GAC033 Project Based Learning and Research Methods

GAC033 teaches research the way a university expects it: a team develops, presents and defends a research proposal 研究提案. Eight units take you from a question to a defended plan.

Assessment is the proposal itself, its presentation 展示 to peers and facilitators, and coursework. What is assessed is the proposal — not results, because the study is not run.

• ⚠ The commonest failure is a question too big to research. Narrowing is the skill, and it is worth more marks than any amount of reading.

• A driving question 驱动性问题 opens an investigation. It cannot be answered by a search, and it does not have one obvious answer.
• Good driving questions are specific, researchable and arguable.
• Start from something you have noticed, not from a topic you were given.

Worked example. Narrowing one topic three times.

Topic: social media. Too broad to research.

Narrower: social media and study. Still no measurable question.

Driving question: Does keeping a phone out of reach during homework change how long students work before their first interruption?

The third names who, what is measured, and what would count as an answer. That is what "narrow" means, and it is the whole first unit.

• Choose the method after the question, not before.
• An experiment 实验 changes something and measures the effect; a survey 问卷 measures what people report; an observation 观察 records what they do; a research interview 访谈 explains why.
• Ethics 伦理: consent, anonymity, the right to withdraw, and nothing that could harm a participant. A proposal without an ethics section is incomplete.

• Use databases 数据库 and library catalogues, not a search engine alone.
• Keep a search log: what you searched, where, and what you found. It is evidence of method, and it stops you repeating searches.
• Record every citation as you go — the same rule as every other module, for the same reason.

• The research question 研究问题 is the driving question made precise: variables named, population defined, timeframe fixed.
• Write the null hypothesis as well. If you cannot state what "no effect" looks like, the question is not yet measurable.
• Define your terms. "Interruption" needs a definition before anyone can count one.

• A literature review 文献综述 says what is already known, where sources agree and disagree, and where the gap is that your study would fill.
• Organise by idea, never by source. One paragraph per idea, citing whoever supports it — the GAC015 rule, applied to a longer text.
• The gap is the justification for your study, and a proposal without one has not explained why it should exist.

• A proposal states: the question, why it matters, what is known, the method, the ethics, the timeline, and the limitations.
• Limitations 局限 are written before the study, not after. Saying what your design cannot show is what makes the rest credible.
• The timeline 时间表 must be realistic for the weeks you actually have.

• Peer review 同行评审 here means reading another team's proposal as a critical friend.
• Review the method against the question: would this design actually answer it?
• Give feedback that is specific and about the work: the sample is only your own class, so the claim about the school does not follow.
• Receiving critique well is assessed too. Defending every point is a worse outcome than changing one.

• Present the question first, then why it matters, then the method. An audience that does not understand the question cannot judge the method.
• Prepare for the defence 答辩: the three hardest questions are almost always about sample, measurement and alternative explanations.
• Answer with the limitation, not around it. "That is a real weakness; here is why the result would still be informative" is the strongest thing you can say.

Vocabulary card meanings

research proposal: A plan that states a question, a method, and why the study matters. presentation: A talk, often with slides, given to an audience. survey: A set of questions put to many people. research interview: A conversation held to collect evidence for a study. literature review: A written account of research already published on a question. timeline: A list of steps with the dates they should be finished. Peer review: Comments on a piece of work from someone at a similar level. defence: An oral exam in which a student answers questions about a project.