Module 4 Activity 2
Module 4 Activity 2
Activity 1
Read and collect at least 5 research designs, sampling techniques and research instruments
applied or used in conducted and published qualitative research articles internationally. Then
provide the information needed in each column of the matrix below.
Sample Of Research
Research Title Research Design
Population Instrument
1. A QUALITATIVE This study followed The informants for The study utilized
STUDY OF THE a qualitative design the study were the three types of
PSYCHOLOGICAL and took a community research instruments
IMPACT OF descriptive approach administrators (at to gather and
UNEMPLOYMEN to tackle the research least one per analyze data,
T ON question. As few community and namely: participant
INDIVIDUALS studies have been preferably a observation guide,
conducted founding member or interview guides,
specifically on the one of the most and textual analysis
interaction among active guides.
members of online administrators, in
communities, the order to provide a
study is largely sufficiently detailed
descriptive in its background on the
methodology of history and inner
gathering and workings of the
analyzing data in community), officers
order to develop in- or members with
depth understanding special roles or
of the phenomenon tasks, and regular
members. For each
community, a
minimum of three
members (including
administrators) was
chosen as informants
Activity 2
Read and collect at least 5 research designs, sampling techniques and research instruments
applied or used in conducted and published quantitative research articles internationally. Then
provide the information needed in each column of the matrix below.
Sample Of Research
Research Title Research Design
Population Instrument
1. A QUANTITATIVE A quantitative, The two An Institutional
STUDY OF quasi-experimental populations Review Board
COURSE GRADES research design was selected were (IRB) form was
AND RETENTION selected to study students enrolled in prepared for
COMPARING grades, course online and face-to- Washburn
ONLINE AND retention, and face courses. The University approval
FACE-TO-FACE program retention sample included prior to data
CLASSES in students enrolled students enrolled in collection.
in the Technology Technology
Administration Administration Data analysis for
program. The courses. Student all hypothesis
design was chosen enrollment was testing was
as a means to analyzed for all conducted utilizing
determine if Technology SPSS software
significant Administration version 16.0. The
differences occur courses in the software system
between online and program sequence provided automated
face-to-face to determine the analysis of the
students by number of samples statistical
examining available in online measures.
numerical scores and face-toface
from all classes. Statistical analysis
participants using twoway
enrolled, and analysis of variance
retention rates in and chi-square
both courses and were used to
programs in the determine if there
Technology are significant
Administration statistical
program. differences in the
course grades,
course retention,
and program
retention of
students enrolled in
online classes as
compared to their
face-to face
counterparts
2. A QUANTITATIVE This research was The population of The data contained
STUDY OF conducted utilizing this study was within this study
TEACHER a survey design. composed of 522 were collected
PERCEPTION OF This was educators certified using the SAI.
PROFESSIONAL accomplished by the New Jersey
LEARNING through the use of a Department of The researcher
COMMUNITIES’ descriptive rating, Education. These utilized data
CONTEXT, Likert-type survey educators were on collected from pre-
PROCESS AND provided by the staff at the 10 and post surveys
CONTENT. NSDC and EIRC, schools that that were
the Standards participated in the conducted within
Inventory research project. two separate 3-
Assessment (SAI), Although all 33 week windows, one
which was used to schools chosen for in the fall and
collect quantitative the grant by the another in the
data from educators EIRC were invited spring. The
in 10 New Jersey to participate in this instrument was
schools. study, only 10 Internet based, and
responded with each teacher was
their data collected given a key to
from the SAI access the survey to
instrument keep all
information
confidential.
4. A QUANTITATIVE The researchs have The researchers had The instrument that
STUDY ON used a quantitative 50 participants for was used in this
EFFECTS OF research design in this study wherein study is a 25-item
LIVING AWAY this study. 24 of the survey
FROM HOME TO participants were questionnaire,
THE ACADEMIC males while 26 which aims to
PERFORMANCE OF were females. The measure the effects
UNDERGRADUAT target participants of living
E STUDENTS were undergraduate arrangements of
students who live undergraduate
away from their students to their
family, e.g. living academic
in dormitories or performance and
condominiums, for behaviors.
their stay in their
respective The survey consists
universities. The of 20 items. The
participants were questions were
from differentmade according to
universities inhow the
Metro Manila. participants view
on different
The said situations
participants have pertaining to living
been selected alone.
through purposive
sampling technique. The data was
analyzed using t-
test in that the
compared variables
are their own
perceptions of
living alone.
5. LEVEL OF The study The research was The said
COMPLIANCE employed employed to 512 questionnaire was
WITH THE RISK quantitative method respondents which anchored on the
REDUCTION AND through a survey comprised of instrument
DISASTER questionnaire teachers and senior formulated by the
PREPAREDNESS anchored on the high school DepEd in its
PROGRAM instruments students. This was School Disaster
AMONG PUBLIC developed by the distributed to 64 Risk Reduction and
SECONDARY Department of teachers and 350 Management
SCHOOLS IN Education (DepEd). students from Manual
BUENAVISTA, Cangawa National (2012) with four-
BOHOL, High School; 11 point Likert scale.
PHILIPPINES teachers and 10 There were 41
students from questions which
Lubang National were divided into
High School; and three categories
16 teachers and 61 namely: safe
students from learning facilities
Panghagban High (17), school
School. All schools disaster
are in Buenavista, management (10);
bohol, Philippines. and disaster risk
reduction in
education (14).