A brief introduction to the information included in academic research publications and to the different kinds of academic research
The format of the research publication
Research publications usually include the following information:
Abstract
A summary of the whole publication. In an academic journal article, abstracts are usually between 100 – 300 words long.
Background / Introduction / Literature
The first section of an academic article is typically a summary of the existing research and context. Usually explains a “problem” or identifies a “gap” that the publication responds to.
Methods
How the research was done (e.g. observations, audio recordings, interviews).
Methodology
How the methods were used: for instance, the number of participants (which might range between thousands of participants to just one or two); if the research was an interview or survey, what the questions were; what the researcher was looking for if it was an observation; and the kinds of ethical approval the researcher had to get.
Data / Findings / Results
A representation of part of what happened during the research. This might be numerical data, produced through tests completed before and after an intervention. Alternatively, it might be field notes, interview transcripts, or written observations. It might also be a reflective diary entries, or something produced with or by participants (e.g., scrapbooks, podcasts, maps). Sometimes combined with analysis.
Analysis
Sometimes presented alongside Data/findings/results. An attempt to “explain” how the data relates to findings of other research and/or the theory or conceptual framework used.
Conclusion or implications
Publications usually end with a summary of the whole publication, as well as some statements of the implications for future research or practice.
Research paradigm / theory / conceptual framework
A conceptual framework informs the methodology and/or analysis. Using one conceptual framework will give different insights than using another would. For instance, if a researcher uses critical race theory as a conceptual framework, they assume that racism exists and that it will be evident in their data: such research also typically sets out to make emancipatory changes in the world. On the other hand, if a researcher was to use posthumanism, they would assume that whatever is being researched is being constantly influenced by the process of doing research: whatever happens during the research wouldn’t have happened otherwise and so the methods and discussion have to account for this. Both theories also assume that what the research has found is tentative and likely only ‘true’ for that particular study.
There are lots of different conceptual frameworks, and these will often be explained in the publication. If the conceptual framework is not explicitly stated, it’s usually because the researcher assumes that the work is both politically neutral and objective. For instance, randomised control trials typically assume that the findins are objective, that what has been learnt can be generalised to all times and places without interpretation, and that the researcher is separate from the thing they’re researching.
Positionality
Positionality statements are related to the conceptual framework. They express how the researchers’ lived experience influences their understanding of and access to the research topic. For instance, a black woman researching anti-black racism directed towards girls would produce different questions, data, and insights than a white man researching the same topic. Sometimes, positionality statements might be included in the methodology. Other times, positionality statements might be included their own section. As with conceptual frameworks, positionality statements are not usually included in research such as randomised control trials, which tend to assume that their findings are objective, politically neutral, and generalisable.
Kinds of research
Quantitative/qualitative/mixed-methods
A description of the kind of data collected. This might consist of numerical data (quantitative), rich descriptions that cannot be represented as numerical data (qualitative), or a combination of the two (mixed methods). A small but increasing number of studies might describe themselves as post qualitative: these studies include unusually extensive use of critical or philosophical theory and typically use less traditional methods.
Reviews
Reviews, or literature reviews, aim to collect and summarise existing research publications on a specific topic. Reviews serve different purposes and can be conducted in several different ways.
Systematic reviews aim to create an exhaustive review of all the research on a specific topic. They usually rely on very specific search terms and ‘exclusion criteria’ (i.e., justifications as to why some articles are included in the review while other, seemingly appropriate articles, are not). Systematic reviews also take pains to be ‘replicable,’ whereby another researcher should be able to locate and include the same studies given the same parameters.
Cremin, Teresa and Oliver, Lucy (2017). Teachers as writers: a systematic review. Research Papers in Education, 32(3) pp. 269-295. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2016.1187664
Meta-analysis or synthesis are often combined with systematic reviews. They attempt to draw together the findings of multiple quantitative studies identified through a systematic review. These often also draw from randomised control trials. Like systematic reviews, meta-analyses tend to emphasise replicability: they go one step further than systematic reviews in assuming that another researcher, given the same parameters would both locate and include the same studies, but also read across and synthesise the studies in the same ways.
Slavin, E.R., Lake, C., Inns, A., Baye, A., Dachet, D., Haslam, J. (2019). A Quantitative Synthesis of Research on Writing Approaches in Years 3 to 13. London: Education Endowment Foundation. The report is available from: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Writing_Approaches_in_Years_3_to_13_Evidence_Review.pdf
Scoping reviews aim to explore all the key topics or themes in a given field, rather than give a comprehensive review of every individual article.
Burnett, C. (2022). Scoping the field of literacy research: how might a range of research be valuable to primary teachers? (Working paper.) http://doi.org/10.7190/shu-working-papers/2201
Narrative reviews combine a review of the literature with discussion and critique: the aim here is not to create an exhaustive summary of the field, but instead to make an argument (for instance, to identify a direction for future research or explore an under-researched topic).
Types of empirical research
While reviews are based on existing publications, empirical research is a term for research based on research data. This data might have been collected by the researcher for the purposes of a particular study, or based on data collected by somebody else (i.e., secondary data). There are lots of different ways to collect research data: too many to summarise here. Below, we trace some of the possibilities.
Randomised control trials (RCTs) aim to measure the effectiveness of an intervention, in such a way that controls and limits the influences of any factors not being measured. RCTs evolved out of the medical sciences, where researchers need to isolate the effects and side effects of a particular treatment from other external factors (for instance, to ensure that a participants’ age or a sporting injury doesn’t affect the success rate of a new flu vaccine being trialled). Similarly, randomised control trials in educational research try to test the effectiveness of an intervention through limiting the influences of external factors. They usually adopt an experimental approach, wherein at least one group of participants does not access the intervention. The results of randomised control trials are often assumed to be replicable because they have screened out external factors that might have otherwise complicated the data: in other words, they aim to test the impact of the intervention and only the intervention. Consequently, they are highly valued by some research agencies.
Rather than prioritise replicability, other researchers argue that educational research is never truly replicable because classrooms are too different from one another. Instead, they aim to account for the specific research context in detail so that practitioners and other researchers can make informed decisions about the applicability of the findings to their own context or project. For instance, action research sets out to assess the impact of an intervention but is often conducted by practitioners in their own classrooms as part of a reflective cycle. The intervention is constantly tweaked and updated based on earlier results. Consequently, the findings are quite specific to an individual classroom, albeit with implications for other practitioners and researchers.
Reflective, practitioner research is sometimes conducted with more than one teacher, supported by an external ‘expert’ who supports the reflective process: this is called lesson study. Sometimes, the intervention is tweaked over a number of discrete phases in response to earlier findings rather than continuously tweaked: this is called design-based research. Like action research, researchers who use design-based research, or lesson study do not typically strive to make their work generalisable: instead, they aim to contextualise the work in detail so that other researchers or practitioners can make decisions about the applicability of the findings to their own work or context.
Not all educational research tests an intervention. For instance, ethnography requires that the researcher immerse themselves in a research context or community for a sustained period of time. Unlike RCTs, or action research, which test an intervention or pedagogical practice, ethnographic researchers aim to find out about ‘real life’ as it is lived. Consequently, it might not always be possible to determine in advance what ethnographic research will be about. Sometimes, ethnography might involve reflecting on one’s own thoughts or experiences, such as in auto-ethnography. Ethnographers might also specifically attend to sensory experiences, such as smells, or tastes, such as in sensory ethnography. There are also ethnographic practices that focus specifically on digital spaces (e.g., social media) network ethnographyand digital ethnography.
In co-produced or participatory research, the research deliberately sets out with the intention that the research questions and methods will be, at least in part, decided with the participants being researched. This also has the effect of sharing power more evenly with the participants. In “Anti-Racist Scholar-Activism,” Joseph-Salisbury and Connelly (2021) argue for the importance of what they term “being there”: of not determining research questions before beginning the research project, but instead of identifying research priorities while immersed in communities.
In other kinds of research, the researcher might carry out a series of activities with the research participants. This might include arts-based research or research-creation,in which the researcher (sometimes supported by an artist) create something together. They might be decided in advance by the researcher, or co-produced or participatory, with choices about the research decided with participants. Sometimes arts-based research is paired with more traditional methods, such as interviews or observational fieldnotes. Other times, the art itself is the research data, and this is analysed and discussed in much the same way as any other data would be.