Hi my friend,
I now see what you mean about Chapter 5 being hard to get your head around. Keep in mind that Dr. Cranton said it was filled with "jargon" and not to get too caught up in it as we will be discussing it further.
At this point, I guess the only thing we can do is determine the meaning of the content the best we can. I found that by breaking the ideas into smaller pieces I was able to get a better sense of what, I think, the author is saying. For example, there are many terms that we are both already familiar with such as sample, randomization, variables, scenarios, hypothesis, etc. Using the meanings I already have for these terms helped me understand them, at least partially, in their relationship to research.
When considering the two types of research presented, experimental and descriptive, I am quite confident in stating that I am more familiar with descriptive research and believe I am doing some right now. For another course I am taking, I have created surveys to determine actual facts about a topic. Experimental research uses predicting as part of its method and the research I am doing is not using prediction in any way. I think I could also say that I am doing casual/comparative research as the information I will receive will hopefully indicate relationships amongst things that may indicate the cause of the issue I am investigating.
When considering the advantages and disadvantages of the two types, it seems like Descriptive Research would be easier to carry out but the type one uses would be dependent on the topic of the research to be completed.
Does any of this make sense? Do you think I am headed in the right direction?
Looking forward to hearing about your thoughts and ideas. Hopefully we can help each other clarify any discrepancies.
Talk soon,
Catherine
No comments:
Post a Comment