Details of task:
I chair a philanthropic trust. Every year we disburse $300,000 for worthwhile research. We
don’t care what the field or topic is, if it sounds interesting and worthwhile we will consider any idea for funding. We have a two-stage process. In stage 1 we consider 1800 word proposals that are just about the research idea and how you plan to carry out the research. We then make a short-list of those we like, and invite them to submit a stage 2proposal, which includes a budget and information about the research team. We are taking stage 1 proposals right now (i.e. your assignment). Detailed information can be found on the Moodle site about what to include, but in a nutshell we would expect to a well-considered hypothesis, options for a research method, ethics considerations, and so on.
NOTE: (You must use this book Title:Social research counts/Author:Earl R. Babbie, Social sciences / Research ; Social sciences — Methodology -Publisher: Belmont, CA : Wadsworth Cengage Learning – Date: 2013). (use must USE ALL THESE CONCEPT like (Operationalised Hypothesis, method, which I’m mostly using qualitative methods using descriptive method…ect)- please check the feedback I received for my last assignment-)
I will attach my previous research topic about Adult Migrant Education Program. I would like you to link it to this assignment and compare it with other program like CALD or others.
Please use plain English
Please use simple sentence
Please use the references I suggested and to not use any web resources unless it’s for the government.
Useful link recommended by university:
NOTE: You have not been penalized for lateness, however please ensure you follow the instructions of the assessment task and submit by the nominated method.
Hypothesis: There is no hypothesis within the submission. The section titled hypothesis actually contains an aim. There is some comment about an expected outcome, however it is ambiguous and not clear what this section is actually trying to say. Please review the section on hypothesis writing. An example from your submission might be, “It was predicted that, refugees enrolled in XYZ program to integrate refugees into the Australian community shall support increased employment prospects compared to those that do not participant in the program.”
Can you see that the statement makes a prediction about what might happen, and gives clues as to the research design?
Design: What is your research design? Within or between groups?
The target group: Yes, good, although how many participants shall you require for the research?
Materials: Surveys and interviews. Good, this mixed mode will ensure you capture some rich data.
Variables: These are unclear, as the research design is unclear. You really need to think through the research design. If you use my example of a hypothesis then you will that refugees undertaking the program, or not is the IV. The DV will be greater employment prospects. Again, you will need to think about the research design to refine your second assessment.
Please refer to the general feedback on the assessment. This shall give you additional support to completing A2.
Feedback on Assignment One ATS2831
The following are a list of the common issues with A1. This is to supplement the individual feedback on each assignment. Please use this general feedback and the individual feedback to propel you into A2.
1. Operationalised Hypothesis
In most cases the hypothesis/es were not operationalised, that is, all the measures needed to be specified.
An example, say you have designed a questionnaire to examine attitudes toward AFL football telecasts, the scores on this questionnaire are an example of a measure.
A second common issue was that the hypotheses were not posed as a statement, that if true solves the problem of the research question. Closely associated to this was the need to ensure you fully understand your research design in order to write the hypothesis.
An example, say you want to compare two groups, AFL footy fans and non-AFL footy fans. The hypothesis would need to contain this comparative aspect so that the reader/marker is able to understand what the research shall actually test.
Two common areas for improvement are the ‘Participants’ and the ‘Design’ sections. Whilst no marks were deducted for not having each section in APA format, evidence that you understood how to conduct the research you propose was assessed.
Participants: The common issue related to the number of participants and where you will secure the participants from. A common issue was that the participants selected were not representative of the population of interest.
An example: AFL footy fans and non-AFL footy fans are the comparison group, yet the participants are selected from a location in the heartland of NRL Rugby. You are not really testing/exploring what you propose to be testing/exploring and your study shall have low validity.
Design: The common issue here was that procedures, how you will conduct the research, were at odds with the hypothesis and possibly even the design section in the method, if you included one. The design section, more importantly understanding the research design, is critical for A2. If you are unsure about the research design check your thinking with someone.
The IV and DV in almost all cases was correct. Well done all. The submissions that also described the measurement of each variable scored higher marks. Those that had measurement in the variables in most cases had these in the hypothesis.
4. Qualitative and Quantitative
This subject is all about a research question and how you respond to that question by planning a research project. As such some enterprising students had both a numbers and descriptive/observational output to explore the research question. On most of the submissions marked I have asked the question what qualitative aspects might you explore. This may enhance A2, if you can work it into your assignment.
Overall, this has all the makings of a good A2. You will really need to understand the research design, so please read the text over again.