Lecture Notes on Research Methodology-Week-7

INSPIRING CREATIVE AND INNOVATIVE MINDS

Research Methodology and Pre-project(SAB 4022)

Credits: 2

Prepared by:

DR. NOORUL HASSAN ZARDARIFaculty of Civil Engineering

Lecture Notes


Week 5: Results and data analysiaIntroduction, observation and interpretationError analysis and validity of resultsDiscussion with supervisorWeek 6: Results and data analysisSignificance of findingsConclusions and recommendations for further workDiscussion with supervisorStudent submit pre-project title with coordinatorWeek 7: Writing and presentationIntroduction. Presentation/publication of research findingsWriting of technical papers/technical reportsDiscussion with supervisorWeek 8: writing and presentationWriting of thesis/dissertationWriting techniques/skillsDiscussioon with supervisorWeek 10: TestTest 1Discussion with supervisor

Weekly Schedule


� Presentation & publication of research finding

� Writing a research paper

� Writing dissertation

� Writing skill

� Seminar presentation

Presentation Outline


� Why must publish?

� Which publication?

�� What to publish?

Presentation & Publication of Research Finding


� To benchmark our research findings

� To get response from others

� To disseminate new findings / knowledge

� To get good reputation

� To get better promotion

� To pass Ph.D./D.Eng./D.Sc. program

� To satisfy academic interest

� To develop intellectual tradition

Why You Must Publish?


� Unpublished research report

� Specialized magazine

� Dissertation / Thesis

� Monograph

� Seminar proceeding

� Refereed journal

� Book

Which Publication?


� Research methodology

� Research data

� Research analysis

� Research experience

� Research review

� Research “proper”

� Research perspective

What to Publish?


� Basic considerations

� Finding a good topic

� Finding suitable literature materials

� Evaluating literature

� Presenting research methodology

� Compiling experimental data

� Analysis & discussion

� Formatting & illustrations

� A sample of research paper

Writing a Research Paper


Which Publication?Format guidelines

Page allowed

Audience

Good Paper?The paper

The publication

The publisher

Steps in WritingSingle author?

Disstribution of work

Publication Procedure

Research PaperBefore Writing Process

Basic Considerations


� Published in a flagship refereed journal

� Subject on frontier of knowledge

� Research findings are original

� Significant area of study

� Published at the right timing

� Minimum mistakes

� Methodologically sound

� Analytically sound

� Grammatically sound

� Clear diagram

� References are up-to-date & significant

� Correctly formatted

Criteria of a Good Research Paper


• Steps to a good topic:

� Choosing a topic that interests you

� Doing preliminary research

� Narrowing your topic

� Deciding which type of research paper

Finding a Good Topic


Step �Choosing a topic that interests you

“Application of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods in water

resources management”


Step � Doing preliminary research

� Ujang Z. & Buckley C. (1999) “Molecular detection of nitrifying

bacteria in sludge of membrane bioreactor using Polymerase

Chain Reaction (PCR)”. Wat.Res. 15 (2) 245-252.

� Yamamoto K. & Urase T. (1999) “Analysis of bacterial

community in membrane bioreactor by fluorescent in situ

hybridyzation (FISH)”. Wat.Sci.Tech. 15 (2) 245-252.

� Wagner J. & Rosenwinkel K-H. (1999) “Sludge production in

membrane bioreactors under different conditions”. Proc. Int.

Conf. Membrane Tech. For Environ. Mgmt., Tokyo Univ. &

IAWQ, Tokyo, 1-4 Nov. 99, pp. 294-301.


Step �Narrowing your topic

“Watershed management as a multi-criteria decision problem: A case study

of the Skudai River Basin”


Step �Deciding which type of research paper

� Research methodology

� Research data

� Research analysis

� Research experience

� Research review

� Research “proper”

� Research perspective


Finding Sources for Research Paper

• Library

� Reference section

� Reserve section

� Periodical section

� Microfilm and microfiche section

� Books

• Experts on the subject matter

• Reliable websites

• Dictionaries, directories, encyclopedias

• Online and bound collections of conference papers


Evaluating Your Sources

� Primary or secondary sources

Primary sources are generally original works and first-hand accounts of research.Such sources include reports of research investigations, government reports, annual reports, minutes of meetings, letters, diaries, autobiographies, theses, articles in journals, data collected through interviews and surveys, as well as key publications by the original authors.

Secondary sources of information include translations, commentaries on original works, summaries of primary material, and other written material gathered from primary sources. Encyclopaedias and guidebooks are generally regarded as secondary sources.

� Evaluating your sources

� Relevant?

� Reliable?

� Taking notes


Taking notes

Some useful tips:

1. Do not make notes from the whole article.

2. Try to find out what the author's main argument.

3. Examine the views of authors who have a different opinion on the subject

and find out why.

4. 4. Critique each article by asking the questions:

a) Does the author use logically sound arguments?

b) Do I agree with them? If not, why not?

c) Does the author omit aspects of the argument which I regard as

essential? Why do I think he/she did this?

Answering these questions will help you formulate your own stance on the

issues under discussion.


Presenting Research Methodology

• Precise.

• Normally not more than1 page.

• Refer to other articles or books for details.

• E.g. “Water quality analysis in this study is based on the

Standard Methods (1999).

• Describe:

� How to do it (method)

� Equipment & materials

� Process & flow chart

� Duration


Compiling Experimental Data

Data can be presented in various forms:

� Graph

� Table

� Photo

� etc.


Analysis & Discussion

�� Should be 50% of the paper

�� Relate to the theoretical part

�� Supported by graphs, tables, photo etc.

�� Formula can be written

�� But no calculation be shown

�� Analysis on experimental data:

Compare with theory

Compare with numerical results

Compare with other works

�� State the importance of the findings


Formatting & Illustrations

Follow the guideline prepared by the publisher

Principles:

�� To help to clarify your written explanation�� Simple presentation�� Easy to understand�� Related to the theoretical derivation�� < 10 (graph + table etc.)


SAMPLE

• Example of a research paper


Writing A Dissertation

�Level of dissertations

�Dissertation vs Research paper

�Formatting

�Examples of a good and a bad dissertation


Level of Dissertations

�Undergraduate dissertation

�Masters dissertation

�Doctoral dissertation


Undergraduate Dissertation

� Training basis

� No significant academic contribution

� Evaluation on:

� Writing skill

� Presentation

� Sequence and formatting

� Data analysis


Dissertation vs Research Paper

Items Dissertation Research Paper

Size ±±±± 200 pp ±±±± 8 pp

Scope Whole research Portion of research

1 Ph.D. = 4 research papers

1 M.Sc. = 2 research papers

1 B.Sc. = 1 research paper

Writer Amateur Professional

Writing Relatively easy Difficult

Presentation Full research data Simplified & selected

Format University-based Journal-based

Publication Unpublished Published


Formatting & Illustration

� Follow the university’s guideline

� Sequence of chapters

� Font, size, spacing, etc.

� Figure head

� Table head

� References

� Appendix


Sequence of Chapters

Model A Model B

Introduction Introduction

Literature review Aim & Objectives

Aim & objectives Literature review

Methodology Methods & Materials

Results Results & Discussion

Analysis & Discussion Conclusion

Conclusion & Recommendation


Referencing

1. The Harvard Referencing System

2. The Referencing System of the American Psychological Association (APA).


Thesis Checklist

Cautionary Comments from Examiners Questions to Ask Yourself

Signposts

“There is a mismatch between the title and the content. The candidate is

strongly recommended to change the title.”

1. Does the title reflect the content?

2. Do chapter/section titles match

chapter/section content?

3. Does the table of contents match the titles in

the text?

4. Is formatting consistent? For example, are you

consistent in the way you set out your headings

or use numbering systems

throughout the thesis?

Use of English

“This thesis contains quite a lot of Chinese-English that can hardly be

comprehended. The grammatical errors and writing style should be polished

before submission.”

“The introduction in Chapter 1 often uses the present tense where the past

tense should have been used…”

“Careless and imprecise writing is perhaps the root cause of the deficiency

of this thesis.

There are simply too many ill-constructed sentences, wrong choices of words

and grammatical errors throughout the thesis.”

“Spell check and grammar check the whole document.”

5. Is English used accurately so that the

meaning is clear?

6. Is the writing grammatically correct?

7. Are the tenses appropriate?

8. Is the punctuation correct?

9. Is common vocabulary used accurately?

10. Is the spelling correct?


Writing for Understanding

“There are no strong links between the two parts of the study.”

“The thesis is too long with many redundant and irrelevant

descriptions.”

“Smaller paragraphs would improve clarity.”

“The experimental setup and conditions are not presented in sufficient

detail.”

“Many terms or phrases are repeatedly used in the earlier chapters as

though they are generally accepted or understood. In fact they are given

meaning only in later chapters.”

“The main impression one gets when reading this thesis is that it is

incredibly repetitive.

While it is good to remind the reader of technical terms, it is

unnecessary to repeat explanations over and over again – in some cases

even in essentially the same words.”

“The abbreviations on p.vii should be listed in alphabetical order. On

p.62, it seems that [ABCD] is not in the list of abbreviations at the

beginning of the thesis.”

”Abbreviations of different versions should be introduced early on and

be used consistently. It is now very confusing and inconsistent’.”

“On p.1, symbols are presented in different styles.”

11. Does each paragraph contain a single idea and does

the first sentence introduce that idea?

12. Are paragraphs, sections and chapters logically

ordered and linked?

13. Are the paragraphs too long? Too short?

14. Are there sufficient examples?

15. Are explanations or descriptions sufficient?

Necessary? Relevant?

16. When terms are first used are they sufficiently

explained?

17. Is the writing unduly repetitive?

18. Are abbreviations expanded early and are they used

consistently?

19. Are all abbreviations used included in the

abbreviation list?

20. Are the full names of symbols given?

21. Are symbols used correctly? If, for example, f is

different from F, do you ever get confused?

22. When two terms are used to denote the same thing or

idea, is this clear?

Thesis Checklist


Substantiation and claims

“Generally, it’s good to not ‘beg questions’ in the research; when the

text says ‘not much work has been done’ then say something about

that work.”

23. Are diagrams, flowcharts, etc., sufficiently explained in

the text?

24. Are claims sufficiently explained? For example, if you

say that one position has been discredited, have you

explained who has discredited it and how?

25. Does the work go beyond description? Do you explain

the significance or meaning of information you describe?

Diagrams, tables, results

“Some Figures are not referenced. Some Figures are referred to in a

disordered way.

Figure 3.8 (b) is referred to for the first time in the text after 3.9,

while Figure 3.8 (a) is not mentioned at all.”

“In Essay 2, starting from p.97, many table numbers are wrong,

making reading a problem and so I had to go back to re-read it

again.”

“The presentation is unnecessarily lengthy and repetitive. The

student should make better use of appendices and charts, as the

procedures are tedious.”

26. Are diagrams, flowcharts, etc., sufficiently explained in

the text?

27. Are diagrams of good quality?

28. Does the information that is presented in tables cohere

with what is written in the text?

29. Is the labelling of graphs and tables unambiguous? Can

labels be interpreted in only one way?

30. Are results presented in the best form? For example,

would text be better as a table, or a table better as text?

Thesis Checklist


Thesis Checklist

Referencing

”On page 22, line 3, a reference ‘Decho, 1990’ is

quoted. However no reference can be found in the

reference list. In line 6 of the second paragraph, a

reference ‘Sutherland, 1990’ is quoted. No such

reference is found in the reference list…”

“The work is weak on recent references. For example,

I list below four references which I have found during

a brief scan of the literature which are highly relevant

to the project but have not been cited…”

“The reference list has a number of irritating errors of

a typographical nature, an inconsistency of presenting

journal names, and occasionally inadequate

information to locate a reference without inside

knowledge.”

31. Is the appropriate referencing convention used?

32. Are works cited in the text included in the

bibliography and vice versa?

33. Are citation and reference styles consistent?

34. Are references related to the work, or are they so

tangential that the reader will wonder about their

inclusion?

35. Were references updated as the work proceeded?

Have important developments since the initial

literature review been considered and referenced?

36. If you have referred to any work arising From this

research that you have already published, have you

included the publications in your reference section?

General

“Page 129 is missing from my copy.” 37. Are the pages all there?


Common Knowledge, Plagiarism, Copyright and Ethics

�We can assume that all our ideas are informed from many sources. However,

in academic writing we distinguish between common knowledge that is available

from sources such as dictionaries, encyclopedias, books etc. and specific

knowledge that came from an identifiable source such as a report.

�In some cases a writer needs to make a judgment about whether to reference

a source of common knowledge or not. The rule generally is: if you are in doubt,

reference the source!

�But you MUST acknowledge distinctive ideas, sources of specific information,

verbatim phrases, sources of original terms and sources of statistics you use in

your writing.

�Using the ideas and information generated by another person in your own work

without acknowledging that usage is generally regarded as plagiarism.

�In academia, plagiarism is a serious issue.


Copyright generally refers to ownership of products, ideas or

knowledge.

The ethical issues in human subjects research have received

increasing attention over the last 50 years.

�The primary concern of the investigator should be the safety of

the research participant.

�The scientific investigator must obtain informed consent from

each research participant.

�The investigator must enumerate how privacy and confidentiality

concerns will be approached.

Common Knowledge, Plagiarism, Copyright and Ethics

Lecture Notes on Research Methodology-Week-7

Documents

Transcript of Lecture Notes on Research Methodology-Week-7