How to do Research: What are the Problems

How to do Research: What are the Problems

There are perhaps unrecognised problems on how to do research by majority of students of the Department of Political Science. This can be seen in the various efforts of the supervisors of both sub-degree, graduate and post-graduate students.

The few serious students are not left out in discussing their weak capability in social science research. The students observations in one debate I witnessed among them centred on two positions.
1. One is that they are generally deficient on the skills i.e. methods and techniques of social science research.
2. Second, the students argued that they lack thinking abilities, perhaps because their training and orientation in the faculty of social and management sciences is not directed to ground them in ‘Thinking’.

These have raised many questions which deserves continuous debate among the students as well as among other members of the faculty. Obviously, issues which need to be recasted would include methodological techniques; theory and method in social research; post-modern reflections in research; etc.

I have no doubt that the discussion may cause shift of our priorities from Traditional Research Method to Post-modernist forms of social enquiry. Needless to stress, but just for reflection is that the traditional social science research method continues to dominate since the faculty is established. This method employs only quantitative approach in designing research, collection of data, and in manipulation and analysis of data. This method has many limitations which need not be spelt-out. But one can be stated because of its significance here. That is that, students of all levels concoct false data and claim it is reliable. On a questionnaire form of data this is easy. It is just to get into a room to fill thousands or hundreds copies of questionnaire by self. Where there is sincerity to collect the data by questionnaire form the scientific criteria are hardly adhered to.

Whereas in social science research these are not reasons for alarm as there are always ‘methodological medicine’ to solve a methodological problem. For example, a multiplicity of methods could be used to verify and enrich data as well as the results of the investigation. But especially, at undergraduate level is not common to do that by students.

There are numerous other methodological difficulties always seen in all categories of the students in Department of Political science.
1. Virtually all categories of students do not know how to make Literature Review. Or they don’t even know what it is. It is worth saying here that doing research is a lot like learning about anything else. As you need to learn the terminologies writers on your area of research use, the big controversies over ideas, and the different factions that define the major theorists. By Literature Review all these could be understood.
2. Subsequently, it becomes very difficult to form theoretical framework. Sometimes it appears that the texts or ideas in the literature review departs from the ideas in the theoretical framework. One dimension of this problem is because students do not want construct their theoretical framework, but to get a ready made theory to apply. Whereas this is allowed, but not in every case.
3. In many cases both undergraduate and post-graduate students got into research without enough reading on the subject of the research. Therefore they got stuck along the way as they are ill-prepared.
4. In gathering of data: in survey research students are hardly guided by scientific criteria in framing and administration of questionnaire. While in non-survey method, students of all categories cannot distinguish between secondary analysis; documentary research and content analysis. For, almost all of them, reading of documents and any other text materials is called content analysis. No! content analysis is different.
5. In analysis of data most students do not know other methods of quantitative analysis (e.g. pie chart; bar diagram; various types of scales) except the tabular method.
6. The relationship between “fact” and “theory” which in social research is very important in determining the objectivity of analysis is always very weak. However, a researcher should be aware that theory and data although are distinguishable but the difference between them is not absolute.
7. Writing research report is a science and a method of its own. There is politics in writing research report. Writing research report has its own logic, linguistic form, etc. but these are hardly issues in presenting research reports to adhere to in the faculty of social sciences.
8. Other problems are also seen in formulating research question, forming statement of research problem and research hypotheses. In many cases these problems arise because students always wanted to see how others before them did their own. So, they wanted to copy what is not necessary the same with what they wanted to do

It is clear that the social sciences including political science are undergoing important changes. Globalisation has changed everything including the development in the knowledge industry. We are witnessing another scientific revolution in the structure of knowledge. In this period of changes traditional perspectives, methodologies, styles, and assumptions are being questioned – a web survey; a computerised literature searches; application of SPSS (statistical social science computer package programme); etc. are making social investigation easier.

However, such tools must be integrated with skills which bring history, philosophy and science together, to document in knowledge form the problems and consequences of social action. Then ultimately this could give out a knowledge which is not going to be dumped and rot in a dark room or hidden to plagiarise, but become public issues as much to serve for further development of knowledge.

Then there are issues personally troublesome to researchers which all students should note

1. Without entering fully into how social science research is carried out, it is important to start by saying that research is a social criticism. Therefore, whether students have or have not undergone a creative thinking training, they have to become thinking students and practice thinking in order to become good researchers. A good research is identified not by the number of statistics or the style of the report, but by what contribution made to knowledge.
2. That must be followed by full preparedness. The initial problem of student researchers in the Department is that they are not set and prepared by the time they got into it. They often choose or copy a topic somewhere and before they read widely enough they start writing. It is always better you choose an area and read substantial number of texts before you set for topic formulation as well as formulating research question. Without the preparatory reading, even if one has a topic would have difficulty in formulating a research question.
3. Again, many students have a very wrong perception about what research is. Indeed if you read enough on the research area, you will somehow be able to produce sensible ideas for further research. But it is not automatic, as to form a statement of research problem and hypotheses. One has to get the training and learn how professional researchers typically generate problem statement and hypotheses.
4. Developing ideas for research also involve theory formation. A theoretical framework in research completes conceptualisation of research because it contains the body of ideas which helps researchers to see through the data collected and its analysis. In reality the adequacy of the relation between theory and data is the most important criterion in establishing the objectivity of analysis of the data and generally of the status of the knowledge. In theory formation all categories of the students are weak. They always start with application of already existing theory i.e. elite theory; underdevelopment theory; etc in whatever study they are doing. But a researcher can construct his or her theory independent of the existing theories. I think this must be taken seriously in training of students. If we are to make a study of a sample of these projects, one problem we would definitely come across is of a weak relationship between theory and data.
5. What about writing a research report. This is an area to the best of my knowledge has not been part of the curriculum, perhaps that is why different forms of this is not displayed to the students to choose. In social science research, writing a report is regarded as a method, so it should be taken seriously in training of students.
6. A combined operations, using several methods for one study can be used in all kinds of study. It has always been the case among professional researchers that one study may include examination of documents, of statistical records and the interview of key informants. A questionnaire research may also be combined with some of the above, except in a matter of only counting simple facts about certain social categories. Another exception may be when secondary analysis is the main method of the research. At undergraduate level in particular, students are hardly introduced to multiple method in research.
7. Students hardly distinguish between secondary analysis and documentary research and or content analysis. For details about secondary analysis research see my other paper titled “How to write small research project”. Secondary analysis research is to reformulate and reassess existing texts on a subject with further research questions to develop another knowledge. Furthermore, one of the most important and least utilised purposes of secondary analysis is to replicate prior research findings, because in any original data analysis there is bound to make many mistakes. In addition, a data may be interpreted from different perspectives. The above are the objectives of secondary analysis method. There is a big gap in the training of the students on methodology as this is submerged in other research methods.
8. Acknowledgement of texts and other resources used as well as referencing are not methods in research but are essential components which tell about originality of knowledge composed. I doubt if this has occupied any place in the training of the students. They are left to wonder and see for themselves in the texts they read how is done. But unfortunately majority of students today are not reading students. At most they are not learners. Almost each one of them – from sub-degree to post-graduate have this problem of what to acknowledge and how to do it. In short, they do not know what it is. Many problems are seen here:
a. That only a quotation from another author is acknowledged.
b. That only the language of another writer is a subject for acknowledgement.
c. Therefore, a student can paraphrase the work of another person and claim it is his own.
d. Another disturbing example is how students credit a point of opinion given in a classroom lecture to the lecturer. Some of these are true and exceptional views of the lecturer. But some are not. For example, you would see a student defining democracy as “a government of the people, by the people and for the people” and would credit it to his/her lecturer on the “references page”.
e. Similarly, the numerous texts which appear as readings for students, (although we have to do with them in underdeveloped university system and where students do not know how to search for what to read) do not help matters in development of standard knowledge through research by students. For example, in this kind of texts one would be talking about political parties or about democracy as if he is the founder of the views and students cite him. Inspite of the availability of the texts by the original writers on the matter.

As for referencing, my paper on “How to write long semester group essay in large classes” would give you guidance.

M.M. Yusif
February, 2008