DESIGN RESEARCH METHODOLOGY // Research
Week 5 - Week 8 (26/04/2021 - 17/05/2021)
Fann Man Ling - 0344623 (BDCM)
Design Research Methodology // Dr. Hayati & Dr. Jinchi
Research
LECTURES
WEEK 5 // 26.04.2021
CRITICAL REVIEWLecture 5 (a)
Writing a Critical Review
Lecture 5 (b)
Lecture 5 (c)
WEEK 6 // 03.05.2021
QUANTITATIVE & QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Lecture 6 (a)
Research Strategy
Lecture 6 (b)
After reviewing all the lecture materials given for Week 5 & 6, I organized the information in Microsoft OneNote.
Notes_Week 5 & 6 (29/04/2021)
INSTRUCTION
Module Information Booklet
Assessment Rubric
ASSIGNMENT 2: Research
WEEK 5 // 26.04.2021
This week, supposedly we were tasked to do critical reviews on 2 journal articles that were used in our proposal. However, I have mistaken it and did 5 critical review papers.
Anyways, at first, I felt confused and have no clue to do it. Hence, I followed the supplementary notes and templates provided by lecturers (Lecture 5b & 5c) in the hope of getting a general picture to do it.
Then, I tried to organize the information and structure them into several sections (Introduction, Structure, Methodology, Sources, Conclusion) so that I know what to write in different paragraphs.
Fig 1: Notes_Content of Critical Review (30/04/2021)
Attempt #1 (first draft):
Fig 2: Critical Review_First Draft .pdf (02/05/2021)
WEEK 6 // 03.05.2021
Today, Dr. Hayati reviewed our critical review paper and gave us feedback. However, Dr. Hayati said she would provide me feedback for the 2 completed critical review papers next week instead because she needs to read the article first before she makes a judgment on it to make sure the feedback given is fair and accurate. Additionally, she gave compliments on my effort as I have done 5 critical reviews in advance. Subsequently, Dr. Hayati did review roughly on my first critical review paper and gave some feedback on it.
WEEK 7 // 10.05.2021
Today is the feedback session for critical review.
The feedback I got from Dr, Hayati is some sentences need to be rephrased and split into two sentences as it is too much. Furthermore, although I have analyzed the methodology and reasonings of the research thoroughly, the content is missing because I didn't justify and describe it in my paper. Also, I was advised to include my personal findings and takeaways in my paper as well based on the research criticized.
After taking the feedback given into consideration, I redid my critical reviews and compiled all of them into one pdf. Below is the version that I have submitted.
PDF Compilation of Critical Review:
Fig 3: Compilation_Critical Review .pdf (16/05/2021)
WEEK 14 // 04.07.2021
However, I realized there are mistakes I made in explaining the methodology used by the particular authors in their research. For instance, I misunderstood a questionnaire as simply a qualitative approach. In fact, it is a quantitative approach if the author used closed-ended questions, and data are expressed in numbers and graphs. Thus, it led to the wrong interpretation in my Critical Review 4 & 5.
Henceforth, I amended both Critical Reviews 4 & 5, and compile them with Critical Reviews 1, 2, 3 into one PDF file.
Since I have submitted the previous version on Week 7 (16/05/2021), I can only show the revised version in my report compilation.
PDF Final Version of CR Compilation:
Fig 4: Revised & Final Compilation_Critical Review .pdf (04/07/2021)
FEEDBACK
WEEK 6 // 03.05.2021
Specific feedback:
- foreign terms like “Kawaii” should be italic or put inverted commas.- use ‘In’ instead of ‘For’.
- don't use "with", "for", "by and large" at the beginning of sentences.
- journal articles should be included Abstract, Keywords, and doi.
WEEK 7 // 10.05.2021
Specific feedback:
- well done in criticizing thoroughly the methodology and reasoning of the particular research article.
- however, the content is missing.
- should justify and describe the content and information of the particular journal.
- personal findings and takeaways should be added to the paper.
Comments
Post a Comment