Research: an OverviewCielito Conti-Olegario, MICTfrom: Khursid Amad, available http://www.computing.surrey.ac.uk/courses/cs383/Research: A DefinitionThe act of searching (closely or carefully) for or after a specified thing or personA search or investigation directed to the discovery of some fact by careful consideration or study of a subject; a course of critical or scientific inquiry.

Method? Procedure for attaining an object.A special form of procedure adopted in any branch of mental activity, whether for the purpose of teaching and exposition, or for that of investigation and inquiry.

Method is also:The methods of procedure in any department, considered as the object of a branch of study; esp. with reference to teaching. Orderly arrangement of ideas and topics in thinking or writing; orderliness and sequence of thought or expression. Why do we research?To get informationTo gain understandingTo answer a questionTo assist in evaluating optionsTo predict outcomesResearch and I.T.Ours is decidedly a new kind of discipline one in which, for example, theory is not concerned with explaining extant physical phenomena, and experimentation is not necessarily concerned with testing whether theory predicts reality. ..

International Review of Research in Computer Science in the UK (2001)

Research and IT (continued)Viewing computer science through the lens of traditional academic disciplines can lead to misconceptions of what is important and of how research in computer science is done, even though aspects of computer science can be traced to the natural sciences, mathematics, or engineering.Research in Relation to ITtheoretical and empirical research to answer a broad array of questions related to the use, impact, and management of information technology in organizations(From The Monash University website)Areas of Computing ResearchPervasive ComputingIntelligent ComputingMultimedia computingSocial ComputingPervasive ComputingThe research goal is ubiquitous, networked computation and information access. aims to enable individuals to accomplish personal and professional transactions with intelligent and portable devices.Includes distributed systems, mobile computing, network computing, distributed information systems, embedded systems, and software engineering. Research ranges from theoretical foundations to practical tools and techniques for the development and management of large-scale networked systems in business, technology and the public sector. Intelligent Computing aims to bring intelligence, reasoning, perception, information gathering and analysis to computer systems. Artificial intelligence, data mining, optimization, constraint solving, knowledge management and decision support systems are the major investigation areas. Multimedia ComputingCombining different media - images, film, sound, words and animation - into an interactive package web sites, information booths, educational software, games and advertising services, amongst othersSocial ComputingFocuses on the information and knowledge needs of people, and how these can be met across time and place with the aid of appropriate information technologies. It seeks to:Improve enterprise and interpersonal information flow and recorded memory (e-business, e-government and virtual communities) Improve how people create, manage, categorise, seek, obtain, evaluate, and use informationBreak down barriers to satisfying the information and knowledge needs of people and to extend their use of information and information technologies.

Fundamental to social computing are issues of communication and recorded memory.The Research Process 1. Identification of the research problem 2. Review of the literature 3. Defining the methodology 4. Pilot Study 5. Data collection 6. Data analysis (Results) 7. Drawing conclusions (includes identification of limitations and recommendations for practice and/or further research).

Defining a Research ProblemIndicate a gapRaise a questionContinue a previously developed line of inquiryCounter-claimThe research idea or research problem as it is often described, can be stated as an aim, a question or as a hypothesis.

"I wonder why this happens?" "How could I stop this from happening?" "I wonder if it happens anywhere else?" We review our performance and wonder how we can improve it by asking questions like: "How can I do this better?" "Can I do this more quickly/less expensively/differently?" "Are people satisfied with my performance?" Turning these questions into a researchable idea is the first stage of the research process. Sometimes our original idea is too difficult to research because it would take too long to find out the answer or it would take too many resources. If this is the case, the original idea has to be narrowed down to a manageable focus. For example, we may want to know if we are doing a good job. This sounds reasonable. But whom do we ask in order to find out? And how do we define what is meant by "a good job". If we spend a long time with each of our patients, they may think we're doing a marvellous job but our managers might not be very happy if we are not seeing enough patients, or we spend a fortune on treating each

REMEMBER! An aim must be achievable. A question must be answerable. A hypothesis must be testable.

The Literature ReviewOutlines the relevant research and literature in a particular areaCritically analyses this work and evaluates it in terms of its contribution to the research in that area and in the context of your own researchThe Importance of doing a Literature Reviewto establish your understanding of current thinking and research in the field to influence your thinking and lead you to your research focus to show you where others have gone before.

The Literature Review Must:Describe, analyse and evaluate the work done so far in the areaShow the current state of researchExplain the arguments surrounding the areaIdentify trends and themes in previous work andProvide reasons for the approach taken in the new researchQuestions What is currently known about the topic? What aspects of the topic lack sufficient information? (the gaps in the literature) Openings for research, how you intend to bridge the gapWhat research has previously been done? What recommendations for further research have been previously made but not acted upon? What methods have previous researchers used to investigate the topic and were some methods better suited to the topic than others?

Skills for writing a literature reviewSelection of relevant materialCritical analysis of the materialStrengths and weaknessesRelevance to themes or argumentsEvaluate:ContributionValidityAny bias that might be presentIdentify ResourcesBooksReference materialsDictionaries,encyclopedias,yearbooks etc.JournalsOften include current research, reviews of literature, scholarly articles and debatesConference PapersGovernment PublicationsDissertationsThe NetResources on the NetWebpagesOnline DatabasesPublisher suites (eg Emerald or Blackwell Science)Full-Text DatabaseOnline JournalsEg Journal of Information Systems Education (http://www.gise.org/JISE/)Discussion boards

Overview of Methodology what am I trying to find out? what sort of information do I need? what is the best way to collect the information? where can I get the information from? how many people will I need to ask? how will I analyse and make sense of the information I collect?

ImportanceOpen to validity & reliability assessmentMethod can affect the resultsDifferent approaches are available, why the choiceDemonstrate Synergy with objectives as well as consistency with accepted practice in the fieldOthers can adopt or replicate studyIssues in Methodology the type of information required the research design the method of collecting data the source of information (sample)

Reading a Journal ArticlePut things in context"Where does this fit in?" "How does this contribute -- what is useful about this?" Relate what you are reading to what you have readAttempt to improve on what is saidAttempt to apply what is said, to a different areaA large part of understanding the meaning of a paper is understanding why something is being said How to Critique a PaperSome tips in Critiquing a Paper Part 1: a summary in your own words of the technical, scientific contribution of the paper (5 to 10 sentences)Big picture: What is the ultimate goal of this research? Motivate the topic. (3 minutes) Problem Description: What exactly are the authors solving? How does it fit in the big picture? (4 minutes) Technical Content and Results: You need to prove that you understand the main points in the paper. (10 minutes) Conclusions and Related Work: Relate the results to the big picture, and compare to other approaches (3 minutes) Part 2: your view of the positive and negative aspects of the work is there an error in the paper? did the author(s) not consider technically relevant items? is the argument incorrect or incomplete? what would be interesting future research that could be done to continue this paper?).

Other tips(http://blue.utb.edu/sfisherhoch/Projects/literaturereview.htm)1. Who wrote the paper, from which institution? Who are they?2. Does the introduction contain all the information you need to understand the study area?3. What are their scientific questions? Why? If you can't figure out from their paper what their questions are this is not a good paper. What was it they wanted to know? (If they cannot tell you what they wanted to know, they are unlikely to be able to find anything out.)4. Is the literature review complete and well referenced?5. Give an exact summary of their methodology. What did they do? Where? How? What was their study population? Etc.

6. Do the results answer the question they asked and reflect the methodology? Do they give results for all the methods 7. Are their numbers and their statistics adequate and correct? Does everything add up as it should?8. Do their tables and figures add useful information to the text, and are they clear and easy to understand?9. Does their discussion summarize their most important findings accurately?

(some papers describe a method, and you can find no results, others may give some results without describing the method)

10. Do the authors interpret their findings correctly?11. Do the authors discuss the problems they encountered and problems in interpreting their data?12. Have the authors made a major contribution with their paper?13. Finally. What is your interpretation of their study? Do you agree with them? If not, what do you think?

FormatAvailable: http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/dahlin/Classes/c0pe/project/critique.htmlGrading SystemMidterm Grade(MG): Midterm paper (60%)Critiques (30%)Class Participation (10%)Finals Grade(FG):Final Paper (60%)Report (30%)Compilation (10%)Final Grade: (mg + fg)/2