IS THERE SUCH A THING AS PERFECT RESEARCH?

There is no hope of doing perfect research (griffiths, 1998, p97). Do I agree? Yes and no. A research can be both a finite and an infinite process, depending on its purpose. A research that aims to support an arguement around a subject and present the findings in a report form, within a certain time frame, is a finite task. This research then has the possibility to be perfect in every sense, within its set parameters, and can be the best work produced in the given context. All available data can be resourced, findings understood, arguements studied and developed, conclusions drawn. The infinite research on the other hand is always open-ended as it is not bound by considerations of form and time. This type of research is always analysing newer findings and data, hence redrawing its conclusions and refreshing its arguements. It is a continuous process, never definitive. If subsequent research convinces that the original statement of purpose needs to be modified, then the opening arguements will need to be revised and any other parts of the paper that this change entails. In my experience of research done in schools that I have studied, I found that we deal mostly with finite research, whereas for selfeducational purposes a society needs its researchers to take the infinite route. Anything infinite is inconclusive, open-ended, dynamic and hence, imperfect. Whether perfect or not, research has a very important role to play in the collective development of communities. I would like to refer briefly to a research project that I participated in during high school. The research project was specifically aimed to study the existing procedure being adopted for involving the local community in the improvement of school education and to identify various Community Based Organizations (CBOs) those have a stake in the development of quality education. Participatory Management of Schools involving the communities has been recognized as crucial at policy level. Still different people have different notions about what it is all about. The distinction between genuine and pseudo-participation is often overlooked. In most of the cases, the community participation in school improvement is being obtained through involvement of

Parent Teacher Association which is a department promoted body that dances to the tune of the officials and teachers. On the other hand, there are non-parent public who represent various sections of the society, who have a stake in the improvement of the school and are willing to contribute their ideas, time and resources for the welfare of their own school. The project concluded that the Village Educational Committees need to function effectively to sustain the participation and involvement of the community in the management of the schools. The role of CBOs was observed to be greater in preparing micro plans and local resource mobilization. Hence a better space for CBOs to play an active role as partners in the joint venture towards quality education. This project exemplifies the far reaching role that research plays in bringing about constructive change in community behaviour. In either form finite or infinite, the research shapes up according to the researcher's approach. A simple analytical approach discusses the major points of a subject, evaluates them each in turn and then concludes with an evaluation of the research to the reader. An expository research paper seeks to inform and explain what the subject matter is rather than seeking to offer altering viewpoints on the topic. In the
argumentative form, a research paper picks a point of view and presents research findings to prove the opening statements.

"There is no hope of doing perfect research. Utopia does not exist."; argued Morwenna Griffiths in Educational Research for Social Justice: Getting off the Fence'(p97). The book provides a set of principles for doing educational research for social justice. These are rooted in considerations of methodology, epistemology and power relations, and provide a framework for dealing with the practical issues of collaboration, ethics, bias, empowerment, voice, uncertain knowledge and reflexivity, at all stages of research from getting started to dissemination and taking responsibility as members of the wider community of educational researchers. As Christina Hughes (op cit) explains, Griffiths offers many principles that underpin working for social justice in qualitative educational research. Among these is the

arguement that all research programmes have to be constructed on the run, and against a background of social and educational change. Time constraints and compromises are inevitable. By the time the best possible design, methods and forms of dissemination are found, the situation will most probably have changed. It follows that all research must be subject to critique. Good research will still need to improve. This may mean that there are areas in which a research programme is excellent, but some other things may be out of its control altogether. Social justice is always in a state of becoming, rather than in one of being. As social justice is bound up with personal and group identities (e.g. of gender, of class, of having a voice or of being oppressed) the issue of becoming applies equally to the teachers and learners involved. The context in which Griffiths expostulates supports the conclusion that indeed there is no hope of doing perfect research, but when a research is not designed to offer new evidence or report on developing work but is a collation and presentation of existing work, it has the scope to be all inclusive, conclusive and perfect. This research is to uncover existing knowledge of a topic and synthesize a focused and coherent report on a subject. This research is not intended to prove a hypothetical point but to present an existing fact.
REFERENCES: 1. Hughes, Christina 'An introduction to qualitative research', web. 18 March 2010. 2. Griffiths, Morwenna(1998) Educational Research for Social Justice: Getting

off

the Fence', Buckingham, Open University Press.

3. bera.ac.uk, web. 18 March 2010. 4. amazon.com, web. 18 March 2010.