“Research Paradigms
The word paradigm was coined from the Greek language. This term refers to methods of organizing and planning in data and information collection in relation to a certain case or subject matter. A research paradigm can be defined as a model standard or framework used in observation and understanding of social events that dictate what we observe and how we comprehend what we observe. Practically all individuals show the desire to foretell their future situations. Social science research offers ways in which answers can be obtained to solve social problems.
There are two sources of secondary knowledge about reality namely traditional and authority sources. Individuals inherit some form of culture comprised of accepted knowledge about the dynamics of the world. This knowledge is widely accepted and there is no need to start from scratch to gather evidence. Regardless of the power of tradition we encounter new knowledge each day. In general acceptance of new information and knowledge largely depends on the status of the person who discovers it. One is likely to believe an epidemiologist advice than accept advice from relatives on a certain disease. Tradition and authority are both considered to be double edged swords in the search for new knowledge and information (Babbie 2011).
The two fundamental pillars of science are observation and logic. Both elements are critical in scientific research and are closely related with three vital aspects of research including analysis of data data collection and theory. Social science provides knowledge of why and what is or what ought to be. However this is only when a common standard is agreed upon a prospect which rarely occurs. The main purpose of social science research is to map out various topics that may warrant or require further research investigate a new political or religious organization expand knowledge about the use of new medical drugs and provide insight into the prevalence of various infections among other things. Social science research is also used as a grading criteria for undergraduate and postgraduate course in institutions of higher learning. This is used to assess the graduates on the levels of understanding and their ability to apply theoretical knowledge in solving current issues. Research methods may vary to a large extent and most of the conclusions are more expressive rather than definitive (Johnson & Christensen 2011).
There is no uniform way of carrying out research. There are idiographic and nomothetic explanations. Nomothetic explanations try to explain a category of events or situations rather than addressing just one. On the other hand idiographic explanations address idiosyncratic causes of a certain event. It seeks to list all reasons in relation to a given event. There is also deductive and inductive theory and pure and applied research. In most cases educational research projects are very complex and dynamic which necessitates the use of more than one paradigm in the study. When more than one paradigm is put to use it necessitates an action known as triangulation (Babbie 2011; Johnson & Christensen 2011).
Quantitative research usually makes use of narrow focus relating to one or few causal factors simultaneously. It makes an attempt to keep all other factors constant. These are the factors that are not being studied. This is mainly evident in laboratory studies where the researcher may assign various participants to groups and choose to manipulate a single factor and observe the results. For instance a researcher may assign research volunteers to two different groups give them different teaching instructions and monitor their responses. The investigator then evaluates the group that learns more and attributes it to totally different instructional methods. The investigator can infer a causal attribution. In this case the two groups were same at the beginning and the only differentiating factor is the mode of teaching (Johnson & Christensen 2011).
Qualitative research uses a broad and deep angled lens analysis. It evaluates the human choices and behavior during its natural occurrences paying close attention to detail. In qualitative research the investigator usually does not want to intervene or influence the natural flow or occurrence of a behavior. The investigator tends to study or examine the behavior from a holistic point of view in its natural setting. They try to comprehend numerous dimensions and layers of reality such as the people in a certain group their thoughts how they relate towards each other the norms and beliefs they hold in common or are divergent. For example in the qualitative study or research on the social climate and institutional culture of a very successful school the investigator would have to study numerous aspects of the school. This will be in an effort to determine or make an analysis of the operations of the school in order to explain for whom and why it is successful. Based on the research questions an investigator employing the use of both approaches would shift back and forth between the two approaches (Maxwell 2007).
The choice of the method of data collection is highly dependent on the form of research being conducted. On most occasions the mode of data collection evolves from the study design. The best method of analyzing data depends on whether the study is using qualitative or quantitative approaches. Quantitative studies would probably use one way analysis. On the other hand qualitative would use an eclectic approach since the data come from different aspects of observation. Qualitative data needs coding and searching for interaction and patterns until when a holistic picture can be created. In a mixed study the investigator has to elaborate on the proposed quantitative and qualitative analysis (Maxwell 2007; Babbie 2011).”

  

Click Order Now to get 100% Original Answer Customized to your instructions!