Graduate Business School Lecturer Name:Justin F. KeoganSubject:Research Methods Sem II 2020-2021Study Mode:Full timeXPart time Assignment No.:Paper 1Assignment TitleTopic, Literature and Critical AnalysisThe following provides the detailed description of the first Topic, Literature and Critical Analysis assignment.Assignment Format YOU MUST ENSURE EACH SECTION IS ADDRESSED IN YOUR SUBMISSIONSection1: Developed description of the researchable topic that is suitable for being addressed through the collection and analysis of data (rather than just literature)500Section 2: Clear and coherent outline of the aims and objectives of the research that are going to be addressed through the collection and analysis of data. You are required to specify what it is you want to find out and why. You will need to consider the question; what will we know once you have completed the research that we do not know now? You need to explicitly address the following items: Provide a comprehensive background to the research objectives, identifying the relevant issues underlying the research you intend to undertake;A developed justification for the doing the research that needs to be embedded in the literature and not just based on personal motivation;Place the research focus in the relevant business discipline(s) and academic area(s) that relate to the research to indicate where you will access relevant theories and frameworks that you can use to operationalize the research.500-1,000Section 3: Provide a critical, rather than just descriptive, review of the peer reviewed literature pertinent to the focus of the research objectives. It is important that this is more a critical review than a summary of relevant literature. The literature review should address the following: A review of the relevant contextual literature for your topic (covering the development of ideas central to your research focus, recent developments, etc.)Identification, description and review of the relevant conceptual literature (theory / models / frameworks related to the research objectives;Relevant empirical literature (data based) completed on the research focus;Identification and review of the debates within the literature;A commentary on the nature of the literature; theory, research, policy, prescriptive;An indication of the implications of the literature you have reviewed for your research objectives.1,500-2,000Section 4: Critical Analysis of ONE peer reviewed, scholarly text to be completed for a single text significant to the proposal (the piece of literature which has been most insightful to date). If the text is not a peer reviewed text, no marks will be awarded. You MUST use the template provided in this assignment for this part of the exercise. ENSURE TO PROVIDE FULL REFERENCE DETAILS OF THE ARTICLE otherwise marks will not be awarded.400-500Section 5: A sample bibliography of at least 20 ADDITIONAL (to those you have already used) good quality sources (authoritative books (e.g. Oxford Handbook series) and peer reviewed journals) that represent key literature to the topic being researched. This should be separate from the list of references used in the complication of the assignment. This sample bibliography should be completed in strict adherence to the Harvard Citation and Referencing System as indicated in the GBS guidelines using Zotero. The word count of each section may vary depending on your overall approach, but the total word count should be no more than 4,000Word count:Approximately 3,000-4,000 Submission details:A copy of the assignment to be submitted through the relevant MOODLE link by the 29th March. There is no hardcopy submission. Late submissions will receive the normal late penalties as applies in the Graduate Business School.Additional Information:Marks Awarded for under the following headings: Clarity of research objective / research question Quality of Literature review support for research Critical analysis of a single peer reviewed journal article Quality of additional sources 20 50 15 15Learning outcomes addressed and assessed in this assignment: Have a dissertation topic with developing workable research questions/hypotheses;Have identified some of the relevant literature and critically reviewed the most pertinent for their proposal. Assignment Checklist Detailed description of the researchable topic to be addressed through data analysisClear statement of aims and objectives of the research that are going to be addressed through the collection and analysis of data and justified within the literatureCritical literature review not just a description but a review contextual, conceptual, empirical literaturesCritical Analysis of ONE peer reviewed, scholarly text using the template provided along with full reference details at the top of the applied templateSample bibliography of 20 ADDITIONAL (to those you have already used) good quality sources (authoritative books (e.g. Oxford Handbook series and peer reviewed journals) that represent key literature to the topic being researchedFull list of all sources used in the assignment completed in accordance with the Griffith Style-Harvard Citation and Referencing Critical Analysis Template to be applied to a single peer reviewed, scholarly text significant to the proposal Full Reference of Peer Reviewed Text: 1. What review question am I asking of this text? (e.g. what is my research question? why select this text? does the Critical Analysis of this text fit into my investigation with a wider focus? what is my constructive purpose in undertaking a Critical Analysis of this text?) 2. What type of literature is this? (e.g. theoretical, research, practice, policy? are there links with other types of literature?) 3. What sort of intellectual project for study is being undertaken? a) How clear is it which project the authors are undertaking? (e.g. knowledge-for-understanding, knowledge-for-critical evaluation, knowledge-for-action, instrumentalism, reflexive action?) b) How does the sort of project being undertaken affect the research questions addressed? (e.g. investigating what happens? what is wrong? how well does a particular policy or intervention work in practice?) c) How does the sort of project being undertaken affect the place of theory? (e.g. is the investigation informed by theory? generating theory? atheoretical? developing social science theory or a practical theory?) d) How does the authors target audience affect the reporting of research? (e.g. do they assume academic knowledge of methods? criticize policy? offer recommendations for action?) 4. What is being claimed? a) What are the main kinds of knowledge claim that the authors are making? (e.g. theoretical knowledge, research knowledge, practice knowledge?) b) How clear are the authors claims and overall argument? (e.g. stated in an abstract, introduction or conclusion? unclear?) c) With what degree of certainty do the authors make their claims? (e.g. do they indicate tentativeness? qualify their claims by acknowledging limitations of their evidence? acknowledge others counter-evidence? acknowledge that the situation may have changed since data collection?) d) How generalized are the authors claims to what range of phenomena are they claimed to apply? (e.g. the specific context from which the claims were derived? other similar contexts? a national system? a culture? universal? implicit? unspecified?) 5. To what extent is there backing for claims? a) What, if any, range of sources is used to back the claims? (e.g. first hand experience? the authors own practice knowledge or research? literature about others practice knowledge or research? literature about reviews of practice knowledge or research? literature about others polemic?) b) If claims are at least partly based on the authors own research, how robust is the evidence? (e.g. is the range of sources adequate? are there methodological limitations or flaws in the methods employed? do they include cross-checking or triangulation of accounts? what is the sample size and is it large enough to support the claims being made? is the
re an adequately detailed account of data collection and analysis? is a summary given of all data reported?) 6. To what extent are claims consistent with my experience? 7. What is my summary evaluation of the text in relation to my review question or issue? a) How convincing are the authors claims, and why? b) How, if at all, could the authors have provided stronger backing for their claims? Grading Scheme for the Assignment Criteria DescriptorHave a dissertation topic with developing workable research questions / hypothesesHave identified some of the relevant literature and critically reviewed the most pertinent for their proposalHave applied the supplied template to one substantially important article used in their literature reviewA sample bibliography of at least 20 good quality additional sources, books and journals, that represent key literature to the topic being researchedWeighting to total 10020501515A (80-100)Great clarity in the selected topic and research objective. The research objective is extraordinarily clear and researchable. The justification for the topic choice, relevance and significance is extremely sound. The nature of the problem/issue is exceptionally well focused and explained.The piece is extensively referenced throughout and demonstrates evidence of extensive reading of top-quality sources. Literature review is very pertinent, very focussed, contemporary and consistent with the research topic. Research topic, questions, objectives are extremely well embedded in this literature review.Excellent critical analysis. Has an advanced understanding of the critical review process. Supports conclusions of each question with reason. Indicates that a well-developed critical literature will result.Exceptionally choice of relevant, top quality sources for the research. All from peer reviewed sources. Absolutely central to the focus of the research.B+ (70-79)Very clear in the selection of a researchable topic. The research objective is very clear and focused which will make implementing the research proposal easier. The justification for the topic choice, relevance and significance is very sound. The nature of the problem/issue is very well focused and explained.The piece is very well referenced throughout and demonstrates evidence of widespread reading of good quality sources. Literature review is pertinent, well focussed, contemporary and consistent with the research topic. Research topic, questions, objectives are very well embedded in this literature review.Very good critical analysis. Has demonstrated a fairly high level of understanding of the critical review process. Supports answers well and should write a well-developed literature.Very good choice of relevant, worthy sources for the research. Mostly peer reviewed. Of major importance to the focus of the research.B (60-69)Good clear selection of a researchable topic. The research objective is quite clear and will assist considerably in the implementation of the research. The choice, relevance and significance of research topic is relatively well justified. The nature of the problem/issue is quite well focused and explained. The piece is well referenced throughout and demonstrates evidence of fairly wide reading of good quality sources. Literature review is quite applicable, well focussed, contemporary and consistent with the research topic. Identifies relevant theoretical base. Research topic, questions, objectives are well embedded in the literature review.Reasonably good critical analysis. Has demonstrated a good understanding of the critical review process. Supports answers reasonably well. If they deepen their understanding of how to critique literature, they could write a well-developed literature.Good choice of relevant, quality sources. Mainly peer reviewed. Of considerable importance to the focus of the research.C+ (55-59)The research topic and research objective is clear but is in need of some development to assist in the implementation of the proposal. The research topic choice and relevance is quite well justified but needs further development when the research starts. The nature of the problem/issue is explained but needs some development. The piece is fairly well referenced throughout and demonstrates evidence of a broad reading of the literature. Literature review is largely relevant and applicable, fairly contemporary and largely consistent with the research topic. The quality of the literature consulted needs to be improved. The research topic, questions, objectives are well embedded in the literature review.Reasonable critical analysis. Critical aspect was less developed than required. Could have provided better support for their answers. May not understand some of the questions and therefore need to review the relevant material in order to write a reasonable literature review.Reasonable choice of mainly relevant, fairly good quality sources. Many peer reviewed. Of importance to the focus of the research but could have chosen a little more selectively.C (50-54)The research topic and research objective is apparent but is in need of relatively significant development to assist in the implementation of the proposal. The justification of the research topic choice and relevance needs further development. The nature of the problem/issue is needs to be elaborated upon. While there are a passable number of references, a number of them are not relevant or their review is not very clear. There is considerable scope to deepen the extent of the literature covered. The quality of the literature reviewed needs to be substantially improved. The consistency of the literature with the research topic needs to be strengthened. The extent to which the research topic, questions, and objectives are embedded in the literature review needs to be strengthened.Adequate review of the text. Needs to develop their critical approach. While they may have supported their answers, this support may not have been altogether appropriate. Appears to have misunderstood some of the questions and instructions.Some of the sources are of relevance but the relevance and quality of many of the sources needs to be improved. Needs to select more from peer reviewed sources. May have suffered due to lack of focus in the research question or objective.D (45-49)The research topic and objective is either not apparent and/or not amenable to research in this case. This topic would need to be substantially redeveloped in order for it to be researchable. The justification for the research topic choice and relevance needs to be completely revised. The nature of the problem/issue is quite poor and needs to be developed significantly.The number and quality of references are poor. Many are not relevant to the research topic and objective. The evidence is of quite a weak review of poor quality literature. There is little consistency between the literature and the research topic. The literature is hardly evaluated at all.Basic review but not a critical analysis of the text. Does not conform to the more advanced instructions. Doesnt appear to understand a number of the questions. Support for answers is basic and undeveloped. Poor selection of sources. Many are from questionable sources. Lack of relevance to the research objective.F ( 0-44)The topic and objective are unclear and/or unresearchable. The topic selection is unacceptable in its present state and is unresearchable in this case. The research topic choice and relevance is unjustified. The nature of the problem/issue is either absent or very poor. There is little evidence of a review of any relevant literature. The number and quality of references are very poor. There appears little evidence of an attempt beyond paraphrasing a list of articles and websites reflecting very poor quality literature. There is little if any evaluation.Doesnt conform to instructions. Review lacks any critique. Many of the answers are inappropriate demonstrating that the question is not understood. Doesnt support answers with reasons or reasons are inappropriate. May have chosen an inappropriate text.Very poor selection of sources. Many are from very questionable sources and are not particularly relevant. What is presented here is not going to help progress the research.