conducting a mini research project

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process

A Beginner's Guide to Starting the Research Process

When you have to write a thesis or dissertation , it can be hard to know where to begin, but there are some clear steps you can follow.

The research process often begins with a very broad idea for a topic you’d like to know more about. You do some preliminary research to identify a  problem . After refining your research questions , you can lay out the foundations of your research design , leading to a proposal that outlines your ideas and plans.

This article takes you through the first steps of the research process, helping you narrow down your ideas and build up a strong foundation for your research project.

Table of contents

Step 1: choose your topic, step 2: identify a problem, step 3: formulate research questions, step 4: create a research design, step 5: write a research proposal, other interesting articles.

First you have to come up with some ideas. Your thesis or dissertation topic can start out very broad. Think about the general area or field you’re interested in—maybe you already have specific research interests based on classes you’ve taken, or maybe you had to consider your topic when applying to graduate school and writing a statement of purpose .

Even if you already have a good sense of your topic, you’ll need to read widely to build background knowledge and begin narrowing down your ideas. Conduct an initial literature review to begin gathering relevant sources. As you read, take notes and try to identify problems, questions, debates, contradictions and gaps. Your aim is to narrow down from a broad area of interest to a specific niche.

Make sure to consider the practicalities: the requirements of your programme, the amount of time you have to complete the research, and how difficult it will be to access sources and data on the topic. Before moving onto the next stage, it’s a good idea to discuss the topic with your thesis supervisor.

>>Read more about narrowing down a research topic

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

So you’ve settled on a topic and found a niche—but what exactly will your research investigate, and why does it matter? To give your project focus and purpose, you have to define a research problem .

The problem might be a practical issue—for example, a process or practice that isn’t working well, an area of concern in an organization’s performance, or a difficulty faced by a specific group of people in society.

Alternatively, you might choose to investigate a theoretical problem—for example, an underexplored phenomenon or relationship, a contradiction between different models or theories, or an unresolved debate among scholars.

To put the problem in context and set your objectives, you can write a problem statement . This describes who the problem affects, why research is needed, and how your research project will contribute to solving it.

>>Read more about defining a research problem

Next, based on the problem statement, you need to write one or more research questions . These target exactly what you want to find out. They might focus on describing, comparing, evaluating, or explaining the research problem.

A strong research question should be specific enough that you can answer it thoroughly using appropriate qualitative or quantitative research methods. It should also be complex enough to require in-depth investigation, analysis, and argument. Questions that can be answered with “yes/no” or with easily available facts are not complex enough for a thesis or dissertation.

In some types of research, at this stage you might also have to develop a conceptual framework and testable hypotheses .

>>See research question examples

The research design is a practical framework for answering your research questions. It involves making decisions about the type of data you need, the methods you’ll use to collect and analyze it, and the location and timescale of your research.

There are often many possible paths you can take to answering your questions. The decisions you make will partly be based on your priorities. For example, do you want to determine causes and effects, draw generalizable conclusions, or understand the details of a specific context?

You need to decide whether you will use primary or secondary data and qualitative or quantitative methods . You also need to determine the specific tools, procedures, and materials you’ll use to collect and analyze your data, as well as your criteria for selecting participants or sources.

>>Read more about creating a research design

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Finally, after completing these steps, you are ready to complete a research proposal . The proposal outlines the context, relevance, purpose, and plan of your research.

As well as outlining the background, problem statement, and research questions, the proposal should also include a literature review that shows how your project will fit into existing work on the topic. The research design section describes your approach and explains exactly what you will do.

You might have to get the proposal approved by your supervisor before you get started, and it will guide the process of writing your thesis or dissertation.

>>Read more about writing a research proposal

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Methodology

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

Is this article helpful?

Other students also liked.

• Writing Strong Research Questions | Criteria & Examples

What Is a Research Design | Types, Guide & Examples

• How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

More interesting articles

• 10 Research Question Examples to Guide Your Research Project
• How to Choose a Dissertation Topic | 8 Steps to Follow
• How to Define a Research Problem | Ideas & Examples
• How to Write a Problem Statement | Guide & Examples
• Relevance of Your Dissertation Topic | Criteria & Tips
• Research Objectives | Definition & Examples
• What Is a Fishbone Diagram? | Templates & Examples
• What Is Root Cause Analysis? | Definition & Examples

What is your plagiarism score?

Our websites may use cookies to personalize and enhance your experience. By continuing without changing your cookie settings, you agree to this collection. For more information, please see our University Websites Privacy Notice .

Office of Undergraduate Research

Tips for starting an independent research project.

By Grace Vaidian, Peer Research Ambassador 

Here at UConn, a prevalent avenue for delving into research is to reach out to professors and join their existing projects. While the structure and guidance that this approach offers can be undeniably valuable (it’s how I obtained the research opportunities I’m currently working on!), there are students who feel like they have a brilliant research idea of their own but lack the know-how to bring these projects to life. I’m here to offer some tips on how to initiate and successfully navigate an independent research project.

Where to Begin: Identifying the Knowledge Gap

The first step in embarking on your independent research journey is to pinpoint a gap in knowledge. This is essentially an underexplored area that could greatly benefit from further research and discoveries. For some, this gap might be immediately apparent, but for others, including myself, it might require a bit more digging. One effective way to identify this gap is through a thorough literature review on a topic of interest. Most academic publications include insights into the unanswered questions and areas that warrant further investigation in the discussion or conclusion sections. This is a great starting point for coming up with your own research question. Additionally, this literature review process can give you ideas for a methodology to follow.

Finding a Mentor: A Valuable Guide on Your Journey

I know, the focus of this blog is how to do independent research, so why am I now suggesting finding a mentor? It’s important to recognize that even if you possess extensive knowledge on a particular topic, you’re still a student with much to learn. Having an expert to provide feedback and guidance on your project idea is invaluable and often mandatory to move a project forward. Once you’ve formulated a research question, you should collaborate with faculty or professionals willing to support your future steps. A case in point is a self-initiated project I worked on involving fentanyl overdose deaths. I realized that having open access to autopsy and toxicology reports would be impossible for a 16-year-old. However, by proposing my project idea to a local forensic pathologist and securing her mentorship, I was welcomed into the Medical Examiner’s Office and was able to review the necessary reports. A mentor can play a pivotal role in helping you secure the essential resources for your project.

Crafting Your Project: Defining Goals and Objectives

With your research question in place, it’s time to define your project’s goals. Do you want to be published? Create a product? Enter a competition? With your goals in mind, you can outline your objectives, methods, and create a timeline. At UConn, there are some great programs that support independent research, such as the Holster Scholar Program and the UConn IDEA Grant . As you explore these possibilities, remember to be realistic about the time and resources your project will require.

Taking the Leap: Go for It!

Independent research projects offer a unique opportunity to delve into your passions, build critical thinking skills, and contribute to new discoveries. The journey may be challenging, but the knowledge and skills you acquire are invaluable. Throughout the process, remember to enjoy the journey. I wish you the best of luck on your independent research adventure!

Grace is a senior double majoring in Molecular & Cell Biology and Drugs, Disease, and Illness (Individualized Major).  Click here  to learn more about Grace. 

How to Plan and Conduct a Research Project: 12 Simple Steps

Let’s have a brief and clear discussion on what we should do for achieving success in our research project.

Well! For planning and conduction we have to go through following steps.

1. Topic selection

Many of us have a clear research topic of mind but some are also there who come up with various ideas. When we are in pressure, we often get panicked and anxious, therefore we should select topic well before time by following ways.

2. Discussing with others: We should discuss with others (e.g., friends, lab mates, seniors, teachers and colleagues) about what they are mostly considering, what is sparking interest in us and whatever question arises we should freely discuss with others as their suggestions and comments will help us in refining our focus.

3. Having a look on other writings or previous people research topics:  Books and journals are major sources of ideas. We can spend some time in library and get some idea on title of other research paper of recent years, or we can go through previous people research projects. Similar studies have also been published in journals. Those articles we have to collect and plan how to make a difference.

Now-a-days many things are available online from internet. Websites like  Google ,  PubMed ,  Scopus ,  Science Direct  and others are some of the best learning sources and provides latest information of research. We can search many related topics and finalize a plan.

4. Considering our own interest:  Final and the vital point is considering our own interest like is giving us more interest. We can focus on that to find out whether that is covered in the syllabus. We should remain extra critical while choosing a topic so that we can find out which thing needs some extra studies. While choosing a topic certain points we should keep in mind like a research study can duplicate of already existing study in a completely different manner, extension of existing study, exploring the unexplored part, reviewing the knowledge in s particular field, application of theoretical idea to a real world problem.

5. Developing a research question

Once topic selection is done and it is accepted by department, we should start focusing on refining the topic and finding something like

• Issue for investigating
• What we want to prove, disapprove or discover
• Research limitations

6. Effectual planning of the research

Well!  Research proposal  is the detailed explanation of the whole project that we are going to conduct. It is like a formal need. It should include your thinking about the research problem, all discussions with your guide and all initial findings on the topic.

This step will include strategies to manage the time and how effectively we carry out all tasks. A plan should be made in such a way that it should allocate required time for each and every task. For this we have to see how much total time we have and accordingly we will divide time for each task. It is vital to remain as much realistic as we can about the timing each task will take. The more focused we will remain at the planning stage the more hours we can save while carrying out task. Better to note down about all the resources we need in each stage like how much time we should spend in  library , working hours, equipment lists, space required etc.

It is one of the common problems while conducting research and we should remain well prepared for it. For  several reasons people procrastinate  like for improper management of time, dauted by scale of the work, motivation loss, perfectionism, negative thoughts and many more. When we recognize these problems early, it will help us in minimizing it to larger extent. To avoid we should be realistic about when we should start, devote more time for planning and revising the research plan, allocation of proper time, highly focused etc.

Early identification of the signs of procrastination will give you the best chance of minimizing any negative effects. Once you suspect that you are procrastinating, it can be helpful to review what you are expecting of yourself, and check that those expectations are realistic. This is where planning is vital. After a research plan is made it is a better idea to show it to some other people of our team or our teachers/guides, who can help us in finding out some missing tasks, or some mistakes.

Conducting Research

After the planning stage is over now comes the time to conduct the research. Here also we should remain highly organized and methodical to achieve success. Let’s have a discussion on each step.

6 thoughts on “How to Plan and Conduct a Research Project: 12 Simple Steps”

We are a group of volunteers and starting a new scheme in our community. Your website offered us with valuable info to work on. You have done an impressive job and our whole community will be thankful to you.|

Very impressive

I find the explanation given very informative.

informative

excellent work

your planning is very helpful for me. please this written planning doc file send me.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

About us   Opportunities   Partners   Language

• Bilingualism and Childhood
• Learning about autism RCT
• Learning About Research
• ASDTech parent survey
• East Park iPad project
• Interactive pretending
• Social Play & Autism
• Bilingualism, Autism & Learning
• Bilingualism, Autism & the Brain
• Parent experiences
• Diversity in Social IQ
• Ageing & Residential Care
• EAR Project
• Employer Attitudes
• Family in Residence
• TUKS: sibling experiences
• Cleft palate & development
• Gesture and Language
• Measuring eye movements
• Music & Autism
• Reading digital stories
• Social development

How to design a small research project

• How to design a small…

A common theme on this blog is an attempt to provide guidance on the things that, as academics, we are meant to know how to do, but on which we rarely receive any explicit training. For today’s June Blog I thought I’d write one of these posts, about designing a small research project.

As people become more independent as academics, there’s a lot of small project supervision required.  By small, I’m talking about a project carried out as part of a taught Masters degree, or smaller. The former mostly takes place over about a 4 month period – though initial planning might happen much earlier – with relatively full-time focus available for the last 2.5 months. Smaller projects might include summer placements for visiting students (anything from 4-10 weeks) and undergraduate mini-projects. For example, at my University, medical students do “student selected components” in their 5th year, which last about 16 weeks but involve about 6 full weeks’ worth of dedicated project time. One thing to note is that some small project designs will need to be created for student groups – I’m not going to tackle the specific elements that apply to group work today, that’ll have to wait for another blog.

So let’s assume you have a single student joining you for something like 6-12 weeks of full-time work.  How do you help them design a project and achieve their goals?

Check the course requirements

I’ve supervised students on degree courses in departments of Psychology, Clinical Psychology, Linguistics, Education, Medicine – and if this has taught me anything, it’s to check the course handbook right at the start! Some programmes have specific rules about the kinds of data you need to work with – for example, whether students are expected to compile their own, new data set or not. You’ll also want to think about the perspective of the second marker.  If they are from a different disciplinary background to you, you want to make sure your student is deploying the kind of questions and methods they will expect to see.  So, for example, when supervising medical students I will try to make sure we are examining a question with clear clinical relevance, even though I’m not a medic myself.

Another key factor is to make sure you are informed about the deadlines – not just for the final project report but any interim milestones.  Some departments will have students present a poster about their project plan, or ask supervisors to confirm that they are satisfied with student progress at the project midpoint. Another rule might concern what you are allowed to comment on in terms of the final report.  Some courses only allow supervisors to comment on one full draft (I personally prefer to see a methods section + detailed outline for other report sections, and then a full draft) or to comment on everything except the discussion.  So make sure you are on the right side of all of this info from the outset.

Keep it small

The single biggest threat to a small student project is over-ambition. Students will often approach the work – understandably, and rightly so – as a chance to discover something important in their field.  But the honest truth is that masters projects rarely lead to important discoveries. The purpose of a masters degree is to learn how to do science, which may be slightly different from actually doing science. Yes, students are learning “on the job” and of course there are plenty of important scientific insights to be gained.  But both of these aims – student learning and scientific insight – will be most effectively achieved if the project design is modest in scale. A petite project delivered to a high standard will be a much better investment of your time and your student’s time than a large project full of compromises, delays and anxiety.

What does “reasonable” actually mean?

Well, here’s a few rules of thumb to help, noting that I and my students have broken these rules multiple times…

1. stick to a single methodology.  Mixed methods studies automatically entail more decision-making and are harder to write up. Also, you’re unlikely to have time to carry out each type of data collection sequentially, and so the end results may just contradict, rather than informing each other.

2. if you want to collect new data face-to-face, collect it from undergrads. Collecting data face to face – running experiments and doing IQ tests – takes a lot of time and effort to organise. If you are also trying to reach a specific population when you do this – neurodivergent children, adolescents with depression, carers of people with dementia – you will have many more hurdles to overcome in recruitment, study design and responsible management of data collection.

3. If you want to work with a particular population, keep it low impact for them. If you want to recruit people from a particular group, you are placing a burden on individuals who probably already have a lot going on in their lives, to also engage with your research. In an ideal world, this kind of work is developed gradually and carefully in partnership with stakeholders, and has a plan for implementation of the findings.  These steps are virtually impossible to squeeze in to a small project and so in-person working with any kind of atypical population needs to be as low impact as possible. Think about phone / video interviews, a (short) online survey or maybe an online focus group.

4. The topic matters too. Yes, you might be interested in the intersection of homophobia and ableism, but do consider whether this small student project is the right forum for addressing such a potentially difficult topic. It might be – a lot depends on the life experiences of the student of course – but as a supervisor, don’t shy away from directing your student down a path carries less risks for participants.

5. Ask a question you can actually answer. I’ve had students come to me before wanting to do a project about something like emotion perception and autism. This is a literature that is absolutely rife with contradictory small studies, none of which do much to enlighten, let alone improve the lives of autistic people. Another small study is unlilkely to resolve the complex debates in the field. So instead try to find an area where even a very small amount of new information might add value.

Be Creative

All this is not meant to limit you to a “boring” project.  Instead, try to be creative.  Can your student identify an important and under-studied intersection and gain some insights into something barely understood?  Could interviews with autistic teachers, doctors, nurses or psychologists yield useful insights for practice? What are the experiences of parents of autistic children with visits to the dentist? Another fruitful angle is to explore some routine outputs from your field, and extract insights about dominant theory or language. For example, would a systematic analysis of the last ten years of conference proceedings tell you about shifts in the discourse? What about a content analysis of policy documents relating to your field? This can be a really accessible project to do – with no ethics required, the data freely available and straightforward to code – that also delivers important new knowledge. It might be a great option for a student who is also working part-time or has a health condition that impacts their work, who needs to be able to work flexibly.

Be Practical

Getting ethical approval is one of the major barriers for a small project because it can take a long time and cause significant delays. For shorter projects then, I would try to stick to analysis of existing data (where permission is already in place), literature review, or analysis of data in the public domain. That said, the process of seeking ethical approval is very useful – it helps you articulate exactly what you propose to do – and so if you don’t decide to collect your own new data, you might still want to think about writing a protocol for what you will do. Remmeber as well that “analysis of existing data” isn’t always as simple as it sounds.  Getting hold of the data, understanding the data, checking quality, dealing with missing data – all of these things can take time and should not be underestimated. Make sure you scope out the data availability at a very early stage.

Another practical dimension to consider is cost.  Lots of students will be unaware that many assessments – questionnaires etc – cost money.  Even if your department can loan them an assessment kit, they may need to pay for record forms for each participant. Make sure you and the student know what budget is available – if any – and make a plan that fits with what you can afford.

And finally

Once you have your plan in place, work with your student to break it down into manageable pieces, and plan for supervisions at the key turning points in the work. In other words, map your supervision onto the project – as far as you can – rather than sticking to a supervision schedule that is the same for everyone. Hopefully this will mean you step in at the right moment to help them make decisions.

If you can keep your student projects modest in scale, hopefully the end result will be a high quality piece of work that they can be proud of. It’s quality, not quantity, that counts.

Author:  Sue Fletcher-Watson

Related posts.

• Integrative article
• Open access
• Published: 20 February 2019

Mini research projects as a mechanism to improve the quality of dementia care

• Hava Golander 1  

Israel Journal of Health Policy Research volume  8 , Article number:  16 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

3031 Accesses

1 Citations

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

Several models have been proposed to connect academia and practice in order to improve long-term care. In this paper we propose and describe the “Mini-Research Group” as an alternative model of such collaboration. The formation of mini-research groups was the unplanned by-product of a longitudinal action research project headed by the late Prof. Rebecca Bergman, a prominent nursing leader from the Department of Nursing at Tel-Aviv University. It involved a two-stage project aimed at developing, and later implementing, a specific tool to evaluate the quality of care provided in geropsychiatric units and to design a nursing intervention which entailed an improved model for care in specialized geropsychiatric units for persons with dementia. Initially, this article describes the projects that led to the development of mini-research groups, and then continues to describe several mini-research projects, focusing on the research questions which emerged from practice as well as the variety of methodologies used. Finally, we discuss the ways in which mini- research groups contributed to the quality of care for persons with dementia, benefited their families, professional staff, faculty participants, and advanced policy development. We argue that in light of the present array of ethical and legal restrictions which inhibit the recruitment of participants, using mini-research groups combined of practitioners and researchers, can provide a pragmatic solution, not only to overcome these barriers, but to improve the quality of care, stimulate clinical dementia research, and promote new insights into the lives of persons with dementia.

Several models have been proposed to connect research with practice in order to improve long-term care, among them research institutes affiliated with nursing homes, clinician-initiated research programs, or the more comprehensive tri-focal model of care which combines patient centered care, positive work environment, and evidence-based practice under one big umbrella which fosters a collaborative relationship between nursing homes and academic institutions. [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] Despite their prior successes, these models seem to have disappeared from the field of dementia research. This paper sets forth an Israeli model for addressing this and other challenges: the mini-research group.

The initiative to improve and evaluate the effectiveness of care in geropsychiatric units, which was started by Prof. Rebecca Bergman in 1985 and completed in 1992, produced important lessons for understanding persons in advanced stages of dementia and for assessing care provided and research conducted in geropsychiatric units. This longitudinal action research involved about 70 nurses from 20 geriatric centers in Israel, national geriatric inspectors from the Ministry of Health and faculty members from Tel Aviv University. The establishment of the mini-research groups was one of a number of unplanned positive outcomes which emerged from this project [ 4 ].

A previous report of an interdisciplinary committee on “quality of care in services for the elderly” [ 5 ] provided a comprehensive framework for Prof. Bergman’s project. The basic undifferentiated model consisted of six major domains: physical environment, psychological environment, basic personal care, health care, family involvement and human resources. Thus, the first stage of the project involved further developing a specific model which would be relevant and unique to the geropsychiatric units’ characteristics. This involved reviewing the literature, conducting on-site observations, and interviewing residents, families and staff caregivers. The tool that was developed was tested in several settings [ 6 ]. It related to residents as individuals, as groups, and to the unit as a whole. The model provided for 72 cells which evaluated nine focus items on eight administrative, affective, and instrumental measures, as shown in Fig. 1 .

A model of the two-dimensional model containing 72 cells

The second phase of the project included the implementation of the tool. The leading project team organized bimonthly full day meetings attended by more than 70 nurses, including unit nurses and directors from 20 geriatric centers, national geriatric nursing inspectors, and nursing faculty from Tel-Aviv University. Each gathering, hosted by a different geriatric center, followed a similar format: presentation of a background paper, discussion of one of the measures of care, guided tours of geropsychiatric units, and exchanges of information regarding problems and experiences related to the topic in discussion. In addition, the project core team, consisting of three geriatric nurse specialists, provided in depth guidance to six non-profit geropsychiatric units during weekly site visits. The team focused on identifying needs, planning and implementing change, and encouraging grass-roots involvement in every phase of the process. One year later, a follow up study showed improved quality of care, retention of positive changes and higher satisfaction among residents, families and staff as compared to the status quo at the project’s onset [ 7 ].

The mini-research groups, an outgrowth of the project’s large group meetings, continued to operate far beyond the official termination of the project (about 10 years). Each group consisted of practical unit nurses, guided by an academic advisor, and focused on a common unresolved clinical problem, which was raised by the clinical staff. With the help of the academic advisors, the problems were framed in terms of systematic research questions, with the goal of formulating appropriate interventions for challenging issues. Favorable results from one study group encouraged the establishment of additional mini-groups to solve other problems within the psychogeriatric unit’s daily routine. Altogether, about 15 mini-research groups were convened to study a wide range of clinical problems, such as how to use Jacuzzi bathing as a therapeutic tool; how to address loneliness; and how to reduce violence.

In order to illustrate how the insights gained from a mini-research project can serve to promote the understanding of dementia and the improvement of care, several exemplars of successful mini-research projects are presented herein, each with its distinctive incentive, methodology and outcomes.

Examples of the mini-research projects

The “Violence Group” Reducing violence among geropsychiatric residents:

Violent outbursts by residents are common occurrences in geropsychiatric settings. The study team decided to study what triggers outbursts of violence. What cues in the resident’s behavior might indicate a mood change? How should violence be categorized? Which interventions can be helpful?

The group carried out a literature review, gathered more than 30 observed and reported relevant incidents, documented them on a semi-structured questionnaire which they developed (see Fig.  2 ) and, using qualitative techniques, analyzed the data in relation to the residents’ characteristics, the nature of the violent act, the reactions of others, and which interventions were effective. The study team presented its findings to the greater group and its findings encouraged others to establish additional mini-research groups [ 4 ].

The “Mirrors Group” – The use of mirrors as a therapeutic tool for raising self-awareness:

Sample incident report

An occasional observation reported by a nurse about a resident in the geropsychiatric unit ,who was searching obsessively in front of and behind the mirror - provided the incentive to establish another group to examine the effects of mirrors on persons with dementia. How do persons with dementia relate to their image in the mirror? Is the use of mirrors effective in raising levels of self-awareness, calmness and satisfaction? In order to answer these questions, the mini-research group carried out a simple experiment in which 100 persons with dementia were exposed to mirrors of different sizes. Their reactions were documented and analyzed, showing varied responses to looking in the mirror. Most responses were positive (52%) with increased self-awareness regarding personal care, while others were indifferent (10%), or even angered (12%). A majority of residents appeared to benefit from looking at the mirrors. In some instances, the use of mirrors led to improved communication between residents and professional staff. The results of the study team’s work brought to light a new and inexpensive therapeutic tool for persons with dementia: mirrors [ 8 ].

The “Dolls Project” – The use of dolls as a therapeutic tool to awaken pleasurable affective responses:

The therapeutic use of dolls in dementia, though still controversial, is becoming more prevalent at nursing homes and dementia centers. Supporters say that dolls can lessen distress, improve communication and reduce the need for psychotropic medication. Critics say that dolls are demeaning and infantilize seniors. The Dolls mini-research project was a pioneering attempt to systematically examine the influence of dolls as a sensory stimulus to residents in geropsychiatric units [ 9 ]. Using a simple experimental design, the staff placed a variety of human and animal figures in a central location inside the activity rooms of 5 units. Using a pre-coded form, the staff observed reactions to the presence of the dolls, method of selection, type of contact, verbal and body communication, behavior of family members and others, and the emotional impact of the dolls. While the attention span of the residents to the dolls varied from a few moments to several hours, the data revealed that more than half of the 100 residents appeared to be happy with the dolls. The residents usually selected “their” same doll. Touching or holding the dolls elicited pleasure, reassurance, and comfort, often stimulating nonverbal communication, with the potential for verbal communication and better interaction between residents and staff. Thus, the researchers found that dolls can be used therapeutically to awaken pleasurable affective responses in persons with dementia.

The “Jacuzzi Bath Project” – The use of Jacuzzis as a therapeutic tool to address the needs of specific residents.

The Jacuzzi research group was actually formed in order to solve a space-management problem: The luxurious Jacuzzi room in one of the units was reduced to a storeroom because the staff was concerned that entering the tub or bathing might cause residents to feel anxiety, confusion, or might provoke them to violence. The group decided to study whether the Jacuzzi could be used therapeutically. A review of the literature did not produce any relevant information, although hydrotherapy is widely accepted. The methodology incorporated a series of case study analyses. The unit team was encouraged to identify residents whose specific problems might be ameliorated through use of the Jacuzzi. The staff provided an inviting Jacuzzi experience and later evaluated the impact of the treatment in selected situations: a person with aggressive behavior; two night wanderers; and a woman with severe body pain due to arthritis. All the Jacuzzi baths produced a beneficial effect, and the staff overcame their concerns about possible harm to the residents. Consequently, two additional nursing homes participating in the project decided to place Jacuzzis in their geropsychiatric units.

The “Social Networks Project” – Understanding the interpersonal relationships among residents in a geropsychiatric unit.

Several nurses were interested in examining the potential for establishing social networks among residents with dementia and the possible impact on the residents’ quality of life. The nurses wished to see if altering the social environment could enhance relationships. This project later developed into a research thesis conducted by graduate student Perri Cohen [ 10 ]. The methodology chosen was a semi-structured open questionnaire (see Fig.  3 observation schedule). It included the description of a relationship, the morphology of each tie (dyad, triad, or cluster structure), the psycho-social nature of the tie (aggressive/passive/friendly), the degree of symmetry in engagement, the function of the tie (intimacy/being together/help/control etc.) and the identification of the initiator. The depth of the tie and the relationship of the environment to the tie were also observed. Data analysis incorporated qualitative and quantitative methods. The results showed that 44% of the residents with dementia were involved in a consistent social tie of some kind, most often observed as “being together” in a dyad (80%), or in a “concern and help” relationship (66%). The resident’s background variables did not influence the formation of social ties, and neither did his/her cognitive or physical function. Significantly, most of the ties were developed between two residents with different levels of function. This seemed to allow for reciprocity and for the enhancement of self-esteem for both parties. The study concluded that social skills, preferences and abilities were relatively preserved in residents with dementia even for those in the more advanced stages of the disease, suggesting that staff members can play a more active role in facilitating the social environment of the residents than previously thought. For example, staff members can maintain a resident’s grooming and aesthetic appearance to promote social interaction, and can promote a friendly atmosphere in the unit for the overall well-being of residents.

Obsevation Schedules Socialities

Contributions of the mini-research group

The impact of the mini-research groups was multi-dimensional and relatively long lasting. The four major contributions of the project were:

Improved quality of care - The mini-research projects had a marked effect on the quality of care in the psychogeriatric units. Staff became more sensitive, attentive and knowledgeable to residents’ potentials and needs. Care became more holistic in the sense of integrating physical, psychological, and social aspects. Nursing interventions tended to become more active, creative, evidence-based, and individualized, compared to the regimented care provided prior to the project.

Increased family involvement - Due to the active role family members played during the project by providing data and feedback to the staff, they became more involved in the unit, They intensified their participation in unit social activities, became closer with the staff and gained an increased general awareness of the needs and potential of their relative and the staff.

Improved self-image of nursing personnel - Personnel employed in the geropsychiatric units traditionally perceive themselves and others employed at nursing homes as holding the least desirable positions in the work world. Those with the opportunity to advance usually preferred more prestigious work environments than those found at geriatric centers. As a result, nursing home staff included few nurses with academic or post-basic preparation. The geropsychiatric project brought a positive change to the self-image of staff members employed in units which participated in mini-research groups. Such staff members became the center of professional attention and the envy of their colleagues in other geriatric units. The geropsychiatric nurses reported that they felt stimulated and challenged and were more eager to continue in their place of work, an environment which had become exciting and rewarding. They felt that they had become more independent in their practice and more knowledgeable, individually and as a group. They took pride in their new practice, they often documented their projects in video and presented their experiences in professional conferences. Upon termination of the formal project, group members decided to continue on their own. They established a national geropsychiatric nurses association, published their own professional journal “The Forum,” organized their own annual conferences, and with some modifications, continue to function as a strong specialty group organization to this day.

The merit of collaboration between practitioners and researchers – The frequent meetings of the mini-research groups provided a model for collaboration between academia and providers that enriched both parties and enhanced mini-research group outcomes. The merit of the collaboration for the practicing nurses seemed most obvious. With guidance by an experienced researcher from academia, staff was introduced to new ways of thinking and developed a research approach to their everyday practice. They learned how to identify problems, focus on goals, review literature, gather data, analyze data, and reach conclusions. An academic advisor, acted as a role model and a facilitator to energize the nurses’ potential individually and as a group.

The merit of such collaboration for the academic research advisors, while less obvious, also warrants favorable comment. The close exposure of the researcher to practicing nurses and to daily life in the clinical field provided him/her with new, enriched and grounded perspectives which assured the relevancy and accuracy of research in relation to the reality experienced by subjects. Through the joint experience of collaboration, the dialogue between practitioners and researchers fostered new ways of thinking, mutual learning and appreciation between clinical practice and academia. The researchers learned to frame and prioritize research questions consistent with the questions’ importance to persons with dementia, staff and family members. They found that “small and simple” research questions were at times more helpful than “complicated and sophisticated” ones. The staff proved that with little guidance, they could become astute and creative partners in collecting and analyzing data generated by observations and other qualitative method techniques, so relevant for the study of dementia, yet so complicated to implement [ 11 ]. Collaborating with service personnel also afforded researchers the satisfaction of witnessing the immediate implementation of their research ideas and recommendations.. The combination of direct input and real-life problems in the field, aided by the experience of practitioners and the knowledge of academia researchers proved to be a happier marriage than the hopeful parties could have imagined during their courtship.

What can we learn today from the experiences of the mini-research groups which operated in the past?, and how can we apply the lessons learned to the future? Effective research and treatment of dementia, and improving the quality of life and promoting social inclusion of persons with dementia have been identified as a global public health priority by the World Health Organization [ 12 ]. Yet conducting research into these matters presents complex ethical and methodological issues [ 13 , 14 ]. For example, while obtaining an Advance Research Directive (ARD) is still considered a valid consent in the first stages of dementia, ethics review committees are often reluctant to permit even qualitative methods studies to be conducted on people in advanced stages of dementia. These and other obstacles hamper progress [ 11 ]. The mini-research model is one way of addressing the numerous ethical and legal requirements which hinder advancement. The mini-research group format provides a pragmatic solution, not only in overcoming procedural barriers, but also in stimulating more research and promoting a greater understanding of persons with dementia. The idea of bringing practitioners and researchers together to study and resolve specific issues which arise in clinical settings has innumerable advantages: The model is simple to administer and overcomes bureaucratic and logistical barriers. Mini-research groups can bring about significant and immediate impacts on the quality of care because they examine and work to resolve “real” problems in specific settings. A diverse research team has a greater likelihood to understand persons with dementia. The diversity within mini-research groups increases the likelihood of finding creative paths forward and furthering the professional growth of participating field practitioners and academic researchers, all to the benefit of persons with dementia.

Prof. Bergman started her project with modest funding, but overflowing personal magnetism, enthusiasm, motivation as well as receptivity by the clinical community. In the ensuing years, long term care facilities have become more overwhelmed with clinical, ethical, legal and financial constraints. If improving the care of persons with dementia is indeed a global goal, achieving progress will require not only sufficient resources and infrastructure, but the selection of effective models for advancing knowledge and implementing best practices. The collaboration of practitioners and researchers in mini-research groups can provide an answer to many of the challenges of addressing the needs of persons with dementia. Yet, to ensure such cooperation on a national level and for long lasting periods, every care policy program should develop and assimilate an appropriate research strategy aimed to increase the knowledge and understanding as well as to ensure the provision of quality care for people with dementia and their family members.

Cohen-Mansfield J, Lawton MP, Riskin C. Research institutes affiliated with nursing homes: strengths and developmental issues. Gerontologist. 1990;30(3):411–6.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Cohen-Mansfield J, Werner P, Braun J. Facilitating clinician-initiated research: a program of a research institute based in a nursing home. J Appl Gerontol. 1994;13(4):469–80.

Article   Google Scholar  

O'Connell B, et al. The tri-focal model of care: advancing the teaching-nursing home concept. Int J Nurs Pract. 2008;14(6):411–7.

Bergman R, Ehrenfeld M, Golander H. Stimulating research thinking: the case for mini-research. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 1995;33(7):34–9.

CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bergman R, Golander H. Evaluation of care for the aged: a multipurpose guide. J Adv Nurs. 1982;7(3):203–10.

Bergman R, Gerstansky Y. Development of an Instrument to Evaluate Quality of Care in Psycho-geriatric Units. Tel Aviv: Tel-Aviv University; Department of Nursing. 1987.

Bergman R, Gerstansky Y, Lindenbaum N. Improving Care in Psychogeriatric Units: Project Report 1992. Tel Aviv: Department of Nursing, Tel-Aviv University. 1992.

Tabak N, Bergman R, Alpert R. The mirror as a therapeutic tool for patients with dementia. Int J Nurs Pract. 1996;2(3):155–9.

Ehrenfeld M, Bergman R. The therapeutic use of dolls. Perspect Psychiatr Care. 1995;31(4):21–2.

Cohen P. The social networks among elderly suffering from dementia residing in long term care facilities, in Department of Nursing. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University; 2001.

Google Scholar  

Carmody J, Traynor V, Marchetti E. Barriers to qualitative dementia research: the elephant in the room. Qual Health Res. 2015;25(7):1013–9.

World Health Organization, Dementia: a public health priority. Geneva: World Health Organization. 2012.

Novek S, Wilkinson H. Safe and inclusive research practices for qualitative research involving people with dementia: a review of key issues and strategies. Dementia. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1177/1471301217701274 .

Jongsma K, van de Vathorst S. Advance directives in dementia research: the opinions and arguments of clinical researchers− an empirical study. Research ethics. 2015;11(1):4–14.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is dedicated to the beloved Prof. Rebecca (Beccy) Bergman (1919-2015) whose vision, creativity, leadership and unique personality led to the outstanding achievements of this project. Prof. Bergman, a distinguished international leader in her field, was the first nurse to be awarded the Israel Prize for her life-long contribution to society and the nation.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Nursing and Herczeg Institute for the Study of Aging and Old Age, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

Hava Golander

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The author read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hava Golander .

Ethics declarations

Authors’ information.

Hava Golander, RN, MSN, PhD, is an associate professor of nursing (retired) at the Department of Nursing, Tel Aviv University and a senior member of Herczeg Institute for the Study of Aging and Old Age.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Consent for publication.

Not applicable- only one author

Competing interests

The author declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Golander, H. Mini research projects as a mechanism to improve the quality of dementia care. Isr J Health Policy Res 8 , 16 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-018-0273-5

Download citation

Received : 11 January 2018

Accepted : 11 December 2018

Published : 20 February 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-018-0273-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Dementia methodology
• Psychogeriatric care policy
• Quality of care
• Service-academia collaboration

Israel Journal of Health Policy Research

ISSN: 2045-4015

• Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Illustration by James Round

How to plan a research project

Whether for a paper or a thesis, define your question, review the work of others – and leave yourself open to discovery.

by Brooke Harrington   + BIO

is professor of sociology at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire. Her research has won international awards both for scholarly quality and impact on public life. She has published dozens of articles and three books, most recently the bestseller Capital without Borders (2016), now translated into five languages.

Edited by Sam Haselby

Need to know

‘When curiosity turns to serious matters, it’s called research.’ – From Aphorisms (1880-1905) by Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

Planning research projects is a time-honoured intellectual exercise: one that requires both creativity and sharp analytical skills. The purpose of this Guide is to make the process systematic and easy to understand. While there is a great deal of freedom and discovery involved – from the topics you choose, to the data and methods you apply – there are also some norms and constraints that obtain, no matter what your academic level or field of study. For those in high school through to doctoral students, and from art history to archaeology, research planning involves broadly similar steps, including: formulating a question, developing an argument or predictions based on previous research, then selecting the information needed to answer your question.

Some of this might sound self-evident but, as you’ll find, research requires a different way of approaching and using information than most of us are accustomed to in everyday life. That is why I include orienting yourself to knowledge-creation as an initial step in the process. This is a crucial and underappreciated phase in education, akin to making the transition from salaried employment to entrepreneurship: suddenly, you’re on your own, and that requires a new way of thinking about your work.

What follows is a distillation of what I’ve learned about this process over 27 years as a professional social scientist. It reflects the skills that my own professors imparted in the sociology doctoral programme at Harvard, as well as what I learned later on as a research supervisor for Ivy League PhD and MA students, and then as the author of award-winning scholarly books and articles. It can be adapted to the demands of both short projects (such as course term papers) and long ones, such as a thesis.

At its simplest, research planning involves the four distinct steps outlined below: orienting yourself to knowledge-creation; defining your research question; reviewing previous research on your question; and then choosing relevant data to formulate your own answers. Because the focus of this Guide is on planning a research project, as opposed to conducting a research project, this section won’t delve into the details of data-collection or analysis; those steps happen after you plan the project. In addition, the topic is vast: year-long doctoral courses are devoted to data and analysis. Instead, the fourth part of this section will outline some basic strategies you could use in planning a data-selection and analysis process appropriate to your research question.

Step 1: Orient yourself

Planning and conducting research requires you to make a transition, from thinking like a consumer of information to thinking like a producer of information. That sounds simple, but it’s actually a complex task. As a practical matter, this means putting aside the mindset of a student, which treats knowledge as something created by other people. As students, we are often passive receivers of knowledge: asked to do a specified set of readings, then graded on how well we reproduce what we’ve read.

Researchers, however, must take on an active role as knowledge producers . Doing research requires more of you than reading and absorbing what other people have written: you have to engage in a dialogue with it. That includes arguing with previous knowledge and perhaps trying to show that ideas we have accepted as given are actually wrong or incomplete. For example, rather than simply taking in the claims of an author you read, you’ll need to draw out the implications of those claims: if what the author is saying is true, what else does that suggest must be true? What predictions could you make based on the author’s claims?

In other words, rather than treating a reading as a source of truth – even if it comes from a revered source, such as Plato or Marie Curie – this orientation step asks you to treat the claims you read as provisional and subject to interrogation. That is one of the great pieces of wisdom that science and philosophy can teach us: that the biggest advances in human understanding have been made not by being correct about trivial things, but by being wrong in an interesting way . For example, Albert Einstein was wrong about quantum mechanics, but his arguments about it with his fellow physicist Niels Bohr have led to some of the biggest breakthroughs in science, even a century later.

Step 2: Define your research question

Students often give this step cursory attention, but experienced researchers know that formulating a good question is sometimes the most difficult part of the research planning process. That is because the precise language of the question frames the rest of the project. It’s therefore important to pose the question carefully, in a way that’s both possible to answer and likely to yield interesting results. Of course, you must choose a question that interests you, but that’s only the beginning of what’s likely to be an iterative process: most researchers come back to this step repeatedly, modifying their questions in light of previous research, resource limitations and other considerations.

Researchers face limits in terms of time and money. They, like everyone else, have to pose research questions that they can plausibly answer given the constraints they face. For example, it would be inadvisable to frame a project around the question ‘What are the roots of the Arab-Israeli conflict?’ if you have only a week to develop an answer and no background on that topic. That’s not to limit your imagination: you can come up with any question you’d like. But it typically does require some creativity to frame a question that you can answer well – that is, by investigating thoroughly and providing new insights – within the limits you face.

In addition to being interesting to you, and feasible within your resource constraints, the third and most important characteristic of a ‘good’ research topic is whether it allows you to create new knowledge. It might turn out that your question has already been asked and answered to your satisfaction: if so, you’ll find out in the next step of this process. On the other hand, you might come up with a research question that hasn’t been addressed previously. Before you get too excited about breaking uncharted ground, consider this: a lot of potentially researchable questions haven’t been studied for good reason ; they might have answers that are trivial or of very limited interest. This could include questions such as ‘Why does the area of a circle equal π r²?’ or ‘Did winter conditions affect Napoleon’s plans to invade Russia?’ Of course, you might be able to make the argument that a seemingly trivial question is actually vitally important, but you must be prepared to back that up with convincing evidence. The exercise in the ‘Learn More’ section below will help you think through some of these issues.

Finally, scholarly research questions must in some way lead to new and distinctive insights. For example, lots of people have studied gender roles in sports teams; what can you ask that hasn’t been asked before? Reinventing the wheel is the number-one no-no in this endeavour. That’s why the next step is so important: reviewing previous research on your topic. Depending on what you find in that step, you might need to revise your research question; iterating between your question and the existing literature is a normal process. But don’t worry: it doesn’t go on forever. In fact, the iterations taper off – and your research question stabilises – as you develop a firm grasp of the current state of knowledge on your topic.

Step 3: Review previous research

In academic research, from articles to books, it’s common to find a section called a ‘literature review’. The purpose of that section is to describe the state of the art in knowledge on the research question that a project has posed. It demonstrates that researchers have thoroughly and systematically reviewed the relevant findings of previous studies on their topic, and that they have something novel to contribute.

Your own research project should include something like this, even if it’s a high-school term paper. In the research planning process, you’ll want to list at least half a dozen bullet points stating the major findings on your topic by other people. In relation to those findings, you should be able to specify where your project could provide new and necessary insights. There are two basic rhetorical positions one can take in framing the novelty-plus-importance argument required of academic research:

• Position 1 requires you to build on or extend a set of existing ideas; that means saying something like: ‘Person A has argued that X is true about gender; this implies Y, which has not yet been tested. My project will test Y, and if I find evidence to support it, that will change the way we understand gender.’
• Position 2 is to argue that there is a gap in existing knowledge, either because previous research has reached conflicting conclusions or has failed to consider something important. For example, one could say that research on middle schoolers and gender has been limited by being conducted primarily in coeducational environments, and that findings might differ dramatically if research were conducted in more schools where the student body was all-male or all-female.

Your overall goal in this step of the process is to show that your research will be part of a larger conversation: that is, how your project flows from what’s already known, and how it advances, extends or challenges that existing body of knowledge. That will be the contribution of your project, and it constitutes the motivation for your research.

Two things are worth mentioning about your search for sources of relevant previous research. First, you needn’t look only at studies on your precise topic. For example, if you want to study gender-identity formation in schools, you shouldn’t restrict yourself to studies of schools; the empirical setting (schools) is secondary to the larger social process that interests you (how people form gender identity). That process occurs in many different settings, so cast a wide net. Second, be sure to use legitimate sources – meaning publications that have been through some sort of vetting process, whether that involves peer review (as with academic journal articles you might find via Google Scholar) or editorial review (as you’d find in well-known mass media publications, such as The Economist or The Washington Post ). What you’ll want to avoid is using unvetted sources such as personal blogs or Wikipedia. Why? Because anybody can write anything in those forums, and there is no way to know – unless you’re already an expert – if the claims you find there are accurate. Often, they’re not.

Step 4: Choose your data and methods

Whatever your research question is, eventually you’ll need to consider which data source and analytical strategy are most likely to provide the answers you’re seeking. One starting point is to consider whether your question would be best addressed by qualitative data (such as interviews, observations or historical records), quantitative data (such as surveys or census records) or some combination of both. Your ideas about data sources will, in turn, suggest options for analytical methods.

You might need to collect your own data, or you might find everything you need readily available in an existing dataset someone else has created. A great place to start is with a research librarian: university libraries always have them and, at public universities, those librarians can work with the public, including people who aren’t affiliated with the university. If you don’t happen to have a public university and its library close at hand, an ordinary public library can still be a good place to start: the librarians are often well versed in accessing data sources that might be relevant to your study, such as the census, or historical archives, or the Survey of Consumer Finances.

Because your task at this point is to plan research, rather than conduct it, the purpose of this step is not to commit you irrevocably to a course of action. Instead, your goal here is to think through a feasible approach to answering your research question. You’ll need to find out, for example, whether the data you want exist; if not, do you have a realistic chance of gathering the data yourself, or would it be better to modify your research question? In terms of analysis, would your strategy require you to apply statistical methods? If so, do you have those skills? If not, do you have time to learn them, or money to hire a research assistant to run the analysis for you?

Please be aware that qualitative methods in particular are not the casual undertaking they might appear to be. Many people make the mistake of thinking that only quantitative data and methods are scientific and systematic, while qualitative methods are just a fancy way of saying: ‘I talked to some people, read some old newspapers, and drew my own conclusions.’ Nothing could be further from the truth. In the final section of this guide, you’ll find some links to resources that will provide more insight on standards and procedures governing qualitative research, but suffice it to say: there are rules about what constitutes legitimate evidence and valid analytical procedure for qualitative data, just as there are for quantitative data.

Circle back and consider revising your initial plans

As you work through these four steps in planning your project, it’s perfectly normal to circle back and revise. Research planning is rarely a linear process. It’s also common for new and unexpected avenues to suggest themselves. As the sociologist Thorstein Veblen wrote in 1908 : ‘The outcome of any serious research can only be to make two questions grow where only one grew before.’ That’s as true of research planning as it is of a completed project. Try to enjoy the horizons that open up for you in this process, rather than becoming overwhelmed; the four steps, along with the two exercises that follow, will help you focus your plan and make it manageable.

Key points – How to plan a research project

• Planning a research project is essential no matter your academic level or field of study. There is no one ‘best’ way to design research, but there are certain guidelines that can be helpfully applied across disciplines.
• Orient yourself to knowledge-creation. Make the shift from being a consumer of information to being a producer of information.
• Define your research question. Your question frames the rest of your project, sets the scope, and determines the kinds of answers you can find.
• Review previous research on your question. Survey the existing body of relevant knowledge to ensure that your research will be part of a larger conversation.
• Choose your data and methods. For instance, will you be collecting qualitative data, via interviews, or numerical data, via surveys?
• Circle back and consider revising your initial plans. Expect your research question in particular to undergo multiple rounds of refinement as you learn more about your topic.

Good research questions tend to beget more questions. This can be frustrating for those who want to get down to business right away. Try to make room for the unexpected: this is usually how knowledge advances. Many of the most significant discoveries in human history have been made by people who were looking for something else entirely. There are ways to structure your research planning process without over-constraining yourself; the two exercises below are a start, and you can find further methods in the Links and Books section.

The following exercise provides a structured process for advancing your research project planning. After completing it, you’ll be able to do the following:

• describe clearly and concisely the question you’ve chosen to study
• summarise the state of the art in knowledge about the question, and where your project could contribute new insight
• identify the best strategy for gathering and analysing relevant data

In other words, the following provides a systematic means to establish the building blocks of your research project.

Exercise 1: Definition of research question and sources

This exercise prompts you to select and clarify your general interest area, develop a research question, and investigate sources of information. The annotated bibliography will also help you refine your research question so that you can begin the second assignment, a description of the phenomenon you wish to study.

Jot down a few bullet points in response to these two questions, with the understanding that you’ll probably go back and modify your answers as you begin reading other studies relevant to your topic:

• What will be the general topic of your paper?
• What will be the specific topic of your paper?

b) Research question(s)

Use the following guidelines to frame a research question – or questions – that will drive your analysis. As with Part 1 above, you’ll probably find it necessary to change or refine your research question(s) as you complete future assignments.

• Your question should be phrased so that it can’t be answered with a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’.
• Your question should have more than one plausible answer.
• Your question should draw relationships between two or more concepts; framing the question in terms of How? or What? often works better than asking Why ?

c) Annotated bibliography

Most or all of your background information should come from two sources: scholarly books and journals, or reputable mass media sources. You might be able to access journal articles electronically through your library, using search engines such as JSTOR and Google Scholar. This can save you a great deal of time compared with going to the library in person to search periodicals. General news sources, such as those accessible through LexisNexis, are acceptable, but should be cited sparingly, since they don’t carry the same level of credibility as scholarly sources. As discussed above, unvetted sources such as blogs and Wikipedia should be avoided, because the quality of the information they provide is unreliable and often misleading.

To create an annotated bibliography, provide the following information for at least 10 sources relevant to your specific topic, using the format suggested below.

Name of author(s):

Publication date:

Title of book, chapter, or article:

If a chapter or article, title of journal or book where they appear:

Brief description of this work, including main findings and methods ( c 75 words):

Summary of how this work contributes to your project ( c 75 words):

Brief description of the implications of this work ( c 25 words):

Identify any gap or controversy in knowledge this work points up, and how your project could address those problems ( c 50 words):

Exercise 2: Towards an analysis

Develop a short statement ( c 250 words) about the kind of data that would be useful to address your research question, and how you’d analyse it. Some questions to consider in writing this statement include:

• What are the central concepts or variables in your project? Offer a brief definition of each.
• Do any data sources exist on those concepts or variables, or would you need to collect data?
• Of the analytical strategies you could apply to that data, which would be the most appropriate to answer your question? Which would be the most feasible for you? Consider at least two methods, noting their advantages or disadvantages for your project.

Links & books

One of the best texts ever written about planning and executing research comes from a source that might be unexpected: a 60-year-old work on urban planning by a self-trained scholar. The classic book The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961) by Jane Jacobs (available complete and free of charge via this link ) is worth reading in its entirety just for the pleasure of it. But the final 20 pages – a concluding chapter titled ‘The Kind of Problem a City Is’ – are really about the process of thinking through and investigating a problem. Highly recommended as a window into the craft of research.

Jacobs’s text references an essay on advancing human knowledge by the mathematician Warren Weaver. At the time, Weaver was director of the Rockefeller Foundation, in charge of funding basic research in the natural and medical sciences. Although the essay is titled ‘A Quarter Century in the Natural Sciences’ (1960) and appears at first blush to be merely a summation of one man’s career, it turns out to be something much bigger and more interesting: a meditation on the history of human beings seeking answers to big questions about the world. Weaver goes back to the 17th century to trace the origins of systematic research thinking, with enthusiasm and vivid anecdotes that make the process come alive. The essay is worth reading in its entirety, and is available free of charge via this link .

For those seeking a more in-depth, professional-level discussion of the logic of research design, the political scientist Harvey Starr provides insight in a compact format in the article ‘Cumulation from Proper Specification: Theory, Logic, Research Design, and “Nice” Laws’ (2005). Starr reviews the ‘research triad’, consisting of the interlinked considerations of formulating a question, selecting relevant theories and applying appropriate methods. The full text of the article, published in the scholarly journal Conflict Management and Peace Science , is available, free of charge, via this link .

Finally, the book Getting What You Came For (1992) by Robert Peters is not only an outstanding guide for anyone contemplating graduate school – from the application process onward – but it also includes several excellent chapters on planning and executing research, applicable across a wide variety of subject areas. It was an invaluable resource for me 25 years ago, and it remains in print with good reason; I recommend it to all my students, particularly Chapter 16 (‘The Thesis Topic: Finding It’), Chapter 17 (‘The Thesis Proposal’) and Chapter 18 (‘The Thesis: Writing It’).

The nature of reality

How to think about time

This philosopher’s introduction to the nature of time could radically alter how you see your past and imagine your future

by Graeme A Forbes

Cognitive and behavioural therapies

How to stop living on auto-pilot

Are you going through the motions? Use these therapy techniques to set meaningful goals and build a ‘life worth living’

by Kiki Fehling

How to control your gambling

What’s fun at first can all too easily get out of hand. Learn the warning signs and use these tips to rein things in

by Luke Clark

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

11.3 Managing Your Research Project

Learning objectives.

• Identify reasons for outlining the scope and sequence of a research project.
• Recognize the steps of the research writing process.
• Develop a plan for managing time and resources to complete the research project on time.
• Identify organizational tools and strategies to use in managing the project.

The prewriting you have completed so far has helped you begin to plan the content of your research paper—your topic, research questions, and preliminary thesis. It is equally important to plan out the process of researching and writing the paper. Although some types of writing assignments can be completed relatively quickly, developing a good research paper is a complex process that takes time. Breaking it into manageable steps is crucial. Review the steps outlined at the beginning of this chapter.

Steps to Writing a Research Paper

• Choose a topic.
• Schedule and plan time for research and writing.
• Conduct research.
• Organize research
• Draft your paper.
• Revise and edit your paper.

You have already completed step 1. In this section, you will complete step 2. The remaining steps fall under two broad categories—the research phase of the project (steps 3 and 4) and the writing phase (steps 5 and 6). Both phases present challenges. Understanding the tasks involved and allowing enough time to complete each task will help you complete your research paper on time with a minimal amount of stress.

Planning Your Project

Each step of a research project requires time and attention. Careful planning helps ensure that you will keep your project running smoothly and produce your best work. Set up a project schedule that shows when you will complete each step. Think about how you will complete each step and what project resources you will use. Resources may include anything from library databases and word-processing software to interview subjects and writing tutors.

To develop your schedule, use a calendar and work backward from the date your final draft is due. Generally, it is wise to divide half of the available time on the research phase of the project and half on the writing phase. For example, if you have a month to work, plan for two weeks for each phase. If you have a full semester, plan to begin research early and to start writing by the middle of the term. You might think that no one really works that far ahead, but try it. You will probably be pleased with the quality of your work and with the reduction in your stress level.

As you plan, break down major steps into smaller tasks if necessary. For example, step 3, conducting research, involves locating potential sources, evaluating their usefulness and reliability, reading, and taking notes. Defining these smaller tasks makes the project more manageable by giving you concrete goals to achieve.

Jorge had six weeks to complete his research project. Working backward from a due date of May 2, he mapped out a schedule for completing his research by early April so that he would have ample time to write. Jorge chose to write his schedule in his weekly planner to help keep himself on track.

Review Jorge’s schedule. Key target dates are shaded. Note that Jorge planned times to use available resources by visiting the library and writing center and by meeting with his instructor.

• Working backward from the date your final draft is due, create a project schedule. You may choose to write a sequential list of tasks or record tasks on a calendar.
• Check your schedule to be sure that you have broken each step into smaller tasks and assigned a target completion date to each key task.
• Review your target dates to make sure they are realistic. Always allow a little more time than you think you will actually need.

Plan your schedule realistically, and consider other commitments that may sometimes take precedence. A business trip or family visit may mean that you are unable to work on the research project for a few days. Make the most of the time you have available. Plan for unexpected interruptions, but keep in mind that a short time away from the project may help you come back to it with renewed enthusiasm. Another strategy many writers find helpful is to finish each day’s work at a point when the next task is an easy one. That makes it easier to start again.

Writing at Work

When you create a project schedule at work, you set target dates for completing certain tasks and identify the resources you plan to use on the project. It is important to build in some flexibility. Materials may not be received on time because of a shipping delay. An employee on your team may be called away to work on a higher-priority project. Essential equipment may malfunction. You should always plan for the unexpected.

Staying Organized

Although setting up a schedule is easy, sticking to one is challenging. Even if you are the rare person who never procrastinates, unforeseen events may interfere with your ability to complete tasks on time. A self-imposed deadline may slip your mind despite your best intentions. Organizational tools—calendars, checklists, note cards, software, and so forth—can help you stay on track.

Throughout your project, organize both your time and your resources systematically. Review your schedule frequently and check your progress. It helps to post your schedule in a place where you will see it every day. Both personal and workplace e-mail systems usually include a calendar feature where you can record tasks, arrange to receive daily reminders, and check off completed tasks. Electronic devices such as smartphones have similar features.

Organize project documents in a binder or electronic folder, and label project documents and folders clearly. Use note cards or an electronic document to record bibliographical information for each source you plan to use in your paper. Tracking this information throughout the research process can save you hours of time when you create your references page.

Revisit the schedule you created in Note 11.42 “Exercise 1” . Transfer it into a format that will help you stay on track from day to day. You may wish to input it into your smartphone, write it in a weekly planner, post it by your desk, or have your e-mail account send you daily reminders. Consider setting up a buddy system with a classmate that will help you both stay on track.

Some people enjoy using the most up-to-date technology to help them stay organized. Other people prefer simple methods, such as crossing off items on a checklist. The key to staying organized is finding a system you like enough to use daily. The particulars of the method are not important as long as you are consistent.

Anticipating Challenges

Do any of these scenarios sound familiar? You have identified a book that would be a great resource for your project, but it is currently checked out of the library. You planned to interview a subject matter expert on your topic, but she calls to reschedule your meeting. You have begun writing your draft, but now you realize that you will need to modify your thesis and conduct additional research. Or you have finally completed your draft when your computer crashes, and days of hard work disappear in an instant.

These troubling situations are all too common. No matter how carefully you plan your schedule, you may encounter a glitch or setback. Managing your project effectively means anticipating potential problems, taking steps to minimize them where possible, and allowing time in your schedule to handle any setbacks.

Many times a situation becomes a problem due only to lack of planning. For example, if a book is checked out of your local library, it might be available through interlibrary loan, which usually takes a few days for the library staff to process. Alternatively, you might locate another, equally useful source. If you have allowed enough time for research, a brief delay will not become a major setback.

You can manage other potential problems by staying organized and maintaining a take-charge attitude. Take a minute each day to save a backup copy of your work on a portable hard drive. Maintain detailed note cards and source cards as you conduct research—doing so will make citing sources in your draft infinitely easier. If you run into difficulties with your research or your writing, ask your instructor for help, or make an appointment with a writing tutor.

Identify five potential problems you might encounter in the process of researching and writing your paper. Write them on a separate sheet of paper. For each problem, write at least one strategy for solving the problem or minimizing its effect on your project.

In the workplace, documents prepared at the beginning of a project often include a detailed plan for risk management. When you manage a project, it makes sense to anticipate and prepare for potential setbacks. For example, to roll out a new product line, a software development company must strive to complete tasks on a schedule in order to meet the new product release date. The project manager may need to adjust the project plan if one or more tasks fall behind schedule.

Key Takeaways

• To complete a research project successfully, a writer must carefully manage each phase of the process and break major steps into smaller tasks.
• Writers can plan a research project by setting up a schedule based on the deadline and by identifying useful project resources.
• Writers stay focused by using organizational tools that suit their needs.
• Anticipating and planning for potential setbacks can help writers avoid those setbacks or minimize their effect on the project schedule.

Writing for Success Copyright © 2015 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• NATURE CAREERS PODCAST
• 06 October 2023

How to craft a research project with non-academic collaborators

• Dom Byrne 0

Dom Byrne is a freelance radio and podcast producer based in Brighton, UK.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

In the penultimate episode of this six-part podcast series about team science, Richard Holliman describes a project involving indigenous researchers in Guyana who wanted to limit insecticide spraying without jeopardising the South American country’s efforts to tackle malaria.

The early warning system they developed with Andrea Beradi, an environmental systems researcher and a colleague of Holliman’s at the Open University in Milton Keynes, UK, involved satellite technology, drones and ground monitoring systems.

Holliman, who studies engaged research, says members of the wider project team were all paid and listed as co-authors. “That was a really straightforward example of just recognizing contributions from some fabulous people,” he adds. But sometimes, he argues, payment and authorship on a peer-reviewed paper may not be what co-producers are seeking. Instead they may want to co-write a report that would better serve their community’s needs in discussions with policymakers.

Helen Manchester, who researches participatory sociodigital futures at the University of Bristol, UK, adds: “For me, there’s a real politics to knowledge production. We really need to be considering all the time when we’re doing our research, to think about our own position as researchers and our relationship to and with other people.”

And finally, Lorraine van Blerk, whose project about homeless young people in African cities featured in a previous episode, lists key questions to ask when working with young people in a research setting. “How do we make sure that young people are involved in the research design, in the data collection, and the analysis and impact of data?” she asks.

Team Science showcases the roles of research managers, administrators and technicians, and their often hidden contributions to the scientific enterprise, and is a collaboration between Nature Careers and Nature Index . The series is sponsored by Western Sydney University. This episode, and others in the series, concludes with a section looking at how it is helping to champion team science.

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-03140-0

Paid content: Western Sydney University (WSU)

In this podcast series from Western Sydney University , we’ll hear from researchers (early and mid-career researchers) whose work has been recognised through the university’s annual Research Impact Competition . Now in its ninth year, this competition showcases impactful research (i.e., research that demonstrates real-world impact, or potential impact, outside of academia), and approaches to engagement with industry and community partners and end users across a range of discipline areas.

In episode 5, Dr Hazel Keedle from the School of Nursing and Midwifery at Western Sydney University discusses her work as the lead researcher on the Birth Experience Study.

To read more of Western’s impactful research stories, visit the Future-Makers website .

Find out more about this type of paid content .

Simon Baker: 00:07

Hello, this is Team Science, a podcast brought to you by Nature Careers in partnership with Nature Index .

I’m Simon Baker, chief editor at Nature Index , which tracks research articles in leading science journals. In this series, we explore behind the scenes of academia, and speak to the people who make it all possible, but do not necessarily get the credit.

This series is sponsored by Western Sydney University. And at the end of this episode, we’ll hear about how it is helping to champion team science.

In episode five, we meet scientists who are pushing for all the contributors to research, from data collectors to technicians, to receive full credit for what they do.

Richard Holliman: 00:53

My name is Richard Holliman, I’m a professor of engaged research. And I work at the Open University in the United Kingdom. And I’m based in the school of environment, earth and ecosystem sciences.

My main area of research is, is engagement at the moment. So I'm interested in the relationship between knowledge in society, and how different people can contribute to knowledge. Production, particularly.

And how did I get here? Well, my background started way back in the mid 90s, where I was a media researcher. And I was studying the way that science was portrayed in different forms of television news, and newspapers.

And they use a model where which which required me to look at contributions to the scientists. contributions from journalists, contributions for decision makers, and contributions from the public.

And the interesting thing is, when I started to look at the different case studies, that notion of the public, as a single entity, obviously became much more complicated and much more interesting.

And that’s really where my journey starts. Just by thinking about the public in a much more sophisticated way.

And once you start opening up in those particular examples, I started becoming interested in that in the governance of science, in the way that science was thought of in an ethical sense. And those kinds of conversations start to bring in these different contributions from different experts, and people with different lived experiences.

And that really starts to broaden out my research agenda to start to think, “Okay, in each research project that I do, who could contribute, in what ways, and in what ways is the research useful for them?”

So that’s really where I’ve got to. But it starts very much in that media, and then broadens out from there.

The project I’m going to talk about is a project which is based in Guyana, which is in South America. And they have an issue, a big issue, which is obviously a global health issue around malaria.

And one of the biggest problems they had was that the World Health Organization’s strategy was effectively insecticide-spraying intensively. So it’s right across the board, was one of the biggest issues.

So what a researcher called Andrea Beradi, who I’ve worked on the project with, who’d been based in Guyana for for 20 plus years, was obviously interested in how you how do you reduce the amount of insecticide you’re spraying at any one time, to be more targeted.

And he got us involved in this project, which started to look at producing an early warning system, which would allow you to detect where the mosquitoes were breeding, and then target your insecticide spraying in that in that area.

And that’s a combination of satellite technology, drones and ground monitoring systems. So the project was really about designing this technical system, but doing it with indigenous researchers to allow us to ensure that the way that the system worked worked for them, and that they can use it and adapt it over time.

So that’s really where it comes in, from Andrea’s work originally. But then bringing in, I say this, this piece of technology would really help on the ground, to reduce this just intensive spraying of insecticide.

So when we started the project, it was very much a case of these individuals were co-researchers.

So they were part of the project team. So in that sense, it was absolutely logical. But obviously (a) we should we should find some way of paying them to do the work with us. So we were being paid. Why would then not be paid?

And then towards the kind of the end of the project, how could we recognize their contributions or their research? So obviously, they were co-authors on the paper.

So that was a really straightforward example of just recognizing contributions from some fabulous people.

I think more broadly in terms of engaged research, there are these questions about how you do this for me And then the obvious thing to me is recognition of who’s contributed and in what ways they’ve contributed.

So that could be co authorship on paper. That could be simple things where we co-write reports, which are not peer reviewed papers, because they’re more useful to that community. So you look, what types of report will be useful for that community? What type of presentation will be useful for that kind of community? It’s giving people opportunities to contribute to little videos, to podcasts like this, to blog posts.

So lots of different ways of contributing, but in ways that really are meaningful for the for the individuals you’re working with, because not everybody wants to be on a peer reviewed academic paper. And to be fair, that kind of contribution may not be useful for them,, but they want to be recognized for the work they’ve done. I think the key issue for me, which is a kind of little side issue around the kind of recognition we all want, but it’s really important is to say it’s all about communication, talking to them about what they need, what’s useful, how do they want to be recognized.

And on the reward front, there is a little side issue, but it is really important, about whether payment is useful for them, which sounds like an obvious thing to save, actually, in some instances, it can cause more problems than it helps.

So the obvious example, that if you’re working with anybody who’s on benefits, or something like that, it becomes an enormously complicated if you start to pay them. So actually, they, they’re mainly just just some form of acknowledgement on the project.

Lorraine van Blerk: 06:37

So I’m Lorraine van Blerk. I’m a professor of human geography at the University of Dundee. I’m also the asociate dean for research in the school of humanities, social sciences and law.

Growing up on the streets is an international research project that worked with approximately 200 young people aged 14 to 20, in three African cities. That was Accra, in Ghana, Bukavu in the DRC, and Harare in Zimbabwe.

It was a longitudinal participatory research project, and it was developed to examine and better understand the lives and conditions affecting children and youth living on the streets and in informal settlements.

Well, the approach of the research for growing up on the streets was participatory and co-produced research. So we worked with young people who were both informants, but also researchers in the project.

So six young people in each of the cities were trained in basic ethnographic methods and research skills. And then they were recruited onto the project as researchers.

And so they worked part-time for a period of three years, as young researchers on the streets working with their peers.

So they would they would carry on their normal daily lives, they were all living on the streets. And they would work with a group of approximately 10 other peers in their cities, and engage with them on a daily basis. And then every week, they would recount their ethnographic reports.

So not quite an interview, but a kind of ethnographic dialogue and collaboration with one of our NGO partners in each of the cities. And that was partly because their ethnography had to be done verbally, it was not something that they could write down. Many of them did not go to school for very long, and so didn’t quite have literacy skills to be able to do that.

But they did that work for three years, really engaged in their own communities and working with their peers, and understanding their lived experiences on the street.

So I grew up in Scotland, on the west coast around Glasgow studied at the University of Strathclyde.

And then at Royal Holloway, I focused a little bit more on development geography, looking at issues around social justice in the Global South.

And then from there, I did a Master’s dissertation looking at informal education for girls in Pakistan. And so that was my first sort of real experience of overseas fieldwork.

When I came back from from doing that research, I decided that I wanted to pursue a PhD, and ended up doing my PhD, looking at the place of street children in Kampala and Uganda. Particularly looking at the social and spatial inequalities that they experienced growing up in in those communities in the late 1990s.

And that’s really been a focus of my research. For the last 20 years now. I have continued to focus on geographies of children and youth in particular, in east, west and southern Africa.

Although I have also done some work with refugee youth in Jordan, and young people in Brazil. But my research really draws attention to inequalities experienced by young people, particularly in context of poverty and marginalization. I have a commitment to social justice, looking at the intersections of social and spatial inequalities with age, gender, and lived experience.

Another really important aspect to me is that research with young people should be participatory and in particular, have spent a lot of time developing co-produced research with young people and their communities of practice, undertaking research that's both relevant to practitioners, and also shaping policy and practice at various scales.

Helen Manchester: 10:57

My name is Helen Manchester and I am a professor in participatory sociodigital futures at the University of Bristol. I am an interdisciplinary researcher. So I’m interested in participatory and creative research methods.

And I started out really as a teacher in inner city schools in Manchester, worked in those schools for about eight years. And then got into research a bit later in life. I guess, after that.

I did a PhD looking at the how people learn to make community media that represents, or re-presents their communities in different ways. And I’ve been now working at the University of Bristol for 10 years developing my research with communities at the margins, trying to counter inequalities and thinking about questions of social justice.

I think it can feel there is a feminist culture in academia, between academics and other contributors to research. I think that’s especially the case often in relationships between researchers and people who they’re researching with, or researching on very often, as is the case.

And I also think within the university, it can be really difficult to challenge the hierarchical infrastructures. You know, and even things like the University of Bristol is on the top of a hill. So symbolically, it's kind of placed at the top of the city. And it feels like some, and it’s in a posh area of the city where people don't necessarily always come. So there are real issues there, about how we see the university and the role of the university, in the city and in society.

So for me, there’s a real politics to knowledge production, that we really need to be considering all the time when we’re doing our research, to think about our own position as researchers and our relationship to and with other people within the city.

The Connecting Through Culture As We Age project is funded by UK research innovation, and it is a three year project where we are working with disabled socioeconomically and racially minoritized older adults who are aged between 60 and 75.

So we called them next gen older adults. And we’re working with them to understand their participation in arts and culture, and to understand their sort of lived experiences of digital culture and social connection.

And the whole aim of the project is to co-design with the older adults themselves digital cultural products that might be able to increase their sense of social connection, and sense of wellbeing as well. I think the really important thing about the project is that often when products or digital products are being designed for older people, they’re designed very often by young white men in labs.

And so we’re trying to shift that to be the older people who the products are for, at the centre of the design process.

And we’re finding that so far, that’s working out really well for the older adults. They are telling us that they’re feeling really empowered by the process that there’s a lot of, they come across a lot of ageism in their everyday He lives and that it this feels like a different kind of space where they’re actually valued for what they bring and for their lifelong experiences that they bring to the, to the project. As well as their experiences of being older now.

And I think that artists and creatives are also finding that input really helpful along the way in order to design for that particular group.

I guess in terms of working with communities at the margins, I think it’s really important that we are able to recognize the different expertise and knowledges that people bring to research as well.

And recognize that, as academics, we definitely don’t have all the answers. And we don't have all the experiences that that we need in order to develop really robust qualitative research.

So I would say that we need, we really need a variety and very diverse knowledge and expertise in order to make sense of the world around us, which is really what I’m definitely trying to do as an academic and a researcher.

And the other thing I would say is that in in my research, I would never speak about research subjects. So rather than doing research to communities, we would always be trying to work with communities to conduct their research.

So rather than think about research subjects, or even necessarily research participants, we very much try to work alongside people with lived experience as collaborators, and as far as possible, depending on funding and all the rest of it, as equal collaborators as much as possible, whilst also recognizing the differences and the different privileges that we have.

So we might call people that we work with in communities at the margins co researchers. We might call them co experts, or collaborators, rather than research subjects.

Richard Holliman: 17:31

It’s interesting, because you’re doing this series called Team Science. So it’s really about how you conceptualize that team. If you just think of it as an academic team, with support staff, then you go down one route.

If you think of it as much more a distributed set of experts who are all contributing, then you go down a slightly different route. And that’s the route I’ve gone down. And I think starting from that premise is incredibly powerful for the individuals you work with. It empowers them, in ways I think, is incredibly useful for the work, it often takes a bit of time, because people have to learn to trust you and think that you are that kind of academic.

So it takes some pretty challenging conversations sometimes at the start of the project. And it's simple things for me.

So I would always start a project by saying, “We will write this up together.”

That’s a really simple thing to say. It’s a simple principle at the start of the project. If you contribute to this, your names is on the paper. And that then starts to obviously start the conversation with all the other aspects of the work.

But just recognizing people for their contributions, not taking credit for other people’s work is pretty straightforward, as far as I can say. And that’s really the nature of good leadership, good academic leadership.

But it’s not often the way that good academic leadership is credited. So there is a problem in the system.

One of the things we did at the Open University a few years ago was change our promotion criteria. And probably the most important criteria in that work in that EU new set of criteria is around collegiality and support for others. If you start from that kind of premise, you won’t be too far off at the end of the project.

Lorraine van Blerk: 19:28

In relation to young people I think we have to be recognizing that they are the experts in their own lives. And so that’s part of the way in which we give them recognition.

But I think another way in which we give recognition is through working together and doing collaborative research.

So this idea of co-producing research with young people helps to shape the research in ways that we may not have thought of, or have even considered to be important, but it’s also helping to understand what’s really important to those participants.

And so we should certainly be giving them recognition in relation to their expertise, and how how they should be engaged in research throughout the whole research process, really, from inception, through to impact.

And I think that’s something that I’ve been focusing on, particularly with the Growing up on the Streets researchers how, how do we make sure that, that young people are involved in the research design, in the data collection, but more recently thinking about the analysis of data, the impact of data, and working together with young people in writing.

And so these are some of the things that we’ve been doing more recently coming out of growing up on the streets.

Helen Manchester: 21:00

Yeah, so it’s really important when we’re working with co-researchers, that we also can credit the involvement that they have in the project.

So whenever we communicate about the Connecting Through Culture, As We Age project, for instance, we will always acknowledge the roles that co-researchers have played in that in that project.

But I guess we’re also always looking for different kinds of outputs and outcomes from the research.

And we often will ask our co researchers what they think would be outcomes or outputs that might be useful from a research project. Useful for them useful for their communities, useful beyond their communities, potentially, as well, to sort of represent themselves, I guess, in different ways

So I think science would really benefit from wider acknowledgement of different communities and their involvement in research. From my perspective, I think research is about understanding the world in all its complexity.

And I don’t think as researchers we can necessarily do that, unless we are working with and alongside others.

I think, politically, it’s really important that we are working with, to bring different kinds of publics into the research conversation.

I think, as I said before, to try and tackle inequalities, nurture alternatives, reconstruct and think about different kinds of possible futures, and maybe also coming back to that sense of solidarity, sense of care, a sense of compassion for others, that we might be able to influence through our role as researchers.

Simon Baker: 23:05

Thanks for listening to this episode of the Team Science podcast.

I’m Simon Baker, chief editor at Nature Index . The producer was Dom Byrne. Next up, we'll hear how Western Sydney University a sponsor of this series is helping to champion team science.

Caris Bizzaca 23:29: I’m Caris Bizzaca and welcome to this podcast series from Western Sydney University. Over this six-episode series I’ll be introducing you to some incredible research taking place – from a million-dollar fungi project that’s helping combat climate change, to surveys into maternity-care treatment, to creating electric vehicles for women in rural African communities, and more. These projects are just a handful of those that entered the 2022 and 2023 Research Impact Competition, run by Western Sydney University in Australia.

There’s also something else they have in common: they each speak to a Sustainable Development Goal or SDG – a list of 17 goals created by the United Nations which tackle global issues including poverty, hunger, climate change, gender inequality and access to education.

So how do we identify problems and then the path forward? Well, through research. And this research is happening at universities across the globe, who are graded in the annual Times Higher Education Impact rankings on their commitment to the SDGs. This is significant because out of 1,700 universities in the world, Western Sydney University ranked number one overall for the past two years. And if we drill down into the SDGs it excelled in, it came first for the goals Gender Equality, Partnership for the Goals, and Responsible Consumption and Production. For more information about Sustainable Development Goals you can visit sdgs.un.org and keep listening, as the researchers across this series will talk to how their projects contribute to positive change.

Before we dive in, I also want to take a moment to acknowledge the custodians of the lands where Western Sydney University campuses are located, and pay respect to the peoples of the Dharug, Tharawal, Eora and Wiradjuri nations. I pay my respect to elders past and present. Always was, always will be.

Now, let’s hear from some of the researchers from Western Sydney University’s Research Impact Competition.

Dr Hazel Keedle 25:36

One of the other things that came out of our survey, and this paper’s currently under review, is we asked women, if you were to have another pregnancy, what would you do differently? And it was a really powerful question. This was the question where we had the largest amount of open text comments, with over six and a half thousand women leaving a comment about what they would do differently.

Caris Bizzaca 25:55

That’s Dr Hazel Keedle, a senior lecturer of midwifery at the School of Nursing and Midwifery at Western Sydney University, and the lead researcher on the Birth Experience Study. In the 2023 Research Impact Competition, Dr Keedle was runner-up for her work looking at women’s experiences of obstetric violence in Australia – a term defined as any act where a healthcare worker causes harm during pregnancy, childbirth or postpartum. This research first began several years ago when the producers of the 2020 documentary Birth Time got in contact.

Dr Hazel Keedle 26:30

When their film was getting ready for release, they reached out to us as researchers. And they were really interested in, you know, could there be a survey that went along at the same time? We then contacted maternity consumer organisations across Australia, and we got representatives from ten to come on board and be part of our consumer reference group. And they helped us design the survey, decide which questions were going to be in there, pilot-test the survey, and then they’ve been part of the whole research process. It’s absolutely a co-designed research project. The survey was then out for nine months in 2021 and resulted in nearly 9,000 completed responses across Australia, which makes it the largest ever maternity-experiences survey done in Australia. And now we’re in data-analysis phase. We’ve had two papers published. We’ve got another two or three under review. And then last year we decided to reach out to any research groups across the globe to see if they would be interested in also doing our surveys. So we’ve now got nine other research groups on every continent using our survey and working with us, and we’re now called the Birth Experience Study International Collaboration.

Caris Bizzaca 27:44

Dr Keedle says the survey explores the interactions between women and their healthcare providers.

Dr Hazel Keedle 27:50

We also had some questions that specifically asked about experiences of birth trauma and the experiences of obstetric violence, which had never been asked in a survey in Australia before, which is the mistreatment of women by healthcare providers during that perinatal period. We also had a validated tool in there called the mistreatment scale, which looks at different forms of mistreatment and whether or not the women experienced it, plus also respectful care. We had a measure in there from Canada that looks at the level of respectful care. So we found that more than one in ten women in the survey across Australia experienced obstetric violence. And then we asked them if they would like to leave a comment. And we did a qualitative content analysis on those comments.

Caris Bizzaca 28:34

So far, two papers have been published on the research, but there have been challenges in getting everyone in the health industry on board with the findings.

Dr Hazel Keedle 28:42

Because it can feel quite polarising when we’re saying that healthcare providers are maybe not doing the right thing. And I’m a health-care provider myself. I spent many years as a nurse and then as a midwife, clinically, in all different models of care. And so I know for a fact that our healthcare providers don’t go into their jobs with the aim to mistreat women and their families. And so often they can be quite offended and upset that maybe we are attacking these people that are doing the right thing. But there’s always room for growth and often the experiences of women were due to being treated like a number in the system, by not getting that individualized, personalized care, which can make the difference. And so, trying to spotlight what it’s like for women, but then actually what we need to fix in our system and what models of care do work. And certainly across our study, we were able to compare the rates of trauma and birth trauma and obstetric violence across different models of care and identify where it does work. And that is when they have the same midwife or doctor throughout the entire continuity-of-care experience, because then that person does know them really well and they’re less likely to experience trauma and obstetric violence. So that is something that we highlight. We are just trying to bring us all together to look at what the systemic issues are and how to address them.

Caris Bizzaca 30:09

The SDGs that this research contributes to are Goal 3 – Good Health and Well-being – and Goal 5 – Gender Equality.

Dr Hazel Keedle 30:17

So looking at the health of the nation, but also equity. Obstetric violence has been recognised by the United Nations as a form of gendered violence because it disproportionately impacts women who are pregnant and then have babies. So that is a part of equality and equitable care, in that fact that this is happening and is a form of gendered violence. And when we look at it through a systemic view to what is going on in the healthcare systems that we have, there’s often an influence of patriarchy and power. And women who are accessing this care are really right down at the bottom of that. But also the general health, we know that women who have a traumatic birth and experience of obstetric violence are more likely to have a not great postnatal time and increased mental-health issues such as postnatal depression, anxiety and PTSD. And this significantly impacts that woman and their family. And there’s also some research being done around Australia that is looking at, you know, maybe there’s also another diagnosis of birth trauma that doesn’t go all the way through to depression, anxiety or PTSD. That’s on its own. And that’s something that we are supporting our research to do as well, because the impacts this has is on the woman and her ability to be able to care for the baby and to care for her family in the best way for her.

Caris Bizzaca 31:41

Dr Keedle talked about two papers that have been published from the research, and the second of these, which was released in December 2022, is contributing to potential policy changes.

Dr Hazel Keedle 31:53

The maternity consumer organisations that have been involved with the project, they have been reaching out to politicians and policy makers to try and get their voices heard about what is happening. And we’ve been able to be involved as researchers, and now we currently have the first ever New South Wales Upper House inquiry into birth trauma. And myself and my research team have been part of that process. We’ve met with the politicians, we’ve met with the consumer groups, we’ve met with human-rights lawyers, and we’ve helped put together the terms of reference and how the inquiry’s going to look.

Caris Bizzaca 32:30

After submissions for the inquiry close, there will then be hearings and then the Select Committee will put forward recommendations.

Dr Hazel Keedle 32:37

This is the first time this has ever occurred and it’s certainly been a collaboration between our research projects and our findings and the consumer groups in Australia.

Caris Bizzaca 32:48

As for next steps, Dr Keedle is excited about the survey going global with the Birth Experience Study International Collaboration, which was not part of their initial plans.

Dr Hazel Keedle 32:58

It came from this real spirit of wanting to share what we’ve learned from this research journey and this really good survey that was designed with consumers, and getting that out across the world. And we now have research groups in the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Taiwan, Japan, China, Brazil and Zambia. And we work together, we meet monthly, we exchange our skills because we’ve all got research skills in different areas. And I was saying in a meeting with our Zambian researchers who have just joined that we’re also sharing our time because it takes a lot of time to do research. But we’re actually going to be able to bring this data together from an international perspective. So not only will we be able to talk about what women are experiencing in Australia, that we can say what women are experiencing across the world in all these different countries. So we’ll end up with this very big data set of women’s experiences of maternity care that I really hope will have an have an impact on the international level as well.

Caris Bizzaca 34:03

That was Dr Hazel Keedle, the runner up of the 2023 Research Impact Competition at Western Sydney University. Join us for the next episode to find out more about the research being undertaken in Australia and its real-world impact, both now and into the future.

Related Articles

“Just get the admin to do it.” Why research managers are feeling misunderstood

Culture clashes: unpicking the power dynamics between research managers and academics

This alternative way to measure research impact made judges cry with joy

“Couldn’t cut it as a scientist.” How lab managers and technicians are smashing outdated stereotypes

• Research management
• Institutions

Adopt universal standards for study adaptation to boost health, education and social-science research

Correspondence 02 APR 24

How can we make PhD training fit for the modern world? Broaden its philosophical foundations

Allow researchers with caring responsibilities ‘promotion pauses’ to make research more equitable

Africa’s postdoc workforce is on the rise — but at what cost?

Career Feature 02 APR 24

Research assessments are still not fit for purpose — here’s how to change things

World View 02 APR 24

How scientists are making the most of Reddit

Career Feature 01 APR 24

Larger or longer grants unlikely to push senior scientists towards high-risk, high-reward work

Nature Index 25 MAR 24

A fresh start for the African Academy of Sciences

Editorial 19 MAR 24

Numbers highlight US dominance in clinical research

Nature Index 13 MAR 24

Seeking Global Talents, the International School of Medicine, Zhejiang University

Welcome to apply for all levels of professors based at the International School of Medicine, Zhejiang University.

Yiwu, Zhejiang, China

International School of Medicine, Zhejiang University

Nanjing Forestry University is globally seeking Metasequoia Scholars and Metasequoia Talents

Located next to Purple Mountain and Xuanwu Lake, Nanjing Forestry University (NJFU) is a key provincial university jointly built by Jiangsu Province

Nanjing, Jiangsu, China

Nanjing Forestry University (NFU)

Career Opportunities at the Yazhouwan National Laboratory, Hainan, China

YNL recruits leading scientists in agriculture: crop/animal genetics, biotech, photosynthesis, disease resistance, data analysis, and more.

Sanya, Hainan, China

Yazhouwan National Laboratory

Postdoctoral Associate- Cell Biology

Houston, Texas (US)

Baylor College of Medicine (BCM)

Head of ClinicalTrials.gov

National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Library of Medicine (NLM) National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) Information Engineering...

Washington D.C. (US)

National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Request new password
• Create a new account

The Essential Guide to Doing Your Research Project

Student resources.

Examples of Student Research Projects

Conducting Short Research Projects

Conducting Short Research Projects teaches students all about research and how to write a research report. Students will discover what resources are and how to cite them properly. They will also learn how to check whether a specific resource is credible or not.

In the “Options for Lesson” section of the classroom procedure page, you will find a suggestion for an introductory activity. To show students what not to do, you can show them the video “The Ten Top Essay Writing Don’ts” using the link provided. You could show them “Eighteen Bizarre Research Topics” as well. These videos will demonstrate the opposite of good research and help them understand why it is important to develop good questions and a focused thesis.

Description

Additional information, what our conducting short research projects lesson plan includes.

Lesson Objectives and Overview: Conducting Short Research Projects guides students through the steps of doing a research project. Students will learn how to pick a topic and narrow it down with specific questions. They will discover that a narrow topic helps them focus the research they explore. They will learn basic steps for writing research reports, what resources to use, and how to cite them. In addition, they will learn how to verify whether or not a resource is credible.

The lesson contains three pages of content. The first page explains what research is and provides a basic foundation for the concept of a research paper. Students will learn eight steps that they can follow to prepare and write a good research essay. The lesson describes each step clearly and relates each one to an overall example.

Students will learn how to cite their sources as well. The final content page explains step seven, cite sources, and provides an example. Because there are many styles people use in their citations. You can choose which one your students will use and walk through a guide for that style with them.

NARROW THE TOPIC ACTIVITY

Depending on your class, you may want students to work in groups or with a partner for the activity. However, the instructions are written as if students are working alone. There are eight topics on the worksheet. One is already complete as an example. For each topic, students will write a topic sentence that narrows down the broader topic. They can only use one sentence.

RESEARCH TOPICS PRACTICE WORKSHEET

The practice worksheet requires students to find sources to support a topic. The topic is about garbage being harmful to the environment. Students will review the topic and thesis statement and look for sources that support it. They should try to use different sources and not just a single type, such as books. There are four blank index cards on the worksheet with which they can organize their sources.

CONDUCTING SHORT RESEARCH PROJECTS HOMEWORK

For the homework assignment, students will build on what they completed in for the practice worksheet. Students will use the information they gathered and write a short, two-paragraph research report on plastic pollution. They will need to cite their sources.

Related products

Women’s History Month

Phyla Vertebrata and Chordata Advanced

Science of Flight

Phyla Platyhelminthes and Nematoda Advanced

Make your life easier with our lesson plans, stay up-to-date with new lessons.

• Lesson Plans
• For Teachers

© 2024 Learn Bright. All rights reserved. Terms and Conditions. Privacy Policy.

• Sign Up for Free

Loading metrics

Open Access

Community Page

The Community Page is a forum for organizations and societies to highlight their efforts to enhance the dissemination and value of scientific knowledge.

See all article types »

Creative Research Science Experiences for High School Students

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Tous Chercheurs, Equipe de Recherche Technologique en éducation (ERTé) Hippocampe n°47, INMED and Aix-Marseille II University, Marseille, France

Current address:Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom

• Constance Hammond, 
• David Karlin, 
• Jean Thimonier

Published: September 21, 2010

• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000447
• Reader Comments

Citation: Hammond C, Karlin D, Thimonier J (2010) Creative Research Science Experiences for High School Students. PLoS Biol 8(9): e1000447. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000447

Academic Editor: Cheryl A. Kerfeld, University of California Berkeley/JGI, United States of America

Copyright: © 2010 Hammond et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: The team is funded by the Ministry of French Education. JT and CH are Inserm members. The Tous Chercheurs lab is financed by the Direction Regionale de la Recherche et de la Technologie (DRRT), Haut Commissariat a la jeunesse, Region Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur and Ville de Marseille. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

The influence of scientific discoveries on daily life has never been greater, yet the percentage of students pursuing careers in science and technology has dropped dramatically in the Western World [1] , [2] . Student disenchantment begins even before high school, where students must typically memorize scientific facts and occasionally perform experiments following a strict protocol that teaches abstract concepts with little relevance to daily life [3] – [5] . French high school students, as in other countries, opt out of scientific tracks in the 6th and 7th grades, often selecting scientific courses simply to increase their chances of being accepted at prestigious universities [6] . This passive teaching style squanders children's intrinsic curiosity, imagination, creativity, and fascination with the natural world and forces universities to invest enormous sums in an effort to recover from these lost opportunities [7] – [9] . Offering high school students the means to explore the world the way working scientists do can rekindle their inquisitive nature.

Tous Chercheurs: A Bioscience Research Program for High School Students

To build bridges between high school students and scientists, our teaching laboratory is located within a research institute of the French medical research council (Inserm), on a scientific campus of the University of Aix-Marseille, France. The institute hosts approximately 1,000 high school students per year for three-day periods to participate in “miniature” research projects. The lab is managed by the non-profit organization Tous Chercheurs—loosely translated as “Researchers, All”—reflecting its philosophy that everyone can be a researcher for at least a little while. Following the success of this program, now five years old, similar initiatives are being planned in other regions of France.

The program engages students in open-ended investigations to teach critical thinking and communication skills [10] – [12] . Our approach has two main components: students spend several hours developing a research question (in the context of a well-defined topic), and then a portion of their time post-experiment to consider the problems encountered during their experimentation. They can redo their experiments if necessary ( Figure 1 ). This approach, which is adaptable to any scientific field, relies on six principles ( Box 1 ). This strategy helps pupils learn different aspects of research, including complex and critical thinking [13] , the experimental method, and teamwork. In addition, PhD students learn how to teach research in an intuitive and inspiring way.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000447.g001

Box 1: The Teaching Strategy

• No pre-selection of students (the entire classroom participates, as well as the science teacher);
• Pupils work in teams, with each team tutored by a PhD student;
• Pupils design, perform, and interpret experiments in a process that is as similar as possible to experiments in a typical research laboratory;
• Pupils perform hands-on experiments (not restricted to computer-based virtual experiments);
• Trials are encouraged and mistakes are not penalized;
• Pupils do not receive grades or exams regarding the research experience. They present their results and discuss their errors much as researchers do among themselves.

Chronology of a Three-Day Mini Research Project in the Tous Chercheurs Lab

We have created thematic workshops (most lasting three days) within several disciplines. All correspond to the French national curriculum to allow students to focus on the research process rather than on absorbing complex concepts. Our workshops have covered a broad range of research topics and fields, including the uses of fluorescent proteins (molecular biology), response to infection (immunology), brain development and plasticity (neuroscience), and the study and mitigation of aquatic pollution (sustainable development).

Each workshop is separated into three parts: (i) observation, creation, and understanding of a problem, what to study, and how to proceed; (ii) experimentation, quantification, and discussion of the results; (iii) interpretation and critical oral presentation of the results ( Figure 1 ). As in real research, high school students do not know the results of the experiments in advance.

High school teachers organize the class into three to five groups of students, each tutored by a PhD student. Each group independently observes the same biological problem, focusing on two to four slides. For example, in the sustainable development workshop, students are shown two slides describing phenotype modifications of different species of fish living in two types of environments influenced by human activity.

For the discussion during these sessions, tutors neither ask for questions nor provide information unless students ask for it. Students are initially surprised by this approach, but soon become more interactive, sharing their thoughts freely, organizing their thoughts and questions, generating hypotheses, and proposing and designing general protocols to test them, guided by their tutor. During the sustainable development workshop, for example, students identify multiple important aspects of aquatic pollution, including biological, chemical, economical, and sociological perspectives. They must then consider how to identify the impact of pollution on the biological and ionic composition of water and how to minimize it.

When the discussion progresses to a more advanced stage and clear-cut suggestions for avenues of investigation have been made, the tutor explains that resources limit the ability to investigate all of the questions raised and proposes that each of the four groups tests a different, complementary research question, so that all the experiments provide a more complete story that addresses the issue.

Students conduct the experiments they have discussed and designed between the first afternoon and the third morning. The tutor fills in the precise details of the general protocol and teaches them how to read and follow a written protocol, explains why they have to design control experiments, how to use the equipment, suggests that they quantify results, discusses the results with the students, and makes sure that they have dealt with artifacts and interpreted data in order to draw reliable, well-supported conclusions. Though the protocols have been prepared in advance, students may suggest and perform additional experiments to test their ideas. In addition, if a technique fails to yield results (a common situation in the course of research), students interrupt the research project and investigate the likely source of the technical failure with the help of their tutor.

For instance, in the sustainable development workshop, students identify whether the effluent of a waste water plant modifies the bacterial and chemical composition of rivers from water samples taken upstream, at the source, or downstream from the effluent. With microbiological experiments on the three water samples, students identify the phenotypes and metabolism of bacterial colonies grown in Petri dishes, using macroscopic and microscopic observations, respirometry, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) techniques. Chemical experiments on the same water samples allow comparison of the concentrations of various ions in the three water samples, using colorimetry, photometry, and pH measurements. In addition, students investigate the willingness of an interviewed population to pay for ecosystem preservation (this includes creating an economic survey, interviewing a population on campus, and analyzing the result). Finally, students create slogans for an awareness campaign on pollution based on a tool (metaplan) derived from psychological studies and management tools [14] .

Teams prepare slide presentations summarizing their questions, hypotheses, and experimental work and then present their work, explaining the problem investigated, the results obtained, and the conclusions drawn. The director encourages questions and facilitates debate to ensure that pupils understand the work performed by the others. If needed, he explains the question their experiment answers and does not answer, the role of control experiments, and the conclusions they can draw. Then students are sorted into four new “chimera” groups containing at least one student from each of the previous groups. Each chimera group designs a poster that summarizes the multiple investigations performed by the different teams and provides a complete overview of the issue. Assembling the results together reinforces multidisciplinarity and group cohesion and facilitates the subsequent oral presentation.

External researchers (one per chimeric group) are then brought in to listen to the students' explanations of the poster and ask for hypothesis-driven approaches in their explanations (rather than simple recapitulation of the results). They help students critique the poster's title, presentation, figures, and application of the scientific method. Finally, pupils and researchers retrospectively analyze how they could have improved their experimental approach.

Recruitment of Students and Tutors

This program requires the concerted efforts of researchers (the organizers and assistants) and their labs, PhD students, science teachers, and high school students. Workshops are designed by us (the Tous Chercheurs team) or by groups of PhD students from different scientific fields (such as biology, physics, chemistry, economics) under our supervision. This is considered part of their teaching obligation and their work is generally promoted by a publication [14] , [15] .

High school teachers have learned about our workshops through word of mouth, and through electronic messages to high schools. Teachers select the research subject six months in advance and organize their lesson plans accordingly. Scheduling the experimental workshop before the theoretical coursework allows students to explore the subject with a more candid, unbiased approach. To ensure teachers that the PhD students can take their place in the lab, the lab's team explains how the plan will work and how pupils will be taught to conduct experiments. Participating teachers are highly motivated to manage the time required for the workshops by collaborating with other teachers at their school. For example, teachers may swap duties for the days needed in exchange for an invitation to attend the course.

Tutors are recruited by advertisement through PhD student associations, trained before their first workshop, and are paid for the sessions. They gain valuable teaching experience for their CVs, and a better understanding of the research process. It is so completely different from their previous experience as lecturers in a passive instructional role, that it often takes some time before they can fully engage the students in active learning. The high school students are actually helpful in that they may look up to the tutors (often closer in age than their own instructors), and come to mimic many of the researchers' behaviors. Researchers who come to the lab at the end of the workshop for the students' presentations are easily recruited from campus labs thanks to their interest in interacting with students and because they enjoy explaining their day-to-day life as researchers.

We have not encountered any problems with keeping students interested. They enjoy the chance to actively participate during the school day, to work as a team, and to test their ideas, experiment freely, and engage in discussion with their tutor. The layout of the lab is also very important. The benches of our lab are not aligned in rows, which hinder efficient teamwork, but are easily moved, allowing many people to engage in face-to-face discussions. Students can move freely within the lab and to their offices opposite the lab, where they have access to computers and whiteboards. They also have access to an outdoor terrace to relax under the Mediterranean sun.

Though evaluation of the program will be complete by the end of 2012 [16] , we have results from one cohort of high school students who participated in the program for three years (2006–2008). Seventy-four percent of those who passed the French baccalaureat (equivalent of A level in the UK or college entrance exam in the USA) are majoring in science at the science or engineering universities, and 5% are enrolled at liberal arts universities.

A few other centres offer high school students the opportunity to conduct experimental science in a dedicated laboratory on a university campus. Israel pioneered this concept with The Belmonte Science Center for Youth ( http://www.belmonte.huji.ac.il/ ), and at least six others have since been created in Europe. These include XLAB ( http://www.xlab-goettingen.de/ ), Life Lab ( http://www.lifelab.de/ ), and Gläsernes Labor ( http://www.glaesernes-labor.de/ )(Germany), Open Lab ( http://www.viennaopenlab.at/ ) (Austria), House of Science ( http://www.houseofscience.se/ ) (Sweden), and Petnica Science Center ( http://www.psc.ac.yu/eng/ ) (Serbia). They all provide excellent equipment and mentoring by scientists. Although they differ in the duration of the workshop (four hours to several days), whether or not they pre-select students and in their educational approach, all share the common goal of encouraging high school students to choose scientific careers.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank F. Challande, A. Guimezanes, C. Langlet, and M. Mathieu for their crucial help in the Tous Chercheurs association and all the partners who supported or assisted the project.

Notes and References

• 1. European Commission Europe Needs More Scientists: Report by the High Level Group on Increasing Human Resources for Science and Technology (EC, Brussels, 2004). Available: http://ec.europa.eu/research/conferences/2004/sciprof/pdf/final_en.pdf . Accessed 23 August 2010.
• View Article
• Google Scholar
• 3. Pring R, Hayward G, Hodgson A, Johnson J, Keep E, et al. (2009) The Nuffield review of 14–19 education and training in England and Wales, in Education for All: The future of education and training for 14–19 year olds. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
• 6. OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) (2006) : Science competencies for tomorrow's world. Available: http://www.pisa.oecd.org/ . Accessed 23 August 2010.
• 10. Gott R, Roberts R (2008) Concepts of evidence and their role in open-ended practical investigations and scientific literacy; background to published papers.
• 14. Vergnoux A, Allari E, Sassi M, Thimonier J, Hammond C, et al. (2010) A multidisciplinary investigation on aquatic pollution and how to minimize it. J Biol Educ. In press.
• 16. Evaluation by the Centre d'études et de recherche sur les qualifications CEREQ, France. Available: http://www.cereq.fr . Accessed 23 August 2010.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Exploring the Impact of Workshops and a Mini-Project in Student Teachers Becoming Qualitative Researchers

2022, The qualitative report

Related Papers

Qualitative Research in Education

Mahmut Kalman

This study aimed at exploring novice researchers’ experiences of and perspectives on the qualitative research journey and determining the difficulties tackled and strategies developed while conducting qualitative research. The study was an interview-based qualitative case study involving nine graduate students in education as the participants. The data were collected between 2017 and 2019 at a state university located in Southeastern Turkey. The content-analyzed data revealed several findings about the research topic, indicating that the novice researchers considered the qualitative research journey as daunting and overwhelming, but pleasurable and satisfying. Despite scholarly development and lessons learned in the process, the researchers confronted with several difficulties concerning data collection, analysis and interpretation, recruitment and developing rapport, representation of findings, and the research process as a whole. They developed personal and external support strate...

Quality & Quantity

Mansoor Niaz

Texto & Contexto - Enfermagem

Fernando Bertolotto

Objective: describe the experience of the proposal, process and results of a training program on qualitative research for nursing teachers based on the constructivist pedagogic model. Method: implementation of a course at a Nursing School in Uruguay from November 3, 2016 to October 12, 2017, in which thirty-nine teachers participated voluntarily. The description of the experience presented in this article is based on the assessment of the course made through participant observation, surveys and a dialogue session with the participants in which the results of the course were discussed. Results: through the implementation of the course, several achievements were accomplished, as well as challenges detected. We would like to highlight the interest received from the course managers and participants in the subject, the nine new research projects, the creation of a bibliographic material, videos and recordings repository, as well as the financial resource mobilization. The challenges were...

Barbara Kawulich

This article surveys the literature from 1999 to 2013 on teaching qualitative research methods. One hundred thirteen articles fitted the inclusion criteria; 79 of these were by academics in the United States and Canada. Only 39 of the 113 were based on empirical research: from these, seven descriptive themes were distilled, of which the dominant ones are experiential learning and practice-based materials and workshops. The literature portrayed teaching qualitative research as providing experiential and practice-based learning opportunities for students that revealed its desirable pedagogical features. It further reported that when students engaged in learning experiences, they underwent paradigm shifts about qualitative research as well as personal transformations. Our study confirmed that there is a lack of a research-based approach to teaching qualitative methods and we recommend that more be done to contribute to its pedagogical culture particularly concerning methods used to eva...

The Qualitative Report

Hassan Soodmand Afshar

This study explored the challenges of conducting qualitative research encountered by Iranian Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) graduate students and their solutions for them. To delve into the issue, 20 TEFL graduate students who had passed a research methodology course were selected based on their availability from among the participants of the study who were selected based on purposive sampling from various universities. The participants thus selected sat a semi-structured interview based on the results of which, a researcher-made five-point Likert-scale questionnaire was developed and validated. Next, one hundred TEFL graduate students who had passed the research methodology course were selected based on purposive sampling from different universities across the country to respond to the questionnaire developed as mentioned above. The results of descriptive statistics revealed that the most important aspect of qualitative research from the students’ viewpoint was data ...

Sharayi Chakanyuka

Psychology Teaching Review

Adam Danquah

This paper describes the development and delivery of an innovative approach to teaching qualitative research methods in psychology. The teaching incorporated a range of ‘active’ pedagogical practices that it shares with other teaching in this area, but was designed in such a way as to follow the arc of a qualitative research project in its entirety over several sessions, whilst episodicallydealing with distinct methodological approaches along the way. In line with this design, and the mutuality of the learning, it was called a ‘qualitative learning series’. Following Mason (2002), the paper also considers the challenge of qualitative teaching in the context of academic psychology, and touches upon whether developments in theyears since have made for much difference. These strands of the paper come together in how the teaching met these challenges.

John Schostak

The Modern Language …

Xuesong Gao

The purpose of this study was to reexamine the principle of researcher-as-instrument to provide insights on methodological ways of engaging critically and reflexively. There are few published pieces that have given attention to the complexities of the educational researcher’s identities through the method of critical self-analysis. The researcher’s nine published case studies were critically reanalyzed by using the criteria of excellent qualitative research such as rich rigor to examine the relationship between the researcher’s identities and the quality of qualitative research. The findings suggest that the researcher’s published studies lack sincerity most among other criteria. The layered identities of the researcher, specifically her theoretical knowledge and linguistic orientation, influenced the data interpretation and subsequent reports. The field of educational research tends to view researchers as one homogenous group; this study redefines that notion as the findings uncove...

RELATED PAPERS

Eloisa Grossman

STRING (Satuan Tulisan Riset dan Inovasi Teknologi)

deny hidayatullah

Arturo Vergara Hernández

Przegląd Organizacji

Maria Romanowska

Peter Wypych

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Andre Buret

Annales historiques de la Révolution française

jean-michel derex

Russian Open Medical Journal

Nur Lailatul Masruroh

Prosiding Seminar Nasional Program Pengabdian Masyarakat

MT Ghozali , PInasti Utami , Ingenida Hadning , Bangunawati Rahajeng

Journal of Bacteriology

Raymond J Turner

PROCEEDINGS OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING

Nenad Jacimovic

Fernando C. Passos

Saifulah Samsudin

Denis Fantinato

Acta Crystallographica Section E Structure Reports Online

Sandra Cruz

Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa

Catarina Rosa

International Journal of Computer Communication and Informatics

Minhaz Uddin

Carbohydrate Polymers

Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety

Marcos Franco

Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP

Aurélien Perera

Daniel Afonso da Silva

IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science

Samantha Cornacchia

The Israel journal of psychiatry and related sciences

Richard Krueger

Advances in Space Research

Rafik Hamdi

Beata Gyuris

See More Documents Like This

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Isr J Health Policy Res

Mini research projects as a mechanism to improve the quality of dementia care

Hava golander.

Department of Nursing and Herczeg Institute for the Study of Aging and Old Age, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

Associated Data

Not applicable

Several models have been proposed to connect academia and practice in order to improve long-term care. In this paper we propose and describe the “Mini-Research Group” as an alternative model of such collaboration. The formation of mini-research groups was the unplanned by-product of a longitudinal action research project headed by the late Prof. Rebecca Bergman, a prominent nursing leader from the Department of Nursing at Tel-Aviv University. It involved a two-stage project aimed at developing, and later implementing, a specific tool to evaluate the quality of care provided in geropsychiatric units and to design a nursing intervention which entailed an improved model for care in specialized geropsychiatric units for persons with dementia. Initially, this article describes the projects that led to the development of mini-research groups, and then continues to describe several mini-research projects, focusing on the research questions which emerged from practice as well as the variety of methodologies used. Finally, we discuss the ways in which mini- research groups contributed to the quality of care for persons with dementia, benefited their families, professional staff, faculty participants, and advanced policy development. We argue that in light of the present array of ethical and legal restrictions which inhibit the recruitment of participants, using mini-research groups combined of practitioners and researchers, can provide a pragmatic solution, not only to overcome these barriers, but to improve the quality of care, stimulate clinical dementia research, and promote new insights into the lives of persons with dementia.

Several models have been proposed to connect research with practice in order to improve long-term care, among them research institutes affiliated with nursing homes, clinician-initiated research programs, or the more comprehensive tri-focal model of care which combines patient centered care, positive work environment, and evidence-based practice under one big umbrella which fosters a collaborative relationship between nursing homes and academic institutions. [ 1 – 3 ] Despite their prior successes, these models seem to have disappeared from the field of dementia research. This paper sets forth an Israeli model for addressing this and other challenges: the mini-research group.

The initiative to improve and evaluate the effectiveness of care in geropsychiatric units, which was started by Prof. Rebecca Bergman in 1985 and completed in 1992, produced important lessons for understanding persons in advanced stages of dementia and for assessing care provided and research conducted in geropsychiatric units. This longitudinal action research involved about 70 nurses from 20 geriatric centers in Israel, national geriatric inspectors from the Ministry of Health and faculty members from Tel Aviv University. The establishment of the mini-research groups was one of a number of unplanned positive outcomes which emerged from this project [ 4 ].

A previous report of an interdisciplinary committee on “quality of care in services for the elderly” [ 5 ] provided a comprehensive framework for Prof. Bergman’s project. The basic undifferentiated model consisted of six major domains: physical environment, psychological environment, basic personal care, health care, family involvement and human resources. Thus, the first stage of the project involved further developing a specific model which would be relevant and unique to the geropsychiatric units’ characteristics. This involved reviewing the literature, conducting on-site observations, and interviewing residents, families and staff caregivers. The tool that was developed was tested in several settings [ 6 ]. It related to residents as individuals, as groups, and to the unit as a whole. The model provided for 72 cells which evaluated nine focus items on eight administrative, affective, and instrumental measures, as shown in Fig. ​ Fig.1 1 .

A model of the two-dimensional model containing 72 cells

The second phase of the project included the implementation of the tool. The leading project team organized bimonthly full day meetings attended by more than 70 nurses, including unit nurses and directors from 20 geriatric centers, national geriatric nursing inspectors, and nursing faculty from Tel-Aviv University. Each gathering, hosted by a different geriatric center, followed a similar format: presentation of a background paper, discussion of one of the measures of care, guided tours of geropsychiatric units, and exchanges of information regarding problems and experiences related to the topic in discussion. In addition, the project core team, consisting of three geriatric nurse specialists, provided in depth guidance to six non-profit geropsychiatric units during weekly site visits. The team focused on identifying needs, planning and implementing change, and encouraging grass-roots involvement in every phase of the process. One year later, a follow up study showed improved quality of care, retention of positive changes and higher satisfaction among residents, families and staff as compared to the status quo at the project’s onset [ 7 ].

The mini-research groups, an outgrowth of the project’s large group meetings, continued to operate far beyond the official termination of the project (about 10 years). Each group consisted of practical unit nurses, guided by an academic advisor, and focused on a common unresolved clinical problem, which was raised by the clinical staff. With the help of the academic advisors, the problems were framed in terms of systematic research questions, with the goal of formulating appropriate interventions for challenging issues. Favorable results from one study group encouraged the establishment of additional mini-groups to solve other problems within the psychogeriatric unit’s daily routine. Altogether, about 15 mini-research groups were convened to study a wide range of clinical problems, such as how to use Jacuzzi bathing as a therapeutic tool; how to address loneliness; and how to reduce violence.

In order to illustrate how the insights gained from a mini-research project can serve to promote the understanding of dementia and the improvement of care, several exemplars of successful mini-research projects are presented herein, each with its distinctive incentive, methodology and outcomes.

Examples of the mini-research projects

• The “Violence Group” Reducing violence among geropsychiatric residents:

Violent outbursts by residents are common occurrences in geropsychiatric settings. The study team decided to study what triggers outbursts of violence. What cues in the resident’s behavior might indicate a mood change? How should violence be categorized? Which interventions can be helpful?

The group carried out a literature review, gathered more than 30 observed and reported relevant incidents, documented them on a semi-structured questionnaire which they developed (see Fig.  2 ) and, using qualitative techniques, analyzed the data in relation to the residents’ characteristics, the nature of the violent act, the reactions of others, and which interventions were effective. The study team presented its findings to the greater group and its findings encouraged others to establish additional mini-research groups [ 4 ].

• b. The “Mirrors Group” – The use of mirrors as a therapeutic tool for raising self-awareness:

Sample incident report

An occasional observation reported by a nurse about a resident in the geropsychiatric unit ,who was searching obsessively in front of and behind the mirror - provided the incentive to establish another group to examine the effects of mirrors on persons with dementia. How do persons with dementia relate to their image in the mirror? Is the use of mirrors effective in raising levels of self-awareness, calmness and satisfaction? In order to answer these questions, the mini-research group carried out a simple experiment in which 100 persons with dementia were exposed to mirrors of different sizes. Their reactions were documented and analyzed, showing varied responses to looking in the mirror. Most responses were positive (52%) with increased self-awareness regarding personal care, while others were indifferent (10%), or even angered (12%). A majority of residents appeared to benefit from looking at the mirrors. In some instances, the use of mirrors led to improved communication between residents and professional staff. The results of the study team’s work brought to light a new and inexpensive therapeutic tool for persons with dementia: mirrors [ 8 ].

• c. The “Dolls Project” – The use of dolls as a therapeutic tool to awaken pleasurable affective responses:

The therapeutic use of dolls in dementia, though still controversial, is becoming more prevalent at nursing homes and dementia centers. Supporters say that dolls can lessen distress, improve communication and reduce the need for psychotropic medication. Critics say that dolls are demeaning and infantilize seniors. The Dolls mini-research project was a pioneering attempt to systematically examine the influence of dolls as a sensory stimulus to residents in geropsychiatric units [ 9 ]. Using a simple experimental design, the staff placed a variety of human and animal figures in a central location inside the activity rooms of 5 units. Using a pre-coded form, the staff observed reactions to the presence of the dolls, method of selection, type of contact, verbal and body communication, behavior of family members and others, and the emotional impact of the dolls. While the attention span of the residents to the dolls varied from a few moments to several hours, the data revealed that more than half of the 100 residents appeared to be happy with the dolls. The residents usually selected “their” same doll. Touching or holding the dolls elicited pleasure, reassurance, and comfort, often stimulating nonverbal communication, with the potential for verbal communication and better interaction between residents and staff. Thus, the researchers found that dolls can be used therapeutically to awaken pleasurable affective responses in persons with dementia.

• d. The “Jacuzzi Bath Project” – The use of Jacuzzis as a therapeutic tool to address the needs of specific residents.

The Jacuzzi research group was actually formed in order to solve a space-management problem: The luxurious Jacuzzi room in one of the units was reduced to a storeroom because the staff was concerned that entering the tub or bathing might cause residents to feel anxiety, confusion, or might provoke them to violence. The group decided to study whether the Jacuzzi could be used therapeutically. A review of the literature did not produce any relevant information, although hydrotherapy is widely accepted. The methodology incorporated a series of case study analyses. The unit team was encouraged to identify residents whose specific problems might be ameliorated through use of the Jacuzzi. The staff provided an inviting Jacuzzi experience and later evaluated the impact of the treatment in selected situations: a person with aggressive behavior; two night wanderers; and a woman with severe body pain due to arthritis. All the Jacuzzi baths produced a beneficial effect, and the staff overcame their concerns about possible harm to the residents. Consequently, two additional nursing homes participating in the project decided to place Jacuzzis in their geropsychiatric units.

• e. The “Social Networks Project” – Understanding the interpersonal relationships among residents in a geropsychiatric unit.

Several nurses were interested in examining the potential for establishing social networks among residents with dementia and the possible impact on the residents’ quality of life. The nurses wished to see if altering the social environment could enhance relationships. This project later developed into a research thesis conducted by graduate student Perri Cohen [ 10 ]. The methodology chosen was a semi-structured open questionnaire (see Fig.  3 observation schedule). It included the description of a relationship, the morphology of each tie (dyad, triad, or cluster structure), the psycho-social nature of the tie (aggressive/passive/friendly), the degree of symmetry in engagement, the function of the tie (intimacy/being together/help/control etc.) and the identification of the initiator. The depth of the tie and the relationship of the environment to the tie were also observed. Data analysis incorporated qualitative and quantitative methods. The results showed that 44% of the residents with dementia were involved in a consistent social tie of some kind, most often observed as “being together” in a dyad (80%), or in a “concern and help” relationship (66%). The resident’s background variables did not influence the formation of social ties, and neither did his/her cognitive or physical function. Significantly, most of the ties were developed between two residents with different levels of function. This seemed to allow for reciprocity and for the enhancement of self-esteem for both parties. The study concluded that social skills, preferences and abilities were relatively preserved in residents with dementia even for those in the more advanced stages of the disease, suggesting that staff members can play a more active role in facilitating the social environment of the residents than previously thought. For example, staff members can maintain a resident’s grooming and aesthetic appearance to promote social interaction, and can promote a friendly atmosphere in the unit for the overall well-being of residents.

Obsevation Schedules Socialities

Contributions of the mini-research group

The impact of the mini-research groups was multi-dimensional and relatively long lasting. The four major contributions of the project were:

• Improved quality of care - The mini-research projects had a marked effect on the quality of care in the psychogeriatric units. Staff became more sensitive, attentive and knowledgeable to residents’ potentials and needs. Care became more holistic in the sense of integrating physical, psychological, and social aspects. Nursing interventions tended to become more active, creative, evidence-based, and individualized, compared to the regimented care provided prior to the project.
• Increased family involvement - Due to the active role family members played during the project by providing data and feedback to the staff, they became more involved in the unit, They intensified their participation in unit social activities, became closer with the staff and gained an increased general awareness of the needs and potential of their relative and the staff.
• Improved self-image of nursing personnel - Personnel employed in the geropsychiatric units traditionally perceive themselves and others employed at nursing homes as holding the least desirable positions in the work world. Those with the opportunity to advance usually preferred more prestigious work environments than those found at geriatric centers. As a result, nursing home staff included few nurses with academic or post-basic preparation. The geropsychiatric project brought a positive change to the self-image of staff members employed in units which participated in mini-research groups. Such staff members became the center of professional attention and the envy of their colleagues in other geriatric units. The geropsychiatric nurses reported that they felt stimulated and challenged and were more eager to continue in their place of work, an environment which had become exciting and rewarding. They felt that they had become more independent in their practice and more knowledgeable, individually and as a group. They took pride in their new practice, they often documented their projects in video and presented their experiences in professional conferences. Upon termination of the formal project, group members decided to continue on their own. They established a national geropsychiatric nurses association, published their own professional journal “The Forum,” organized their own annual conferences, and with some modifications, continue to function as a strong specialty group organization to this day.
• The merit of collaboration between practitioners and researchers – The frequent meetings of the mini-research groups provided a model for collaboration between academia and providers that enriched both parties and enhanced mini-research group outcomes. The merit of the collaboration for the practicing nurses seemed most obvious. With guidance by an experienced researcher from academia, staff was introduced to new ways of thinking and developed a research approach to their everyday practice. They learned how to identify problems, focus on goals, review literature, gather data, analyze data, and reach conclusions. An academic advisor, acted as a role model and a facilitator to energize the nurses’ potential individually and as a group.

The merit of such collaboration for the academic research advisors, while less obvious, also warrants favorable comment. The close exposure of the researcher to practicing nurses and to daily life in the clinical field provided him/her with new, enriched and grounded perspectives which assured the relevancy and accuracy of research in relation to the reality experienced by subjects. Through the joint experience of collaboration, the dialogue between practitioners and researchers fostered new ways of thinking, mutual learning and appreciation between clinical practice and academia. The researchers learned to frame and prioritize research questions consistent with the questions’ importance to persons with dementia, staff and family members. They found that “small and simple” research questions were at times more helpful than “complicated and sophisticated” ones. The staff proved that with little guidance, they could become astute and creative partners in collecting and analyzing data generated by observations and other qualitative method techniques, so relevant for the study of dementia, yet so complicated to implement [ 11 ]. Collaborating with service personnel also afforded researchers the satisfaction of witnessing the immediate implementation of their research ideas and recommendations.. The combination of direct input and real-life problems in the field, aided by the experience of practitioners and the knowledge of academia researchers proved to be a happier marriage than the hopeful parties could have imagined during their courtship.

What can we learn today from the experiences of the mini-research groups which operated in the past?, and how can we apply the lessons learned to the future? Effective research and treatment of dementia, and improving the quality of life and promoting social inclusion of persons with dementia have been identified as a global public health priority by the World Health Organization [ 12 ]. Yet conducting research into these matters presents complex ethical and methodological issues [ 13 , 14 ]. For example, while obtaining an Advance Research Directive (ARD) is still considered a valid consent in the first stages of dementia, ethics review committees are often reluctant to permit even qualitative methods studies to be conducted on people in advanced stages of dementia. These and other obstacles hamper progress [ 11 ]. The mini-research model is one way of addressing the numerous ethical and legal requirements which hinder advancement. The mini-research group format provides a pragmatic solution, not only in overcoming procedural barriers, but also in stimulating more research and promoting a greater understanding of persons with dementia. The idea of bringing practitioners and researchers together to study and resolve specific issues which arise in clinical settings has innumerable advantages: The model is simple to administer and overcomes bureaucratic and logistical barriers. Mini-research groups can bring about significant and immediate impacts on the quality of care because they examine and work to resolve “real” problems in specific settings. A diverse research team has a greater likelihood to understand persons with dementia. The diversity within mini-research groups increases the likelihood of finding creative paths forward and furthering the professional growth of participating field practitioners and academic researchers, all to the benefit of persons with dementia.

Prof. Bergman started her project with modest funding, but overflowing personal magnetism, enthusiasm, motivation as well as receptivity by the clinical community. In the ensuing years, long term care facilities have become more overwhelmed with clinical, ethical, legal and financial constraints. If improving the care of persons with dementia is indeed a global goal, achieving progress will require not only sufficient resources and infrastructure, but the selection of effective models for advancing knowledge and implementing best practices. The collaboration of practitioners and researchers in mini-research groups can provide an answer to many of the challenges of addressing the needs of persons with dementia. Yet, to ensure such cooperation on a national level and for long lasting periods, every care policy program should develop and assimilate an appropriate research strategy aimed to increase the knowledge and understanding as well as to ensure the provision of quality care for people with dementia and their family members.

Acknowledgements

This paper is dedicated to the beloved Prof. Rebecca (Beccy) Bergman (1919-2015) whose vision, creativity, leadership and unique personality led to the outstanding achievements of this project. Prof. Bergman, a distinguished international leader in her field, was the first nurse to be awarded the Israel Prize for her life-long contribution to society and the nation.

Availability of data and materials

Authors’ contributions.

The author read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ information

Hava Golander, RN, MSN, PhD, is an associate professor of nursing (retired) at the Department of Nursing, Tel Aviv University and a senior member of Herczeg Institute for the Study of Aging and Old Age.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Consent for publication.

Not applicable- only one author

Competing interests

The author declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

New Project: Utilizing Arts & Culture to Mitigate Construction Impacts

Can placemaking, temporary art, community or cultural events support quality of life and help offset the negative impacts of road construction?

MnDOT, with the University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Public Affairs, is conducting a research implementation project that will help answer that question while potentially offsetting the impacts of highway construction on downtown Lanesboro when Highway 250 is rebuilt.

Project goals

Primary goal : To test, document, and evaluate the premise that arts and culture can help overcome the disruption of highway construction and mitigate negative impacts on businesses, residents, and visitors.

Secondary goal : To identify and test potential partnerships and funding strategies to support place-making, temporary art, community, or cultural events to complement traditional mitigation strategies and tactics used to help offset the negative impacts of highway construction.

This project will not only help address construction impacts in Lanesboro, but also will inform improvements in the larger process of engaging community members impacted by highway construction and ensuring that the strategies conducted are relevant for the community.

Project tasks

• Identifying and documenting economic strengths in the community
• Identifying and documenting impacted stakeholders
• Developing and implementing a plan for mitigating economic and community construction impacts
• Documenting successful practices and identifying tools to assess the impacts after construction
• Sharing findings with local governments, transportation agencies and arts/cultural groups

“This research is looking into leveraging community assets as a new and innovative way to help mitigate the negative impacts of roadway construction. It will also inform improvements in the process of engaging community members and complement the existing mitigation guidance and tools currently available to MnDOT project managers,” said Jeanne Aamodt, technical liaison.

Project Details

• Estimated Start Date:  06/29/2023
• Estimated Completion Date: 06/30/2027
• Funding:  MnDOT
• Principal Investigator:   Frank Douma
• Co-Principal Investigators:  Camila Fonseca-Sarmiento
• Technical Liaison: Jeanne Aamodt

Details of the research study work plan and timeline are subject to change.

To receive email updates about this project, visit  MnDOT’s Office of Research & Innovation  to subscribe .

Share this:

3 thoughts on “new project: utilizing arts & culture to mitigate construction impacts”.

• Pingback: New project: Using arts and culture to reduce construction impacts - USA Biz Wire Business News Wired
• Pingback: Proyek Baru: Memanfaatkan Seni & Budaya untuk Mengurangi Dampak Konstruksi – PoskoNews.com
• Pingback: New Project: Utilizing Arts & Culture to Mitigate Construction Impacts - FoxNea

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Minnesota's transportation research blog.

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

April 2, 2024

VCU students, faculty document oral history of the East Marshall Street Well Project

The Health Humanities Lab, a research lab at VCU’s Humanities Research Center, is conducting the project in collaboration with the Family Representative Council.

Share this story.

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn

By Brian McNeill

The remains of at least 44 adults and nine children were discovered in 1994 in an abandoned 19th-century well during construction on Virginia Commonwealth University’s MCV Campus. Historical and scientific research showed that the remains were primarily of Black Richmonders whose bodies had been stolen between 1848 and 1860, used for anatomical study at the Medical College of Virginia and then discarded in the well.

In 2013, VCU established the  East Marshall Street Well Project  to facilitate a process with the community that would ensure that the remains receive appropriate study, memorialization and reburial. The project has been working to implement the  recommendations  of the  Family Representative Council , which represents the descendant community.

This spring, the  Health Humanities Lab , a research lab at the VCU  Humanities Research Center , has begun conducting an oral history project in collaboration with the Family Representative Council to document the progress of the East Marshall Street Well Project. In a recording studio in  The Workshop  at the James Branch Cabell Library, VCU African American studies assistant professor  Ana Edwards  has been interviewing council members and others who have been connected with the work going back to 1994.

“These stories [and] histories are not written and can be transmitted only through the telling,” said Family Representative Council member Stephanie I. Smith, who was recently interviewed. “There’s a tendency for people to think of history or historical events only in terms of written documentation. That is so limiting and incomplete because much of our story is our experiences that have not been written by scholars or journalists. Therefore, it’s important to gather the memories, experiences and revelation of events from those people who experienced them.”

The project is being stewarded by postdoctoral fellows Maggie Unverzagt Goddard, Ph.D., and Daniel Sunshine, Ph.D., as well as Health Humanities Lab director  Chris Cynn , Ph.D., an associate professor of gender, sexuality and women’s studies, and  Michael Dickinson , Ph.D., the lab’s oral history and memorialization project co-director and an associate professor of African American history. 

“Part of the Family Representative Council’s recommendations was to have an oral history that would capture the history of the East Marshall Street Well Project,” Dickinson said. “From its inception, what did it look like at its founding? And what are the perspectives of community members who have been engaged throughout the process?”

All the interviews will be publicly available later this spring through  Special Collections and Archives  at  VCU Libraries , which will serve as a repository for the project and will manage the recordings and transcripts while the participants will maintain ownerships of their interviews under a Creative Commons license.

The project’s team includes 10 undergraduate and one graduate student fellows, who are helping to process the interviews and provide additional support. The students are also working on a variety of related projects, including programming  a traveling exhibit on the East Marshall Street Well Project , designing a walking tour, developing a podcast, researching institutional policies on human remains and planning a teach-in.

Neha Potla, a sophomore biology major, is working on the policy project. “We’re looking at how VCU and other universities take accountability and can maybe consider implementing memorialization processes to ensure that bodies are treated as bodies and with justice,” she said.

Olivia Washington, a sophomore double-majoring in psychology and sociology, said being a student fellow with the oral history project has provided her with a new perspective on VCU and its history.

“VCU is such a beautiful and central part of Richmond, so I think learning about its history and engaging with both the good and bad parts is important,” she said.

Goddard said the oral history project will be valuable to the community, as well as VCU students and faculty. “We’re seeing a real appetite for faculty to incorporate this into their curriculum,” she said. “Having a podcast created by students would be such an incredible asset for course adoption.”

The oral history project is part of a  Vertically Integrated Project , a program of the Office of the Provost and the Office of the Vice President for Research and Innovation that supports the engagement of undergraduate students in faculty-led research, design or entrepreneurial projects focused on finding solutions to societal challenges. 

The student fellows have been participating in facilitated discussions about community-engaged research, and they have been learning audio production and other skills such as curriculum development, exhibition design, video production and ArcGIS mapping.

“The biggest part of the project,” lab director Cynn noted, “is to try to highlight this history so that students can better understand the institutional racism at the foundation of VCU. We were just awarded an Impact Grant to fund Health Humanities Lab student stipends for next year. We’re hopeful about receiving additional funding to ensure that we can carry out the Family Representative Council recommendations and complete the oral history and memorialization project.”

The oral history project is just one aspect of the East Marshall Street Well Project’s ongoing work. 

In January 2022, the remains of the people discovered in the well were transferred from the Virginia Department of Historic Resources to the VCU  Department of Forensic Science , where researchers began seeking to understand more about who the people were and the cultural and historical context in which they lived.

VCU researchers set out to answer questions, developed by the Family Representative Council, that were related to biochemical and DNA analysis of the remains, including information about the regional genetic ancestry of the individuals; the sex of children and younger adolescents whose sex cannot be determined by physical examination of the bones; the health environments of the individuals; and any connections between individuals whose remains were discovered and potential living descendants.

For more about the East Marshall Street Well Project, including the recommendations of the descendent community, please visit  the  project homepage. 

For more about the oral history and memorialization project, please visit  the  Health Humanities Lab homepage.

Subscribe to VCU News

Subscribe to VCU News at newsletter.vcu.edu and receive a selection of stories, videos, photos, news clips and event listings in your inbox.

Most popular

April 1, 2024

‘A real scents of pride’: VCU launches signature fragrance

March 20, 2024

VCU expert: Record Clery Act fine is ‘a wake up call’ to all colleges on campus safety

March 25, 2024

Meredith Weiss, VCU’s vice president for administration, named interim vice president for finance and chief financial officer

Here’s what you should know about the upcoming eclipse

Latest headlines

Class of 2024: Former Miss America Camille Schrier adding a new title: Doctor of Pharmacy

I submitted my FAFSA. Now what?

Off the wall, Italian frescos become a canvas of hands-on learning in VCU-led curriculum for high school students

Research Specialist

• Madison, Wisconsin
• SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH/DEPARTMENT OF MEDICINE
• Partially Remote
• Staff-Full Time
• Opening at: Apr 2 2024 at 16:30 CDT
• Closing at: Apr 16 2024 at 23:55 CDT

Job Summary:

The Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology (GI) is seeking a Research Specialist to provide comprehensive project support services to faculty conducting clinical research. This position will work closely with investigators, clinical research coordinators, industry sponsors, contract research organizations and others to ensure research activities align with objectives and sponsor timelines. The GI Division is within the Department of Medicine (DOM), in the School of Medicine and Public Health. Under the direction of the Principal Investigator (Dr. Freddy Caldera), the incumbent will work with research teams (faculty, clinical research coordinators, research administrators, collaborating sites, sponsors, etc.) to manage task timelines, participant recruitment, data collection/management, produce project communication materials, draft research reports, engage in study planning, purchase project materials, and troubleshooting project obstacles. This position will serve as the primary contact for regulatory and fiscal personnel, sponsors, and additional study team members. Candidates must feel comfortable in a timeline driven role, be self-motivated and be highly detailed-oriented with excellent organizational skills. This position interacts with many different teams and customers and assists in identifying and implementing quality improvements to ensure that processes are efficient and timely. Attention to detail, time management and excellent organization will be critical to the success of this position. The incumbent is expected to follow the policies, procedures, guidelines for excellence and professionalism established by the Department of Medicine, SMPH Clinical Trials Institute and the University of Wisconsin. Additionally, this position will ensure that all clinical research activities adhere to Federal, State, and University policies, procedures, and requirements.

Responsibilities:

• 10% Conducts research experiments according to established research protocols with moderate impact to the project(s). Collects data and monitors test results
• 10% Operates, cleans, and maintains organization of research equipment and research area. Tracks inventory levels and places replenishment orders
• 10% Reviews, analyzes, and interprets data and/or documents results for presentations and/or reporting to internal and external audiences
• 15% Participates in the development, interpretation, and implementation of research methodology and materials
• 20% Provides operational guidance on day-to-day activities of unit or program staff and/or student workers
• 15% Performs literature reviews and writes reports
• 10% Assists with proofreading, editing, and uploading manuscripts
• 10% Plans, develops, and implements processes and protocols to support research aims. Attends research meetings as needed/assigned.

Institutional Statement on Diversity:

Diversity is a source of strength, creativity, and innovation for UW-Madison. We value the contributions of each person and respect the profound ways their identity, culture, background, experience, status, abilities, and opinion enrich the university community. We commit ourselves to the pursuit of excellence in teaching, research, outreach, and diversity as inextricably linked goals. The University of Wisconsin-Madison fulfills its public mission by creating a welcoming and inclusive community for people from every background - people who as students, faculty, and staff serve Wisconsin and the world. For more information on diversity and inclusion on campus, please visit: Diversity and Inclusion

Preferred Bachelor's Degree or equivalent experience 

Qualifications:

Required: - One or more years of experience working in a clinical health setting and/or one or more years of experience in clinical, health services, or social sciences research environment - Reading and understanding of research principles and methodology and ability to apply that knowledge to a clinical research environment. - Ability to listen, understand and communicate information and ideas effectively in writing, over the phone or in person. - Excellent time management skills. Ability to work independently or collaboratively, and manage multiple projects despite interruptions, while closely tracking details and looking for ways to improve processes. Preferred: - Work experience in human research, patient care, or a clinical research environment. - Experience in coordinating clinical research studies from various departments and sources. - Demonstrated experience in scheduling, coordinating, and conducting visits and study meetings. - Experience with research data collection and management; including use of REDCap data collection software.

License/Certification:

Preferred Drivers License - Valid Travel is required. Must provide a valid driver's license. Employees may use their own transportation or receive approval for University Car Fleet usage. Employment is conditional pending the results of a Pre-hire Driver Authorization Check. See https://businessservices.wisc.edu/managing-risk/driver-authorization-and-insurance/driver-authorization/#become-authorized-driver  (click on "Become an authorized driver"; then click on "Required criteria").

Full Time: 100% This position may require some work to be performed in-person, onsite, at a designated campus work location. Some work may be performed remotely, at an offsite, non-campus work location.

Appointment Type, Duration:

Ongoing/Renewable

Minimum $45,500 ANNUAL (12 months) Depending on Qualifications The expected salary range for this position is $45,500 up to $65,000 for highly experienced candidates. Actual pay will depend on experience and qualifications. Employees in this position can expect to receive benefits such as generous vacation, holidays, and sick leave; competitive insurances and savings accounts; retirement benefits. Benefits information can be found at ( https://hr.wisc.edu/benefits/ ).

Additional Information:

University sponsorship is not available for this position. The selected applicant will be responsible for ensuring their continuous eligibility for employment in the United States on or before the effective date of the appointment. UW-Madison is not an E-Verify employer, and therefore, is not eligible to employ F1-OPT STEM Extension participants. This position has been identified as a position of trust with access to vulnerable populations. The selected candidate will be required to pass an initial caregiver check to be eligible for employment under the Wisconsin Caregiver Law and every four years. TB testing will be required at the time of employment.

How to Apply:

To apply for this position, please click on the "Apply Now" button. You will be asked to upload a current resume/CV and a cover letter briefly describing your qualifications and experience. You will also be asked to provide contact information for three (3) references, including your current/most recent supervisor during the application process. References will not be contacted without prior notice.

Emily Zentz [email protected] 608-265-3399 Relay Access (WTRS): 7-1-1. See RELAY_SERVICE for further information.

Official Title:

Research Specialist(RE047)

Department(s):

A53-MEDICAL SCHOOL/MEDICINE/GASTROENT

Employment Class:

Academic Staff-Renewable

Job Number:

The university of wisconsin-madison is an equal opportunity and affirmative action employer..

You will be redirected to the application to launch your career momentarily. Thank you!

Frequently Asked Questions

Applicant Tutorial

Disability Accommodations

Pay Transparency Policy Statement

Refer a Friend

You've sent this job to a friend!

Website feedback, questions or accessibility issues: [email protected] .

Learn more about accessibility at UW–Madison .

© 2016–2024 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System • Privacy Statement