANT & SOIL
Southern Forests: a Journal of USDA NC FOREST
Forest Science EXPERIMENTAL STATION
PLANT PHYSIOLOGICAL
RESEARCH PAPER
BIOCHEMISTRY Southern Hemisphere Forest
Industry Journal WATER AIR AND SOIL
PLANT SCIENCS
POLLUTION
Southern Journal of Applied
PLANT SOIL Forestry WATER ENGINEERING AND
ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT
State of Canada's forests
POL J ENVIRON STUD WATER POLLUTION
State of the world´s forests CONTROL
PSC Communications / KCL
Paper Science Centre WATER RESEARCH
Sustainable Land Management
Publications digest / (Forestry (e)
WATER RESOURSE
Canada) Canadian Forest Sylwan / Polskie towarzystwo MANAGEMENT
Service lesne
WATER RESOURSES
Pulp & paper international Taiwan journal of forest RESEARCH
science
Quarterly Journal of Forestry WATER Science
TAPPI Journal
Recent publications / WATER SCIENCE AND
Atlantic Forestry Centre - Technology transfer notes / TECHNOLOGY
Canadian Forest Service Pacific Forestry Centre,
Canada (haku: sarjan nimellä WEST NORTH AM
Recent reports / valikosta / publication type) NATURALIST
Intermountain Research
Station Western Journal of Applied
The Forestry Source Forestry
RESOURCES AND The South Pacific Journal of
CONSERVATION WETLANDS
Natural Science
REVUE D ECOLOGIE-LA Timber Harvesting Magazine WILDLIFE RESEARCH
TERRE ET LA VIE
Timberjack Magazine WILDLIFE SOCIETY
Scandinavian J. of Forest BULLETIN
Research
Træ og Industri Wood
SCIENCE
TREE Wood and Fiber Science
SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL
ENVIRONMENT Tree Physiology Wood processing newsletter
Silva Carelica TROPICAL GRASSLAND Wood Science and Technology
Silva Fennica TROPICLE AGRICULTURE
z. Find
Silva Fennica Turkish J. of Agriculture and
Forestry
more…….
Silva Fennica [email protected]
SILVAE GENETICA Unasylva

Silvae Genetica

977 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

Research Report Contents; Outline of a Research Report

Ensure your research plan is documented so that you can regularly and efficiently carry out
your research activities. In your plan, record enough information so that someone outside of
the organization can understand what you're researching and how. For example, consider the
following format:

Table of Contents (where necessary)

First Page:

1. Runnig Title (as Header)

2. Title
3. Name(s) of Author(s)n *
4. Affiliation of Author(s); [*Address of Institution(s) e.g. 1Department of Forestry,
Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan-Pakistan]
5. Abstract/ Summary
6. Key words: (helpful for online search)

TITLE: [in a memorandum, the subject]

Title Page (containing Research Title of research project, authors’ name and affiliated
organization(s) that has/have a product/ service/ program that is being researched; date/ year)
Since a research report is simply a description of an investigation or a problem-solving effort,
such reports can take forms other than those of articles in professional journals. We use the
word "title" to refer not only to titles of articles, books, and technical reports but also to
subjects of memoranda, and we shall use "article" to refer not only to journal articles but also
to books, technical reports, and memoranda.
A title provides the reader with his or her first idea of what the article or memorandum is
about. Often the reader will decide on the basis of the title alone whether to examine the
article further; this is especially likely to be true if the only information about the article
available at the time is the title, perhaps with the author's name also. Clearly, an author who
wants his or her article to be read should provide potential readers with enough information
in the article's title to whet their interest.

Executive Summary/ ABSTRACT [in a memorandum, the first paragraph] (one-page,

concise overview of findings and recommendations)
An abstract is a brief note about the content of an article, technical report, or book. Abstracts
typically are around 100-500 words in length and are written in the form of complete
sentences. In a well prepared memorandum, the first paragraph should state the purpose of
the memorandum as a whole, thus serving the same purpose as an abstract.
Abstracts come in two forms. One type is usually referred to as informative or direct; it
provides the reader with the basic informational content of the source, i.e., the abstracted
article, technical report, or book.
The other is the "descriptive" ("indicative," "alerting") abstract, whose function is to indicate
to the reader whether the source would be of enough interest to him or her to be worth the
effort of examining it.

978 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

Page 2

1. Running Title (as Header)

2. Title of the article
3. Name of Author(s)
4. Introduction

INTRODUCTION
In the introduction to a research report, the author should prepare the reader for what the
latter is going to find in the report.
The introduction to a research report is the "what I'm going to tell" portion of the report.
Background about Organization and Product/Service/ Program that is being researched. In
the background part of the introduction, the author should explain what led up to the
problem-solving effort or investigation being reported in the article (or technical report or
book). Organization Description/ History, Product/ Service/ Program Description (that is
being researched)
Problem Statement (in the case of nonprofits, description of the community need that is
being met by the product/ service/ program).
Outline of the problem and its context:
In the outline of the problem and its context part, the author should succinctly explain the
problem itself. The explanation should include a description of as much of the setting of the
problem as will help the reader to understand the problem; e.g., the author might explain that
the problem came to light in the public-services department of an academic library of a stated
size serving a college of a stated size and nature.

979 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

Subsequent Chapters / pages Headings

Review of Literature/ Previous related work;

In the previous related work part, the author should discuss earlier research efforts that looked
into problems similar, but not identical, to the author's problem. The author should explain
why the results of the earlier researches failed to provide a satisfactory solution to the
problem about which he or she is now writing; i.e., why the author's research needed to be
done even though similar problems had already been investigated.

PURPOSE
Purpose of the Report (what type of research was conducted, what decisions are being aided
by the findings of the research, who is making the decision, etc.).
The purpose section of a research report should clearly state the goal and the objectives of the
investigation. In addition to any informal discussions of the goal that the author may think
helpful, there should be a carefully worded explicit statement of each major objective.
Hypothesis or hypotheses; One of the best ways of providing such statements is to express
each major objective in the form of a testable hypothesis. While the absence of a testable
hypothesis does not necessarily mean that the author failed to really understand what he or
she was doing, the presence of such a hypothesis should encourage the reader to expect to
find that the investigation was carried out well.
At the very minimum, the report should contain a statement along the lines of: "The purpose
of this investigation was. . .", or "This project was intended to establish that. . .", or "What we
attempted to do was. . .", etc. If the report contains no such statement, the reader is entitled to
infer that the author never had a clear purpose in mind, either during the investigation or in
writing about it.
Definitions; In addition to an explicit statement about the hypothesis or hypotheses that were
tested, there should be explicit definitions of all terms that were coined for use in the report
and/or are used in the report in an unusual way and/or are used in the report in a specific,
restricted sense.
Assumptions; Similarly, there should be statements of the assumptions made in the
investigation; i.e., there should be explicit discussions of those aspects of the problem, and
the situation in which it arose, (a) that were not under the control of the investigator, thus
forcing the investigator to accept them as they were, and (b) that have, in the investigator's
judgment, a reasonable likelihood of having an effect on the problem, and hence on the
investigation--an effect that cannot be known exactly.
Overall Goal(s) of Product/ Service/ Program
Outcomes (or client/ customer impacts) and Performance
Measures (that can be indicators toward the outcomes)
Activities/ Technologies of the Product/Service/ Program (general description of how the
product/ service/ program is developed and delivered).
Staffing (description of the number of personnel and roles in the organization that are
relevant to developing and delivering the product/ service/ program)
Overall Evaluation Goals (eg, what questions are being answered by the research)

Materials and Methods or Methodology (if no materials involved)

What are the data that were used? Types of data/ information that we recollected
How data/ information were collected? Instruments used to collect data/ information
How data/ information were analyzed?

980 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

Limitations of the evaluation (eg, cautions about findings/ conclusions and how to use the
findings/ conclusions, etc.)

Interpretations and Conclusions (from analysis of the data/ information)

In the methods section of a research report, the author should explain carefully and in detail
just what data were used in the investigation. That is, the author should explain just what
were the objects or concepts (e.g., relationships, behaviors) that were observed and/or
examined and/or studied in the investigation. In particular, the author should clarify the
question of why these data were pertinent to the purpose of the investigation; i.e., why they
could be expected to shed light on the problem.
Furthermore, the author should discuss the methods of collection of the data: just how were
they identified and observed. In a statistically oriented investigation, if the data were
identified by means of random sampling, the author should say so and should outline the
randomization process; if random sampling would have been preferable but was impossible
(or thought to be) for some reason, the author should discuss the rationale for replacing
randomized collection by his or her other method of data collection. If the investigation was
not statistically oriented, the author should explain whatever methods were used to identify
the objects or concepts to be further processed in the investigation, and should indicate the
reasons for choosing them.
Finally, the author should discuss the methods of analysis of the data: how they were
examined, studied, counted, etc. In a statistically oriented investigation, the statistical
procedures used should be identified and the rationale for choosing them discussed. If the
investigation was not statistically oriented, the author should explain whatever procedures
were used for analyzing the data, and should indicate the reasons for choosing them.

981 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

RESULTS, Discussion, CONCLUSIONS, and RECOMMENDATIONS

Properly used, the word result should be restricted to only those findings of the investigation
that can be inferred by rigorous procedures from the data collected. Used in this careful
fashion, the word result does not mean the same thing as the word conclusion. A conclusion
is an interpretation, by the investigator, of the results in the light of the whole problem and its
context.
The goal of clarity in communication is best served by authors who carefully distinguish
between results and conclusions, and between both of these and recommendations.
Unfortunately, too many authors mix them up. Preferably, each of the three types of
statements should appear in a section of its own in an article.
In the recommendations section of a research report, the author discusses his or her
judgments about what should be done next. Recommendations can range from specific
actions to be taken to statements about problems that remain to be investigated, especially
problems that were recognized in the course of the investigation.
An important part of any research effort should be the recognition of questions that need
further study. Investigators have a professional responsibility to record such questions and to
communicate them to the fellow members of their profession, in order to increase the chances
of someone's undertaking the needed study. The recommendations section of a research
report is an excellent means of passing such questions along.
The final section of the paper is the Conclusion section. Briefly summarize the overall
conclusion of the data analysis based on the purpose of the study. Also explain the importance
of the major finding to educational practice.

Writing Discussion and Conclusion

The second to last step in conducting a research study is to interpret the findings in the
Discussion section, draw conclusions, and make recommendations. It is important that
everything in this last section is based on the results of the data analysis. Simply put, look at
the key topics in the conclusion and recommendations. If that topic was not precisely
assessed by the questionnaire, then you cannot draw a conclusion or make a recommendation
about that topic. A paper can only make valid conclusions and recommendations on those
variables that the study has empirical data to support.
Draw conclusions and make recommendations only directly related to the purpose and results
of the study.
Draw conclusions and make recommendations that are meaningful, unique, and relate to the
results of the study.
Most papers require five different sections for the Discussion, although the order may vary
depending on the requirements of the paper. Each section is described separately below.
Discussion or Summary of Findings. The purpose of this section is to highlight the
major statistical findings from the results section and interpret them.
First, restate the overall purpose of the study.
Then explain the main finding as related to the overall purpose of the study.
Next, summarize other interesting findings from the results section.
Explain how the statistical findings relate to that purpose of the study. One way to do
this is to take every research question and hypothesis in turn and explain in plain terms
what the statistical results mean. Also describe how the results are related to education
in general. All explanations must be supported by the results of the data analysis.

982 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

Generally, the Discussion section does not need to include any numbers. No statistics need to
be repeated from the results, nor does the discussion need to refer to table numbers. Instead,
simply explain the results in language that is easy for a non-researcher to understand.
Also try to integrate the findings into the results of other research studies.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Next, give recommendations based on the results of the study. What practical steps can
educators take to implement the key findings of the research study? Remember, these
recommendations must be supported by the statistical findings from the data analysis.
After the recommendations have been written, reread each recommendation. Consider which
statistical result from the results section supports that recommendation. If there is no
statistical result to support the recommendation, then it must be canceled.
• Recommendations (regarding the decisions that must be made about the product/
service/ program).
• Data tabulation and tabular format, etc.
• Testimonials, comments made by users of the product/ service/ program
• Case studies of users of the product/ service/ program
• Any related literature

Limitations
All studies have limitations in terms of the sample, measurement or manipulation of key
variables, and procedure for data collection.
How could the research be conducted with a different research design?
How may the participants and sampling techniques not be representative of the target
population?
How might the target population be limited?
How were the instruments inadequate?
Were there any problems with the treatment?
What problems resulted from the study's procedures?
What other unexpected problems arose in the data collection?
Every single research study ever conducted in the history of this world was limited by money,
resources, and time. These factors are external to the study and should not be mentioned.

Suggestions for Further Research

Every research study provides one or two answers about education, but also opens the door
for five to ten additional questions. Based on the Discussion/Summary of Findings and
Limitations of the study, what additional research should be conducted?
What questions arose because of the major finding of your study?
How can other research studies improve over the limitations that were described in the
Limitations section?

SUMMARY AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In the summary section of a report the author, following the old-time preacher's practice, tells
the readers what they have just been told. The summary provides the opportunity for the
author to state succinctly what the whole investigation was intended to find out, how the
investigation tried to find that out, and what it did find out. By reviewing the whole process
briefly in the summary, the author can help the reader grasp the connections among the many

983 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

details about which the reader has just been reading, and can thus help the reader see the
forest instead of merely the trees.
Acknowledgements of assistance are almost always appropriate in a report on a problem-
solving effort or investigation, and the summary section is a conventional place for an author
to express his or her thanks for help received.

APPENDIX OR APPENDICES
In writing expository prose, an author can serve the cause of clarity of communication well
by keeping the main flow of the exposition as simple and direct as possible. One good way in
which an author can simplify the main flow of his or her writing is to put into an appendix (or
appendices) the highly detailed discussions of subordinate portions of what he or she wants to
say. The author should summarize briefly, in the main expository flow, what has been
appended and should refer the reader from the main flow to the appendix as appropriate; e.g.,
with statements along the lines of: "The observations made are presented in full in Appendix
A"; or "Appendix B contains the questions asked in the questionnaire sent to catalogers"; or
"The full database structure will be found in Appendix C."
The appendix is not used as much in journal articles as it might (and, in my opinion, should)
be. This may be partly due to authors' fears that editors would often be tempted to excise
appendices in order to reduce easily the length of articles as published. In technical reports
and memoranda, however, such editorial concerns are unlikely, and when you write in these
forms you should certainly take advantage of the appendix as a good expository device.

Peer review process in scientific publishing.

Benefits and limitations of peer review in ensuring the quality of research publications.

984 of 1350


 Peculiarities of field (in VIVO) research

References:

1. Anonymous (2019) http://www.korbedpsych.com/R19Ch5.html (Accessed on

04.08.2019). (Incomplete reference)
2. Anonymous (2019) Analyzing, Interpreting and Reporting Basic Research Results.
(https://managementhelp.org/businessresearch/analysis.htm Accessed on 1/8/19, 8'57
am) - © Copyright Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD, Authenticity Consulting, LLC. AField
Guide to Nonprofit Program Design, Marketing and Evaluation, Field Guide to
Consulting and Organizational Development with Nonprofits and Field Guide to
Consulting and Organizational Development. Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD,
Authenticity Consulting, LLC. A Field Guide to Nonprofit Program Design, Marketing
and Evaluation, Field Guide to Consulting and Organizational Development with
Nonprofits and Field Guide to Consulting and Organizational Development. https://
managementhelp.org/businessresearch/analysis.htm Discussion and Conclusion 1/8/19,
8'58 am (Editable reference)
3. Google () Conducting Educational Research Step 19: Write Discussion and Conclusion
(Incomplete reference)
4. Evaluating Reports of Research: Introduction to Research in Library ...f . Library and
Information Science, The University of Texas at Austin am Last revised 2002 Nov 8 .
https://www.ischool.utexas.edu/~wyllys/IRLISMaterials/evaluatingres.html (1/8/19,
8’57) THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
(Incomplete reference).

985 of 1350