Analyzing the Role of Research Methods Courses in Shaping Educational Research Practices

• In Event: Rethinking Higher Education Curriculum, Learning Spaces and Practices

Proposal

Introduction and Literature Review
Teaching practices and skills on research and inquiry are fundamental aspects of developing and shaping PhD students’ (PS) understanding of research. In most universities, PSs learn about the philosophies and skills of various research methods in courses that they take. The general research methods courses provide a broad view of multitudes of research paradigms, methodologies, and methods that all students must take in their doctoral program. This proposal compares the syllabi of general research methods courses from two universities- University A (UA) in Kazakhstan and University B (UB) in the United States.
Research methods courses are essential in shaping educational research practices among graduate students, providing a foundational orientation that aids students in becoming proficient educational researchers (Coronel Llamas & Boza, 2011). These courses are seen as beneficial, potentially transforming students' perspectives and practices in research (Diab, 2006). Yet, the history of teaching research methods in Kazakhstan Universities significantly emphasizes theoretical research methods, historical analysis, and pedagogical studies (Orynbassarova, 2020) rather than building better research practices and skills than in the US. However, many students express dissatisfaction with the current design and delivery of research methods courses, often finding them pedagogically monolithic and conceptually challenging (Daniel, 2022). Despite these challenges, research methods courses significantly enrich PS’s research experiences and support the timely completion of their degrees (Daniel, 2022). Although graduate students recognize the importance of educational research for informing policy, equity, and research direction decisions, they may still hold misconceptions regarding its meaning and application to practices (Moulding & Hadley, 2010). Thus, the need is there to redesign and enhance research methods courses to better support PSs educational research.
Course Framework and Brief Context
In this proposal, we compare three courses [1 UA (UA1) and 2 UB (UB1 and UB2)] that collectively aim to equip PSs in education with theoretical and practical research skills in educational inquiry. Each course is designed to provide a blend of theoretical foundations and hands-on applications. For example, UA1 course focuses on research design and data collection, whereas UB1 course emphasizes qualitative and quantitative paradigms. On the other hand, UB2 course highlights critical thinking and scholarly articulation, preparing students to apply methodologies in real-world contexts.
Courses led by UA and UB professors’ is to equip students with theoretical and practical knowledge to conduct high-quality educational research and build ethically sound and rigorous research practices.
Methods
This study employed a qualitative content analysis of course syllabi (Elo et al., 2014) utilizing both the conceptual and relational foci in understanding connections. The syllabuses were analyzed to identify the primary goals, instructional strategies, and assessment methods employed to develop students' research skills. We primarily analyzed the syllabi contents and some observational data that clarified the syllabi’s goals and activities.
Sample Courses Analyzed:
UA1 Course: Comprehensive coverage of research methods and techniques, focusing on research design, data collection, and analysis.
UB1 Course: Introduction to qualitative and quantitative paradigms, aimed at grounding students in research and inquiry in education.
UB2 Course: Emphasis on various research paradigms, including positivism, interpretivism, critical theory, and ethical considerations in scholarly research.
Findings
Similarities and Uniqueness: Inclusions and Exclusions
The findings showed that the courses shared common goals, including developing critical thinking, understanding research paradigms, and practical research skills. Each course, however, approached these goals from a unique angle:
UA1 course provided a broad overview of research methods, with an emphasis on research design and ethical considerations. It incorporated theoretical and practical lessons, ensuring students could apply what they learned to real-world research scenarios.
The UB1 course focused on establishing a strong foundation in both qualitative and quantitative research, preparing students for specialized methodology courses. The course emphasized epistemology, various research theories, and question generation.
The UB2 course covered the philosophical foundations of research, focusing on paradigms such as positivism and critical theory. It emphasized the development of research questions, literature reviews, and ethical considerations in educational research.
The analysis showed that UA1 focused less on understanding the framing of research questions than UB1 and UB2.
Course Assignments and Evaluation
The course assignments across the three courses were very different. The methods course in UA1 focused on reflective journals, annotated bibliography, and literature reviews. The UB1 and UB2 courses focused on these and had students leading the class discussions, peer review of research idea development, and a final paper on literature review and designing a study. The evaluation of student performance was primarily formative in UB1 and UB2 courses, with peer and instructor feedback being a central component of the learning process.
One of the unique differences between UA1, UB1, and UB2 courses was that UB2 specifically focused on the value of the “positionality statement” of a researcher to improve trustworthiness.
Ethical considerations were emphasized throughout the courses, ensuring students had the knowledge and skills to conduct ethical research.

Equity
One of the key differences between UA1 course and UB1 & UB2 courses was that the UA1 course did not indicate the value of equity and inclusivity of students in learning. Furthermore, there was no evidence of mental health support for students in UA1 course. We believe this is a very concerning omission in the UA1 course.
Discussions and Implications
The findings suggest that these research methods courses provide a well-rounded education in research theory and practice, preparing Ph.D. students to navigate the complexities of educational research (Elo et al., 2020). Including qualitative and quantitative methods ensures students have the necessary tools to approach research from multiple perspectives (Coronel Llamas et al., 2011). Yet, equity and inclusivity seemed excluded from the UA1 course, which is of concern in an increasingly connected culture. All three courses intended a balanced approach to content coverage, critical engagement, and ethical considerations, but practical applications seemed scattered. Courses integrating qualitative and quantitative paradigms offer a more comprehensive understanding of educational research, allowing students to tailor their methodologies to their research interests. Many similarities exist despite Kazakhstan’s recent research history. This proposal shows the value of research methods courses in PhD education across the globe.

Authors

• Saule Sadykova, Zhubanov University

• Bhaskar Upadhyay, University of Minnesota - Minneapolis, MN (06940)