Recently, Pat Thompson wrote about classification of research questions. Research questions can classified broadly as gap-spotting questions or problematization questions (Alvesson and Sandberg, 2011). Gap spotting questions ( ie. confusion gaps, neglect gaps or application gaps) fill in the picture while problematization questions make leaps and connections to undiscovered areas.
Problematization questions, as described by Alvesson and Sandberg, are associated with more interesting research because they challenge, confront and even disrupt received knowledge.
Let’s consider type of research question against cognitive rigour. This assessment scale (Webb NL) to type the depth of knowledge (DOK) according to cognitive rigour encompasses 4 levels.
DOK-1
Recall & Reproduction — Recall a fact, term, principle, or concept; perform a routine procedure.
DOK-2
Basic Application of Skills/Concepts — Use information, conceptual knowledge; select appropriate procedures for a task; perform two or more steps with decision points along the way; solve routine problems; organize or display data; interpret or use simple graphs.
DOK-3
Strategic Thinking — Reason or develop a plan to approach a problem; employ some decision-making and justification; solve abstract, complex, or non-routine problems, complex. (DOK-3 problems often allow more than one possible answer.)
DOK-4
Extended Thinking — Perform investigations or apply concepts and skills to the real world that require time to research, problem solve, and process multiple conditions of the problem or task; perform non-routine manipulations across disciplines, content areas, or multiple sources
Smashing the gap-finding research questions together with the DOK framework, I wonder if you would agree with the following propositions:
Assessment committees for doctoral work do not factor the nature of the research question into consideration of the merits of the work.
My proposed research aims to develop an application (an index) for stakeholders in doctoral education from the student’s point of view. So the problematization of the work expands on what do doctoral students want from a doctoral program and how well does the program align to expectations?
As long as the work passes the muster test; whatever that is; that’s what matters.
Original: http://fabricationnation.wordpress.com/2014/01/05/smash-type-of-doctoral-research-question-into-depth-of-knowledge-scale-doesnt-matter/
By: SheriO
Posted: January 5, 2014, 12:00 pm
The Landing is a social site for Athabasca University staff, students and invited guests. It is a space where they can share, communicate and connect with anyone or everyone.
Unless you are logged in, you will only be able to see the fraction of posts on the site that have been made public. Right now you are not logged in.
If you have an Athabasca University login ID, use your standard username and password to access this site.
We welcome comments on public posts from members of the public. Please note, however, that all comments made on public posts must be moderated by their owners before they become visible on the site. The owner of the post (and no one else) has to do that.
If you want the full range of features and you have a login ID, log in using the links at the top of the page or at https://landing.athabascau.ca/login (logins are secure and encrypted)
Posts made here are the responsibility of their owners and may not reflect the views of Athabasca University.