Qualitative (Content analysis) FINAL research memo guideline and rubric

Click here to see the template you will use

Open it and click File -> Copy.

Sample final research memo

Sample final research memo here

Note: Submissions without data analysis that is generated in "Coding your own data for draft research memo" will automatically receive zero.

Word count

Minimum 2,500 words of text excluding bibliography.

The goal

The goal of writing a final research paper is to

• confirm or reject your hypotheses, and answer your research question

• explain in detail the theoretical and empirical grounds/justifications, and the methodological choices

• show and discuss the results

Writing is easier as you read

In this stage of your research, you finalize your research paper.

Everything you wrote for the draft paper or other assignments can be used for your final paper.

You will need to find the full PDF version of the articles. If you do not have access to them, please email me ([e-mail]) with the title and the link of the articles. Make sure the link does NOT start with https://csu-mb.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/

Sections

1. Abstract: The abstract summarizes the content of your paper. It should provide the reader with a quick overview of the entire study, with the following information: (1) Importance of the topic and/or reference to the current literature and/or identification of a knowledge gap, (2) Aim(s) of the current study, (3) Indication of the methods used, (4) Statement of the key finding(s), and (5) Implications of the findings and/or Value of the current study. The abstract should not contain any undefined abbreviations or citations. Provide an abstract of 100 to 150 words.

2. Introduction and background: Clearly state the topic. What are you investigating? Who is the target group that you are investigating (Women of color, first-generation students, etc.)? What is the significance of the topic? Why does it matter? Highlight the significance of the topic. Indicate an issue, problem, or controversy in the field of study. Where does the field lack knowledge and how is your research filling that gap? Mention your research question here with its reasoning.

3. Theoretical structure: List and review the relevant literature and construct relevant associations to your own research topic. Do not summarize others’ works like A claimed this, B asserted that! Analytically use and interpret them as long as they benefit your own research. Define the key concepts here. In your project, for instance, if you are working on return migration, explain and cite what return migration is. Formulate at least three hypotheses that focus on your content analysis. Your hypotheses are tentative predictions. Explain what you expect to find and your reasoning, and cite them.

• 3.1. “The relationship between first independent variable and dependent variable” (You will name this subsection with your first focused code): Review the specific relevant literature about the relationship between your first independent variable and dependent variable: This is your first focused code. Provide at least two citations. Explain what you expect to find and your reasoning. End this subsection with your first hypothesis.

• 3.2. “The relationship between second independent variable and dependent variable” (You will name this subsection with your second focused code): Review the specific relevant literature about the relationship between your second independent variable and dependent variable: This is your second focused code. Provide at least two citations. Explain what you expect to find and your reasoning. End this subsection with your second hypothesis.

• 3.3. “The relationship between third independent variable and dependent variable” (You will name this subsection with your third focused code): Review the specific relevant literature about the relationship between your third independent variable and dependent variable: This is your first third code. Provide at least two citations. Explain what you expect to find and your reasoning. End this subsection with your third hypothesis.

1. Methodology: In the Methodology section, give an account of how you carried out your research. An experienced researcher should be able to repeat the research and reproduce the results based on this section. Your content analysis should include online newspaper articles, newspaper article comment sections, any social media platforms, YouTube comment sections, blogs, etc. Explain from which media platform you utilized data. What were your data selection criteria? What were the main biases? Describe all your methodological choices. Paste links of the data at the end of this section (Newspaper article, Facebook group, TikTok videos, etc.)

2. Results: The standard approach to this section of a research paper is to present and describe the results in a systematic and detailed way. You will highlight and comment on the themes that emerge from the analysis. More elaborate commentary on the results is restricted to the Discussion and Conclusion section.Clearly state whether you confirm or reject each of your hypotheses. Discuss your initial, axial, and focused codes here, and organize your results based on the focused codes. Remember not to include all your results. You should present and discuss only those findings that relate to your hypotheses and accordingly your research question. Do not just summarize your content; you should direct the reader to the component or components of it that are especially striking from the point of view of your research aim. Try to ask yourself what story you want the content to convey and try to relay that story to your readers. You can create tables and provide some quotations from the content you used.

3. Discussion and conclusion: In the Discussion and Conclusion section, you reflect on the implications of your results for the hypothesis that has driven your research. In other words, how do your results illuminate your hypotheses? The discussion will revolve around whether the hypotheses have been confirmed or not, and, if not, you might speculate about some possible reasons for and the implications of their refutation. You might suggest some ways in which your findings have implications for theories relating to your area of interest. It is valuable to propose areas of further research that are suggested by your findings. Discuss the limitation(s) of this research.

4. References (Bibliography): Cite a minimum of 12 sources (ONLY peer-reviewed journal articles) in APA style. Books, book chapters, or other sources, such as reports found on google or websites, are NOT acceptable.

5. Data sources links: Paste the links of the data sources (Newspaper articles, Youtube videos, etc.)

6. Coding file: Paste the Google Drive link of your coding file. On Google Drive, right-click on your coding file. Choose “Get link” and “Copy link.” Make sure “anyone with the link” is selected. If I do not have access to this document, you will receive zero for this section.

7. Self-grade sheet

Template

Click here to see the template you will use.

Open it and click File -> Copy.

Grading

As no two research papers are the same, grading will be a somewhat subjective business. The concepts, literature, and analysis you pursue will differ in many ways from research papers written by your peers. Some research papers on topics with large existing literature will have longer literature reviews. Hence, I place no strict limits on the length of each section. Your goal is to specifically discuss and justify your research, which generally takes ~2,500-3,000 words of text,

Below I provide a list of things I expect to find in all research papers. These are the things on which I will assess the research papers and assign grades. The research paper is worth 100 points, and there are items below, which are worth 3 to 15 points each.

I will rate your research papers from these items and the sum will represent your research paper grade. The grading of each item will be based on how clearly and completely you address each question posed.

Rubric

Abstract

1. Importance of the topic and/or reference to the current literature and/or identification of a knowledge gap (1 point)

2. Aims of the current study (1 point)

3. Indication of the methods used (1 point),

4. Statement of the key findings (1 point),

Introduction and background

1. Did you clearly show what you are investigating? (2 points)

2. Did you mention the target group that you are investigating? (Women of color, first-generation students, etc.) (2 points)

3. Did you show why the topic is significant and matters? (2 points)

4. Did you clearly state your research question (2 points) with its reasoning (1 point)

Theoretical structure

1. Did you clearly define your key concepts? (2 points)

2. Did you adequately review the literature in three subsections (3.1, 3.2, and 3.3) to articulate a theoretical basis for your hypotheses and a justification for your research question? (9 points)

3. Did you provide at least two citations for each subsection (3.1, 3.2, and 3.3)? (6 points)

4. Did you clearly state your hypotheses and their reasoning? (6 points)

Methodology

1. Did you discuss what content you analyze? (2 points)

2. Did you discuss your method of selecting media sources? (2 points)

3. Did you discuss the biases of your data selection? (2 points)

4. Did you paste the links of your data sources? (paste the links after the references) (3 points)

Results

1. Did you discuss your initial, axial, and focused codes? (5 points)

2. Did you present and describe the results in a systematic and detailed way based on the focused codes? (5 points)

3. Did you create tables and/or provide some quotations from the content you used? (5 points)

4. Did you clearly state whether you confirm or reject each of your hypotheses? (3 points)

Discussion and conclusion

1. Did you clearly interpret your main findings? (3 points)

2. Did you reflect on the implications of your results for the hypotheses that have driven your research? (2 points)

3. Did you mention any new understanding or insights about the topic you worked on? (2 points)

4. Did you identify the main limitation of this research? (2 points)

References

1. Did you cite at least 12 peer-reviewed journal articles (both in-text and end-text)? (15 points)

2. Consistent use of citation and reference format (4 points).

Writing and Template

1. Clarity of writing style. (4 points)

2. Use of template, the logic of research memo organization, consistent font and font size, title, and clear use of headings. All instructions and sample sentences are deleted. (4 points)

Self-grade Sheet

1. Self-grade sheet is completed (Otherwise you will lose 10% of the grade)

If you do not meet the minimum word count (2,500 words), your grade will be adjusted proportionally

Reminders

Reminder 1: Submissions without data analysis that is generated in "Coding your own data for draft research memo" will automatically receive zero.

Reminder 2: Do not use direct quotes from the peer-reviewed articles (-10 points for each):

Reminder 3: When citing peer-reviewed articles, only provide the in-text citation within the text and the end-text citation under the references (bibliography), do not write the title of the article in the text.

Should be:

“Szinovacz (1998) argued that grandparenthood has a multifaceted nature which lacks clear perceived and ascribed roles, and may embody different meanings, expectations and experiences in distinct cultural settings.”

“Family unity across generations is vital for family survival (Nesteruk and Marks, 2009).”

NOT acceptable (-10 points for each):

• “In his work entitled ‘Research on grandparenting: needed refinements in concepts, theories, and methods’ Szinovacz (1998) argued that grandparenthood has a multifaceted nature which lacks clear perceived and ascribed roles, and may embody different meanings, expectations and experiences in distinct cultural settings.

• “The study titled ‘Grandparents across the ocean: Eastern European immigrants struggle to maintain intergenerational relationships’ argues that family unity across generations is vital for family survival (Nesteruk and Marks, 2009).”