Originally published here.
This week I returned to work and found it tough to find the time to devote to #crit101.
Completing the activities and readings was out of my reach, so in an effort to try and continue, I decided to at least read the references. I left the tabs open on my computer for the whole week but it wasn't until the weekend that I managed to get back to them.
The required activities were:
- Read and critique the #egg research project conducted by your group. Analyse and evaluate the validity and reliability of your research.
- Write and publish a 500-750 word critique (in Google Docs), making reference to both the article and your weekly reading. References should adhere to the Harvard system.
- Complete a blog post reflecting on the week’s assignment and your progress (include a link to the published assignment)
- How did this week’s reading and assignment build on last weeks?
- How has it added to your understanding of conducting effective research?
- How do these skills fit in with your understanding of being an in(ter)dependent learner?
- How much progress do you believe you have made as you approach the halfway point of the course?
References:
- Graham R. Gibbs (University of Huddersfiled): Reliability, validity, generalizability and credibility. Pt .1 of 3: Research Quality [Video]
- Graham R. Gibbs (University of Huddersfield): The Quality of Qualitative Research. Part 2 of 3 on Research Quality and the Research Process [Video]
- Cohen, et al., (2007) Validity and Reliability from Research Methods in Education, Routledge [Chapter]
- University of Surrey: Advantages and Disadvantages of Questionnaires [Guide]
- Blaxter, et al., (2010) Advantages and Disadvantages of Surveys from How to Research, McGraw-Hill International [Section - click on 'page 79' to view/read]
- University of Surrey: Evaluating Secondary Sources [Guide]
- Johns Hopkins University: Evaluating Information Found on the Internet [Guide]