Have you prepared these important questions from Unit 22 for IGNOU PGDCFT MSCCFT MCFT005 Exam? Don't miss this chance to score good marks - start now!

Unit 22 Evaluating Research Reports

1. List the major attributes of well-written objectives in a research report.

• Clarity of expression and direction.
• Measurability.
• Comprehensiveness.
• Judiciousness.

2. List the points which an evaluator should keep in mind while evaluating the variables used in a research exercise.

• Formulation of variables.
• Classification of variables.
• Whether the variables are operationally defined.
• Measurability of variables.

3. List the points of evaluating the chapter on data collection and analysis.

• Administration of research instruments.
• Authenticity of the data.
• Kinds of tests used.

4. State the points on which the annexures of a research report are evaluated.

• Whether the annexures are in proper serial order.
• Comprehensiveness of annexures.

5. What do you mean by evaluation of a research report?

Evaluation of a research report refers to the systematic assessment of its quality, validity, and significance. It involves a critical examination of various aspects of the research, including:

• The clarity and relevance of the research problem and objectives.
• The appropriateness and rigor of the research design and methodology.
• The validity and reliability of the data collection instruments and procedures.
• The accuracy and appropriateness of the data analysis techniques.
• The significance and interpretation of the findings.
• The logical flow and organisation of the report.
• The clarity, conciseness and accuracy of writing, referencing and presentation.
• The evaluation process is crucial for determining the merit and contribution of the research to the existing body of knowledge and its practical implications. It also helps to identify strengths and weaknesses in the research process, as well as areas for future improvement.
• Ultimately, a scientific evaluation is important, because it assesses the implications properly and ensures the hard work of the researcher is acknowledged.

6. How do you evaluate the report a research based on knowledge generation?

To evaluate a research report focused on knowledge generation, several key aspects need to be considered, as detailed in the sources. This type of research is regarded as the highest form of research. The evaluation process involves a detailed look at both the methodology and the contribution to the existing body of knowledge.

Here's how to evaluate such a report:

• Methodological Rigour: The evaluation should begin with a thorough assessment of the research methodology. This is crucial because the dependability of the results, which form the basis of new knowledge, hinges on the appropriateness of the methods used. This includes examining:

  • The research design: Is the chosen design suitable for addressing the research questions and objectives?
  • Sampling techniques: Are the sampling methods appropriate for the study's scope and objectives?
  • Data collection procedures: Are the data collection methods appropriate and reliable?
  • Data analysis techniques: Are the chosen statistical or qualitative techniques suitable for analysing the data?
  • Validity and Reliability: Were the validity and reliability of the research methods and instruments checked and ensured?

• Researcher's Understanding of Existing Knowledge: The researcher’s grasp of the existing knowledge in their field of research is a critical component of the evaluation. This is often found in the introductory chapter and literature review.

  • Coverage of theoretical literature: The review should show a thorough understanding of the conceptual paradigms relevant to the research.
  • Assessment of research literature: The researcher should assess previous research against their own conceptual paradigm, or an established one.
  • Identification of gaps, overlaps, and contradictions: The review should highlight any gaps, overlaps, or contradictions in the existing research.

• New Contribution to Knowledge: A primary focus of the evaluation should be whether the research has introduced any new findings to the field. This includes:

  • Originality of findings: Does the research present new data, interpretations, or insights?
  • Support for findings: Are the new findings supported by rigorous testing, validity checks, and reliability measures?
  • Feasibility of solutions: If the research proposes solutions, how feasible and realistic are these solutions?

• Generalisability of Findings: The ability of the research to be applied to broader contexts is a key element in knowledge generation. This involves assessing:

  • The extent to which the findings can be generalised. Does the research clearly articulate the limitations on generalisability of its findings?
  • Mechanisms for corroboration: Does the researcher corroborate their findings using other studies, and justify claims of new contributions to the knowledge system?

• Relationship to the Existing Knowledge Structure: The report needs to clearly state how the new findings relate to the current knowledge base. Specifically:

  • Does the research reinforce an established theory or knowledge system?
  • Does it fill a gap in the existing knowledge system?
  • Does it contradict old theories, opening new avenues for research?

In summary, evaluating a knowledge-generating research report requires a comprehensive approach. It is crucial to assess not only the methodological rigor but also the extent to which the research contributes new, valid, and generalizable knowledge to the field. This is why research intended to generate new knowledge is considered to be the "highest form of research".