Cognition and Critical Abilities in a Learning Experience - Essay Example

CRITICAL DIS ANALYSIS By Critical Dis Analysis In the study en d Critical Analysis and Thinking: An Experimental study in an EFL context, the researchers Hashemi and Ghanizade (2012) were guided by various assumptions on the subject matter. The study employed a quantitative methodology that sought to explore the factors behind the observable variations in the critical thinking ability of two groups of EFL students at the pre-test and post-test stages of the experiment. One of the assumptions of the study is that no external factors outside the variables would influence the outcome of the study. The study assumed that students of the same cognitive ability would naturally connect with the same levels of understanding of a same piece of writing. The study also assumed that the different backgrounds of the students and other distinguishing factors would not affect their levels of cognition. The study also assumed that the homogenous nature of the student would directly translate into identical abilities of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). The assumption was that matters of capacity would reflect in a similar pattern across the different categories of the students. Another assumption was that the EFL students at the same level were similar in their intellectual capacities and would therefore respond to the tests in nearly the same ways. Given that 38 of the students were female while 15 were male, the study was based on the assumption that gender differences and the imbalance in number would not determine the trend of responses. There was also the assumption that cultural factors would not influence the critical potentials of the students. The study divided 29 students into the experimental group and the remaining 24 into a control group. This arrangement was based on the assumption that there were no significant discrepancies between the experimental and control group to levels that could influence the results of the experimental. However, the studies show that differences in demographic factors, and variations in numbers between control and experimental groups can create significant impacts on the outcome of quantitative experiments (Balnaves & Caputi, 2001, p. 44). However, other studies indicate that such differences have insignificant impacts on quantitative experiments. In this particular experiments, it might be assumed that the participants had nearly the same levels of abilities and would respond in similar ways on various reading texts. The application of the quantitative methodology to study the critical thinking ability was appropriate with regard to the provision of measurable and quantifiable details on the outcomes. A widely cited advantage of quantitative methodologies is that they are generally precise and provide reliable information that can be used to study the characteristics of alternative samples. In the particular case of determining the critical thinking ability as stated in this article, the researchers incorporated a comparative quantitative study involving a control group and an experimental group. A major advantage of using a control group and an experimental group is that the control group is used to illustrate the variations observed in the experimental groups in order to assess the causal relationships as understood within the variables of the study. In order for the study to increase the level of accuracy and dependability of the results, the study incorporated a homogenous group that represented similar characteristics. This consideration is important because it ensures that all the observable changes in the population or sample are only caused by the variables and not internal consistencies. The choice of students with the same proficiency levels allows the researcher to focus on other experimental factors that connect with the kind of differences observed within the population. In quantitative studies, homogenous groups are the most appropriate because they provide internal controls and offer a higher level of accuracy as compared to disharmonious groups (Benz & Newman, 2008, p.36). The kind and nature of participants greatly determines the outcome of the studies with regard to accuracy and reliability. The relationship between methodology and methods in this study is consistent and appropriate as regards the subject matter. The quantitative methodology requires the use of tests in order to measure outcomes (Gravetter & Forzano, 2009; Blaxter, Hughes & Tight, 2006). The methods used in this study enable the incorporation of tests and measures. The instruments used and the application of control and experimental groups ensured the assessment of the level of statistical difference between the control groups and the experimental groups. The study used independent samples T-tests to determine the degree of difference between the various variables. In this manner, the researchers were able to compute the statistics relating to the two groups during the pre-test and the post-test phases of the experiment. Quantitative experiments are usually based on the need to assess the statistical differences between or among the variables. As such, the choice of methods in this particular study appropriately addresses the objectives of the research. Limitations in quantitative studies often occur due to a mismatch between methods applied and the methodology. Theoretically, this study responds to the fundamental tenets of post-positivism. In this regard, the assessment of the various results obtained from the participants from the experimental group and the control group are representations of the conjectures of the experiment. As such it would be necessary to probe the extent to which the results lend themselves to possible biases or established subjective positions adopted by the researcher. In general, post positivism adopts the position that the researcher and the participants in the research are not independent (Groff, 2004; Punch, 2005). In this particular study, the results were determined by use of comparative methods. In particular, the methods involved the arrangement of facts in accordance with some of the issues that conform to the central arguments of the study. The warrants upon which any research work is based are unstable and could change in light of new evidence (Vogt, 2006: Yu, 2006). On this score, it would imply that the results obtained in this study is only limited to the specific group or sample chosen and might change if the groups or any other fundamental factor in the study is shifted. The truth-value of the experiment cannot be established with absolute certainty, which means that the findings might not capture meaning as understood within a universal context (Blaxter, Hughes & Tight, 2006). The research practices adopted in this particular study illustrate the sequential and orderly manner in which the tests were conducted at the pre-test and the post-test levels and the manner in which they were calculated to suit the interests of the study. Quantitative studies require the application of methods that can produce similar kinds of results if applied in the same way at different times and places. Within the framework of post-positivism, the study would still recognize the primacy and essence of experimental methods but accommodate the possibility of established biases within the researcher or certain inherent weaknesses on the part of the participants. Section II The link between theory, practice, and research in this paper can be constructed from the learning experience that tested the validity of post-positivism in terms of its connection to the pattern of results from both the experimental and the control group. The practical aspect would require engaging students in a learning experience that tests their cognition and critical abilities as they manifest across the different categories of learning subject to a range of variables. The level of consistency between theory and practice can be determined by searching for some specific responses from the students and patterns of results, which illustrate the workability of the post-positivism theory. For instance, ascertaining the presence of conjectures in the results obtained would validate the explanation of post-positivism, which connects experimental results to multiple determinants including the biases of the researcher and the uniqueness of the situation. The patterns of response in this research uphold the view that logical determination of information is subject to causal factors that are found in the samples, variables, and environmental determinants. In practice, the application of post-positivism in this particular study shows a significant level of consistency with the results of the research. Works Cited Balnaves, M & Caputi, P 2001, Introduction to quantitative research methods: An investigative approach, SAGE, London. Benz, C, R & Newman, I 2008, Mixed methods research: Exploring the interactive continuum, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale. Blaxter, L, Hughes, C & Tight, M 2006, How to research, Berkshire, Open University Press, England. Blaxter, L, Hughes, C, & Tight, M 2006, How to research, Berkshire, Open University Press, England. Gravetter, F, J & Forzano, L, B 2009, Research methods for the behavioral sciences, Wadsworth Cenage Learning, Belmont. Groff, R 2004, Critical Realism, Post-positivism and the Possibility of Knowledge, Routledge, London. Hashemi, M, R & Ghanizadeh, A 2012, Critical discourse analysis and critical thinking: An experimental study in an EFL context, System, 40, 37-47. Punch, K, F 2005, Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches, SAGE. Vogt, W, P 2006, Quantitative research methods for professionals, Pearson/Allyn and Bacon, Boston. Yu, C, H 2006, Philosophical foundations of quantitative research methodology, University Press of America, Lanham. Read More