20081015_Prestage for Literature Review–criteria for selecting good research papers

Before reviewing an article, a paper will be scanned or quickly browsed to determine if it be worthy of a review. To do that, Dr. Jonathan Foster taught the students how to judge a paper from the basic structure, title, abstract, introduction, literature review, methods, findings, discussion, and conclusion. He asked the students to exercise the checking points to a real paper that he carefully selected, a research paper published in Information Research 2007 by a local researcher, Professor Yeh whose research is about culture and Aborigines' information behavior.

The model paper is carefully selected: (1) the context is local, (2) publishing date is current, and (3) it is easy access from a prestigious and open access journal.

Jonathan's checking list is simple and easy. My criteria for evaluating a research paper counts on three major elements of a research paper -- justified inquiry, proper methodology, and legitimate results. That makes a checking of :( 1) good research questions? (2) Methods? (3) Results? (4) Methods answer the research questions? (5) Results based on empirical methods? And (6) results answered the research questions. My list of judging criteria is of more logical processing, and Dr. Foster's list is more practical and easy to apply.

The students with their first exercise seem to be confusing. Like the first RM assignment I had in graduate school while professor O'Connor asked the students to find an empirical paper on the shelf of the library and to find out two critical errors or failed (thrilled -- how can it be possible that a peer reviewed paper's errors can be identified by an entry level graduate student... ). But it worked. An attitude of critical reading of research paper, the foundation for a researcher is in formed. I hope the young students are willing to be self-trained to form a keen eye for finding quality research papers.

Reading a colleague's fine work and discussed it is very helpful. Professor Yeh's article is viewed with valuable merits: clear title, systematic and clear abstract, well written introduction in a type of context review as well as theoretical review, very good writer. Yet, the method session is expected to describe more about research instruments, such as interview questions. And the results session is expected to be presented in a categorical code scheme. Overall, it is a legitimate good group exercise in class. I understand that it takes more practice for the students to appreciate the selection of literature. More practice is needed, maybe three more practices, but the class is running out of time.

The students are still suffering from difficulties in understanding and expressing in English. But have you got the points how to select good empirical papers now?

複習作業要訓練的能力：

作業 1 -- 學習如何選擇好文獻 -- 參考Dr. Foster的表格，再找三篇文章找老師和同學一起閱讀， 就會更能熟能生巧。