Post-Graduate Quantitative Research Methodology: A Strategic Plan to Alleviate Student Anxiety
Navodya C. Selvaratnam, Nayagara Karunaratne, Lahiru Pothmulla, Naren D. Selvaratnam
Abstract
Quantitative Research Methodology (QRM) is a module oftentimes considered by students and scholars to be challenging and anxiety-provoking. There are numerous negative attitudes toward QRM from learners leading to lower interest and reduced engagement. In the present study, it was observed that students tend to persistently perform poorly in the QRM module in a psychology postgraduate program in Sri Lanka. To further shed light on the identified issue, the current action research was conducted among three student cohorts. Initially, each cohort’s performance was quantitatively analyzed and compared to observe trends in student achievements. Following this process, a sample of instructor feedback on a few failed students was randomly selected. A qualitative analysis of feedback revealed difficulty in research paper formulation and deficits in statistical knowledge as two major reasons for inferior learner performance. The researchers introduced a strategic plan to address the issue, which includes unique tutoring sessions. The suggested strategy would help to alleviate anxiety and improve student learning prior to the final examination. The tutoring sessions are developed utilizing Samejima’s Graded Response Model (GRM), which is a form of Item Response Theory (IRT) that succeeds in providing a psychometrically robust framework to assess student ability. Thus, the present research initiates a dialogue to encourage educators in Sri Lanka to use data-driven strategies to assess learning, assessments, and feedback in postgraduate psychology programs.
Keywords: Quantitative Research Methodology, Item-Response Theory, Graded Response Model, Statistics Anxiety
References
​
Brown, G. T. (2017). Doctoral education in quantitative research methods: Some thoughts about preparing future scholars. Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics 3, 3(25). https://doi.org/10.3389/fams.2017.00025
​
Bryman, A. (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 8–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/2345678906290531
Carroll, W. C. (2004) Psychology of Language, Wadsworth, Belmont: CA.
Carlson, N, R. (2013) Physiology of Behavior (11th ed.). Pearson.
​
Combes, N. J. (2019). Targeting conceptual understanding: How to improve learning and course retention in research methods courses. Journal of Political Science Education, 15(3), 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2018.1462189
Counsell, A., & Cribbie, R. (2020). Student attitudes toward learning statistics with R. Psychology Teaching Review, 26(2), 36-56. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/76w2p
Daniel, B. (2018). Reimaging research methodology as data science. Big Data and Cognitive Computing, 2(1), 1-13.
https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc2010004
Daniel, E. (2016). The usefulness of qualitative and quantitative approaches and methods in researching problem-solving ability in science education curriculum. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(15), 91-100
​
Darder, A. (2015). Decolonizing interpretive research: A critical bicultural methodology for social change. The International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 14(2), 63-77.
Gnepp, J., Klayman, J., Williamson, I. O., & Barles, S. (2020). The future of feedback: Motivating performance improvement through future focused feedback. PLoS ONE, 15(6): e0234444. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234444
Hsu, J. L., & Goldsmith, G. R. (2021). Instructor strategies to alleviate stress and anxiety among college and university STEM students. CBE life sciences education, 20(1), es1. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-08-0189
Lee, Y., Palazzo, D, J., Warnakulasooriya, R., Pritchard, D, E. (2008) Measuring student learning with item response theory. Physics Education Research, 4, 1-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.4.010102
Milligan, L., Rose, J., & Harris, R. (2014). Convincing Students? Quantitative junkies, avoiders and converts on a cross-disciplinary course using quantitative narratives. Enhancing Learning in the Social Sciences, 6(2), 59-73. https://doi.org/10.11120/elss.2014.00039
​
Murtonen, M. (2005). Learning of quantitative research methods – University students’ views, motivation, and difficulties in learning [Doctoral dissertation, University of Turku]. https://iase-web.org/documents/dissertations/05.Murtone.Dissertation.pdf
Ivankova, N. V., & Clark V. L. P. (2018). Teaching mixed methods research: using a socioecological framework as a pedagogical approach for addressing the complexity of the field, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(4), 409-424. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1427604
​
Nind, M., & Lewthwaite, S. (2018) Methods that teach: developing pedagogic research methods, developing pedagogy. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 41(4), 398-410. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2018.1427057
Rizopoulos, D. (2006) LTM: An R Package for Latent Variable Modeling and Item Response Theory Analyses, Journal of Statistical Software, 17(5), 1-25.
Roberts, L. D., & Castell, E. (2016). "Having to shift everything we've learned to the side": Expanding research methods taught in psychology to incorporate qualitative methods. Frontiers in psychology, 7, 688. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00688
Shaukat, S., Siddiquah, A., Abiodullah, M., & Akbar, R.A. (2014). Postgraduate Students’ Attitudes towards Research. Bulletin of Education and Research. 36(1), 111-122.
​