Research Article
Inquiry-Based Learning Approaches to Enhance Engagement among Post Graduate
Students in Research Methodology Courses
Aspalila Shapii1*, Nurliyana Bukhari2
*1,2School of Education & Modern Languages, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Kedah
Corresponding Author: 1*aspalila@uum.edu.my
Article History: Received: 10 November 2020; Revised: 12 January 2021; Accepted: 27 January 2021; Published online: 05 April 2021
Abstract: Lecturers teaching research methodology courses often feel concerned when discovering many students attempted research without the necessary research methodology skills even after completed compulsory faculty-organized research methodology (RM) courses. The lack of research knowledge and skills is evident when the submitted research proposal deemed not robust enough to qualify for a feasible study. Scholars identify lack of deep learning during RM courses as the main factor since the courses are perceived as not having context and uninteresting hence there was little engagement with the material. Inquiry-based Reflectice Learning (IBL) has been argued to effectively rectify this as its pedagogies involve students in discovery learning that uses activities that are regulated by students. IBL requires students to apply questioning and researching skills to explore, conduct analysis, communicate, and reflect on information. In the study, inquiry-based instruction was used to encourage students to develop multiple perspectives and encourages empathy with the subject and eventually enhance engagement. The study involves a reflective cases study of research methodology courses to explore the lecturer‟s classroom practice using IBL and the students‟ experiences participating in IBL activities. st. The methodology used involve conducting a needs analysis via Google Form survey, interviewing and document analysis of the lecturers‟ teaching plans and field notes and the reflections by both the lecturers and students. The findings from the survey indicate that most students admit they have minimal research skills and require assistance particularly practical research skills. Data from the reflections and field notes also show that students feel engaged with discovery activities conducted, while the lecturer feel students understand better and more engaged with IBL activities conducted. The study has shed significant input on the needs of RM students, participants‟ experiences, and the challenges of implementing RM course using IBL. Some recommendations to facilitate more deep learning experiences among postgraduate students taking RM courses are also proposed. Keywords: Inquiry-based learning, deep learning, teaching research skills, guided reflection, SoTL, post-graduate
1. Introduction
Background of study
Student-centred learning has been the ideal aspirations of the 21st Century outcomes-based Education (OBE) that principally requires the learners to be at the centre of the learning process. It predominantly involves experiential and discovery learning where learners should be the ones who actively participate in the learning
process. In many programs of study, the Research Methodology course is one important compulsory course to be taken by students before completion of their study at undergraduate level. It is particularly useful for those pursuing post graduate degree studies. Generally, the Research Methodology (RM) courses was commonly taught using a traditional lecture-based approach where lecturers use Power Point slides to explain concepts and topic for the duration of 12-week semester. This Presentation, Practice, Production (PPP) approach have been said to contribute to poor student engagement and thus result in limited and superficial learning.
Student-centred learning (SCL) approaches to teaching especially at the tertiary level have emerged from Constructivist view of learning that perceives the nature of learning as the process constructed by the learners themselves. Constructivist theories encompass aspects of philosophical, psychological and epistemological orientations and these aspects can assist tremendously in managing courses like research methodology (Barraket, 2005). The students will be seen as the key players who design of their own learning and knowledge construction as opposed to being the passive receiver of knowledge transmitted by the teachers. SCL has itself been defined in various ways but mainly refers to a process whereby students are given more autonomy and responsibility to determine aspects of learning such as the pace of learning, and the learning methods used (Shapii, 2011, Mc Combs & Whisler, 1997) particularly for higher education. Influenced by the principals of constructivist views in terms of knowledge construction, this study will attempt to propose solutions to the lack of deep learning process in RM courses by applying an inquiry-based approach that could be an alternative to traditional teaching where IBL can really challenge the students to learn through real/ authentic problem. These problems can act as the context and driving force of learning.
Context of study
RM course in many institutions including UUM primarily aims to develop student‟s research skills to be able to formulate research problem, propose the appropriate research questions, design appropriate research methods to address the research questions and finally prepare a research proposal.
These expectations as outlined by the Ministry of Higher Education in the document standard for postgraduate studies under the section; Standards: Master‟s and Doctoral Degree by Research (MQA, 2013) states that the graduates are supposed to go through the knowledge construction, development of research and communication skills. In addition, graduates are expected to be competent in the scientific enquiry process besides enhancing generic skills (such as ethics, positive attitudes, professionalism and leadership skills). Graduates are also expected to utilize analytical and problem solving skills, so that they can evaluate and make critical and creative decisions based on evidence derived from research and; disseminate research findings through publications (MQA, 2013, p.3)
University research programs are expected to consider the above goals in the design of their research programs to produce future researchers who possess relevant research skills. Based on the overall program outcomes, the graduates are supposed to be able to have relevant skills, for example for Master‟s Degree by Research (MQA, 2013, p3) the graduates are expected to “demonstrate mastery of knowledge in the relevant field; apply practical skills in the relevant field; relate ideas to societal issues in the relevant field”. Research students are also expected to; conduct research with minimal supervision and follow ethical and professional
codes of practice, besides demonstrating leadership qualities through effective communication and working with peers and stakeholders; generate solutions to problems using scientific and critical thinking skills and manage information for lifelong learning” (MQA, 2013, p.3).
As for doctoral degree by research, the standards indicate that the end of the program, graduates must be able to “synthesize knowledge and contribute to original research that broadens the frontier of knowledge in the relevant field; adapt practical skills leading to innovative ideas in the relevant field; provide expert advice to society in the relevant field; conduct research independently and adhere to legal, ethical and professional codes of practice” (p.5)
Therefore, based on the above aspirations, all university‟s research program curriculum structure should integrate various multi-disciplinary approaches a range of activities that enhance students‟ personal and professional development. Thus, needs analysis for the program should collect input from stakeholders towards program improvement in order to enrich students‟ personal and professional development. Therefore the study will explore the practices of lecturers using IBL and RM students partipating in various IBL learning activities in two RM courses in UUM. The partipants‟ engagement via reflections in the IBL activities are also investigated
Problem Statement
It has been a great concern among supervisors and lecturers teaching research methodology courses when they discovered that many students attempted research without the necessary research methodology skills despite having attended research methodology courses or workshops organized by the faculty. This lack of skills is evident when the research proposal is submitted not robust enough that may affect their completion of successful thesis later. However, at this stage it is maybe too late for the lecturers or supervisors to facilitate the learners. There are several factors that contribute to lack of „deep learning‟ of research methodology courses. For instance, the subject matter has been viewed as having no context and not interesting (Barraket, 2005). This results in decreased engagement and interest with the learning content and materials.
From a teaching perspective, lecturers have great difficulty in trying to engage students in the activities and in measuring whether the learning outcomes have been achieved. This may be due to the lack of a context that contribute to the students‟ inability to fully understand and apply the research skills into practice. Therefore, drawing from a review of different learning and teaching methodologies, an inquiry-based approach to learning research methodology has considered a more effective learning methodology than the traditional lecture. UUM like other universities in Malaysia receive many postgraduate students who embark on research to complete their studies. Therefore, students‟ success rate for Graduate on Time as highlighted by the ministry of higher education has put more pressure for lecturers to ensure that students have robust research skills and this study is devised to address the above concerns.
Research Objectives
The study aims to conduct a reflective study of a classroom practice conducting Research Methodology courses at postgraduate level. It attempts to enhance student learning by using student-centred teaching methods using inquiry-based learning tasks in a social research methodology subject at the School of Education, UUM.
The study will involve the introduction of a range of specific SCL techniques that encourage student engagement, including problem-based learning, group work, role-play, simulation. The methodological concerns regarding the delivery of the course is then reflected upon. The research objectives are as listed: to conduct a needs analysis of the students‟ research skills prior taking the research methodology course to identify student‟s and lecturer‟s perceptions of inquiry-based learning that could enhance deep learning in research methodology courses to investigate how IBL can enhance deep learning experiences to make recommendations to improve engagement through inquiry-based learning to students taking research methodology courses. The respective research questions of this study are: What are the students‟ research skills needs before the RM course? What are the students‟ and lecturer‟s perceptions towards the Inquiry-based learning activities during the RM course to enhance deep learning experience? How has the Inquiry-based learning activities affected the students‟ deep learning experiences ? What are the recommendations to improve deep learning experiences?
Theory
This could be illustrated in the model of curriculum design and the research-teaching approach by Ramsden (2008) in figure 1 below.
Figure 1. Curriculum design and the teaching of research
2. Methodology
The study
The study involved students and lecturers of RM courses in School of Education & Modern languages, UUM. Two lecturers and 6 postgraduate students (Masters and EdD) for two research method courses participated in the study. Two lecturers using referred to Dr Oshin and Dr Aminah (pseudonyms). Both RM lecturers have more than 3 years teaching RM courses. The RM courses are Course 1 (SZRZ6014 Research Methodology) and Course 2 (SDDP7043 Advance Qualitative Research in Education). The study was conducted throughout three semesters from different semester from 2019-2020.
STUDENTS AS PARTICIPANTS
Research-tutored Curriculum emphasising learning (focus on students writing and discussing papers or essays)
STUDENTS AS AUDIENCE EMPHASIS ON RESEARCH CONTENT EMPHASIS ON RESEARCH PROCESSESES AND PROBLEMS Research-based
Curriculum emphasizing on students participating in inquiry-based learning
Research-led
Curriculum structured around teaching subject content
Research-oriented
Curriculum emphasizing on teaching processes of knowledge construction in the subject
In order to address the research questions planned, the study involved multiple data collection strategies that include needs analysis survey using Google form, semi-structured interviews with the lecturers and document analysis of teaching notes and reflections by the students as listed below.
Needs analysis survey to indentify what are the students; research skills and needs before the RM course using a form comprising items to rank on three components namely Research skills and Techniques; Research management and Communication skills (see Appendix 1)
Semi structured interviews to explore the lecturer‟s perceptions towards the Inquiry-based learning activities during the RM course to enhance deep learning experience; and Analysis of documents of the teaching plan/ notes and guided reflective writing to explore how has the Inquiry-based learning activities affected the students‟ deep learning experiences and to identify the recommendations to improve learning experiences
Content analysis of the interview data and reflections were conducted to identify the recurring patterns of descriptions of their perceptions and experiences participating in IBL activities as shown in the findings section later. The document analysis of the teaching plan yielded some input on how teachers implement IBL activities
3. Literature Review
Student-centred approaches for deep learning experiences
According to Biggs (1999), approaches to learning can be seen in two dichotomies, a surface approach refers to activities that involve inappropriately low cognitive level, which results in superficial and fragmented outcomes. The deep approach refers to activities that are appropriate to handling the task so that an appropriate outcome is achieved. The surface approach is therefore to be discouraged, while the deep approach should be the target and is referred by Biggs as his working definition of good teaching.
To apply Biggs‟ approach in the study, learning in research methodology courses should be perceived and implemented in such a way by giving opportunities to learners to interact with the world and to develop conceptual change, and not just the acquisition of information. Therefore, for this study, as suggested by Weimer‟s five changes theory, the Research Methodology courses involved in this study explored the shift towards student-centred learning encompasses changes to the learning environment (social and physical), change of roles, changes to the nature and communication of learning content, and changes to the assessment of learning. The ultimate aim of IBL approaches are to achieve deep learning that can only take place when learners are engaged. Shapii (2012) also propose that in order for learners to be actively engaged in any SCL activities, there is a need to investigating the practice and process of identifying learners‟ needs (formal- needs analysis instruments and informal-everyday observation). She asserted that the success of SCL learning activities is depended on the nature classroom pedagogical interactions (classroom talk) that should predominantly involve high order thinking questions (HOTs) versus low level questioning.
Likewise, the learner‟s perceptions and acceptence of the activities associated with LC approaches such as group work, project work and discussion of findings and presenting in front of class could also determine their engagement level. In addition, the assessment tasks that yield deep learning as proposed by Biggs (1999) that highlighted that, in order to develop deep learning and to develop research skills and application skills, the
recommended assessments could be in the forms of seminars, presentations, critical incidents and projects (p.70) Therefore, the study will adopt inquiry-based reflective learning (IBL) activities that can enhance deep learning that comprises learning activities that allow learners to relate topic and ideas to past knowledge and experiences; thinks critically about newly knowledge; connect information from other sources; create new arguments; recognizes a structure in the content, have intrinsic motivation and willingness to learn.
Inquiry-based Inquiry (IBL) and student engagement
The term „Inquiry-based Learning‟ (IBL) refers to a variety of pedagogies that involve students in discovery or research and employ approaches to learning that are essentially student-led. Case or problem-based learning (PBL) is perceived as subsets of the wider concept of IBL. Student engagement has been associated with improved performance, motivation and retention (Payne, 2017) students‟ lack of engagement has been seen as having great impact on students achieving their learning outcomes and cognitive development (Bond et al., 2020, Finn & Zimmer, 2012). Merits of hands on approach to research methodology courses has been discussed in various fields of study (Oguz, Acar & Aybars Tuncdogan, 2019; Bond, et al., 2020), where the format of “learning by doing” was found to be very rewarding for the students (Aguado, 2009).
Implementing inquiry- based learning
IBL can be implemented by embedding tasks such as field work or project-based activities within a more traditional curriculum. IBL can also be used as a design principle for whole course and program curriculum (Levy et al, 2013). In fact, the basic principle behind IBL is that the starting point of learning should be a problem, query or puzzle that the learners wish to solve. IBL requires students to use questioning and researching skills to investigate, analyze, communicate, and reflect on information. In the social studies, inquiry-based instruction encourages students to have multiple perspectives and to encourage empathy with the subject (Kahu & Nelson, 2018). Thus, for this study, hands on activities that reflect the above will be used while teaching RM course namely, inductive-nature activities involving project, simulations, role plays, reflective writing. The IBL learning output is directly linked to the assessment and to the dissertation or thesis (Barraket, 2007), so that the students are always aware of the purpose of the RM module or courses. Students are also supported by their peers, being encouraged to present their ideas and discuss their progress with their lecturers or supervisors.
4. Findings
The overall findings show that majority of the students admit they have very basic thus require help in all the research skills particularly the actual process of conducting research. Data from the reflections and field notes also show that students feel engaged with discovery activities conducted, while the lecturer feel students understand better and more engaged with IBL activities conducted.
Needs analysis of students’ research skills
The finding for the needs analysis was obtained from the template form given to the students to be filled at the beginning of the course. The main purpose of this exercise is to provide general input for the lecturers on which areas to focus on for this data collection not to specifically identify each student‟s research needs due to practical reasons and could be explored in another study. The input from this preliminary data guide the planning
of the IBL activities. Due to unavoidable problem, only 6 students were able to participate. Overall, the finding indicated that the students rank lowest and keen to learn the Research Skill & Techniques component compared to Research Management and Communication. This could probably be because they are in early stage of study and therefore cannot visualize the other two components. The summary of the research skills highlighted are as listed in appendix 1. The finding shows that majority students rank themselves (somewhat able) and (moderately able) for all the components of research skills listed in the needs‟ analysis form particularly for the Research skills and Techniques component. Only one student rank particularly able for the Research Management component that involve library and IT skills and 1 rank least able for Communication Skills component.
RESEARCH SKILLS COMPONENTS
1 (Least Able) 2 (Somewhat able) 3 (Moderately able) 4 (Particularly Able) Research skills and Techniques (items 1-16)
(Problem solving, Original Critical Thinking; Discipline knowledge, Discipline, Critical literature review)
0 3 3 0
Research Management (item 17-27) (Project management, Library skills, Bibliography skills,
IT skills)
0 0 5 1
Communication Skills (Items 28-37)
(Academic writing, Critical writing, research presentation)
1 4 1 0
From this finding, the focus of study on the implementation of IBL activities was directed to Research skills and Techniques and Communication skills component.
The preliminary finding on needs analysis indicate that the Research skills and Techniques and Communication skills component are the two areas where the students feel either least to somewhat able. Therefore, both lecturers conducted explored the implementation of IBL activities in these two areas. The lessons to enhance research skills is by integrating IBL elements namely group work, hands on activity and presentation using multiple teaching aid namely PowerPoint, packets of jellies and assorted candies, and Padlet by Dr Oshin and Dr Aminah.
Based on the needs analysis data gathered above, for the study, the researchers documented three lessons planned that involved IBL Lesson 1 is as summarized below
Document analysis was conducted to the reflections collected from the students after each IBRL activities conducted Data from the reflections on students‟ reflection on how IBRL activity implemented by Dr. Oshin by involving an invited qualitative researcher/ practitioner to share her research during the course. The student were given a guided question What are your opinions of qualitative design based on the sharing by Dr. Aminah?.
TOPIC Course/lesson learning outcomes covered
Lecturer activity Students‟ activity Lesson 1 Formulating Research Problem & Reviewing the Literature (1) Formulate problem statement (2) Formulate research objectives and research questions/ research hypotheses for quantitative research
93) Choose and organize relevant literature
(4) Write literature review
L provides YouTube Links https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=u_akSSowN8A& t=58s https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=AnDK2dhucD0& t=27s https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=YM4NQSKXq0k &t=3s
L gives input on important components of Chapter 1 and 2 and input on how to conduct a literature search Demonstration on creating alert on Google Scholar and provide guidance on sorting relevant literature
Students formulate problem statement for their research on Google Doc
Students conduct literature search based on their research topic
Students organize at least seven literatures from quality journal articles in a form of a Reading List Students draft the headings of their literature review based on their Reading List and start writing their literature reviews Lesson 2 Quantitative/ Qualitative Sampling Techniques (1) Describe sampling terminologies; (2) Demonstrate sampling using analogy and real life examples;
(3) Compare the strengths and weaknesses of different sampling methods and (4) Choose appropriate sampling methods based on research design.
L giving a simulation of applying sampling in real life context by asking the students to work in groups and asked to conduct different types of probability sampling. L then present sampling case and technique and discuss strengths and weaknesses of respective sampling technique. Conduct sampling using jellies and candies.
SS are given different data sets to practice with different data types and methods of analysis such as content analysis, interaction analysis and discourse analysis.
Lesson 3 Reliability and Validity
Describe the notions related to validity concepts and different types of validity Identify different sources of validity evidence based on analysis of different testing situations
Elaborate on the reasons why certain factors may affect validity
L gives Input on validation and different sources of validity evidence to conduct validation
L provide examples of each validity evidence in the context of MUET
Q&A on sources of validity evidence
Process input by responding and commenting on validity issues in Malaysian testing practices
Work in groups based on the role assigned for role play Listen to instructions and conduct role play
Reflect on peers‟ presentations and the role play activities conducted to elaborate on factors affecting validity
(L-lecturer, SS-all students)
Students‟ and lecturer‟s perceptions on the implementation of IBL activities
The analysis of teaching notes and reflections of IBL Lesson 1 found that, the students apply sampling in real-life research and experience conducting data analysis context and presented their task to the class. Then, the lecturer explains sampling case and technique followed by a discussion of strengths and weaknesses of sampling techniques. The lecturer found that the learners were very engaged and asked many relevant questions related to
sampling. This inductive approach was found to be very effective than explaining through PowerPoint slides presentation and asking questions to students. The students may not be able to visualize the sampling process. This enable the students to be engage in activities that enhance their research as well as communication skills.:
S1 explains that the IBL activity through forum by invited lecturer and reflective journal practices enable her to view alternative paradigm in research by stating, “My research paradigm before was constructivism, which talks about having no one real truth and requires interpretation. So I believed that there's more to just numbers and scores and it requires more explanation…My worldview before having this session was positivist where I believe on single truth as for my research” (S1) .Another student (S2) also reflected on the approach used by the lecturer by inviting a guest lecturer. S2 explains that, “We learned about the aspects of qualitative methods and how qualitative can help to define what quantitative cannot. We also learned about the topic can be processed and narrowed down something feasible and specific. We also been exposed to the challenges and experiences that Dr got when she did her PhD” (S2)
While S3, stated that “I believe that qualitative design is a more, in-depth design that can explain better what numbers cannot. It is not to undermine the use of quantitative, but it would seem that qualitative explains more about the real world conduct and what is really happening”. Another student (S4) acknowledged that “ it (qualitative study” is very rigorous‟ and it was “It was a great opportunity to be in the sharing given by Dr. Aminah and she really did explain well for us to understand the concept/theory”
Another student (S5) highlighted on his revelation on the richness and merits of qualitative research by connecting to the contribution research make to society by stating that „Data collected from qualitative research is very rich and our task as a researcher to use that information to bring useful impact to the society”. In fact, S3 was able to appreciate the „beauty‟ of qualitative research” from the session, “From this sharing, I learned more of the beauty of qualitative research where it could explain a particular phenomenon further and in depth. It‟s also a good learning session where we‟re exposed to the differences between qualitative and quantitative research” (S3)
5. Discussion
The findings of this study are consistent with those of previous research that IBL activities that are engagaing could enhance learning (Barakett, 2005, Levy et al, 2010)
However, there are some challenges associated with the implementation of IBL. This is in line with that of the works by Fin & Zimmer (2012) and. Bond et al (2020). It is also found that IBL could be challenging without students‟ willingness & readiness to participate. In implementing IBL activities, while students seemed to be engaged, there are certain conditions that may facilitate learning. While engaged in discovery experiential learning, the students somehow need more exposure and practices in IBL environment particularly in the changing roles from the recipient of knowledge to the participant as succinctly summarized by a student 6 stating that, “I prefer the lecturer to take a role as a guider, navigator, facilitator, observer, coach, delegator to guide me along the learning journey. It would be perfect, which blended both the learning approach in the research design process; and the ways to preserve a balance point among both strategies was required” S6
In addition, findings also show that in to ensure the smooth implementation of IBL activities, the students expect some supportive learning environment from the lecturers as described by a learner who find IBL activities challenging, “Moreover, the students hope that the lecturer should create a compassionate, accepting learning environment for students to ask foolish questions, make mistakes, and request help from the lecturer” S6
The findings were also able to address some of the expectations by the ministry (MQA, 2013) as highlighted in earlier chapter stating that research methodology courses should develop graduates who are able to develop specific skills. The students were able to demonstrate some mastery of knowledge in their field and apply practical skills in the relevant field and seemed able relate ideas to social issues in their field and minimal demonstration leadership traits through communicating and working effectively with peers and stakeholders. The students seemed to be able to manage information for lifelong learning. This signifies that the study was able to address some the aims of the Malaysian Higher Education (MQA, 2013). The process of identifying learners‟ needs both formally via needs analysis instruments and informally through observation during teaching can provide insights for lecturers could contribute to the success of SCL learning using IBL activities. The use of reflective tools by the students and teachers themselves as a self evaluation tool to improve their learning and teaching practices as suggested by Bond at al, (2020), Shapii (2012) and Mc Combs & Miller (2007).
6. Limitations
The study, being conducted for actual RM course in the university involved very small number of participants due to small intake and for the scholarship of teaching & learning grant (SoTL) funding which focuses on lecturers‟ own classroom practice. Therefore, the findings cannot be generalised. However, this study design can be further explored in a larger scale or bigger funding to explore the overall RM students‟ population in the institution. In addition, due to the Covid 19 pandemic some of the planned IBL activities cannot be carried out or adjusted as classes are conducted online.
7. Recommendations
The findings of this study suggest that there are still avenues to explore engagement particularly in the current pandemic situation where face to face IBL teaching cannot be implemented. Thus, further explorations on IBL in blended learning or remote learning environment should be ventured. More studies on a larger scale on the effects of IBL activities on engagement involving project, simulations, role plays, reflective writing especially in a blended learning environment need to be conducted to ensure RM courses would produce skilled researchers.
8. Conclusion
This use of IBL activities in learning process enable learners to experience hands-on approach to learning empirical research method. Literature on the new research methodology courses encourages students to be more accountable and „take ownership‟ of their learning of the research methodology courses. This ownership and using a more student centred approach help to maintain interest in the research methodology and thus allow students to engage in real research study or „learning by doing‟.
References
Affairs Education, 15 (2) pp 251–260
2. Bromley, A. P., Boran, J. R., & Myddelton, W. A. (2007). Investigating the baseline skills of research students using a competency-based self-assessment method. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(2), 117-137. https://doi.org/10.1177/
3. Barraket, J. (2005). Reaching Research Method using a student-centred approach? Critical Reflections on Practice. Journal of Understanding Teaching and Learning Practice, 2(2)
4. Benson, A and Blackman, D (2003) „Can research methods ever be interesting‟ Active Learning in Higher Education, 4, pp. 39-45
5. Biggs, J. (1999): What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning, Higher Education Research & Development, 18 (1), pp57-75
6. Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S. et al. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Eduationc 17 (2) https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8
7. Brad W. Lundahl PhD (2008). Teaching Research Methodology Through Active Learning. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 28:1-2, 273288, DOI: 10.1080/08841230802179373
8. Finn, J., & Zimmer, K. (2012). Student engagement: What is it? Why does it matter? In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement, pp. 97– 131. Boston: Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_5.
9. Kahu, E. R., & Nelson, K. (2018). Student engagement in the educational interface: Understanding the mechanisms of student success. Higher Education Research and Development, 37(1), 58–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1344197.
10. Levy, B. L. M., Thomas, E. E., Drago, K., & Rex, L. A. (2013). Examining Studies of Inquiry-Based Learning in Three Fields of Education: Sparking Generative Conversation. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(5), 387–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487113496430
11. Marie-Jeanne Meijer, Femke Geijsel, Marinka Kuijpers, Fer Boei & Emmy Vrieling (2016) Exploring teachers‟ inquiry-based attitude, Teaching in Higher Education, 21(1), 64-78, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2015.1115970
12. McCombs, B. & Miller, L. (2007). Learner-centred classroom practices and assessments: maximizing student motivation, learning and achievement. USA: Corwin Press.
13. McCombs, B. L. & Whisler, J. S. (1997) The learner-centred classroom and school: strategies for increasing student motivation and achievement. San Fransisco: Jossey Bass.
14. McCulloch, A. (2009) The student as co-producer: learning from public administration about the student-university relationship. Studies in Higher Education, 34(2), 171-183
15. Oguz A. Acar & Aybars Tuncdogan (2019) Using the inquiry-based learning approach to enhance
student innovativeness: a conceptual model, Teaching in Higher
Education, 24(7), 895909, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2018.1516636
16. Payne, L. (2017). Student engagement: Three models for its investigation. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 3(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1391186.
from:
http://www.dius.gov.uk/higher_education/shape_and_structure/he_debate/~/media/publications/T/teachi ng_and_student_experience_131008 Accessed 10/9/09
18. Shapii, A. (2012). Learner-Centredness in Malaysian Year Five Primary School Teaching: Four Case Studies Of Teachers‟ Practices, Beliefs And Knowledge. EdD Thesis: University of Leicester, UK. AccessIBLe at https://lra.le.ac.uk/bitstream/2381/28722/1/2012shapiiaedd.pdf
19. Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centred teaching: five key changes to practice. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. 20. Malaysian Qualification Agency (2013) Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia: retrieved from
http://www2.mqa.gov.my/QAD/garispanduan/2019/Standard%20Masters/6.%20Standards%20-%20Masters%20and%20Doctoral%20Degree_BI%20-%20[FB].pdf
Appendix 1
Table 1 Self-ranking of Research Training Needs Analysis: Postgraduate Research Students (adapted from Bromley, et al., 2007).
1(least able); 2 (somewhat able); 3 (Good/ moderately able); 4 (particularly able)
Research skills rank
A1
Problem solving
Able to define research problems extracted from a systematic and rigorous analysis of gaps in existing knowledge literature
can identify potential areas that might contribute to new knowledge.
Able write a research proposal, constructing research questions, describing context, exploring sources and methodology suitable for PG level
A2
Critical Thinking
Able to formulate hypotheses and research questions for a research project Able to contribute novel (new) and innovative research ideas
Able to be objective and display knowledge when critiquing published research A3 Knowledge
in discipline
Can display knowledge about their research area with supervisor and peers. Show familiarity with recent relevant literature in their field of study. Can synthesize and write a literature review on the topic.
A4 Discipline
Able to discuss and justify various methodologies that address related research question(s).
Possess in-depth knowledge and understanding of appropriate research techniques and how to apply them
A5
Critical literature review
Able to acknowledge the weaknesses and assumptions in research findings objectively.
Able to be objective to comment on other people‟s work.
Excellent digital/ IT skills in data collection analysis and presentation of data in appropriate form.
A6 Progress summaries
Able to clearly present a summary of a research problem to different audiences.
Able to critique own research and define future research objectively. Able to construct written summaries relevant for research purpose
Able to write an appropriate professional standard progress reports on their research
B: Research Management Component Research management
B1 Project management
Able to plans and balance various demands on time effectively.
Able to plan, organize, execute and evaluate a research program. Able to set and focus on various goals within their research project.
Able to strategize to meet the demand set for the project. B2
Library skills
Able to gather and record information in an organized and professional way Competent in relevant software
Able to conduct searches using appropriate online and offline resource B3
Bibliography skills
Able to demonstrate a great awareness of potential sources of information relevant for subject area.
Able to do referencing for various sources
Able to use a variety of referencing styles and conventions B4
IT skills
Able to establish a reference list expected for scholarly publication and be updated with latest searches and electronic services.
Able to use appropriate software to prepare papers with any relevant features (such as use of master documents, or embedding of charts, figures and images)
C: Communication Skills Communication skills
C1 Academic writing
Able to produce a well-structured and well written report of relevant length. Able to write concise, academic work and express ideas clearly
Have full control over various writing styles C2
Critical writing
Able to communicate about their own research reports (orally and in written) Able to produce well-constructed and clear presentations.
Able to explain their research at a range of levels appropriate for various audience types (e.g. international conference or non-specialist audiences)
Able to use slides and PowerPoint confidently and easily in oral presentations
Able to provide feedback for their research subject and to respond to feedback
C3 Research presentation
