This document summarizes research evaluating a first year module called "Researching Society". The research was conducted by students to better understand student learners and promote achievement. Methods included surveys, interviews, and focus groups. Key findings included that most students found seminars useful, though interest declined in the second semester. There were also inconsistencies between quantitative and qualitative results regarding content coverage and teaching approaches. The research provided suggestions for improving student interest and subjects based on student feedback.
2. Introduction to module
• The research investigated and evaluated a first
year module – Researching Society.
• Range of degree routes researched.
• Module was under revalidation, therefore
under new format (from RMSS to Researching
society)
3. Rationale
Aim:
• To explore messages from student led research
into module challenges and attitudes.
• To understand student learners better so that
achievement could be promoted more effectively.
4. Objectives
• Discovering students’ views about learning and
in a particular Research module
• Promoting students’ sense of agency through
their role in the project as researchers and
planners
5. Literature review
We will start our literature review by looking at the concept of
action research
• Habermas’ (1970) work provides a very good theoretical background
to the methodologies advocated by action researchers. The research
results and outcomes all relate to the researcher and can be applied
directly, therefore it is closing the gap between theory and practice.
This is why this action research approach has been used in the
current study, as research has been carried out by students who have
had experience of the research module in the past (Sarah and I), and
were co-ordinated by the member of staff leading the module (Ruth)
This gives as an unique positioning of students researching students
6. Literature review
• We now move on from action research to student centred-techniques of
teaching and their benefits
• Barrakett’s (2005) work is a reflective case study analysis of ways to enhance
student learning through student-centred teaching methods at masters-level
for a social research methods course (some of these techniques would be
case study techniques, problem based learning, group work or role-play).
• This study found that while student-centred techniques were a useful
tool, students also valued more didactic/formal teaching approaches. The
study therefore concludes that a combination of these methods should be
used in order to enhance student learning.
The current study will explore how these findings can be used if they were
adapted for use with a Level 4 student cohort in a Research Methods group
(we would also refer to student centred techniques versus formal teaching
used in this module later on in the findings section). This research also
explores the success of this approach.
7. Literature review
• The next thing we will look at is the work of Alaniska et al taking
the form of a workshop for different Quality Assurance agencies
discussing levels of student engagement across countries
• Hanna Alaniska et al (2006) looked at student involvement in
quality assurance, including benefits and support of this process.
The report also investigates the level of student involvement in
Finland, Catalunya and the UK and compares the three systems.
• Relating this back to our research, incorporating students views
and experiences is a key aspect of this module’s future
development and a one of the key aims of this Student as
Researchers pilot scheme. We would therefore look at how our
involvement in this research would benefit both ourselves and
the quality of learning, therefore directly participating in quality
assurance.
8. Methods
• Unique position of students researching
students.
• Quantitative – Survey Monkey online
questionnaire created
• The data collected was then entered into SPSS
and analysed.
9. Methods
Qualitative
• 1 scoping interview
• 2 seminar module evolutions (11 students
History/Politics + 6 students Criminology/
Sociology)
• Open ended questions from survey
The data collected was then imported into
NVivo and analysed.
10. Methods
Something that consistently came up in our literature review
are the different challenges regarding student involvement.
Therefore, some of the issues that we faced as researchers
while doing this research were:
• difficulties in recruiting participants (due to clash with
OUR/THEIR assessment times)
• Lack of student engagement with the project (due to survey
fatigue OR not understanding the purpose of the research, its
objective or its value for them)
• time delays in survey completion and participant involvement
(lack of interest in module evaluations)
• time delays in recruiting participants for focus groups and
semi-structured interviews (due to late start of the Student as
researchers pilot scheme just a couple of months ago)
11. Sampling
• Purposive sampling technique (selecting a
group of students within the module and then
surveying them )
• 467 students were invited to take part in the
survey
• Response rate 19% (87 students)
Ethics
• An ethical clearance form was filled in by the
student researchers before any work was
carried out and a consent form was filled in by
all participants in the research project.
12. Findings
• The majority of students found the
seminars to be useful (67%), even if
this interest decreased in the
second semester (58%) with the
introduction of a hands-on
approach to seminar teaching
13. The seminars in the second semester
were useful
12%
Agree
Disagree
30% Don't know
58%
14. Findings
• 59% of our quantitative respondents found that the
Research module is relevant to the rest of their course.
However, Politics and Criminology students did not
find it relevant in the qualitative part of the study.
Research methods is relevant to my course
17%
Agree
Disagree
24% Don't know
59%
15. • The qualitative results showed that this applied
approached in the 2nd semester appealed to
students, BUT the quantitative results reflected an
even split between respondents’ preferences (39%
prefer hands-on approach/ 40% do not prefer hands-
on approach )
I found the hands on approach using Lego useful
21%
39%
Agree
Disagree
Don't know
40%
16. Findings
• The majority of respondents in the
quantitative study felt happy about the
amount of content covered in semester 1
(62%) and in semester 2 (70%), but the
qualitative side disagreed with the findings as
students responded that the content was too
high or not interesting enough.
17. Research conclusion
• The research produced suggestions about how to
best raise interest and improve research subjects by
the use of improvement strategies collected directly
from students:
• Involving students in research and drawing on our
sense of agency encouraged our motivation and
involvement in the whole educational experience as
well as providing us with research skills
18. Discussion
1. Our own experience as Student as researchers
allowed us to develop awareness on real-life
research issues
• 1.Time management
• 2.Meeting deadlines
• 3.Organising interviews and focus groups
• 4.Writing reports
2. This experience also gave us the opportunity
to use skills learnt within our degree and put it
into practice.
19. However, there are some points to
consider
• This research showed an inconsistency between
quantitative and qualitative results. This could
be seen as an opportunity for further
investigation into the relationship between a
chosen method and the studied
phenomenon, ‘thus allowing researchers and
the readers of their reports, alike, to improve
their understanding of that phenomenon’
(Rocco et al, 2003)
20. Points to consider
• On the other hand, These inconsistencies could also
be seen from a qualitative perspective. Qualitative
study is not about trying to reflect quantitative
results, but explaining in more depth why people
might have responded as they did.
• It was a shortcoming that the qualitative results did
not illuminate why some people didn’t like the second
semester seminars, but the project has more
information on why some people did.
21. We would be interested to find out
What do YOU think about
inconsistencies between
research methods
(Quantitative/Qualitative)?
22. References
• Alaniska, H., Arboix
Codina, R., Bohrer, J., Dearlove,R., Eriksson, S., Helle, E., Wiberg, L.K.
2006, Student involvement in the processes of quality assurance
agencies, Available online at:
http://www.enqa.eu/files/Student%20involvement.pdf
• Barraket, J., Teaching Research Method Using a Student-Centred
Approach? Critical Reflections on Practice, Journal of University
Teaching & Learning Practice, 2(2), 2005. Available
at:http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol2/iss2/3
• Habermas, J., 1970. Toward a rational society: student
protest, science, and politics; translated by Jeremy J. Shapiro.
Heinemann Educational
• Rocco et al, 2003. Taking the Next Step: Mixed Methods Research in
Organizational Systems, Information Technology, Learning, and
Performance Journal, Vol. 21, No. 1, Spring 2003
