Research

Traditional Research vs Action Research

Traditional Research

Established or conventional methods of doing things, especially in the context of learning, teaching, or social practices. In the context of education, traditional action could refer to more conventional teaching practices

Lecturing
Paper Based Assessments
Face to Face Interactions

Action Research

A methodical and reflective procedure in which researchers or educators recognize an issue, take appropriate action to resolve it, and then evaluate the outcomes to enhance their work. It is frequently employed in the classroom to address real-world problems

Identifying a Problem
Collecting Data
Analyzing Results

The difference between traditional research and action research is their purpose and approach. Traditional research focuses on generating new knowledge or testing theories in a controlled, objective manner, often with the researcher detached from the process. It aims to contribute to broader academic fields. In contrast, action research is more practical and aims to solve specific, real-world problems within a particular context, such as a classroom or organization. The researcher actively participates in implementing solutions, reflecting on the results, and making ongoing improvements, with the goal of directly enhancing practices and outcomes.

Qualitative Vs. Quantitative

Test results, survey ratings, and completion rates are examples of quantifiable data and figures that are the focus of quantitative research. It makes it easier to spot trends and assess the efficacy of educational resources in a more impartial manner.

Vs

Qualitative research examines observations, experiences, and feedback. It assists in revealing the emotions of students, the difficulties they encounter, and the significance of their educational journeys.

How Did I Use This?

I've employed both strategies. For instance, I used a quantitative approach when creating my athlete recruitment website by considering how I could monitor user involvement, such as the number of students who finished particular modules or tests. By getting input on how understandable and beneficial the information was, as well as by taking into account the individual experiences of student-athletes navigating the recruiting process, I simultaneously drew on a qualitative approach. I was able to balance quantifiable outcomes with learner voices by utilizing both viewpoints, which strengthened and increased the project's relevance.

My Reflection:

During my IDT program, both traditional research and action research will serve as powerful tools for my growth as an instructional designer.
Traditional research, grounded in evidence-based theories and methodologies, will strengthen my understanding of effective teaching practices and educational technologies. This foundation will guide my decisions and ensure my work is informed by proven approaches.

In parallel, action research will allow me to apply, test, and refine my instructional designs in real-world environments. By gathering authentic feedback and measuring results, I can make continuous, targeted improvements.

By integrating the rigor of traditional research with the adaptability of action research, I will be able to create instructional materials that are both effective and tailored to specific learning contexts. This dual approach not only sharpens my design skills but also ensures my work remains relevant, impactful, and responsive to learners’ needs.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse