Reply | RES 820 | Grand Canyon University
Please reply to the student Answer: Below is the Question
What considerations must be given to the selection of a quantitative methodology for a research study? Based on what you know now, which of these considerations do you believe are the most important? Why?
1. Marissa Gibbs
RES 820: The Literature Landscape
Topic 4 DQ 1
February 20th, 2022
When using a quantitative methodology some considerations to consider for this type of research are limitations, credibility, methodology, integrity, purpose are all the written reports according to (Cronin et al 2007). While doing my own independent research on this topic, I found that it is very important to be concise, grammatically correct and organized. It is very important that as a researcher to always make sure that the information I am reading is accurate and clear. I also learned that when doing a research study, certain strengths and weaknesses of the study should be systemically accurate. Before learning how to do a qualitative study, the researcher must understand that the study has to be tested, analyzed, coded and reported (Powell et al. 2008). Also, it is very important to look at the literature review for answer because it will help support in finding different prospective and topics using information towards the chosen method of study (McClendon, Greenberger, & Bridges, 2020). The peers who critique the study should make sure that its accurate research to determine the quality of the study. And it’s also very important for the researcher to demonstrate their techniques for better understanding of the research (Powell et al. 2008).
McClendon, C., Greenberger, S., & Bridges, S. (2020). Reading quantitative research. In Grand Canyon University (Ed.), GCU doctoral research: The literature landscape. Retrieved from https://lc.gcumedia.com/res820/gcu-doctoral-research-the-literature-landscape/v1.1/#/chapter/4
Powell, H., Mihalas, S., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Suldo, S., & Daley, C. E. (2008). Mixed methods research in school psychology: A mixed methods investigation of trends in the literature. Psychology in the Schools, 45(4), 291–309. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1002/pits.20296
2. Crystal Artalejo
Grand Canyon University
Ed.D. Organizational Leadership: Organizational Development
RES 820A: The Literature Landscape: Organizational Leadership
Dr. Mendi Davis
Hello Dr. David and class,
Collecting data and research is essential in the doctoral candidacy journey. In this discussion we visit more on quantitative methodologies. According to (Coughian et al.) Quantitative methodologies include statistical data such as surveys, questionnaires, and additional observational tools. This data shows concrete results such as numerical or measured data which can be used as part of the data collection process for one’s dissertation. In addition this may assist in one’s defense in the doctoral candidacy. In opinion it is important to consider the data to be based on facts and not a bias opinion. It is important to collect the data for what it is and not based on one’s opinion. The data gives overall importance to the study being conducted. It is important that the research conducted is clearly defined and implemented with the use of a tool approved by GCU. In opinion, the type of data being sampled is very important. An age group, demographic, or place of employment can negatively or positively affect a sample. In addition the age of a research study can also affect a sample. For example if one is determining how a product in technology is affecting a business, one might want to retrieve sampling from a specific department, and classify age groups. It is possible a younger generation would be supportive of a change in technology used while an elderly population might not. These are items to consider when one is conducting quantitative research and selecting sampling. I am interested in taking the quantitative approach for my own dissertation, however would have to get comfortable and familiar with the GCU tools for research in the future.
Coughian, Michael, et al. “Step’by-Step Guide to Critiquing Research. Part 1: Quantitative Research.” Login, 14 June 2007, https://web-p-ebscohost-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=d17ca9ff-8130-4cd8-b4b4-71bcdb986b3d%40redis.
Coughlan, Cronin, and Ryan (2007) provided a step-by-step guide to critiquing quantitative literature. Using these criteria, critique the article by Barnett. What are the important markers to look for when critiquing a quantitative study?
Reply to Student Answer
3. Theresa Sonoda
Grand Canyon University
RES 820A, Topic 4, DQ2
February 19, 2022
The report appeared to be well-written, direct, and concise. The numbering system was different than most of the articles this learner has seen so far, but one has not reviewed a lot of articles yet. The numbering system actually added clarity, and the definitions were complete and left no question as to their meaning and place in the report. The author had a Doctorate in Organizational Leadership from GCU. The title of the article was clear, and each word appeared to be carefully chosen to amply describe the report’s content without extra wording (Barnett, 2017; Coughlan, et al., 2007).
The abstract was clear and included the information necessary for a full overview of the study, to include the research problem, sample, methods, and findings. The research problem was defined. To this learner’s untrained eye, the report flowed naturally, and logically. At the conclusion section, the author linked back to the problem and the need for more research, and then provided recommendations for actions that should be taken (Barnett, 2017; Coughlan, et al., 2007).
The literature review was numbered and divided into sections containing definitions of leadership styles and other pertinent terms, and the literature was listed among those sections. Both older and newer literature were listed in each section, providing a capsule view of each term, with its history and more current data. The literature seemed evenly distributed between primary and empirical data to the more recent literature within five years of the date this article was published. The methods, sample, and especially the instruments were well-defined (Barnett, 2017; Coughlan, et al., 2007).
The completeness, flow, and conciseness of the writing stood out to this learner and the complete descriptions dispelled any doubt that the author was indeed a subject matter expert, as well as a scholar. Upon delving deeper into the article, this learner appreciated its full explanations and clarity. Writing clearly is vital to the researcher’s work and authorship; it is the vessel the researcher uses to disseminate the knowledge (Baird, et al., 2020).
Baird, S., Kearney, K., & Nephew, A. (2020). Writing through theoretical frameworks in the doctoral classroom. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, 11(3), 281–294. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1108/SGPE-02-2020-0013
Barnett, D. (2017). Leadership and job satisfaction: Adjunct faculty at a for-profit university. International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, 4(3), 53–63. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1213598
Coughlan M, Cronin P, & Ryan F. (2007). Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: quantitative research. British Journal of Nursing, 16(11), 658–663. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.12968/bjon.2007.16.11.23681