Educational Technology

Kinmond, K. (2012). Coming up with a research question. In Sullivan, C., Gibson, S., & Riley, S. (Eds) (2012) Doing Your Qualitative Psychology Project. (pp. 23 – 36). Sage.

The author provides a user-friendly “how to develop a research question” book chapter emphasizing the importance of clarity of research questions to its audience. The author suggests that choosing a research question can be challenging. Nonetheless, it is vital that the researcher takes the time to execute it methodically and thoroughly. The ultimate success of a research project depends upon asking an appropriate and clear question. The question must be suitable for qualitative research and for the researcher’s specific approach or design. Furthermore, the research question must be grounded in valid, reliable, and trustworthy research.

The article has many strengths, such as providing several activities enabling the reader to practice the design and develop a research question. A high-level research questions flowchart is provided to the practitioner focusing on the decision of what the research will be based on as well as deciding on a topic and becoming knowledgeable on that topic, resulting in a potential list of questions. Next, the researcher conducts their preliminary analysis to confirm their final research question. How the context is segmented in the chapter makes it appropriate to digest and reflect simultaneously. The phrase “in a nutshell” is operationally similar to “bottom line up front” in my practice. Likewise, I have found the “top tips” and success stories insightful. Lastly, understanding the importance of identifying assumptions early will help the researcher shape their research questions. Additional research is needed to explore general assumptions’ depth and breadth.

From an instructional designer’s perspective, planning, designing, and developing a research question is similar to conducting job task analysis, resulting in a critical task list and measurable learning objectives. My research on educational and institutional accreditation has initialized a few research questions. What are the key factors that contribute to successful institutional accreditation? What are the most common challenges institutions face during accreditation? How do institutions use the feedback they receive during accreditation to improve their operations and programs? The next 10 to 15 years of my life will be dedicated to this body of work for the U.S. Army and potentially other Department of Defense (DoD) services.

Eaton, J. S. (2015). An overview of US accreditation. Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA).

The author provides a synopsis of accreditation in the U.S. Accreditation is a process of external quality review created and used by higher education to scrutinize colleges, universities, and programs for quality assurance and quality improvement. Accreditation in the U.S. is over 100 years old, emerging from concerns to protect public health and safety and serve the public interest. U.S. accreditors review colleges and universities in 50 states and 125 other countries. They review thousands of programs in various professions and specialties, including law, medicine, business, nursing, social work, pharmacy, arts, and journalism. The U.S. accreditation system is built upon a core set of traditional values and beliefs.

The article has many strengths, including identifying the four types of accrediting organizations (regional, national faith-related, national career-related, and programmatic accreditors). As of 2012-2013, eighty-five recognized institutional and programmatic accrediting organizations operated in the U.S. Notably, accrediting organizations derive their legitimacy from the colleges, universities, and programs that created accreditation, not the government. Accreditation carries out four essential roles: (1) assuring quality, (2) access to federal and state funds, (3) engendering private sector confidence, and (4) easing the transfer of education credits. Moreover, an institution or program seeking accreditation must go through a number of steps stipulated by an accrediting organization and may include self-study, peer review, site visit, judgment by accrediting organization, and periodic external review.

Accreditation of institutions and programs takes place on a cycle that may range from every few years to as many as 10 years. The Army cycle is every three years, with the accreditation window being six to eight months. Nevertheless, accreditation is ongoing; the initial earning of accreditation is not entry to indefinite accredited status. Periodic review is a fact of life for accredited institutions and programs. Self-accreditation is not an option, as this dynamic ensures that the institution is accredited by a neutral, third-party agency and is held accountable. The Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) has five recognition standards, in contrast, the Army Quality Assurance Program (AQAP) has seven recognition standards where research to identify the differences would be worthwhile. On the other hand, CHEA working with the U.S. Department of Education (USDE), has recognition standards that emphasize whether an institution or program is of sufficient quality to qualify for federal funds for student financial aid and other federal programs.