Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Hast, Michael (2015)
Publisher: Macrothink Institute
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: 378

Classified by OpenAIRE into

It is not uncommon for undergraduate students to feel aversion towards research methods teaching. This does not change the fact that research methods play a key role in their education. Targeting module design is imperative to ensure success. However, end-of-module student evaluations may provide a false sense of security regarding satisfaction and learnt knowledge. In order to approach module design more effectively it may instead be necessary to view module evaluations from a delayed perspective. The present study addressed student perceptions of a second year social science research methods module and the related final year dissertation module, thereby offering two perspectives on research methods. Both pre- and post-dissertation students participated in a survey evaluating their theoretical and practical knowledge as well as issues surrounding confidence in carrying out independent research. The key findings demonstrate that end-of-module evaluations do appear to give good insight into research methods teaching but that post-dissertation students provided critical input that could not be gained from end-of-module evaluations alone. As a whole, the findings demonstrate that making more comprehensive use of different student perspectives may be essential to ensuring appropriate teaching design and, as a result, student satisfaction and success as independent researchers
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Ahlfeldt, S., Mehta, S., & Sellnow, T. (2005). Measurement and analysis of student engagement in university classes where varying levels of PBL methods of instruction are in use. Higher Education Research and Development, 24, 5-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0729436052000318541 Allin, L. (2010). Linking research, teaching and learning within the discipline: Evaluating student learning through “real life” research in sports development. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 9, 92-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.3794/johlste.91.261 Bauer, K., & Bennett, J. (2003). Alumni perceptions used to assess undergraduate research experience. The Journal of Higher Education, 74, 210-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2003.0011 Benson, A., & Blackman, D. (2003). Can research methods ever be interesting? Active Learning in Higher Education, 4, 39-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1469787403004001004 Bignold, S. (2003). A review of linking teaching and research in the health sciences and practice disciplines. Retrieved April 04, 2014, from http://www.health.heacademy.ac.uk/lenses/publications/m10100.html Brew, A. (2006). Research and teaching: Beyond the divide. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
    • Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Cassidy, S. (2012). Exploring individual differences as determining factors in student academic achievement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 37, 793-810. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.545948 Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education. London: Routledge.
    • Cooper, B. (2012). Embedding student-led change in the curriculum. Retrieved June 28, 2014, from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/stem-conference/STEMLearningandTea chingIssues1/Barrie_Cooper.pdf Coughlan, J., & Swift, S. (2011). Student and tutor perceptions of learning and teaching on a first‐ year study skills module in a university computing department. Educational Studies, 37, 529-539. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2010.539698 Diseth, A., Pallesen, S., Brunborg, G. S., & Larsen, S. (2010). Academic achievement among first semester undergraduate psychology students: The role of course experience, effort, motives and learning strategies. Higher Education, 59, 335-352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9251-8 Dunne, E., & Zandstra, R. (2011). Students as change agents: New ways of engaging with learning and teaching in higher education. Exeter: University of Exeter.
    • Hunter, A.-B., Laursen, S. L., & Seymour, E. (2007). Becoming a scientist: The role of undergraduate research in students' cognitive, personal, and professional development.
    • Science Education, 91, 36-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.20173 Ishiyama, J. (2002). Does early participation in undergraduate research benefit social science and humanities students? College Student Journal, 36, 380-386.
    • Jenkins, A., & Healey, M. (2011). Navigating between teaching, learning and inquiry: Developing students as researchers. The International HETL Review, 1, 35-43.
    • Kay, J., Dunne, E., & Hutchinson, J. (2010). Rethinking the values of higher education - students as change agents? Bristol: The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education.
    • Leckey, J., & Neill, N. (2001). Quantifying quality: The importance of student feedback.
    • Quality in Higher Education, 7, 19-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13538320120045058 McCulloch, A. (2009). The student as co-producer: Learning from public administration about the student-university relationship. Studies in Higher Education, 34, 171-183. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075070802562857 McGrath, J. R., & MacEwan, G. (2011). Linking pedagogical practices of activity-based teaching. The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 6, 261-274.
    • Mutz, R., & Daniel, H.-D. (2013). University and student segmentation: Multilevel latent-class analysis of students' attitudes towards research methods and statistics. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 280-304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.2011.02062.x Nicholson, L., Putwain, D., Connors, L., & Hornby-Atkinson, P. (2013). The key to successful achievement as an undergraduate student: Confidence and realistic expectations? Studies in Higher Education, 38, 285-298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.585710 O'Neill, G., & McMahon, S. (2012). Giving student groups a stronger voice: Using participatory research and action (PRA) to initiate change to a curriculum. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 2, 161-171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2012.677656 Petress, K. (2008). What is meant by “active learning”? Education, 128, 566-569.
    • Pritchard, A. (2009). Ways of learning: Learning theories and learning styles in the classroom. Oxford: Routledge.
    • Rammell, B. (2006, October). Innovations: Exploring research-based learning. Paper presented at the University of Warwick Conference, Warwick, UK.
    • Ramsden, P. (2008a). Higher education: Put students first. The Journal, 14. Retrieved June 28, 2014, from http://www.journal-online.co.uk/article/5131-higher-education-put-students-first Ramsden, P. (2008b). The future of higher education teaching and the student experience.
    • Retrieved June 28, 2014, from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/consultations/paulramsden_teaching_and_ student_experience Rees, A., & Wilkinson, M. (2008). Scientific communication skills: The transition from further education to higher education in the UK. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 5, 33-40.
    • Robinson, C. (2012). Student engagement: What does this mean in practice in the context of higher education institutions? Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 4, 94-108.
    • Ryan, M., Saunders, C., Rainsford, E., & Thompson, E. (2014). Improving research methods teaching and learning in politics and international relations: A 'reality show' approach.
    • Learning and Teaching in Politics and International Studies, 34, 85-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9256.12020 Sandover, S., Partridge, L., Dunne, E., & Burkill, S. (2012). Undergraduate researchers change learning and teaching: A case study in Australia and the United Kingdom. CUR Quarterly, 33, 33-39.
    • Seymour, E., Hunter, A., Laursen, S., & Deantoni, T. (2004). Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three-year study.
    • Science Education, 88, 493-534. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.10131 Shevlin, M., Banyard, P., Davies, M., & Griffiths, M. (2000). The validity of student evaluation of teaching in higher education: Love me, love my lectures? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25, 397-405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/713611436 Smith, K. A., Sheppard, S. D., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005). Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom-based practices. Journal of Engineering Education, 94, 87-101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00831.x Stefani, L., Clarke, J., & Littlejohn, A. (2000). Developing a student-centred approach to reflective learning. Innovations in Higher Education and Training International, 37, 163-171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13558000050034529 Todd, M., Bannister, P., & Clegg, S. (2004). Independent inquiry and the undergraduate dissertation: Perceptions and experiences of final-year social science students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29, 335-355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0260293042000188285 Ward, C., Bennett, J., & Bauer, K. (2003). Content analysis of undergraduate research
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article