Saturday, September 26, 2009

...How Do we knOw if A rEsEarch wOrk is gOod...

The first question stated of how do I know if the research work is good or not. This question is intended foe me as well. Since we are doing research now. For me, research is somehow like searching or studying a specific idea based from the past or creating your own idea as well. A good research is not based on the perspective of the researcher alone, it should be validated and studied for a period of time. Because of this, based on my understanding alone, a good research work is not only based on the researchers own idea of creating the research. It should be validated and the work should answer the question of why do such research. Meaning, a good research work answers the question of the researcher or in other words it provides a conclusion.

From the second question, how are they being evaluated, here is my answer. I will now base my answer on the answers provided by Ann. Since we gather the same section. First is the reusability. Reusability in the sense that the research work alone is not intended to end there. Research alone is rising every year. Meaning the research is usable for a long period of time and not intended to end. Everyday, we are doing research works. In creating a research, the work must be understandable to the next one using it. That’s one of the criteria in evaluating research work. Next is originality. Research, mostly, is based on past ideas. In creating research, the research that is done within your time should perhaps have the same idea from past. But not really having the same concepts cause it can be said to be plagarism. “The core idea should be original. A pioneering paper may face more challenges during reviewing (which is inherently conservative) than an incremental paper, but the most cited papers are pioneering papers. I will cite your paper if I use an idea of your paper is one of the oldest references I can find for that idea.” On real basis, the mean point of the second criteria is dealing on own’s idea. Researcher have their own idea, each researcher have their own idea. Next is effectiveness. “There should be some experiment evidence that the core idea works better than th past ideas or better than reasonable baselines. Reviewers care deeply about this, I will want to use your idea if you can show me that it works on tasks that I care about.” Research is not on papers alone, it should become helpful in such a way that it would provide some solutions to the first question on the first part of doing the research. Next is the timeliness. The urgency of the topic why is it being done now, not yesterday, and not tomorrow. While no number of sources can be called automatically "enough," the assignment requires that you find sources of sufficient quality to support what you say you know about your topic. Scholarly sources are preferable, but in some disciplines the popular-scholarly source can be used for support if corroborated by scholarly sources. See me for advice about this. In the end, though, one of the most complex and subtle measures of your readiness for upper-division college writing will be your ability to match source quantity and quality to the strength of claims made by your thesis and the demands your readers are likely to make.Articles are the sources of the most recent and most tightly focused analysis on your topic. Students who rely on books because OLLI is easier to use, or because books appear to have "more on the topic," are still thinking at a pre-college level. They do not understand how quickly book-length manuscripts become outdated, and how books' much larger theses can make it difficult for students to extract useful support from them without misunderstanding what they are borrowing. Take seriously the task of reading scholarship in your field. The popular works available will not give you the authority to say things that will persuade your professors. You can use popular-scholarly journals and scholarly reference works to give you a "ladder of expertise" so that you can read professional scholars' work, but you eventually will have to join the dialogue they are conducting several times each year in their field's scholarly journals. You can learn a lot from "negative success" at reading scholarly work, too. If you are trying your hardest, using all the aids available (including asking teachers in the subject for help), and you still cannot read the scholarship near the end of your first year of study, you probably should rethink your intended major.

No comments: