Ssegawa, J K and Rwelamila, P D (2009) The research skill factor as a cause for high postgraduate attrition rate. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 7(3), pp. 293-322. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose: This paper aims in the first part to document experiences encountered in dealing with challenges facing students embarking on their postgraduate research journey. It gives a brief background on the consequences for not being able to handle properly the research processes. It also identifies factors that contribute to postgraduate attrition and long completion periods focusing on the perceived major contributor to problem - the lack of skills in research on the part of students especially in the early part of the research process. Second, the paper aims to describe and discuss the proposed framework for approaching the research project definition and design process in a systematic and logical manner after formulating a research framework. Design/methodology/approach: Experience recording method is used by reflecting on the authors' supervision experience at honours, masters and doctoral level. A reflection on these experiences is compared with good practices in research approaches to identify gaps which need to be addressed. The second part of the paper is used as a building block in producing a fully fledged research proposal. Two tasks forming the backbone of writing a research proposal at post framework are at the centre of this paper - developing an outline of literature review and the actual writing of the proposal. Findings: It is clearly established that major reasons for the problems facing student researchers are the lack of hands-on skills in the research process on the part of students especially in the early part of the research process (research definition and design) and hence the need for a facilitative framework. The second part of the paper discusses in detail the three main components of the research proposal. Finally, the paper reveals the "final picture" of the research proposal made out of the three components, and an emphasis is put on the need to treat the proposal as a plan which is highly likely to change depending on the research environment forces faced by researchers as they embark on the research journey in the post proposal phase. Originality/value: The original value is two-fold. First, there is an opportunity for educators to identify common problems facing student researchers, hence this information could be used when supervising student researchers. Furthermore, the student has an opportunity to understand the dynamics of research approaches and this provides a good base to avoid bad practices. Second, the paper provides solutions towards overcoming typical problems, and this will help both educators and student researchers to manage the dynamics of research processes. The proposed research framework in order to facilitate the research thought process in a more systematic, logical and integrated manner is an encompassing recommendation which should be used by educators and research students.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | postgraduates; research work |
| Index terms: | literature review, design process, proposal, postgraduate, methodology, good practice, facilitative, supervision, dynamics, reflection |
| Subjects: | professional development, management, performance measurement, research methods, higher education, systems engineering, design methods, control systems, project planning, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Design Practice, Education, Research Practice, Project Management, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here