4) Research Design: You need to design an experiment that will answer your research question. This is accomplished by answering the following questions. In your document use the following subheadings...

1 answer below »

4) Research Design:
You need to design an experiment that will answer your research question. This is
accomplished by answering the following questions. In your document use the following
subheadings to clearly identify each question. You will be penalized for not doing so
a) Research Question (max 100 words)
Restate the research question outlined in your introduction and why it is important
b) Related Work (max 400 words)
Select two research designs from the literature that you have read related to your
research question. For each paper in about 200 words explain the research design, the
strengths and limitations of the design and how this design will be useful to support your
research design.
c) Design (max 350 words)
What research design will you use to answer your research question? That is,
experimental, quasi experimental, correlational, ethnography etc.
Explain your design. For example, outline your control and experimental groupings, the
number of samples you need, and how you will determine the accuracy of your results.
Why did you select this design? What are the strengths and limitations of this design in
relation to your research?
Your design should show how it will answer your research question




Literature Planner – Instructions Delete this page when submitting this document online for assessment. Reference Number: Number your references starting from 1 Authors: If one or two authors list their names. If more than two list the first author followed by et. al. Title of Article: The title of the research paper / book etc. Type: State if it is a conference, journal, book etc. Publication: The name of the publication that the work was published in. Year Published: What year was article published Number of citations: The number of citations that the publication has received to date. Also mention the source of data (e.g. Scopus or Google Scholar) Publication Rating: Use Scopus to determine the CiteScore and ranking information for each publication. Not all publications are rated, use 'N/A' if there is no score. See notes on how to extract this from lecture 2, and the document ‘How to measure impact - CiteScore and citation counts’ Primary or Secondary: State if the research conducted in the article is primary or secondary research (see lecture notes week 2) What themes were discussed in the Literature Review: Use keywords to discuss the major themes in the article What was the research question: What was the question the article was trying to find the answer to? Design: How did they try and answer the question: What did they do? E.g. simulation, experimental design, statistical analysis etc. What was the finding: What answers were found from undertaking the research in the article? What were the gaps: What limitations occurred in the research design or where outlined in the results or discussion? Note: When this work is submitted into Turnitin, it is ok if the similarity percentage is high due to the similarity in headings. What the markers will be concentrating on is the similarity in the text that you write Literature Planner Student Name:Student Number: Topic: Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Reference Number: Title of Article: Authors: Publication: Type: Year Published: Number of citations: Primary or Secondary: Publication Rating: CiteScore:Rank: Percentile: In-Category:CiteScore Year: What was the research question? What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Design: What was the finding? What were the gaps? Microsoft Word - ENGG851 Assessment Two Details-Spring.docx ENGG851 – Assessment Two    IMPORTANT:  To pass this subject you must get at least 35% in three out of the four assessment tasks and participate in all  five assessed activities. Failure to do so will result in a Technical Fail.  Late submissions: The ‘Due Date’ is the due date. While you are given a penalty free period, do not  consider the end of the penalty free period as your ‘real’ due date. For students that do, it is  common that when they go to submit they encounter problems and ask for an extension. You will  not get one – do not ask or email as your requests will be ignored. Submissions submitted within  24hours of the end of the penalty free period can only receive a maximum grade of the ‘good’  column. After this 24hr period, submissions will receive a grade of zero! Therefore, aim to complete  for the real due date and if you run into problems you will actually have the penalty free period to  save you.  After the penalty free period expires, if you have already submitted a document through Turnitin, you will  NOT be able to resubmit another updated document.  This assessment continues the work you conducted in Assessment One.   Format: Use the thesis specifications outlined in the lecture for ENGG851 students. You must submit  a WORD document!  Plagiarism: Any section with major plagiarism issues will be given a score of zero for ALL relevant  marking criteria! See Lecture 4 for full details on plagiarism! Remember the learning objective of this  subject is to provide evidence of your higher order skills!  Feedback: As this is the major assessment task for ENGG851 you will not receive your grades or  feedback for this assessment until December.  The assessment requires the following:  1) Abstract:  Write an abstract for your research (this abstract will take the form of one suitable for a  journal article). It should take the following form:  a. TOPIC: Outline topic area  b. SIGNIFIGANCE: Why is your research important?  c. METHODOLOGY: How are you conducting your research?  d. FINDINGS: What came from your research? (Create your own finding – make it up)  e. CONCLUSION: As a result we recommend…..  The abstract should be no longer than 200 words. While the abstract is the first activity  it should be the very last thing that you write. If you try and write this first you might  struggle. You won’t have any findings (as you are not undertaking any real research), so  pretend that you did the experiment and mention your findings. Your abstract should  not have any paragraphs or citations.  2) Introduction:  You need to IMPROVE and resubmit your Introduction Chapter from Assessment One.  You should use the feedback from the marked version and make all the necessary  improvements. Take note that it is ok if Turnitin finds substantial similarity with your  submission in assessment one, this is expected. You should also consider the discussions  held with the sample student submissions in the lecture. If you need to slightly change  the wording of your research question, you may do so. However, you should not be  changing your topic, this should be a continuations of your existing work. The markers  will have greater expectations compared to assessment one.    3) Literature Review:  Complete a Literature Review Chapter. This is only a short literature review (~1800  words) identifying key findings in the area, leading into the gaps in our current  understanding that your research studies seek to address. In this section you should be  showing your ability to critique literature! This should then lead into a research  proposal/design. Look at the examples provided in week 4 lecture, and consider the  discussions held with the sample student submissions in the week 4 lecture.    4) Research Design:  You need to design an experiment that will answer your research question. This is  accomplished by answering the following questions. In your document use the following  subheadings to clearly identify each question. You will be penalized for not doing so    a) Research Question (max 100 words)  Restate the research question outlined in your introduction and why it is important     b) Related Work (max 400 words)  Select two research designs from the literature that you have read related to your  research question. For each paper in about 200 words explain the research design, the  strengths and limitations of the design and how this design will be useful to support your  research design.    c) Design (max 350 words)  What research design will you use to answer your research question? That is,  experimental, quasi experimental, correlational, ethnography etc.    Explain your design. For example, outline your control and experimental groupings, the  number of samples you need, and how you will determine the accuracy of your results.     Why did you select this design? What are the strengths and limitations of this design in  relation to your research?    Your design should show how it will answer your research question      5)  Design Questions  This section is NOT related to your research topic. This is simply testing your  understanding of key concepts. Use ‘Design Questions’ as the subheading. DO NOT  include this section in the peer review activity in the tutorial. Answer the following  questions:    a) What are experimental and correlational designs? What are the strengths and  weaknesses of the designs? 2MARKS (max 200 words)    b) What are some of the key ethical issues associated with research involving human  participants? What processes and considerations are needed? 2MARKS (max 200 words)    c) Consider the following table outlining an analysis of results from an experiment. What  can you say about the results between the various groups? 2MARKS (max 100 words)    Group  Effect on Performance  p‐value  A vs B  5.12  0.235  A vs C  2.35  0.002  B vs C  3.75  2.350    6)  Literature Planner  At the end of the document you MUST submit your updated literature planner. Every  reference you use must be outlined in the literature planner.     Note: No marks are assigned for the literature planner in this assessment. However, a  literature planner that is incomplete, not attached, of bad quality or does not reflect the  references used in parts 1 – 4 will receive UP TO 20 penalty marks. It is expected that  there will be substantial similarity with your earlier submissions of the literature  planner.    Submission  i) Submit ONE document comprising a partial thesis (Title page, Abstract, List of Contents, List of  Figures, List of Tables, Abbreviations and Symbols, Introduction, Literature Review and Research  Design and Questions and Literature Planner. This needs to be a WORD document.  ii) You need to upload this document via the Turnitin link available in Moodle. You must submit the  link to the discipline that your topic belongs to. The tutor from each school will be responsible for  marking the assessment task. A penalty applies for submitting your work to the wrong Turnitin link.  IMPORTANT – You can submit your work to Turnitin as many times as you like up until the penalty  free period expires. If you already have a submission in the system you will not be able to update  your document after the penalty free period expires. When resubmitting ensure the file name  remains the same. Only the last version will be used to confirm the originality. The first time you  submit your work to Turnitin it will take only a few minutes to generate the report. All further  submissions will take at least 24hours to produce the report. Therefore you need to plan your work  very carefully. Waiting for a Turnitin report is no excuse for late submission!  Words of advice  1. Use the marking rubric and subject outline to guide you through what needs to be done and  submitted. Understand all the penalties that apply  2. Use the structure of the introduction and literature review examples presented to you in lecture  3, and plagiarism examples in lecture 4 to guide you. Also, consider the previous student  submission examples and the related discussions in the lecture 4 to guide you.  3. Get a friend to proof read your work. Your ability to write is a major contribution to the  assessment  4. Use EndNote to help with referencing  5. Do not leave this to the last minute. A lot of work is required to complete the assessment  6. Turnitin will find all sorts of plagiarism. Any attempts to beat the Turnitin system will face major  penalties. See the marking rubric for more details.
Answered Same DayOct 12, 2019ENGG851

Answer To: 4) Research Design: You need to design an experiment that will answer your research question. This...

David answered on Nov 30 2019
105 Votes
Literature Planner – Instructions
Delete this page when submitting this document online for assessment.
Reference Number: Number your references starting from 1
Authors: If one or two authors list their names. If more than two list the first author followed by et. al.
Title of Article: The title of the research paper / book etc.
Type: State if it is a conference, journal, book etc.
Publication: The name of the publication that the work was published in.
Year Published: What year was article published
Number of citations: The number of citations that the publication has
received to date. Also mention the source of data (e.g. Scopus or Google Scholar)
Publication Rating: Use Scopus to determine the CiteScore and ranking information for each publication. Not all publications are rated, use 'N/A' if there is no score. See notes on how to extract this from lecture 2, and the document ‘How to measure impact - CiteScore and citation counts’
Primary or Secondary: State if the research conducted in the article is primary or secondary research (see lecture notes week 2)
What themes were discussed in the Literature Review: Use keywords to discuss the major themes in the article
What was the research question: What was the question the article was trying to find the answer to?
Design: How did they try and answer the question: What did they do? E.g. simulation, experimental design, statistical analysis etc.
What was the finding: What answers were found from undertaking the research in the article?
What were the gaps: What limitations occu
ed in the research design or where outlined in the results or discussion?
Note: When this work is submitted into Turnitin, it is ok if the similarity percentage is high due to the similarity in headings. What the markers will be concentrating on is the similarity in the text that you write
Literature Planne
Student Name:                Student Number:
Topic:
Reference Number: 1                
Title of Article: Hardfacing            
Authors: Afrox Product Reference Manual
Publication: afrox.co.za
Type: Article
Year Published: 2012                    Number of citations:
Primary or Secondary: secondary
Publication Rating: N/A        
CiteScore:    Rank:     Percentile:     In-Category:            CiteScore Year:
What was the research question? How hard facing is used in welding repair of dragline bucket
What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? hardfacing
Design: meta-analysis
What was the finding? Use of hard facing in maintenance and repair of dragline bucket used in mining industry
What were the gaps? Lack of verification of the study
Reference Number: 2                
Title of Article:     New dragline repair link from Columbia Steel        
Authors: Aspermont Ltd
Publication: miningmagazine.com
Type:article
Year Published:     2017                Number of citations:
Primary or Secondary: secondary
Publication Rating:     N/A        
CiteScore:    Rank:     Percentile:     In-Category:            CiteScore Year:
What was the research question? The different welding methods used by companies to repair mining equipment
What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Welding methods
Design: meta-analysis
What was the finding? The different methods of welding repair applied in steel companies while repairing mining equipment
What were the gaps? Lack of study findings validation
Reference Number: 3                
Title of Article: Multi-process welding robot cuts weld time by up to 90 percent SMW Group, Rockhampton QLD, 2016             
Authors: BOC Limited
Publication: boc-limited.com.au
Type: article
Year Published:     2016                Number of citations:
Primary or Secondary: primary
Publication Rating: N/A        
CiteScore:    Rank:     Percentile:     In-Category:            CiteScore Year:
What was the research question? What are the improvements experienced in welding repair for dragline bucket used in mining industry?
What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? Improved welding repair process of mining equipment
Design: meta-analysis
What was the finding? There has been advancement in welding repair
What were the gaps? Lack of literature on improved technology applied in welding repair for dragline bucket used in mining industry.
Reference Number: 4                
Title of Article: A WELDING REVIEW PUBLISHED BY ESAB Repair & Maintenance        
Authors: ESAB.
Publication: www.esab.cz
Type: website
Year Published:     2001                Number of citations:
Primary or secondary: secondary
Publication Rating: N/A    
CiteScore:    Rank:     Percentile:     In-Category:            CiteScore Year:
What was the research question? What are the welding repairs for dragline bucket used in mining industry?
What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? The theme of repair and maintenance
Design: meta-analysis
What was the finding? Welding is widely used in maintenance and repairs of various equipment used in the mining industry
What were the gaps? There is literature gap on information related to specific maintenance for specific dragline bucket
Reference Number: 5            
Title of Article: New gen robots cutting weld time by up to 90 per cent        
Authors: fe
et
Publication: fe
et.com.au
Type: article
Year Published:     2016                Number of citations:
Primary or Secondary: primary
Publication Rating:     N/A        
CiteScore:    Rank:     Percentile:     In-Category:            CiteScore Year:
What was the research question? What are the welding repairs for dragline bucket used in mining industry?
What themes were discussed in the Literature Review? The themes included use of robots for welding and repair in the mining industry and increased productivity and performance.
Design: meta-analysis
What was the finding? The findings included that the use of robots to improve manpower has enhanced productivity and reduced cost in welding repairs of equipment.
What were the gaps? There is not enough literature to compare robotic studies and its...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here