Group: ______________

Title of the Activity: Critique Me if You Can

Objectives:
Evaluate the two given samples or research using the given evaluation tool.
Differentiate qualitative from quantitative research.

Materials:
Copies of the following:
o Research samples
o Evaluation tool
o Guide questions for analysis

Procedure:
Read and evaluate the two given research samples using the evaluation tool
Discuss and answer the guide questions for analysis in your group.

Guide Questions for Analysis:

Based on the result of your evaluation of the two research samples, answer the following
questions:
1. What are your important observations about the two research samples?

2. Which of the two aims to test the hypothesis and look for cause and effect? What about to
explore?

3. Which of the two is subjective? Is objective? Why

4. What is the data collection technique used in sample 1? In sample 2?

5. Which is analyzed statistically? Which is not?

6. In terms of outcome, which has the measurable results?

7. Based on your evaluation, which do you think is a qualitative research? Which is a quantitative
research? Why?
 EVALUATION TOOL

Directions: Evaluate the given sample of research based on the given criteria. Check the appropriate box
that corresponds to your evaluation about the characteristics of the sample research.

Sample Research No: ____________

Criteria Evaluation
1. Aim/ Purpose Exploration of participants To test hypotheses, look at
experiences and life world cause & effect, & make
predictions.
2. Objectivity and Subjectivity is expected. Objectivity is critical.
Subjectivity
3. Data collection In-depth interviews, Questionnaire, Standardized
participant observation / interviews or Tightly structured
fieldwork or focus group observation
discussion,
4. Data Analysis Thematic, constant Statistical analysis
comparative analysis,
Content analysis or
Ethnographic analysis
5. Outcome Story, theory or ethnography Measurable results
(the scientific description of the
customs of individual peoples
and cultures.)

Sample Research No: ____________

Criteria Evaluation
1. Aim/ Purpose Exploration of participants To test hypotheses, look at
experiences and life world cause & effect, & make
predictions.
2. Objectivity and Subjectivity is expected. Objectivity is critical.
Subjectivity
3. Data collection In-depth interviews, Questionnaire, Standardized
participant observation / interviews or Tightly structured
fieldwork or focus group observation
discussion,
4. Data Analysis Thematic, constant Statistical analysis
comparative analysis,
Content analysis or
Ethnographic analysis
5. Outcome Story, theory or ethnography Measurable results
(the scientific description of the
customs of individual peoples
and cultures.)
SAMPLE RESARCH 1

Ensuring Safety and Resiliency: Disaster Risk Reduction in School and Community Through
Localized Science Literacy

ABSTRACT
This study focused on exploring the local knowledge of the community regarding the practices on
disaster preparedness before, during, and after disasters, assessing the needs to be addressed to improve
disaster preparedness in a coastal community and designing a community-based learning material to enhance
disaster preparedness in a local community.
Using the ethnographic tools such as key informant interviews, observations, and focus group
discussions, the researcher explored and utilized community local knowledge and science concepts as bases
and context in the development of a community-based learning material. Findings of the study revealed that:
the coastal community posses a wealth of knowledge regarding DRR on typhoons; there are certain needs of
the community to be addressed such as the need for relevant DRR learning materials that can be used in
school and community, and the need to enhance skills in coping after disasters.
The study also generated a model on how to create a community-based learning material utilizing
local knowledge and science concepts focusing on the following major
activities, namely: (a) drawing funds of knowledge from the community, (b) developing a community-based
learning material, (c) identifying culturally relevant science concepts in disaster risk reduction and (d)
teaching culturally relevant disaster risk reduction concepts in school and community.
Focus group discussion with selected teachers was done to elicit knowledge and evaluation of the
designed learning material. It was concluded that 1) the coastal community possesses a wealth of knowledge
regarding the disaster-risk reduction and impact mitigation, 2) culture and practices on disaster preparedness
and impact mitigation can be infused with science concepts to teach disaster risk reduction in schools, and 3)
community-based learning materials can help foster deeper understanding and connection between the
school science and the communitys practices on disaster risk reduction.

Taken from: Donna Borda Amarillo, Capiz State University Pontevedra, Capiz, 2016.
Ensuring Safety and Resiliency: Disaster Risk Reduction in School and Community Through Localized
Science Literacy
Research Adviser: Dr. Harold O. Buenvenida (Modified Version)
SAMPLE RESEARCH 2

Pedagogical and Epistemological Beliefs and Instructional Practices

of Science Teachers

Abstract
This study determined the pedagogical and epistemological beliefs and the instructional practices of
Science teachers. Relationships among these three variables were also determined. This study was conducted
among the entire 65 population of secondary private and public school Science teachers in the Division of
Roxas City during the school year 2015-2016.
The Teaching and Learning Conceptions Questionnaire (TLCQ) (Chan et. al, 2004), Epistemological
Belief Inventory (EBI) (Schraw et. al, 2002) and a researcher-made questionnaire for instructional practices
were utilized to determine the pedagogical beliefs, epistemological beliefs and instructional practices of
Science teachers correspondingly.
The descriptive statistical tools such as frequency count, percentage, mean, and standard deviation
were employed. On the other hand, Pearson r, t-test for independent samples and One-Way Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA) which set at .05 alpha level, were used as inferential statistics.
Study results revealed that generally, the Science teachers have high level of pedagogical beliefs.
When it comes to the two domains, they have very high level constructivist beliefs and high level traditional
beliefs. They are generally sophisticated as to their epistemological beliefs. In terms of the 5 dimensions, the
Science teachers are nave-certain believers of the structure of knowledge, nave-simple believers of the
source of knowledge. On the other hand, they are sophisticated-personal experience believers of the source
of knowledge, sophisticated-changeable believers of the control of knowledge acquisition and sophisticated-
gradual process believers of the speed of knowledge acquisition. As to the instructional practices, the
Science teachers are outstanding in general. Similarly, they are outstanding in the 5 domains of instructional
practices such as instructional planning, instructional strategies, learning environment, assessment, and
professionalism. No significant difference existed in pedagogical belief, epistemological belief and
instructional practices of teachers when classified according to age, sex, tenure, highest academic
qualification, teaching load, monthly salary, and type of school. Finally, no significant correlation was noted
among pedagogical belief, epistemological belief and instructional practices of Science teachers however, a
weak-positive relationship existed between pedagogical belief and epistemological belief.

Taken from: Besa, Adonis P. Pedagogical and Epistemological Beliefs and Instructional Practices of
Science Teachers. Unpublished Master of Arts in Teaching (General Science) Thesis, Filamer
Christian University, Roxas City, April 2016. (Modified Version)