prof eluid english dis 1
1369rh
chap1.docxPrevious section
1.1 What Is Research?
Before we get started, you should understand that the academic environment is not the only environment that values research. Research skillsare also highly valued in policy settings, as well as in the professions and trades. According to Dr. David Jonassen (2000), director of theUniversity of Missouri Center for the Study of Problem Solving, "Virtually everyone, in their everyday and professional lives, regularly solvesproblems. Few, if any, people, are rewarded in their professional lives for memorizing information and completing examinations" (p. 63).Research is primarily a problem-solving activity. When you conduct research, you must define and clarify problems, ask answerable questions,locate and evaluate resources, and use sources to make persuasive arguments and actionable recommendations. By learning to conductresearch, you will get more out of your education, enhance your career, and contribute to the success of the civic and business organizations towhich you belong.
You Already Do Research
Exactostock/SuperStock
As a researcher, your most basic task will be toidentify problems of interest and ask the rightquestions.
At the most basic level, research satisfies our need to answer questions, solve problems, makechoices, or figure out what things mean. Sometimes our questions are simple or of personalconsequence. In those cases, our answers depend simply on gathering information or weighingopinions and evaluating what we find in terms of our taste or preference. For example, whenwe browse the Internet to find restaurants for a special dinner next weekend, we are in factconducting simple informal research. When we read everything we can find about differenttypes of automobiles to help us make a decision about what type of car to purchase, we areseeking reliable expert testimony to help us make sense of the vast amount of informationavailable to us.
Critical Thinking in Everyday Research
Even though the research is simple in these cases, we are still using some critical thinking skills.In fact, we are using some of the same ones that inform academic research. Professionalresearchers always approach their sources of information skeptically. They know that theirconclusions depend on having high-quality, reliable information to think carefully about. So theyneed to ensure that they are not misled by irrelevant, inaccurate, or out-of-date information, orby the arguments of sloppy or unscrupulous thinkers. The same goes for everyday researchers.In order to avoid a bad meal or being dissatisfied with our new car, we need to evaluatewhether our sources are relevant, credible, and timely; understand their motivation and bias;and make judgments about how representative a particular review is in light of what otherreviewers write. In Chapter 4, Evaluating and Working with Sources, you will learn more aboutthese criteria. But for now, you can draw on your experience with everyday research tounderstand that a review of a Chinese restaurant is irrelevant or of no use if you want to eatThai food.
Criteria for Evaluating Sources
· Relevant
· Credible
· Timely
· Representative
· Appropriate motivation and controlled for bias
A review written by the cousin of the owner of the restaurant is not credible, or believable, because you cannot be sure that the reviewer iswriting to tell the truth. Perhaps he or she means to drive more customers to the restaurant with an excellent review, and therefore overlookssignificant problems in service or quality. He or she is motivated by his or her relationship with the owner, and therefore his or her evaluationis biased in favor of the restaurant. This review would not then be trustworthy. A review of the restaurant written 5 years ago may no longeraccurately reflect the dining experience; in order to get a more accurate picture, you will need a more recent, or timely, review. Finally, youmay have had the experience of reading one or two negative reviews of a place among a hundred positive reviews. Those negative reviews donot represent or stand for the general opinion of the place. To say that a review is not representative is not to say that it is untrue necessarily—merely that it is does not fall in line with the consensus. With a nonrepresentative source, it is good practice to ask why it dissents from theconsensus. A source may be nonrepresentative because its writer has idiosyncratic or personal preferences, uses a different method of arrivingat conclusions, looks at things from a different viewpoint, or perhaps has made some mistake. You will use these same criteria to evaluatesources in the research you will conduct.
The Differences Between Academic or Professional Research and Everyday Research
This text is meant to prepare you to use research to answer more complicated questions: the kind that you will encounter in academic andworkplace environments. In those settings, questions can be very complex, and expert testimony may not provide clear guidance. Answers maybe partial, not definitive, or dependent on multiple variables or on the values of the researcher. Moreover, the stakes can be considerablyhigher than choosing a restaurant or car.
Consider these questions:
· In the last 2 decades, honeybee populations have been decimated by Honeybee Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). Since Honeybees pollinateour food crops, the collapse of millions of colonies is a threat to the world food supply. What is causing this disorder? What can be doneto prevent CCD and restore the Honeybee population?
· The United States continues to experience high levels of unemployment despite an uptick in the economy. Why has job growth not keptpace with the increasing gross domestic product (a standard measure of the productivity of our national economy)? What factors influenceunemployment? What can the government do to help businesses create good, well-paying jobs?
· Your company wants to develop a new product or line of business. How will consumers respond to your product, service, or marketing?What variables will influence their purchasing decisions for the foreseeable future? How can you mitigate risk?
It is not just complexity that distinguishes these questions from the research questions we tend to ask and answer in our daily life. It is thatthey are emerging, not-yet-fully-understood problems. There are no simple, clear-cut, definitive answers out there waiting to be found.Reasonable people in full possession of available data might reasonably disagree as to what the data mean, or what the appropriate course ofaction should be.
Yet these are pressing matters. We simply cannot wait for all the information to become available, and for unclear matters to resolvethemselves before taking action. That is where research—our most effective means of solving complex problems—comes in. In such cases,researchers use a systematic approach that enables them to begin to ask and answer these emerging questions. As a result, the work ofresearch is not always to provide clear and definitive solutions to problems. Research can also clarify issues, bring forward new variables oralternative perspectives for consideration, reduce uncertainty, or reveal tacit values.
1.2 The Cumulative, Ongoing, and Critical Nature of Research
Because of the nature of the problems researchers need to solve, research tends to be cumulative and ongoing, which is to say thatresearchers consider the results of the past and expect that future research may extend, revise, or refute their own work. That is whyresearchers tend to start their work by reviewing what is already known or believed to be true. They read journal articles, conferenceproceedings, and other forms of scholarly publication to ground themselves in the ideas and perspectives of other researchers. As they readthese sources, they want to know:
· What questions other researchers have pursued,
· How other researchers have framed their questions,
· What data exist,
· What concepts and ideas previous researchers have used or created to make sense of their data,
· What related problems, issues, or phenomenon need to be taken into account,
· What false starts others have encountered, and
· What remains to be understood about the problem.
The work of review is more than a simple gathering of useful information, however. Researchers look critically at earlier work to evaluate itsstrengths and weaknesses, as well as its utility for their own work. As they read the works of other researchers, they
· Check for errors,
· Look for ideas to refute, borrow, or build on,
· Browse for suggestive data, cases, or examples,
· Seek out unexplored questions or unrecognized implications,
· Uncover problematic assumptions or bias, and
· Consider alternative explanations or perspectives.
As you start to review sources for use in your own research, you will need to approach them just as critically. To do so, it is important to havean idea of what makes sources trustworthy.
Trustworthy Research Is Selective
Every research study is selective, in the sense that researchers must focus their study on a limited number of questions. As a result, researcherstend to specialize and coordinate their work. For example, because the problem of Honeybee Colony Collapse Disorder is so complex, there areseveral overlapping communities of researchers trying to solve it. Some teams of researchers are trying to isolate an environmental cause ofCCD. Others are looking at causes in biological pathogens. Still others are trying to improve methods for gathering and analyzing relevant data.Yet even others are looking to the past to find analogous events that might help us see the problem in a more familiar light. Each of theseteams comprises experts with different skills and knowledge, bringing different methods of generating and interpreting data to the work ofsolving the problem of CCD. Without specialization and focused studies of constituent elements of the problem, key aspects of the problemwould go unstudied.
Trustworthy Research Tends to Be Peer Reviewed
Jason Hawkes/The Image Bank/Getty Images
Synthesis is the process of taking multiple strands of research andcreating a bigger, more useful picture of what the research communityknows about an issue.
With specialization, however, comes the prospect of conflicting results. Forexample, one study may show that eating beef has health benefits for humans,while another study shows that eating beef is detrimental to our health in someway. For consumers looking for guidance, this apparent contradiction can befrustrating because they presume that one study must be right and the otherwrong. Someone must have gotten the facts wrong. However, researchers knowthat each research study develops different research questions, studies differentpopulations of people or different types of beef, or conducts research in adifferent manner. So results may vary even when a study's facts and facthandling are correct. In the future, results and the conclusions drawn fromthem may vary as more data are gathered, alternative perspectives orexplanations are considered, and new ways of framing questions are developed.That is why researchers' work is subject to review by other experts in theirfield. Peer review certifies that the research has been carried out carefully andsystematically and that interpretations and conclusions are reasonably drawn.This constant, critical peer review process is one reason research is so reliable,and such a powerful tool for constructing knowledge.
Research Must Be Synthesized to Be Useful
Over time, as fields of study mature, researchers start the important work of synthesizing the current state of knowledge. In synthesis,researchers assemble the diverse work on different aspects of the problem and try to create a bigger, more useful picture of what the researchcommunity knows. But synthesis is more than simple summary. It is the critical interpretative act of making meaning out of information. Thismakes research useful. As we have seen in the CCD case, it often takes multiple strands of research to help us solve complex problems. Insynthesis, researchers attempt to weave these strands together into a more comprehensive explanation for the purpose of resolving conflicts orcontradictions, and exploring the implication of what has been learned. Much of the work you will do in research projects will be to synthesizethe current state of knowledge in your field and explore its implications for an argument you wish to mak
1.3 Research as Conversation
This text focuses on a research process that begins with a systematic review of the literature produced by other researchers. In a literaturereview, your role is primarily to synthesize, assess, and interpret the existing research in order to increase clarity, reduce uncertainty, locateareas for further research or discussion, and possibly to make actionable recommendations. Ordinarily we think of "literature" as referring tothe works of creative writers: poems, plays, stories, and novels. In research settings, "the literature" means the set of articles, books, reports,conference presentations, and other publications that contain the current state of knowledge. "Reviewing the literature" means finding andreading those publications to see what is known, what questions and issues are currently being discussed, and where you can make acontribution to the discussion.
Stephen Simpson/Stone/Getty Images
The goal of research is not to make a definitive finalstatement on a subject but to engage in discussionwith existing research in order to pose newquestions and further impel the dialogue.
Before we get started understanding the research process you will use in this text, it isimportant to make a subtle shift in the way you think about research. Most of us tend to thinkabout research primarily in terms of information and what we do with it: We gatherinformation, evaluate it, analyze it, summarize it. However, such a view of research tends tomake student researchers passive conduits of information produced by others. Furthermore, itencourages them to see the presentation of information itself as their chief work in writing. Inprofessional settings, researchers make progress by constantly exchanging and testing ideas andbuilding on one another's work. In order for their work to be useful to others, researchers mustdo more than just deliver information. One point of research is to contribute to the collectivework of problem solving. Researchers must demonstrate the relevance and utility of their ideasby showing how it relates to previous work, whether by adding nuance, altering conclusions, orprovoking reconsideration of issues once thought settled. Throughout this text, you will beexpected to take a more active role in research, one that approximates what researchers do.You will be asked to go beyond collecting and reporting facts, to formulate your ownresearched response to what researchers have written.
Research as an Evidence-Based Conversation Among People
In order to take a more active approach to research, it can be helpful to think of your purposein research as joining the conversation of an established community of thinkers. Here is howphilosopher, critic, and researcher Kenneth Burke (1973) describes what it is like to join theconversation of other thinkers:
Imagine that you enter a parlor. You come late. When you arrive, others have longpreceded you, and they are engaged in a heated discussion, a discussion too heated forthem to pause and tell you exactly what it is about. In fact, the discussion had already begun long before any of them got there,so that no one present is qualified to retrace for you all the steps that had gone before. You listen for a while, until you decidethat you have caught the tenor of the argument; then you put in your oar. Someone answers; you answer him; another comes toyour defense; another aligns himself against you, to either the embarrassment or gratification of your opponent, depending uponthe quality of your ally's assistance. However, the discussion is interminable. The hour grows late, you must depart. And you dodepart, with the discussion still vigorously in progress. (pp. 110–111)
Part of what is so compelling about this passage is the way that it captures the persistent exchange of ideas and positions that is characteristicof research. It also suggests that in order to join the conversation, it is your responsibility to figure out for yourself what others are saying, whythey are saying it, and what importance it has for you.
Research Articles Make Contributions to a Conversation
One implication of seeing research as a conversation that preexists you, and that will continue on after you, is that you must approach a pieceof researched writing with an eye toward understanding what work that piece of writing is doing in the conversation. Instead of an articlestanding on its own and simply reporting information, you must make an effort to see how an article fulfills a researcher's intent to make somespecific contribution to the conversation: to support another's view, to resolve an open question, to add a new dimension to the problem, tocorrect an error or misinterpretation, or to argue that the conversation itself is based on faulty assumptions.
Another implication of this conversational view of research is that it relieves you of the pressure and responsibility of having the final word, orto base your response on original findings of your own. Your goal is simply to use other researchers' data and ideas to make a usefulcontribution to the conversation, to "push it forward, to say something new, something that seems to call for further talk and writing," as DukeUniversity writing professor Joseph Harris puts it (2006, pp. 35–36). You bring your critical thinking skills, the interpretive act of synthesis, yourability to see implications, and your own considered perspective to the conversation of research.
This idea that the purpose of research and the writing based on research is to join in and contribute to a preexisting conversation will shapeyour research process. Instead of looking for pieces of information that support your view, you will be looking for communities of researchersactively engaged in conversation with one another. In Burke's language, you will conduct research to "listen" in on their conversation, and then"put your oar in" to respond to some researchers in order to contribute to some specific branch of the conversation.
1.4 If the Idea of Research Sounds Scary to You, Read on
Many people approach academic research apprehensively or fearfully, thinking that it is complex, difficult, and fraught with danger. If you areone of these people, remember that you do not bear the burden of producing a "Eureka!" discovery in your research. Your job is to noticesomething unusual or interesting about your topic and contribute to the conversation others are having using reason, evidence drawn fromother researchers' work, and your own careful judicious thinking.
Even though we might not be aware of them, many of us hold anxiety-producing beliefs about research. Many of those beliefs are not foundedon fact or experience. And what is worse, many of them work to our disadvantage when we actually try to do academic research. In thissection of the chapter, we will debunk some of the more common myths about research, and encourage you to see yourself as well preparedto start and complete your project.
Greatest Challenges of Research Papers
College student Auralia Thrasher explains how she writes a little bit every day in order to avoid thestress that can come with procrastination.
Critical Thinking Questions
1. What is your biggest worry about the research process, and how might you overcome this fear?
2. In what ways can you avoid procrastination on your own papers?
Myth 1: Research is too time consuming to be done in a first-year writing course.
It is true that some research projects take a long time to develop and complete. But we can design many worthwhile research projects to becompleted in a short time. The key to designing a short research project is to define the focus of your research narrowly enough to allow it tobe completed in the time allotted, while at the same time doing justice to the topic. Chapters 2 and 3 will help you go through a process ofproject definition that will enable you to locate a small area of interest to you, and learn enough about it to ask a small set of answerablequestions.
Myth 2: I have to have extensive knowledge of a subject to do research.
Actually all you need is the desire to know more about a subject. Using the exploratory research techniques provided in Chapter 2, you willquickly learn enough to know what questions need answers. After that, it only takes curiosity, persistence, and a few relatively simple searchand reading strategies to pursue the answer.
iStockphoto/Thinkstock
While research may seem daunting, as a student researcher, you haveplenty of knowledge and experience that will enable you to posequestions and enter the conversation surrounding many topics.
Myth 3: The experts who conduct research and writeresearch articles are beyond criticism, so what can anewcomer to the field possibly think or write abouttheir findings?
Because most of us think that research is done by experts with advanceddegrees and using sophisticated techniques, most of us are reluctant toconsider that published professional research might by unreliable, or evensimply wrong. Bßut since professional researchers are working to solve complexproblems—like Honeybee Colony Collapse Disorder—even experts makemistakes, draw conclusions that their evidence does not support, or producefindings that conflict with other studies. Researchers working at all levels—fromprofessional to student—expect their work to be subject to scrutiny. For manytopics, student researchers have more than enough knowledge, experience, andperspective to pose questions, extend thoughts, and otherwise respond to theworks of professional researchers.
Myth 4: Research always produces big insights andnew knowledge.
The vast majority of research being done is small scale. Most researchers aim to add small insights or nuances to existing knowledge. One formof really useful research—synthesis— looks at other researchers' findings and combines them in innovative ways to produce new insights. Otherforms of research aim to improve clarity, reduce uncertainty, or justify positions or beliefs. Still others seek to find other uses for ideas orprocesses, or to reevaluate an issue from a new perspective. For college purposes, research can be what writing specialist Ken Macrorie (1988)calls "I-search," a search for ideas, insights, and information that enables you to create knowledge and perspectives that are new to you.
Myth 5: Research is super-systematic and analytical; logical, linear thinkers are better at it thanintuitive or "messy" thinkers.
It is true that once researchers have a clear idea of the questions they are asking and the data they need, they tend to work systematically,analytically, and in a disciplined manner. However, in order to arrive at those questions, and in order to understand the implications of theirfindings, researchers must think creatively and be open to new perspectives. Researchers depend as much on associative thinking, serendipity,and other forms of messy-but-productive creative thinking as they do on rigorous systematic thinking.
Myth 6: Research has to be totally fact based and objective; there is no room in my project for myideas or values.
While researchers do tend to privilege reason over emotion, and try to ensure that their strictly personal beliefs do not unduly influence theirwork, most of the potential research topics you will encounter will be researchable from a wide range of perspectives. You will need to beopen minded in your research to prevent yourself from introducing bias, but your ideas and values will influence your choice of topic, the set ofquestions you pursue, your selection of evidence, and your response to the ideas and findings of other researchers.
If you can put these myths aside and embrace the truth about academic research, you can be more confident in your ability to start andcomplete a research project. Remember Joseph Harris's advice:
The goal of [academic] writing is not to have the final word on a subject, to bring the discussion to a close, but to push itforward, to say something new, something that seems to call for further talk and writing. . . . A dialogue is not a debate. Youdon't win a conversation, you add to it, push it ahead, keep it going, "put your oar in," and maybe even sometimes redirect ordivert the flow of talk. (2006, pp. 35–36)
When you think of conducting research to join a preexisting conversation, you realize that you are not alone. Other researchers have gonebefore you and have shared the paths they followed. They have dropped "breadcrumbs" along the way, in the form of sources and ideas foryou to follow. As you pick up these breadcrumbs and examine them, you will encounter many surprises and learn something fascinating aboutyourself and about your world.
At times, making your way through a thick forest of ideas without getting lost, or sidetracked, can be challenging. It can also be frustratingwhen you struggle to find the right direction or learn you are on a dead-end trail. However, you have your instructor and many other resources—including this text—to help you find your way and show you how to forge ahead again. Figure 1.1 represents the approach to research thatthis text takes, including the steps of the research process.
Figure 1.1: The process of writing a researched essay
Those writing a researched essay can consider themselves in dialogue with the current body of researchon the topic. Allow sufficient time in your writing process to move through each of these phases, fromplanning to drafting to refining your paper.
You will encounter pitfalls along the way. Nonetheless, as you work your way through the thick brush, you will eventually come to a clearing,where ideas begin to take form and conclusions begin to suggest themselves.
The treasure at the end of this journey is a new perspective or an answer to the question you asked when you started your quest, thesatisfaction of adding to your own knowledge and the knowledge of others about this subject, and the reward of developing a valuable set ofresearch skills that will serve you well in future areas of your personal and professional life. But the most important outcome of this process isthat you will have learned what it takes to add your voice to the research work of others in the community of scholars.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, you learned that academic or professional research is simply a more systematic and rigorous version of the research processyou use to answer questions in everyday life. Because academic research is a cumulative, ongoing conversation among skeptical participants, itcan answer complex questions. Because it is selective and peer reviewed, it tends to be highly reliable.
You have also learned that some of the beliefs about research that some students hold can hinder their ability to complete their researchprojects well. It is important to believe that you can complete your project in the time allotted with the resources available to you. Remember,most research deals with the particulars of a small set of questions. You should also believe that newcomers to a field (or even to researchitself) can contribute valuable insights. While the ability to think analytically and systematically can be useful to researchers, so too is the abilityto think creatively and intuitively. Finally, every researcher's work is informed by his or her values. While it is important to seek the truth inresearch, many questions (especially in the humanities and social sciences) demand that researchers make value judgments. The key tointegrating your values into your research is to be sure to remain open to new data, ideas, and perspectives.
Key Terms
Click on each key term to see the definition.
Assumptions, attitudes or dispositions that cause a researcher to be closed to new evidence, ideas, or perspectives.
Sources written by certified experts in their field of expertise; they offer reasons and evidence to support claims, consider all available andrelevant information, and fairly and accurately represent the views of other writers.
A critical summary and evaluation of sources relevant to the questions a researcher is seeking to answer.
The needs or purposes that inspire a researcher to conduct research and write about it.
The process by which new research is certified as reliable, rigorous, and worthy of consideration. During peer review, experts anonymouslyevaluate pieces of research for errors of fact, logic, judgment, or omission. They also evaluate the significance and value of the research.
Sources that provide resources to answer your research questions and share concepts, vocabulary, cases, and methods with other researchersin the field.
Sources that illustrate a view or position in a field of study, or a significant earlier view that is still relevant.
Research that is selective in the sense that it seeks to answer a limited set of questions on the basis of available evidence.
The evaluative and interpretive process of combining diverse strands of research conducted by different researchers into a coherent argument.
Sources that take into account a field's most recent information, ideas, and theories.
Web Sites for Further Reference
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bByHhUa5_A Jamie McKenzie discusses how to approach research when, like most researchers, you begin your project "not knowing what you don't know."The key is to take a cyclical approach to research in which you "muck about" with ideas for a while, then sort and sift through them to developessential questions of your own.
http://fno.org/dec99/rcycle.html An article by McKenzie detailing the research cycle.
