Task 4a: Developing Thoughts

Today I looked back into my reflective journal and I found this comment in one of my entries from this week: ‘Recently, I have been feeling very overwhelmed by module 2. I feel like I dived into my questions too quickly and now I don’t really know where I am heading with any of them. I feel like I have jumped to too many conclusions and now I don’t know how to get out of this. It feels frustrating…’ I have really been finding it difficult to make any sense of any of my inquiry questions that I posted last week. After this comment in my reflective journal and my tutorial with Paula, I decided to use Reader 4 to try and decipher which of my previous ideas are useful, and which I need to readdress. I have built on previous research with the Reader 4 questions to try and make my ideas more cohesive.

What were some of the points in the reading that you will use to develop your topic?

I found that the book Ground Rules for Social Research – Guidelines for Good Practice by Denscombe (2010) was particularly useful for me, as it enabled me to consider whether my initial questions would be suitable for an inquiry based on three key research aspects: Purpose, Relevance and Feasibility (Denscombe, 2010).

Denscombe (2010) outlines the importance of having ‘an explicit and precise description of purpose and answers’ before undertaking any research (p. 7). This helps a practitioner to understand research before undertaking it, evaluate the research one it is completed and finally it provides a sound starting point to the research itself (Denscombe, 2010). I feel I am lacking this clear vision of which path my inquiry is going to take, which could result in ‘a recipe for sloppy research’ (Denscombe, 2010, p. 8).

Denscombe, M. (2010) Ground Rules for Social Research - Guidelines for Good Practice 2nd Edition. New York: Open University Press. p. 7

To address this issue of lack in clarity within my inquiry research so far, I found his theory of ‘Different types of Research’ particularly useful, as it allowed me to consider which ‘category’ my initial questions fall in to. I found the following three categories most useful:

• ‘Explaining the causes and consequences of something (why do things happen?)’
• ‘Describing something (what is it like?)’
• ‘Developing good practice (how can it be improved)’
• (Denscombe, 2010, p. 11-12)

Firstly, ‘Explaining the causes and consequences of something’ is concerned with applied research, which recognizes the relationships between things and tries to understand them, ‘understand why things happen as they do’ (Denscombe, 2010, p. 11). Next, ‘Describing something’ involves collecting facts from situations or events in order to ‘discover information that didn’t exist before’ (Denscombe, 2010, p. 11). Its primary aim is to find out how things are and how they work rather than how they will be in the future. Finally, ‘Developing good practice’ addresses the research involved with problem solving, resulting in recommendation of good practice to ‘enhance performance of the organization’ (Denscombe, 20120, p. 12).

I can recognise which of my initial questions fit into each of these ‘purposes’ of research. Categorising my initial questions has enabled me to think more clearly which questions are viable questions for inquiry, as some of my original question do not actually have a clear purpose, which could lead to confused and misleading research.

I also found Denscombe’s (2010) four main theories of the ‘Relevance’ of research has helped me to outline whether my question are indeed relevant for one purpose or another.

• ‘Existing knowledge’ – how the research contributes to existing theories.
• ‘Practical needs’ – the problems that need solving in an organisation can be addressed through research.
• ‘The timeliness of research’ – how current concerns can be addressed through research.
• ‘The researchers personal agenda’ – how the research fits the abilities and needs of the researcher.
• (Denscombe, 2010, p. 24)

I feel the final bullet point regarding ‘personal agenda’ in particularly key when undertaking the inquiry project on the BAPP (Arts) course. Many of the tasks in Reader 4 have surrounded the ideas of ‘What knowledge and skills do you think you will need for the future?’ Denscombe (2010) identifies that ‘in reality, social researchers, particularly those doing small-scale one-off projects, tend to choose topics that are of relevance to them and their personal agendas’ (p. 28), whilst acknowledging that this is not necessarily a negative, Denscombe posits that ‘a personal interest, however, should not blind researchers to thinks that challenge their expectations’ (p. 13) as it becomes difficult for them to be impartial.

This research contradicts everything I have researched and believed up until this point. Although I understand Denscombe’s argument, I believe for an inquiry to be completed successfully BAPP course, the key is in choosing an inquiry that will develop me and my orgnaisation professionally, and ultimately this will inevitably something that I am passionate about. However, this idea of ‘impartial research’ is something I will consider carefully.

Denscombe, M. (2010) Ground Rules for Social Research - Guidelines for Good Practice 2nd Edition. New York: Open University Press. p. 23

Finally, Denscombe (2010) identifies two significant areas within ‘Feasibility’, which I feel will help me to consider which inquiry is suitable: ‘time’ and ‘good will’. Time is incredibly important when undertaking research and as Denscombe ascertains is the notion that the amount of time available for research ‘puts boundaries on the scale and scope of the research that is possible’ (p. 43). This is something I will have to consider, how much time will this line of inquiry actually take and can I complete it successfully whilst still performing my job properly?

Furthermore, the idea that much of social research involves the good will of others (for example colleagues) to cooperate and give up their own time and resources for researchers are ‘hidden resources that researchers must use to improve their prospects of collecting valid information’ (Denscombe, 2010, p. 49). I will need to consider which of my questions are suitable for inquiry as some many rely too heavily on other staff for research. However, I need to discuss these questions with these members of staff, because my perception of what I consider ‘too much’ and their perception of ‘too much’ can be very different.

Denscombe, M. (2010) Ground Rules for Social Research - Guidelines for Good Practice 2nd Edition. New York: Open University Press. p. 40

Below I have created a ‘table format’ in which I have evaluated my questions using this research above, in turn helping me to decide which question are suitable. I am now going to take this document with me when discussing my possible lines of inquiry with my employer and colleagues.

If any BAPP students/colleagues have any comments on my developing questions, the advice would be very much appreciated as I am finding this task very difficult.

4. What is your inquiry question(s)? What do you want to find out about a particular topic?

Reference List:

Denscombe, M. (2010) Ground Rules for Social Research - Guidelines for Good Practice 2nd Edition. New York: Open University Press.