Sometimes, writing a research can make us wonder, "What tense of verb should I use in Chapter 2?" Then, when you reach the ANALYSIS part, the question of verb tense surfaces again.
This article, WRITING ABOUT YOUR RESEARCH: Verb Tense , can help a lot when we are faced with verb-tense questions in writing our own research.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Some points raised during the oral presentation:
1. Did I consider the legal implication of being actually at the precincts observing how election is being conducted? You need clearance and approval from COMELEC officials to do this kind of method.
2. How can I be at so many precincts at the same time? If I would stay only in one precinct, the result might be too narrow to have significance.
3. Would your effort in conducting such a study matter to the COMELEC officials? Would the possible result of your study can actually change the conduct of election system in the city?
4. Will the result of your study be useful, if it only covers Angeles City, or you observe only one precinct?
5. What would the poll watcher say if they know that you are there to observe, when you don't represent any candidate?
6. If you ask for the help of research assistants who would be observing during the election day, the result would still be more accurate if you, as the researcher, were actually the one who conducted the observation.
7. FGD, in general, may be used to verify information gathered from the respondents.
8. FGD is easier said than done. It's very hard to gather people who don't even know each other, or who don't even know you as the researcher.
9. Giving your study geographic depth could give it more significance.
2. How can I be at so many precincts at the same time? If I would stay only in one precinct, the result might be too narrow to have significance.
3. Would your effort in conducting such a study matter to the COMELEC officials? Would the possible result of your study can actually change the conduct of election system in the city?
4. Will the result of your study be useful, if it only covers Angeles City, or you observe only one precinct?
5. What would the poll watcher say if they know that you are there to observe, when you don't represent any candidate?
6. If you ask for the help of research assistants who would be observing during the election day, the result would still be more accurate if you, as the researcher, were actually the one who conducted the observation.
7. FGD, in general, may be used to verify information gathered from the respondents.
8. FGD is easier said than done. It's very hard to gather people who don't even know each other, or who don't even know you as the researcher.
9. Giving your study geographic depth could give it more significance.
Recommendations/Suggestions from the Panel
The suggestions/recommendations from the Dissertation Writing Proposal Committee:
1. Wider geographic scope. Instead of focusing on Angeles City, it would be better to focus on a regional scope. Region III or Central Luzon coverage can make the study more significant, esp. it's a dissertation.
2. Limit the study in terms of methods and problems. For example, instead of gathering data from BEIs, voters, COMELEC officers, etc., I may just limit the study to voters only from Region III.
3. Make it a combination of quantitative and qualitative approach. Qualitative tools, e.g. FGD, may just be utilized to verify information from the respondents which would be gathered thru questionnaires.
4. May still include pre-election, election, and post-election aspects but the length of the questionnaire should be considered. If it's too long, respondents might not answer accurately, or they may lose interest in answering.
5. The voter-respondents should have actually voted, and the records showing they actually did so must be obtained from COMELEC.
6. No need to conduct the study on the day of election, but floating of questionnaires must be done immediately after election day to maximize respondents' recall.
7. New title suggested:
1. Wider geographic scope. Instead of focusing on Angeles City, it would be better to focus on a regional scope. Region III or Central Luzon coverage can make the study more significant, esp. it's a dissertation.
2. Limit the study in terms of methods and problems. For example, instead of gathering data from BEIs, voters, COMELEC officers, etc., I may just limit the study to voters only from Region III.
3. Make it a combination of quantitative and qualitative approach. Qualitative tools, e.g. FGD, may just be utilized to verify information from the respondents which would be gathered thru questionnaires.
4. May still include pre-election, election, and post-election aspects but the length of the questionnaire should be considered. If it's too long, respondents might not answer accurately, or they may lose interest in answering.
5. The voter-respondents should have actually voted, and the records showing they actually did so must be obtained from COMELEC.
6. No need to conduct the study on the day of election, but floating of questionnaires must be done immediately after election day to maximize respondents' recall.
7. New title suggested:
THE CONDUCT OF THE AUTOMATED ELECTION
SYSTEM IN CENTRAL LUZON: An Assessment
SYSTEM IN CENTRAL LUZON: An Assessment
Done with my proposal defense :-)
I'm done with my proposal defense!
I was scheduled to present my research proposal at 4 pm, but it started I think an hour earlier. I arrived at the graduate school office at 2 pm, then I went out just a bit. When I came back, I was asked to set the laptop and a few minutes after, the presentation started.
Actually, I was thinking of giving myself some time to practice before the presentation. I didn't know I would be presenting right away. But still, I thought the presentation went well.
I really would like to conduct qualitative study, but maybe this isn't the time for it.
I was scheduled to present my research proposal at 4 pm, but it started I think an hour earlier. I arrived at the graduate school office at 2 pm, then I went out just a bit. When I came back, I was asked to set the laptop and a few minutes after, the presentation started.
Actually, I was thinking of giving myself some time to practice before the presentation. I didn't know I would be presenting right away. But still, I thought the presentation went well.
I really would like to conduct qualitative study, but maybe this isn't the time for it.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Dissertation Proposal set on April 24
April 24, 2010
4-5 p.m.
PS 112
Committee Membership:
Chair: Dr. Pepito M. Galang
Members:
Dr. Rosario G. Fudotan
Dr. Manuelita G. Valencia
Dr. Chere' C. Yturralde
Adviser:
Dr. Joseph Alexander B. Pangilinan
[This is it!]
4-5 p.m.
PS 112
Committee Membership:
Chair: Dr. Pepito M. Galang
Members:
Dr. Rosario G. Fudotan
Dr. Manuelita G. Valencia
Dr. Chere' C. Yturralde
Adviser:
Dr. Joseph Alexander B. Pangilinan
[This is it!]
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)