5/11/22, 7:08 PM BUS-7100 v1: Scholarly Literature Review (6760019724) – BUS-7100 v1: Scholarly Literature Review (6760019724)

https://ncuone.ncu.edu/d2l/le/content/159454/printsyllabus/PrintSyllabus 1/3

Books and Resources for this Week

Week 2

BUS-7100 v1: Scholarly Literature Review (6760019724)

Strategies for Reading and Notes

This week, you will begin to search for articles and determine if an article is a good fit for

a topic. This would be a good time to begin thinking about a possible topic for your own

research and dissertation. Along with researching articles, you will also determine a

method to keep notes of your search. This may sound simple, however, chapter 2 in the

dissertation is the literature review and it is a minimum of 40 to 80 pages with over 100

references or typically 8-10 pages of references.

You will learn the importance of how to critically read articles. When reviewing articles,

you will discover hundreds or even thousands of articles about a topic. Understanding

how to read critically and take notes will be displayed by you in this week’s assignment.

Read all the resources and articles in this week’s work. Observe the different approaches

to scanning an article for alignment to the topic.

Critiquing an article is paramount for the literature review. You will begin the task of

creating ‘depth’ to your topic by reviewing many articles in the general area of your topic.

Your job will be to narrow down and stay focused on the topic. It is a good idea to keep

track of all articles that interest you, and then narrow your list of articles as you find

better articles. To critique an article, search for the author's main points. Determine the

argument the author is laying out. Then, compare the argument with the facts the author

gives. (The sources this author cites are important as well as checking the reference page

for other paths to follow.)

Be sure to review this week's resources carefully. You are expected to apply the

information from these resources when you prepare your assignments.

80 % 4 of 5 topics complete

5/11/22, 7:08 PM BUS-7100 v1: Scholarly Literature Review (6760019724) – BUS-7100 v1: Scholarly Literature Review (6760019724)

https://ncuone.ncu.edu/d2l/le/content/159454/printsyllabus/PrintSyllabus 2/3

Clary, D., & Bannister-Tyrrell, M.,

(2018). Harnessing research-based

practices to critique ‘truth’. Literacy

Learning: The Middle Years. 26(3)… Link

NCU Libraries. (2018). Anatomy of a

Scholarly Article Link

NCU Libraries, (2018). Reading a

Scientific Article Link

Willison, J. W. (2018). Research skill

development spanning higher

education: Critiques, curricula, and

connections. Journal of University… Link

Week 2 – Assignment: Apply Critical Reading and

Techniques for Notes Assignment

Due May 15 at 11:59 PM

Create a procedure to follow for reviewing article abstracts. This can be similar to a

standard operating procedure or in a format you prefer. A flow chart or similar model can

also be used. Assume you will use this method when you begin your own chapter 2.

Begin your procedure with the following:

1. Include at least three steps for determining if the abstract has the main points

related to your topic.

2. Outline how or what you will look for in the abstract. This information will be what

prompts you to open the full-text article.

In the next step of the procedure:

5/11/22, 7:08 PM BUS-7100 v1: Scholarly Literature Review (6760019724) – BUS-7100 v1: Scholarly Literature Review (6760019724)

https://ncuone.ncu.edu/d2l/le/content/159454/printsyllabus/PrintSyllabus 3/3

3. Develop a plan or visual tool to take notes about each search engine, main theme,

URL, and a section of the chapter this would be used.

For example, chapter 2 begins with an introduction for the reader about your topic, next

to a paragraph of how and where you found the literature, then the theoretical or

conceptual framework, and then finally the main content of the chapter. The main content

is categorized by you and how your literature develops.

Length: 1-2 pages, plus title and reference pages

References: Include a minimum of five (5) scholarly resources.

Your submission should demonstrate thoughtful consideration of the ideas and concepts

presented in the course and provide new thoughts and insights relating directly to this

topic. Your response should reflect scholarly writing and current APA standards. Be sure

to adhere to Northcentral University's Academic Integrity Policy.

Upload your document and click the Submit to Dropbox button.

5/11/22, 7:03 PM Anatomy of a Scholarly Article: NCSU Libraries

https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/tutorials/scholarly-articles/ 1/1

Click here to re-display the directions.

Last updated: 7/13/2009. Contact the author. Shared under the Creative Commons Attribution – Noncommercial – Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

Presented by NCSU Libraries

Anatomy of a Scholarly Article

References

Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice Volume 15 Issue 4 Research Skill Development spanning Higher Education: Curricula, critiques and connections

Article 1

2018

Research skill development spanning higher education: Critiques, curricula and connections John W. Willison Dr University of Adelaide, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp

Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected]

Recommended Citation Willison, John W. Dr, Research skill development spanning higher education: Critiques, curricula and connections, Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 15(4), 2018. Available at:https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol15/iss4/1

Research skill development spanning higher education: Critiques, curricula and connections

Abstract The Research Skill Development (RSD) framework was devised in 2006 to articulate what educators do when they facilitate student learning through active exploration in ways that enable their skills to grow in sophistication and rigour. This special issue of JUTLP comprises eight articles that focus on the critique, adaptation and application of the RSD. This article introduces the special issue and presents the 2018 version of the RSD, in response to 12 years of feedback on the framework. Changes in the RSD include improvements in articulation of the facets of research, better delineation of autonomy, and the addition of the affective domain and guiding questions.

Of the other seven articles, five are set in the undergraduate years and two in master’s, with contexts including biology, education, engineering, humanities and interdisciplinary studies. The articles are based across diverse settings, including laboratory, online, language and workplace learning. Of these seven, one critiques the RSD, three focus on curriculum design and three connect the RSD to enduring issues of current concern by adapting the framework for academic literacy, work skills and problem solving. These three adaptations are examples of numerous emerging models that modify RSD terminology and shape, within its broad parameters, and are introduced in this issue as the Models of Engaged Learning and Teaching (MELT).

Keywords Research Skill Development, student autonomy, teacher autonomy, sophisticated thinking, Models of Engaged Learning and Teaching, collaborative partnerships, connecting curricula, cognitive and affective

Cover Page Footnote On behalf of all the authors, I thank the peer reviewers of the papers in this Special issue of JUTLP: Said Al- Sarawi, Ryan Banow, Jack Bowers, Cally Guerin, Michele Jacobsen, Hanno van Keulen, Kara Loy, Diane Mayorga, Ursula McGowan, Julia Miller, Dorothy Missingham, Nayana Parange, Jenny Shanahan, Shinta Sari, Colin Sharp, Tara Shepperson, Sylvia Tiala, Ray Tolhurst, Lyn Torres, Lalitha Velautham, Gerda Visser, Helen Walkington, Georgina Willets, Mike Wilmore, David Wilson

This journal article is available in Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice: https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol15/iss4/1

Introduction

The explicit and coherent development of student research skills has been an enduring educational concern at least since Dewey’s (1908) call for student discovery learning and Vygotsky’s work on the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD: Vygotsky 1978). Discovery learning requires a raft of skills, and the ZPD provokes thought about the level of guidance that students may need from educators in the discovery process. One model that brings together these vital aspects of discovery learning is the Research Skill Development (RSD: Willison & O’Regan 2006) framework, which elaborates the skills associated with research and discovery into a continuum that describes the extent of student autonomy. Research skill development not only remains current for educators and researchers, but recent educational trends towards increased research in coursework have amplified the need for an explicit, developmental learning process. The publication of the article that explicated the RSD framework in 2007 (Willison & O’Regan 2007) prompted educators to consider their role in modelling, scaffolding and withdrawing for students’ own research, problem solving and project-based learning, and to what extent to make research processes explicit to students. The RSD is a conceptual framework, not a set of rules or a rubric, and is designed for educator engagement that enriches their pedagogical content knowledge (Gudmundsdottir & Shulman 1987) so that they know how to teach students sophisticated thinking skills within (inter)disciplinary contexts.

The original concepts that explicitly informed the 2006 RSD framework are present in the updated 2018 version (see Table 1: Willison & O’Regan 2006/2018). The six ‘standards’ of the Australian and New Zealand Institute of Information Literacy (ANZIIL: Bundy 2004) provided the starting point for the left-hand column of Table 1 and these were combined with Blooms et al.’s (1956) Taxonomy to create the six facets of research. These six facets were elaborated then, as now, into five levels of student autonomy, and the elaboration of one of the facets, analyse & synthesise was informed by the SOLO taxonomy (Biggs & Collis 1982). Trialling of the pre-published versions of the RSD with first-year human biology students was carried out by Eleanor Pearce and Mari Ricci, and many iterations, evaluations and changes in terminology were devised before a workable version was published in 2006.

Table 1: The 2018 version of the Research Skill Development framework (Willison & O’Regan, 2006/2018).

The RSD framework was designed from the outset to inform the coherent, incremental, explicit and cyclic development of the skills associated with research, primary school to PhD for any discipline or context (Willison & O’Regan 2005; 2006; 2007). The original journal article introducing the RSD demonstrated a clear need for explicit and coherent research skill development in school and university education (Willison & O’Regan, 2007). Subsequently, the usefulness of the RSD to address this need was empirically demonstrated for a broad range of university undergraduate courses (Willison 2012), across entire degrees (Willison & Buisman- Pijlman 2016; Wilmore & Willison 2016; Ain, Sabir & Willison 2018), for master’s programs (Willison, Schapper & Teo 2009; Willison, Sabir & Thomas 2017) and for PhD supervision (Velautham & Picard 2009). Use in primary and secondary schools is only now starting to take off (e.g., Heck 2017; Home 2017; Sari 2017) with much work to be done in terms of evaluating effectiveness of RSD implementations in a variety of contexts.

1

Willison: Research skill development spanning higher education

D isce

rn in

g

H a rm

o n isin

g C

u rio

u s

D e te

rm in

e d

D isce

rn in

g C

re a tive

C o n stru

ctive

Table 1: Research Skill Development Framework Fo r educators to facilitate the explicit, coherent, incremental and cyclic development of the skills associated with researchin g, proble m solv in g, crit ic al thin kin g and clin ic al reasonin g.

Pr escribed Research

Hi ghly structured directions and modelling fr om e ducato r p rompt r esearching, i n wh ich…

Bo unded Re search

Bo undaries set by and limited directions fr om e ducato r c hannel re searc hing, in wh ich…

Sc affolded Re search Sc affolds placed by educator shape in dependent researchin g, in wh ich…

Op en-en ded Resear ch St udents initiate research and this is gui ded by the educ at or .

Un bounded Re search

St udents determine guidelines for re searc hing that are in accord with di scipl ine or cont ex t.

Em bark & Clarify Wh at is our purpose? St udents respond to or initiate direction, cl arify and co nsi der ethical, cu ltural, so ci al and team (E CST) issues.

St udents respond to questions/tasks that are di rec ted. Use a pr ov ided, struc tur ed appr oac h to c larify q uesti ons, te rms, r equirements , ex pec tat ions and et hi cal, cul tur al , soc ial and te am is sues.

St udents respond to questions/ ta sks w ith l imite d o pti ons. C hoos e from se ve ral provided st ruct ures to cl arify ques tions , req ui rem ent s, ter ms, ex pec tat ions and et hi cal, cul tur al , soc ial and team issues .

St udents respond to broad tasks/ ques tions given. Cho os e from a range of pr ov ide d appr oac hes or struc tur es to cl arify requirements, quest ions, ex pec tat ions and et hi cal, cul tur al , soc ial and team issues .

*S tudents generate questions /a ims/h ypoth eses/p urpose fr amed w ith in st ruct ured guidelines* . An ticipate and prepare for et hi cal , cul tur al , so ci al and team is sues.

*S tudents generate questions/aims/ hy pot hes es /pur pos e bas ed on ex per ienc e, ex per tise an d liter at ur e. De lve into and prepare for et hi cal , cul tur al, so ci al and team is sues.

Fi nd & Generate Wh at do we need? St udents find information and generate dat a/ ideas us ing appr opr iat e met hod ol ogy .

St udents collect and record required in formatio n/data usin g a prescrib ed me thodology from a prescribed source in wh ich the information/data is evident.

St udents collect and re cord appropri ate in formatio n/data usin g giv en methodolo gy fr om p re-det er mine d sour ce/ s wher e in formatio n/data is not obvio us.

St udents collect and record appropriate in formatio n/data from self -se lect ed so urce s usi ng one of se ve ral provi ded me thodologies.

St udents collect and record self-det ermined in formation/data choosing an appropria te me thodology based on parame ters set.

St udents collect and record in formatio n/data from self -se lect ed so urce s, ch oosi ng or devi si ng an appr opr iat e met hod ol ogy with se lf- st ruct ured guidelines.

Ev aluate & Reflect Wh at do we trust? St udents determine the credibility of sour ces , inf or mat ion, dat a and ideas , and mak e thei r ow n res ear ch pr oc es ses vi si ble.

St udents evaluate so urce s/ in formatio n/data usin g sim ple prescribed cr iteria to sp eci fy cr edibility and to reflect on and impr ov e the pr oc es s us ed.

St udents evaluate sources/ in formatio n/data usin g a choic e of pr ov ide d criter ia to spec ify credi bi lity and to r efl ect o n a nd i mp rove processes used.

St udents evaluate sources/ in formatio n/data and the processes to fi nd/g enerate , u sing c rite ria r elate d to th e ai ms of the inqui ry to ref lec t on and im prove processes used.

St udents evaluate information/data and th e i nquiry p rocess u sin g self -det er mined cr iteria deve loped within parameters given. Re flect to refine own and others’ pr oc es ses .

St udents evaluate information/data and in quir y process rig orously using self – gener at ed criter ia bas ed on ex per ienc e, ex per tise an d the liter at ur e. Re flect to re new own and others ’ pro cesses.

Or ganise & Manage Ho w do we arrange? St udents organise information & data to re veal pattern s/themes, managing teams and pr oc es ses .

St udents organise information/data using pr es cribe d struc tur e. Manage linear pr oc es s pr ov ided (with pr e-sp ecified team ro les).

St udents organise information/data using a ch oice of give n st ruct ures. Manage a pr oc es s whi ch has al ter nat ive pos sibl e pat hw ay s (an d spec ify team rol es ).

St udents organise information/data using pr ov ide d gui del ines to choos e struc tur es . Ma nage processes (and teams ) with mu ltiple possible pathways.

St udents organise information/data using se lf-det er mined or gr ou p-det er mined st ruct ures, and manage the processe s (i ncluding team function) within the par am et er s se t.

St udents organise information/data using se lf-det er mined or gr ou p-det er mined st ruct ures and management proce sse s (i ncluding team function).

An alyse & Syn thesi se Wh at does it mean? St udents analyse information/data cr itica lly and syn thesi se new kn owledge to produce co herent in div id ual/ team understandin gs.

St udents interpret given information/data, det er mine pat ter ns and synt hes ise kn owledge into prescr ibed formats. *As k emergent questions of cl arifica tion/cu riosi ty *.

St udents analyse trends or themes in se ve ral so urces of information/ data and syn thesi se to integrate kn owledge into pr ov ide d standar d for mat s. *As k emergent, re levant and re searc hable questions.*

St udents analyse trends or themes in in formation/data and synthesis e to fully integrate co mponent parts in st ruct ures that are app rop riat e to tas k. *As k rigorous, researchable questions based on new un der stan di ngs *.

St udents analyse information/data and syn thesi se to fully integrate co mponents, co nsi st ent with se lf-det er mined par am et er s. Fi ll knowledge gaps that are stated by ot her s.

St udents analyse and synthesise in formatio n/data to generalis e or abstract kn owledge that addresse s se lf-id entif ie d or gr oup -id entifie d gaps in understandin g.

Co mmunicate & Ap ply Ho wdo we relate? St udents apply their understanding and di scus s, listen, write, per for m, res pon d to fe edback a nd p resent p rocesses, kn owled ge an d implication s of resear ch, hee di ng et hical , cul tur al, soc ial an d team is sues an d au di enc e ne ed s.

St udents di scus s wi th each other, listen, re ad and write to re late their pri or and new kn owledge to se t tasks. Use prescr ibed la nguage and genre to develo p under- st anding and then demonst rate this to a sp eci fied audience . Apply to a si milar co ntext the kn owledge developed. Follow pr om pt s on et hi cal l, cul tur al , soc ial is sues.

St udents use some discipline-sp ecific la nguage and genre to rela te their prior and new ly de ve loped kn owledge to tasks and then to a spec ified aud ienc e. App ly th e k nowledge d eveloped to s everal si milar co ntext s and st ay within boundaries se t for et hi cal , cul tur al , soc ial an d team is sues.

St udents use discipline-sp eci fic or other appr opr iat e langu ag e and select genres to dev el op und er standi ng an d rel at e thi s to an audi enc e chos en from gi ven opt ions . Ap ply the knowledge developed to di ffer ent cont ex ts and spec ify the et hi cal , cu ltural, so ci al and team is sues that em er ge.

St udents choose appropriate language, genr e an d per for manc e to ex tend the kn owledge of an aud ience they have se lect ed. Apply the knowledge deve loped to di ver se cont exts an d spec ify et hical , cul tur al , so ci al and team is sues in init iating, co nduct ing and co mmu nicating.

St udents choose appropriate language, genr e an d per for manc e to ex tend the kn owledge of a range of audience s. Apply in novativ ely the knowle dge develo ped to mu ltiple contexts. Probe and specify et hi cal , cul tur al, soc ial an d team is sues th at e merge br oad ly.

Sc ope for St ude nt Aut onomy www.rsd.edu.au [email protected]

F a c e t s o f R e s e a r c h

Students develop research mindedness when they…

Creative Commons 4.0

Creative Commons 4.0

T here has been broad recognition that many disciplines’ conceptions of research ‘… align with the six facets of Willison & O’Regan’s (2007) Research Skill Development framework’ (Walkington, Griffin, Keys-Mathews, Metoyer, Miller, Baker & France 2011, p. 317). This alignment mirrors the disciplinary use of the RSD to inform curriculum and assessment design, and scaffold student learning in a variety of disciplines from accounting (Wilkin 2014) to zoology (Hazel, Heberle, McEwen & Adams 2013). This A to Z use of the RSD spans first year to PhD. Moreover, the RSD has been used to enable rich curriculum conversations and collaboration between academics, sessional teachers, library staff and academic language and learning staff in diverse disciplinary areas (Torres et al. 2012; Torres & Jansen 2016) and interdisciplinary studies (Venning & Buisman-Pijlman 2011; 2013). Initial use of the RSD was in Australia, and there has been an escalating uptake internationally, including in countries as diverse as Cambodia (Serey & Sok 2017), Indonesia (Mataniari 2017), nations of the South Pacific (Janif 2017), Malaysia (Wong & Yahya 2017; Kananatu 2017) and the USA (Maurer 2017; Tiala 2017; Shanhan 2017).

With broad-ranging use has come diverse feedback, enabling improvement of the framework. This paper serves two purposes: the first purpose is to present the 2018 articulation of the RSD (Willison & O’Regan 2006/2018; Table 1) in response to the community of users and commentators. The second purpose of the paper is to introduce the seven other articles in this special issue of the Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice (JUTLP). The contributing authors have provided papers that critique the RSD, use the RSD to evaluate and redesign curricula, and show the connections between research skills, problem solving, work integrated learning and academic literacies.

2

Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, Vol. 15 [2018], Iss. 4, Art. 1

https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol15/iss4/1

Since the first publication of the RSD, there have been at least three major changes that have increased the need for an articulation like the RSD. One change is the acceleration of student learning through research in numerous nations over the past decade (Jenkins & Healey 2012). The Council on Undergraduate Research in the USA has shifted from almost exclusively mentored research models to include in-curricula models of undergraduate research (Auchincloss et al. 2014). Many Australian universities have instituted research-based learning in the undergraduate years, with research capstones becoming common (Brew 2013), while coursework master’s in Australia have a federally-mandated obligation since 2015 to enable students to work highly autonomously on research projects, scholarship or capstone experiences (Australian Qualifications Framewor

Related Tags