COURSE TITLE: METHODS OF RESEARCH

WEEK 2 ASSESSMENT

Part 1. Written Quiz

Instructions: Provide the following essay questions with brief answer. Limit your
answer into four to five sentences.

1. The scientific method is often described as self-correcting and cyclical. Briefly

describe your understanding of the scientific method with regard to these concepts.
This cyclical, self-correcting process is largely due to science's empirical character.
Theories emerge as explanations for observed occurrences in the actual world. Specific
hypotheses are produced and tested based on theories. As a result of this testing, ideas
will be examined and adjusted or refined, resulting in new hypotheses that will be tested
again. This cyclical process eventually allows for more exact (and presumably accurate)
data collection.

2. Discuss how you would explain your science fair project results to a news reporter
who wants to feature you and your project in a very popular science magazine.
Firstly, I would tell them about what my research project is. Then tell them what my
objectives are on this project. Thirdly, I would tell them what my methods are then
proceed to telling my results. The results should be explained accurately but in a
concise manner.
3. A very clever scientist did not follow the scientific method in conducting an
experiment. However, he arrived with a conclusion. Do you believe that the conclusion
drawn from the experiment is valid and reliable? Why or why not? No, since we are
talking about a scientific method, we should have an objective process in which we do
not use our feelings. The scientist may have overlooked or might have forgotten
something in arriving at the conclusion. Furthermore, without following the methods, it is
possible that he could have gotten the answers from others sources, thus formulating a
biased answer.
Part 2. Reflection Paper
Instruction: Write an essay (1250-1500 words) reflecting on the completed topic of the
week.

The scientific method is widely attributed to Roger Bacon, a 13th-century English

philosopher and scientist, however others contend that the Italian scientist Galileo
Galilei had a significant role in its development. Philosophers Francis Bacon and René
Descartes made later contributions to the scientific method. Although there is
considerable dispute over the precise qualities of the scientific method, most believe
that it is distinguished by the following components: Empirical Approach, Observations,
Questions, Hypotheses, Experiments, Analyses, Conclusions, & Replication.

Empirical Approach collect, measure, record, and analyze data in order to generate
knowledge. Empirical study may investigate, characterize, or explain human, animal, or
natural world behaviors or events. It may employ a variety of quantitative or qualitative
methodologies, ranging from laboratory experiments to surveys. From surveys to artifact
analyses, we've got you covered. Empirical research is the bedrock of knowledge in the
scientific sciences, social sciences, medical and health sciences, and engineering and
technology. Humanities experts may also employ empirical research to validate and
expand the theoretical understanding of their subjects. Publishing empirical research
articles in peer-reviewed journals is one of the keyways empirical researchers
disseminate their results (and hence improve knowledge in their disciplines). These
articles are primarily published for other researchers, experts, practitioners, and
professionals in the subject or discipline, although interested members of the public,
college or graduate students, or professionals in adjacent disciplines may also read
them. While each profession has its own set of standards and criteria, most empirical
research papers are between 3,000 and 10,000 words long and follow the pattern
outlined below.

Observation is a vital part of every scientific inquiry. In this context, observation relates
to two separate concepts: being aware of our surroundings and taking precise
measurements. Observations of the world around us frequently prompt questions that
are addressed by scientific study. For example, Newton's discovery that apples fall from
trees sparked extensive research into the forces of gravity. As a result, keeping a
watchful check on your surroundings may often give you with several research study
ideas. In the realm of science, observation entails more than simply watching our
surroundings to generate study ideas. The process of making meticulous and exact
measurements, which is a distinctive aspect of well-conducted scientific research, is
sometimes referred to as observation. Scientists often take considerable care while
performing measurements in the context of research to avoid producing biased
observations. For example, if a researcher is watching the amount of time that elapses
between two occurrences, such as the time that elapses between lightning and thunder,
it is highly recommended that the researcher record the data. The researcher must
utilize a measurement instrument with excellent precision and dependability. Rather of
guessing the length of time that transpired between the two occurrences, the researcher
should utilize a stopwatch or equivalent measurement instrument. By doing so, the
researcher assures that the measurement is precise and not erroneous. Extraneous
influences might skew results. Most individuals would probably agree that we rarely
make such meticulous or systematic observations in our daily lives.

Following the generation of a research concept, which may have resulted from
observations of the world around us, the following phase in the research process entails
turning that research idea into an answered question. The adjective "answerable" is
crucial in this context and should not be missed. Attempting to solve an unanswerable
research issue through scientific study would obviously be a difficult and ultimately
unrewarding task. "Is there an exact clone of myself in another universe?" is an
example of an unanswerable research question. "While this is a fascinating issue that
will almost probably generate vital knowledge, the current level of science cannot give a
solution." That is the question. As a result, it is critical to develop a research topic that
can be answered using known scientific methodologies and processes. One can
wonder, for example, if exercising (possibly operationally defined as jogging three times
per week for 30 minutes is beneficial each time) lowers cholesterol levels. Using
recognized scientific procedures, this topic might be explored and addressed.

Next is hypothesis, a forecast about what your investigation will uncover. It is an

untested preliminary response to your research question. You may be required to draft
many hypotheses that address distinct areas of your research issue for some research
initiatives.

A hypothesis is more than simply an educated guess; it should be founded on current

ideas and information. It must also be testable, which implies that scientific research
methods may be used to support or deny it (such as experiments, observations and
statistical analysis of data). All hypotheses must make a prediction, which is an
essential aspect. Keep in mind that hypotheses are the researcher's attempt to explain
the phenomena under investigation, and that explanation should include a prediction
regarding the variables under investigation. The hypotheses are then tested by
collecting and analyzing data, and the results might either support or disprove the
hypothesis. Proposing hypotheses, doing research, and developing or revising theories
are all part of the scientific method of study results.

Following the formulation of the hypothesis, the experiment must be carried out (or
research study). For example, if the study entails looking into the effects of exercise on
cholesterol levels, the researcher would develop and carry out a study that looked into
that would make an effort to answer that question. As previously said, one critical part of
performing a research study is accurately and reliably monitoring the phenomena of
interest. In this case, the researcher would gather information about the cholesterol
levels of the participants. Using a precise and reliable measuring instrument, study
participants.

Following the research and data collection, the next stage is to analyze the data, which
usually necessitates the application of statistical tools. The statistical approaches
utilized by a researcher are determined by the study's design and the type of data being
collected, and the questions being asked. Although a full explanation of statistics is
beyond the scope of this article, understanding the function of statistics in performing a
research study is critical. In brief, statistics assist researchers in reducing the possibility
of drawing an incorrect conclusion regarding the link between the variables being
researched.

It is critical that researchers draw only findings that can be substantiated by data
analysis. Going beyond the data is a cardinal sin that researchers must avoid at all
costs. For example, if a researcher conducted a correlational study and the findings
showed that the two variables under consideration were significantly connected, the
researcher could not conclude that one caused the other. Correlation (i.e., a relationship
between two things) does not imply causation, as is frequently said and will be explored
in subsequent chapters. In other words, just because two things are connected does not
imply that one produced the other.

It is impossible to overestimate the value of replication in research. Replication serves

various important functions, including assessing the dependability (i.e., consistency) of
the research study's findings and whether the same results can be produced using a
different method.

Participants from various groups. This last criteria concerns whether the original study's
findings are generalizable to different groups of research participants. If the findings of a
study are duplicated, the researchers—and the area in which the researchers
work—can have more confidence in the original findings' dependability and
generalizability.
Part 3. Analysis Paper
Instructions: Read the passage and fill in the Scientific Method Chart.

How Penicillin Was Discovered

In 1928, Alexander Fleming was studying Staphylococcus bacteria growing in culture

dishes. He noticed that a mold called Penicillium was also growing in some of the
dishes. A clear area existed around the mold because all the bacteria that had grown in
this area had died. In the culture dishes without the mold, no clear areas were present.

Fleming hypothesized that the mold must be producing a chemical that killed the
bacteria. He decided to isolate this substance and test it to see if it would kill bacteria.
Fleming transferred the mold to a nutrient broth solution. This solution contained all the
materials the mold needed to grow. After the mold grew, he removed it from the nutrient
broth. Fleming then added the nutrient broth in which the mold had grown to a culture of
bacteria. He observed that the bacteria died.

1. What was the observation? It is observed that penicillin kills bacteria

2. What question/s were asked? How was penicillin discovered?

3. What was the hypothesis? The mold must be producing a chemical that
kills bacteria.

4. How was the hypothesis tested? The hypothesis was tested by experimentation.

5. What was the result of the experiment? The results showed that penicillin kills bacteria.
6. What conclusion could be drawn? It can be concluded that penicillin from a mold
is helpful in producing an antibacterial
chemical.