International relations

Advice on SSC4602 Assessment 1

“Critical review of research design (Submit Week 22). Students will select one from a choice of 4 research-based articles from a relevant journal and prepare a critical review of the research design, identifying the research paradigm it is situated in and its ontological and epistemological assumptions (2000 words)”

The following advice is available in the module handbook but it is replicated here.

This assignment involves reading a journal article from a choice of 4 research-based articles from journal relevant to either International Relations or Global Governance and Sustainable Development links to which will be placed in the Assessment Section of the SSC4602 mylearning page. Your 2000 word assessment should cover all or most of the following:

1. A clear outline of what the article is about, its research question(s) and its key findings 2. A critical assessment of the selected methods that the authors used to undertake the research

that the article draws from 3. Identification of the research paradigm that the authors are situating their research approach

within and the ontological and epistemological assumptions underlying that paradigm. 4. Consideration of any alternative methods and research paradigms that the authors could have

explored

You could structure your review around these 4 points, perhaps using the terms in bold as section headings – though feel free to shape it as you wish, as long as you cover these aspects in the body of your review.

We can expand on each of the above 4 points –

1. Can you find what the article is about? What its key research questions are? What are the findings? If these are not explicit or the author does not establish why the article is relevant to the wider topic area and academic study on the issue, what new knowledge it contributes or its policy relevance (if applicable) then these become points of critique.

2. Does the article make clear what research methods were used? If you do not think so, then say so. Perhaps consider why the author has not made the methods of research more apparent or transparent.

3. This is asking you to consider the ontological and epistemological assumptions of the journal article; i.e what research paradigm it is situated in. Put simply, did the author conduct research from a positivist stance, which views reality in terms of objective categories (e.g. the unemployed, voters, gender, ethnicity etc)? Or is it research situated in an interpretive paradigm that views reality as formed of the meanings and values espoused by the research subjects (i.e. those interviewed, observed, or via the texts, films, letters, blogs where they express their views)? Maybe it is researcher’s positionality that is important (i.e. from a gender, ethnic, or broadly emancipatory standpoint)? In which case it connects perhaps to feminism, critical theory or critical realism that draws attention to the possibility that reality is not immediately apparent. This inevitably is due to power differentials. The goal of the researcher is to expose what is beneath the surface appearances. This might be employer / employee relations, discriminatory practices, claims made about the aims of various policy initiatives etc. The knowledge generated by such research methods associated with such a paradigm is directed towards emancipatory possibilities and raising the public consciousness towards the potential for change.

4. Think also about whether the research could have used other methods and how that might have altered any findings. Would you have done things differently to achieve what the author set out

to do? What audience do you think the author was directing the journal article at – e.g. Fellow academics? Policy makers? The business community? The poor, disadvantaged and/or disenfranchised? Who does the author work for?

How to choose between and scope the articles:

Before choosing which of the four articles you will review you might consider your strategy for deciding that. Perhaps you could use the SQ3R approach. This involves –

Survey / Skim: Skim through each of the articles – note the section headings (is there one on research method?), read the abstract and conclusion. Make a note of the journal it is in, who wrote it, who they work for, and when it was written. This stage should not take long, and you may at this point already prefer one.

Question: Having surveyed it what do you think you will get out of the article? Jot down some questions you think you might get answers to from reading it. In this case it might be some of the questions we have been raising above.

Read: Now read the whole article. Make notes! These might be formed around your questions. If it is your own hard copy, use the margins to highlight what at this stage you think are the key points, and / or underline to emphasise these.

Recall: Jot down or pronounce aloud to yourself the main things that emerged from the article for you

Review: Read over your notes and what you recalled from your reading. Maybe make reduced notes on your notes.

The SQ3R method might prove useful in all your studies. We are suggesting it for this assessment as it might help you to carefully select your article to review. You might have already decided that after the Survey / Skim phase across all 4 articles. So the rest of the phases of SQ3R will be focused on the article you decide you will critically review.

Finally, a word about the critical aspect – building your skills of ‘criticality’. Criticality is seen as a skill to be developed, but it is more than that. It’s not something like a tap that you turn on when reading or reviewing, then turn off after. It is a disposition; an attitude that is central to all education. An ability to question, see below the surface of what is going on, and going beyond just soaking up knowledge or information to be regurgitated later. It is also about setting what you are learning about something (e.g. from your selected journal article ) in a wider setting of your discipline and beyond. Furthermore it is an evolutionary process; as you exercise criticality to distil what you are learning, then if you continue to apply criticality you carry on questioning and generate new questions. Problem solving and analytical skills all require criticality.

You might also want to check out the Academic Writing and Language site where you will find useful resource some useful resources on criticality.

https://unihub.mdx.ac.uk/study/writing-numeracy/awl-resources/criticality

Mel Evans

March 2022