Task Brief Research Methods
Instructions to Students
The assignment is a 2,500 word research proposal that demonstrates your ability to reflect on methodological choices and select methods that are appropriate for your
research topic (to be further developed in your Masters dissertation).
Assignments will be submitted online through Blackboard. The submission point will be found on the assessment tab on the module home page.
You must submit a copy of your research proposal via Turnitin UK before you submit your final assignment. You must also submit a copy of your ethics form along with
your research proposal.
Please do not wait until the last minute to submit your assignments online, Blackboard can be slow or can fail which will result in your assignment being marked as
late. Submit with plenty of time spare.
After submitting your proposal, contact your research supervisor to discuss your submission. Do not wait for feedback before contacting your supervisor.
Assignment criteria(Research Proposal)
Research Focus: Make a clear statement of the rationale for, and purpose of, the research. Link the purpose of the research to a specific research question(s) and/or
objectives.
Literature: Demonstrate a critical knowledge & understanding of the literature relevant to the proposed research, and link it to the research question.
Research Design: Demonstrate knowledge of theoretical issues affecting research methodology, and show the ability to synthesize theory by developing a practical
approach to the proposed study.
Practical Outcomes/Research Plan:Demonstrate an appreciation of potential benefits and problems associated with carrying out the research, and present a realistic and
achievable research plan.
Presentation: Choose an appropriate title, and make a case for the research using a logical, and clearly structured, argument with references that follow academic
conventions.
Ethical Review: Demonstrate the ability to reflect on the ethics of undertaking research, and the potential impact of research on participants.
Your research proposal must have an ethical review checklist attached to the proposal Research proposals without an ethical review will not be accepted. If you
subsequently change your research topic, you must resubmit the ethical review and get it signed by your dissertation supervisor.
Masters Level Assessment Criteria
Note: The marking matrix provides guidance in terms of the assessment criteria for the module. The tutors also take a holistic view of the assessment process and award
additional marks where the work demonstrates originality, creative thinking and deep personal learning.
Criteria & Weighting Distinction Distinction Merit Pass Marginal Fail Fail
80 – 100%
Excellent Work 70 – 79%
Very Good Quality Work 60 – 69%
Good Quality Work 50 – 59%
Satisfactory Work 40 – 49%
Insufficient work does not meet the assessment criteria 39-0%
Work does not meet the assessment criteria
Research Focus / Question(s) / Objectives
(25%). Command of the topic, unusual creativity, perception and insight, all suggesting that work should be published in an academic forum Demonstrates command of
the topic by showing creativity, perception and insight – a serious contribution to the academic debate Demonstrates a well-informed understanding of the topic by
showing some creativity and insight Descriptive while demonstrating reasonable understanding Limited but insufficient understanding demonstrated. Any
creative input is somewhat off the point. Insufficient understanding demonstrated
Any creative input is off point
Literature Review (25%). Demonstrates excellent critical knowledge and understanding of the literature relevant to the proposed research with an exceptional
theorisation of important literature relevant to the research focus and should be published in an academic forum. All literature discussions are linked to the research
question / objectives, and leads the reader into the methodology. Demonstrates critical knowledge and understanding with high level of theorisation drawn from a
wide range of relevant and innovative perspectives and sources.
Literature discussions are linked to the research question/s or objectives and leads the reader into the methodology Demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the
literature drawn from a from a good and relevant range of perspectives and sources
Sources mostly well-integrated into the overall argument with attempts at linking discussions back to research focus or questions/objective Demonstrates knowledge
and understanding of the literature drawn from a relevant but not wide selection from a reasonable range of sources.
Sources not integrated into the argument and little attempt at theorisation or linking discussions back to the research focus or question/objectives Limited but
insufficient relevant sources and topic coverage demonstrating limited knowledge and understanding of the literature relevant to the proposed research.
However with some minor amendments this could achieve a satisfactory standing Few relevant sources and limited topic coverage demonstrating insufficient knowledge
and understanding of the literature relevant to the proposed research
Research Design
(40%) Excellent ability to synthesise theoretical and practical issues, choose a practical approach to sampling and data collection with a critical awareness of
analytical techniques and limitations of the methodology. Excellent use of methodological literature as a source for making justifications that are of the highest
academic quality Very good ability to synthesise theoretical and practical issues, choose a practical approach to sampling and data collection, with critical
awareness of analytical techniques and limitations of the methodology. Draws on a wide range of methodological literature which are very well integrated into clear,
well-structured justifications. Shows ability to synthesise theoretical and practical issues in selecting research methods with an awareness of analytical techniques
and limitations of the methodology
Draws on a range of methodological literature to make mostly clear, cogent and well-structured justifications Shows ability to synthesise theoretical and practical
issues in selecting research method with some awareness of awareness of analytical techniques and limitations of choices. Sources sometimes integrated into the
argument and drawn from a limited range. Some tendencies towards a clear and cogent justifications Shows limitedbut insufficient ability to synthesise theoretical
and practical issues in selecting research methods.With some minor amendments this could achieve a satisfactory standing
Sources occasionally/not at all integrated into discussions with some/minimal justifications present Does not show ability to synthesise theoretical and practical
issues in selecting research methods.
Sources /not at all integrated into the justifications.
Minimal structure and minimal to no justifications present
Presentation / Practical Outcomes
(10%) Logical and excellent arguments on the practical issues, with a realistic and detailed plan, excellent presentation that obeys academic conventions regarding
writing and referencing. No errors in grammar or spelling Logical and very good arguments on the practical issues, with a realistic and detailed plan, very good
presentation that obeys academic conventions regarding writing and referencing. Virtually no errors in grammar or spelling Good appreciation of the practical
issues that affect the outcomes of the research, with realistic and detailed plan and good presentation.
Referencing clear and accurate using appropriate conventions. Near perfect grammar and spelling, with only a few errors Attempts to recognize the practical
issues that affect the outcomes of the research, and includes a satisfactory plan.
References adequate but clearer and/or more references needed.
Reasonable grammar and spelling but with several notable errors Limited but insufficient appreciation of the practical issues that affect the outcomes of the research.
References limited but insufficient showing superficial engagement with the literature
Many errors in grammar and spelling which can make it difficult to read
Does not appreciate practical issues that affect the outcomes of the research.
Insufficient references (Very few references most o which are basic / inappropriate)
Many errors in grammar and spelling, making it impossible to read
Ethical Review Demonstrate the ability to reflect on the ethics of undertaking research, and the potential impact of research on participants
Includes approval ethical review form Demonstrate the ability to reflect on the ethics of undertaking research, and the potential impact of research on participants
Includes approval ethical review form Demonstrate the ability to reflect on the ethics of undertaking research, and the potential impact of research on participants
Includes approval ethical review form Demonstrate the ability to reflect on the ethics of undertaking research, and the potential impact of research on participants
Includes approval ethical review form Demonstrate the ability to reflect on the ethics of undertaking research, and the potential impact of research on participants
Includes approval ethical review form Demonstrate the ability to reflect on the ethics of undertaking research, and the potential impact of research on participants
Includes approval ethical review form
Topic 1: Introduction to Research Methods
and Plagiarism
Topic 2: Literature Review
Topic 3:Introduction to Philosophy
Topic 4: Research Design
Topic 5: Case Study / Mixed Methods
Topic 1: Introduction to Research Methods
Lecture
• The aims and objectives of the module
• The lecture and seminar programme
• What is ‘research’ and why is it undertaken?
• An overview of research methods
• What are the main problems and issues involved in conducting research?
• Key Study Skills
• Critical and Reflective Thinking
Seminar Questions and Activities
The first seminar will also serve as a ‘getting to know you’ session and will provide you with opportunities to ask questions about the programme of activities and
about the assessment tasks. It will also provide opportunities for the lecturer to gauge the extent and nature of your previous research experience. We will then
consider the key area of topic selection and writing research questions. This will then be followed by a short discussion around plagiarism.
Seminar Activity 1 – Getting to Know You (30 Minutes)
In groups of 2-3 ask each other the following questions:
Did you undertake an undergraduate dissertation? If so:
a) What was the subject?
b) What was the length?
c) What research methods did you use?
d) What difficulties did you encounter?
e) What was the main thing you discovered about research from undertaking the dissertation?
If no, answer the following questions:
a) What things are of interest to you?
What type of research methods might suit you?
[Please not the tutor will come around and speak with each group quickly to get an idea of peoples experience and interests]
Seminar Activity 2 – Drafting Research Questions (Round 1) (45 Minutes)
You will be given 5 examples of research questions that either IHRM / HRM students have submitted within their research proposal for this module. In your groups,
consider the following [30 minutes]:
a) Are the proposed research questions ‘good’?
b) If they are good, explain why?
c) If they are not good, explain why? Then consider how you might make them better (i.e. re-write them)
Once everyone has completed these portion, we will then discuss what everyone has found either as a class or each group will present their thoughts on one of the
proposed set of objectives / questions. [15 minutes]
Seminar Activity 3 – Drafting Research Questions (Round 2) (30 Minutes)
Here are the same students’ questions / objectives but after they have changed them based on feedback and discussions with their dissertation supervisor / tutor. In
your groups compare these to the previous research question and consider the following [15 minutes]:
a) Do you think these research questions are better than the previous attempts? If so why?
b) If you don’t think so why? Suggest any changes you would make to further improve these.
Once everyone has completed these portion, we will then discuss what everyone has found either as a class or each group will present their thoughts on one of the
proposed set of objectives / questions. [15 minutes]
Seminar Activity 4 – Intro to Plagiarism (15 Minutes)
Here the tutor will discuss with you what is plagiarism, some basic tips to avoid it, some frequent examples of plagiarism, way to avoid it.
Topic 2: Literature Review
Lecture
• Types of data
• Evaluating the sources of information
• Exploring the literature
• Critical reading and thinking skills
• Writing a literature review
• Developing your ideas (conceptual framework/hypothesis)
In addition, you might make use of the Postgraduate Dissertation guide (especially the section entitled “how you do a literature review”, as this contains information
on accessing material for a research problem)
Seminar Questions and Activities
At the beginning of seminar the tutor will break you off into groups of 2-3. Remember before class you were asked to read an article by Saunders and Rojon (2011) on a
critical literature review which will be discussed in class.
Firstly, In pairs / small groups they will do two referencing exercises to get familiar the importance of referencing and assessing information sources.
Seminar Activity 1 – (20 Minutes)
In pairs of small groups, read the following statement in a marketing report about the purchase of jeans:
• Only 17% of respondents consider established brands important when buying jeans and this is much more prevalent in men than women, with a quarter of men
agreeing compared to just one in ten women.
• This is an indication of women’s confidence when shopping, not feeling the need to stick to the tried and tested brands, but more willing to try out brands
that may not be so mainstream. Women are also more likely than men to buy high street retailer brands.
• Men seem to be attracted by the provenance of the jeans brand and consider the brand a marker of quality as well as a status symbol.
Consider the following questions:
1. If you were conducting new research, how would you go about checking and/or challenging the claims made above?
2. What difference would it make if sources were provided?
3. Think of any project involving research (including business planning / market research) in which you have worked with others. Debate the following question –
The source of information in group work should be credited to the individual who found it’
a. What advantages do you see from this approach?
b. What disadvantages do you see in this approach?
Seminar Activity 2 – (20 Minutes)
On your own: You have been given the following list of sources by a friend to investigate leadership skills.
Handy, C. (1998) The Hungry Spirit: Beyond Capitalism – A Quest for Purpose in the Modern World, London: Arrow Books Ltd.
Harper, D. (2008) “Towards a Theory of Entrepreneurial Teams”, Journal of Business Venturing, 23(6): 613-626.
Greenleaf, R. (2008) “Choose the Nobler Belief”, http://servantleadershipblog.com/servant- leadership/blog/, posted 4th August 2008, accessed 8 September 2008.
Mullins, L. J. (2005) “The Nature of Leadership”, in Mullins, L. J. (ed) Management and Organisational Behaviour, pp. 280-327.
Anonymous (2008) “Leadership”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership , accessed 8th September 2008.
Goffee, J. & Jones, G. (2005) “Managing Authenticity: The Paradox of Great Leadership”, Harvard Business Review, 1st December 2005.
1. Individually, rank the sources in order of the perceived reliability / unreliability. With 1 being the most reliable.
2. Compare the ranking that you have given each source with others in your group. Why did you put some at the top of the list?
3. Whilst the above may be true about subject-related research, what sources would be particularly useful in researching the background of an organisation?
4. Where would you rank the lecture slides given by a member of SHU staff?
Seminar Activity 3 – (60 Minutes)
In each set of pairs or small groups you will be given an iPad. Here the tutor will show you library gateway and how to access various online reference databases. You
will also be introduced to the Association of Business Schools (ABS) journal ranking list to identify quality journals in the area of human resource management and
general management as a source of journal articles. The tutor will also give you some key tips around how to speed read / skim articles for key points. [15 minutes]
In each group you can either choose a topic provided by the tutor or pick an agreed topic (which could be an area of interest of one of the group members). Once this
is agreed, you will spend 30 minutes gathering ‘quality sources’ on the topic of interest. We would like you to try the doing the following:
1) Try doing a key word search on your topic in Google scholar. Then try doing the same key word search but in specific relevant 3*/4* journals. Compare and contrast
the advantages and disadvantages of using either approach.
2) Record the sources you have found and try practicing your ‘speed reading skills’ that is try to pull out some of the key messages from these papers (make notes on
this). How difficult do you find this? What are areas of the paper you tend to use the most? Was this an effective way of finding more and new papers to look at
In the final 15 minutes we will discuss as a class what the groups found in regards to finding sources and critically skimming them concerning the difficulty,
challenges, advantages, any tips that worked particularly well.
Topic 3: Introduction to Philosophy
Lecture
• What is a Research Methodology?
• Types of Research Methodology
• Defining research questions
Seminar Questions and Activities
Seminar Activity 1: Reality as a Construction of the Mind (60 minutes)
This is an exercise to help us frame and discuss the issue of the ontology. Here you are going to watch a video clip from A Beautiful Mind in which Dr. John Nash (real
person, real story) and his wife come to terms with the way John has understood his own world. (20 minutes)
While watching the video, consider the following:
1. All of us have a mind that ‘fills in the blanks’ when it is short of information (whether visual, auditory or informational)
2. Does this uncertainty about ‘reality’ mean that we are all constructing meaning in order to understand the world around us?
In pairs or small groups discuss the following: (30 minutes)
1. Can reality ever be anything other than a collection of subjective understandings about the world around us?
2. To what extent is ‘reality’ a projection of our mind, schooled by our education systems, the media and popular culture?
3. To what extent do we create our own realities?
4. To what extent do the realities in which we live create us?
5. As a researcher, is your primary objective to understand the world in which you live, or to understand how people react to the world in which they live
In the final 10-15 minutes we will discuss these points as a class
Seminar Activity 2: Applying Philosophy to Research Practice (45 minutes)
1. In your pairs or small groups, your discuss the key philosophical commitments of :
a. A positivist paradigm
b. An interpretivist paradigm
3. Now consider what a ‘piece’ of research designed by a positivist and the interpretivist paradigm would look like. Consider the following:
a. What data would be collected and which methods would be used to collect this data?
b. Would this research be primarily inductive or deductive in design?
c. What is the role of the researcher and researched in the research process?
d. How would the data be analysed?
e. What would be the purpose of the research?
f. What would good or valid research look like in these different approaches
In the above think about how these design choices ‘fit’ with the different philosophical commitments. Compare and contrast how each of these philosophical paradigms
produce very different research designs (consider how and why they are different). We will then discuss these points as a class.
Topic 4: Research Design
Lecture
• The three types of research design
• The components involved in research design
• Designing research
• Choosing a research topic
• Outlining research proposal
Seminar Questions and Activities
Seminar Activity 1:Evaluating Research Design Exercise 1 (30 minutes)
I would like you to break up into small groups (3-5 people) and read the article (The Abrasiveness Trap) which was published in Fortune magazine. There was quite a bit
of negative comments about this article’s research design and its findings which we will debate.
Assessing the research design
Before we can consider the quality of a piece of research, we need to first consider its research design. I appreciate the detail is limited regarding design choices –
using what you have learned today please summarize the research design.
Things to consider: what is the research purpose / questions? Is it inductive or deductive? Can you align it with a particular research paradigm? What was the sampling
strategy? What methods were used and how was it analyse
Let’s consider the critics views
Here are some of the criticisms levelled at the article. What do you think about these criticisms? Do you agree?
Criticism 1: I found it consistent with my own experience, and many of the women I’ve worked with said it resonated with them too. One of my male colleagues, a systems
analyst for whom I have a lot of respect, pointed out that from what he can tell of the study, it likely suffers from confirmation bias. He noted that if you gave the
reviews to naive readers with gendered information stripped out and let them assess the quality of the language, that would help reduce or eliminate the possibility of
confirmation bias. As much as I respect him, though, his commentary was framed as “this study is useless” as opposed to “this study is an interesting first step and
here is something that additional research would benefit from…”
Criticism 2: It’s unclear from this article if the research controlled for job performance (review rating, correlation between review and raise/bonus/promotion
metrics). Can you clarify if you controlled for these factors? It would be essential to drill down on this to ensure that isn’t a significant factor. If this was not
controlled for, you can’t really assume that you are comparing apples-to-apples. There are many other possible hypotheses that could explain the differences other than
the conclusions in this article.
Criticism 3: With such a small sample size, how can this survey be representative of anything? One could just as easily use the data to suggest that men are less
likely to submit feedback containing criticisms to an anonymous study
Re-design this research
Thinking about the above criticisms, how you would re-design this research? What would elements would you change?
Seminar Activity 2:Evaluating Research Design Exercise 2 (60 minutes)
In this exercise you have been put in groups of 2 and each of you have been given an example of research either conducted from the interpretivist or positivist
philosophical paradigm. The purpose of this exercise to help demonstrate how our research philosophy impacts on how we design and present our research.
[30 mins] Step 1 (as individual): Skim read through the article you given. Then consider for the key areas listed below how each of these relate to, or are reflective
of, research conducted in either the ‘interpretivist’ or ‘’positivist’ philosophical paradigms:
• Research aims and questions/objectives
• Research Design (i.e. methodology, methods, sampling, analysis)
• Role of the researched (is there voice to the research participants in the research)
• Role of the researcher (how involved is the researcher in gathering data and knowledge construction – is there theory neutral language?)
• Language and the style in which the research is written and presented (is it descriptive or challenging and critical? Is it written in the first or third
person? Is the language detached or involved? Are the authors making generalisations?)
Note: In the above highlight relevant chunks that signal any of the above to use an evidence trail….
[20 mins] Step 2 (in pairs): Once you have identified the above information discuss with your partner what you have found. Your partner will have a piece of research
conducted from a different philosophical paradigm. During this conversation identify the differences between the way research is designed and written about between
these two papers. Show each other physically how these com
[10 mins] Step 3 (as a class): Discuss as a class what you have found? What did you think were the biggest differences? What stood out to you the most when reading the
papers? Did any of the authors explicitly say what paradigm they were in? Was it easy to locate them in one? And how?
Topic 5: Case Studies / Mixed Methods
Lecture
• Introducing case study approach
• Different types of case study
• Designing case study
• The strengths and limitations of case study approach
• Introducing mixed methods
• The use of mixed methods in case study
Seminar Questions and Activities
To be confirmed
Topic 6:Quantitative Methods – Surveys
Topic 7: Qualitative Methods – Interviews
Topic 8:Analysis
Topic 9: Research Proposals and Writing up
Topic 10: PRESENTATIONS
Topic 6: Quantitative Methods – Surveys
Lecture
• What are quantitative methods?
• Introduction to surveys and observations
• Descriptive vs Analytical Surveys
• Conducting a descriptive survey (questionnaire construction, sampling, analysis)
• Conducting a analytical survey (hypothesis/conceptual framework, operationalising constructs, sampling, analysis)
• Validity in survey research
• How to administer a survey data
• Practical challenges faced when doing survey research
• Criticisms of the survey method
Seminar Questions and Activities
In the seminar we are going to consider the design of analytical and descriptive survey to study HRM practice. I am using student examples rather than academic papers
to provide some familiarity and context. I have tried to include the following:
• background information to help you get an idea of the purpose of the research (aims and objectives)
• data collection tools (survey instruments) and sampling methods
Seminar Activity 1: DBA Questionnaire (individually or in groups) [20-30 minutes]
This is a fun and light hearted approach to survey design (and was not produced by a student!)
1) Take a look the DBA questionnaire and considering the principles of good questionnaire design discussed in lecture, highlight all the areas of bad practice
[10-15 minutes]
2) Lets discuss as a class all the areas that are ‘weak’ and could be improved [10-15 minutes]
Seminar Activity 2:Survey of Work-Life Balance [30-45 minutes]
First you are given a first draft of a MSc student’s survey instrument. Think about the following points when consider the quality/efficacy of the draft questionnaire
1. What type of survey is being deployed and why?
2. Do the survey questions help the researchers to answer the research questions / aims? [try and pick some examples from the questionnaire].
3. Going through the questionnaire try to pick out the various design flaws. What would you change and to what? [mark up the questionnaire]
It is very easy to criticise but this is why you are engaged in the supervision process to help develop your thinking. I will now give you the final version which was
used to collect data. Note: I would like to add as a supervisor, I gave feedback to the student on the first draft – they never came back to me again for comments and
just re-designed the survey, administered it without piloting and showed it to me at the analysis stage. You might find this odd but it wouldn’t be the first time this
has happened.
4. What do you think of the final version? Are there things you would still change? What are they? [mark up the questionnaire]
5. How will they administer the survey? What sampling method do you think they used?
Topic 7: Qualitative Methods – Interviews
Lecture
• Why do interviews?
• Preparing for the interview
• Conducting the interview
• Interpreting the results
Seminar Questions
Seminar Activity 1: Interviewing Exercise (60 Minutes)
You will break off into groups of three (observer, interviewee and interviewer – each person will play each role over the time period of the exercise). In 3 separate
rounds you will conduct a structured, semi-structured and an unstructured interview.
The interviewer will be responsible for drafting a topic guide (on any topic of interest – consider using your dissertation topic or a topic related to this) for a 10
minute interview. [Note those that are doing the structured interview will be provided with a topic guide so wont have to draft one]
1. At the start of the exercise assign roles (structured, unstructured and semi structured interviewer – who will be interviewed and the observer for each and design
topic guides (15 minutes).
2. You will then go off and conduct this round-robin interviewing exercise. You can go elsewhere in the building to do this. Some key points here:
The observer needs to keep time and note the quality of the information the interviewer is obtaining and any challenges / advantages of this interviewing technique.
The interviewer needs to decide if they want to record it (try with your phone) and attempt to take notes during the process – what will these notes look like
The interviewee needs decide if they will be nice or difficult – I would suggest not trying to be very difficult as in practice most people are willing participants
but if you give one word answers this could help to encourage the interviewer to ask further lines of questioning and try different techniques.
Seminar Activity 2: Reflection Time (30 Minutes)
Once the activity has finished in your groups I want you to consider the following (15 minutes)
1) Ask the observer and interviewee – What worked well? What did not go so well?
2) Consider if you were going to use this method of collecting data again, what lessons would you take from the experience?
3) What are the key points to remember going forward in your dissertation?
As a class lets consider (15 Minutes)
1. Was there anything surprising that emerged? Was it easier or harder than you imagined?
2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each type of interview?
3. What key points will you take forward to the dissertation?
Topic 8: Analysis
Lecture
• Quantitative Data Analysis – descriptive statistics
• Quantitative Data Analysis – inferential statistics (the very basics)
• Qualitative analysis 3 different ‘ways’
Seminar Questions and Activities
Seminar Activity 1: Quantitative Analysis (45 Minutes)
In seminar we are going to consider how we analyse quantitative data. The main example we are going to use here is drawn from the Work-Life Balance Survey we used in
our previous survey session. I am providing you with the following:
• student’s first draft of their analysis of the survey data
• copy of the questionnaire (give you a feel for what the data is available)
The purpose of this exercise is to consider:
• how to display our quantitative data (good or bad data display)
• how to present or discuss our findings
Stage 1: Assess the quality of the analysis
Go through the draft ‘ Chapter 4 – Data Presentation and Analysis’ and thinking about what we learned in lecture in regards to quantitative analysis answer the
following questions
6. Are they any examples of variables or questions being analysed incorrectly?
7. Do the figures, charts and tables presented in a way that reflect ‘good data display practice’ (e.g. are they easy to read, are there population totals, can
you find trends easily, is the chosen display tactic appropriate [is a pie chart the best?],
8. The point of analysis is not to tell the reader exactly what is in the table (i.e. data display) but to tell the reader what the data is telling us (i.e.
findings). Here we are looking for meaningful results. Is the analysis presented meaningful? And why?
9. Are there any forms of analysis which are missing that you feel could provide more depth of understanding? [think of the different types of descriptive
statistics which are missing from this chapter]
Stage 2: How would you present and analyse this data?
I appreciate we don’t have access to computers and the raw data to re-create our own analysis but from looking at the questionnaire, how would you present and analyse
this data to the reader. Just try sketching out a basic outline and with some draft charts/tables/figures etc. Things to think about are:
• are there some basic sections you might want to divide this chapter up into? (i.e. respondent demographics, attitudes towards things, certain types of
behaviour)
• if you were going to analyse one question or a series of questions from the survey – how would you present it? bar chart, table, pie chart and what would it
look like?
• are there other descriptive statistics beside basic frequency counts that you might use? if so what would they be?
Seminar Activity 1: Qualitative Data Analysis (60 Minutes)
There are a number of ways to analyse qualitative data, and you can analyse data at the level of the phrase, sentence, paragraph or section.
Read the attached passage of qualitative data (taken from a mentoring conversation) and mark/label the passages that are most significant and interesting to you:
Mentor: Can I take you back to this week, and the start of this new job. Something that’s come up for me is that usuallyI know what’s happening in your working life,
and I usually know what’s happening in your personal life, because you’re very chatty, you share a lot. But this week, it’s a big new beginning and you’ve said how you
would have liked the head of section to show some interest. I wonder if you could say a bit more about that. It seems like a quiet start …
Mentee: Yes, a quiet start … um … previously, he’s been very supportive, but this week he’s been very busy with other things. Another colleague, he says you
have to manage him (laughter). When I was in charge of the last area, he would leave me to get on with it and I would feed him information from time to time. But this
new job is different.
Mentor: It sounds like there is something you want from him?
Mentee: Er … I think more information … I think there’s this other issue which comes up … that he suffers from “last minute-ism”, in time management, and you
know what I’m like with time management. You know, if it’s not in the diary three months ahead, I find difficulty with it really. For example, there is a very
important meeting today that I was just told about on Wednesday. Well, I’m sorry, there’s no way I can go to it … (laughter) … so there’s that issue.
Mentor: That’s his style …
Mentee: Yes, yes … worries me a touch …
Mentor: Somebody you are having to work to … yes … and that’s a problem for you …?
Mentee: Yes, simply on that one, generally he’s very good, the “last minuteism”, it gets a bit close for comfort, and personally I find that very difficult. I
like plans in the future.
Mentor: You’re usually very upfront with people, would you think about going to see him?
Mentee: I think I would, actually, although … I’ve not really thought about it … (pause) … I think … (pause) … yes, I do need to go and see him and say “Now
look, that meeting was important, you knew it was coming up, could we have this information more in advance”. With other things he doesn’t control directly, the
administrator has put in place some of these dates and we now have them. And I think he needs to learn some of that …
Mentor: This issue has come more to the fore this year with the shift to the new role as director. It’s something to do with the last job being less important
than the new work and here you are with a high profile. And it means you’ve got a different sort of relationship with him.
Mentee: Well, it’s big business, it’s worth a lot of money, in the picture of things, the last job is worth peanuts really, actually, in financial terms,
whereas this one is worth a lot of money. Mentor: So the stakes are higher?
Mentee: Absolutely.
Mentor: This relationship with the head of section is perhaps more important than it’s been before.
Mentee: I think it is. (pause) I just wonder, just sometimes, I wonder whether it’s me that’s got the problem with this time management business … um …
Mentor: It’s bit of a running joke, isn’t it …?
Mentee: It is really (laughter)
Mentor: I have a simple man’s diary … (laughter) … you … have a different sort of diary …
Mentee: Absolutely … absolutely, (laughter) … and you seem to survive all right (laughter) … um …
Mentor: So is that another issue …?
Mentee: I don’t know … but I wonder if, personally, it’s a bit of an obsession. I think the busier you are, and all there is to do, you need to be organised.
This view of time, which is … (pause) fundamentally, I think that my time is mine and that I choose to sell it to my employer … (pause) I don’t think everyone sees it
like that (laughter) so if I choose to sell it, then it’s a negotiable thing.
Mentor: Well …?
Mentee: I’m sure other people won’t see it like that.
Mentor: There’s the culture you come up against. (pause) I’m conscious that we’ve been talking for some time … I wonder if it would be useful for you to
summarise …
Mentee: You want me to do that!!?
Mentor: You start and I’ll chip in …
Mentee: All right … well, I suppose the first thing is the issue of the past, what went on then, but I don’t … that’s gone now, that was tense but I got out of
that responsibility … so in a sense that was quite satisfying. But it wasn’t like frying pan to fire, it’s a new thing opening up. What I have, you know, in terms of
budget, and that’s a bit nerve racking. And then there’s … (pause) … then there’s the time management issue … um … which is … I’m not sure whether it’s my problem or
his. Either way, we’ve got to sort it out. And I think that’s probably the key issue. When people are busy you’ve got to sort out some sort of organisation around
that.
Mentor: So when we take this further, we’ll pick up these issues. You’re in the early, very early stages, the first days of the new responsibility …
Mentee: Yes.
Mentor: And working on the relationship with your line manager is a priority …
Mentee: Yes, I think it is, I think you’re right, and I think I shall tackle that … although, I’ve always got on well with him …
Mentor: Yes
Mentee: I don’t have a problem with that. Because the stakes are a bit higher, the relationship is likely to be a bit closer.
Mentor: On the other side there’s what you’ve described as being obsessive about time management. Perhaps it will be helpful to explore that more, so that you
can get clearer about it, and that may help you with your manager.
Mentee: Yes, because it does create tensions. Last minute things create tensions for me, because my sense of responsibility says I should be doing that, and my
sense of time management … which is “my time and we negotiate” – thinks – I’m not going to be there because I’ve already made previous arrangements. So that’s
complicated. Feelings of guilt, I suppose (laughter) are around.
Questions:
On your own: (30 minutes)
1. What themes (subjects) are contained in the passages you have marked?
2. What problems / issues does the mentee identify for the theme you have created?
3. If you now wished to explore the themes further, in the context of a research interview, what questions would you put to the interviewee?
In your groups / pairs (30 minutes)
1. What differences are there in the passages you marked as ‘interesting’?
2. Discuss with the others in the group the reasons you felt the passages you marked were more interesting than other passages. What drives your different
interests?
3. Discuss whether differences in perception are a ‘research problem’ or a ‘research opportunity’?
Topic 9: Research Proposal and Write up
Lecture
• Planning and writing strategies
• The Research Proposal
• Designing a structure for your dissertation
• The literature review
• The ‘methodology’ chapter (or section)
• The ‘analysis and discussion’ chapter (or section)
• Presenting your material
Seminar Questions and Activities
The suggestion is to bring all your materials with you that you have been using to work on your research proposal and presentation. We would like you to work on this
class and use each other as sounding boards for your ideas and justifications / arguments.
The tutor will make themselves available (depending on number in seminar group) to discuss with each student (2-5 minutes) any questions, comments, concerns they might
have regarding their presentation / proposal.
This a peer led and tutor supported presentation and proposal workshop.
We highly recommend you come prepared to get the most out of this session – have sketched your ideas out already. If you wait until this session to start thinking of
ideas the likelihood is you will get very little out of this session and will struggle to be successful in the following weeks presentation.