Research Methodology 3 Sem 6, Jan 2019.

15BAR5RM32S | Sylvie Dominique

Sushant School of Art and Architecture

RESEARCH METHOLOGY (Barch)

Subject Name: Research Methodology Names and pairing of Faculty:

Subject Code: 15BAR5RM32S Parshati Dutta – Piyush Das
Year and Semester: 3rd Year 6th Semester (2019) Parul Munjal – Rahat Varma
Name of Coordinator: Sylvie Dominique Sudar Oli – Sylvie Dominique
Contact Days / Hours: 2 Hours/week Sindhuree Iyengar – Sylvie Dominique

AIM

The aim of this course is to introduce students to different research methods for them to acquire solid
theoretical and practical pre-requisites for taking dissertation next semester. Students will be taught how
to structure and plan a research work on a topic of their choice, each topic falling into one of the three
fields related to architecture – Theory and Philosophy of Architecture, Design and Architecture (practice),
Built Heritage and History of Architecture. The semester consists in teaching them how to write a research
proposal – synopsis – following a step-by-step process. At the end of the semester, they are expected to
resume their learning outcomes in the shape of a research synopsis which will be used as their main tool
for dissertation the following year.

OBJECTIVES

1. Understanding the value and significance of a research project.

2. Making an informed choice in the selection of a research topic, according to both personal genuine
interest and availability of sources. Being aware of the difference between a topic and a subject,
aims and objectives.

3. Becoming familiar with source fishing and evaluation by establishing a routine in the search for
references. Developing a critical analysis of references in order to refine aims and objectives. Being
aware of the existence of different schools of thoughts in the selected topic.

4. Ability to record continuously research process and by gradually building a research board – in the
shape of a Research Tool Kit.

5. Acquiring ethical behaviour and exigencies in the use of sources, collection and analysis of data.
Learning how to refer properly and systematically to sources in text, bibliography and illustrations.

6. Being aware of the different research methods, their non-exclusive nature and being able to use
their different respective tools. Being able to elaborate a methodology and define scopes and
limitations accordingly.

7. Structuring a research plan, writing a clear and rigorous synopsis, being aware of the value and
significance of a synopsis as a personal tool in research.

8. Understanding the link between analysis of data, critical thinking and the elaboration of an
academic discourse. Learning how to write an introduction and an abstract.
LEARNING OUTCOME:

1. Understanding the significance of a research project and the purpose of a synopsis as a support for
research.
2. Writing with integrity: acquiring a rigour in the use and referencing of sources and understanding
the implications of plagiarism.

3. Being familiar with the different research methods and their tools and gaining in confidence in
their practical applications.
4. Planning a research project through the elaboration of a pertinent methodology and the
organisation of realistic objectives.

5. Ability to define a framework of research.

6. Developing a critical thinking and ability to generalise a pattern.
7. Writing a Synopsis

TEACHING METHODS

Courses will be taught in a studio format introduced by a 15min lecture, with Research Tool Kit (RSK) as
the main tool. The semester consists in a step-by-step process which culminates with the final redaction of
the research synopsis. The RTK is a file owned by each student which will contain every reference tools –
plagiarism cases table, templates, notes – and synopsis sections – aims, objective, methodology, fieldwork,
bibliography etc - gradually done by the student. Each class’ outcome will result in writing a section of the
synopsis which will be subsequently added to the RTK. It is meant to ease the work of the student who at
the end of the semester will have to edit and put together these sections in order to generate a synopsis.

Therefore the teaching methods will be both theoretical and practical and will include: short introductory
lectures, workshops, group activities, active interactions and writing sessions. Students are expected to
conduct their own readings. It will also be the responsibility of students to bring their RTK to every class
and keep it updated.

WEEKLY SCHEDULE (Subject to change) – See “Detailed Teaching Plan” word doc.

RESEARCH TOOL KIT

WEEK LECTURE TEACHER TASK
LEARNING OUTCOMES
Definition of research topic
Week 1 Orientation & Significance of
Short lecture + Activity Template of a synopsis
14-18 Jan Research
(LO 1)
Week 2 Harvard style guide. Bibliography
21-25 Jan template.
Citing and Referencing List of digital tools for referencing.
Short lecture + Activity
Checklist of criteria for source
evaluation.
(LO 2)
Homework
Submission
Defined Research Topic (2%)
Tab of type of sources, list of
libraries, list of digital platforms,
Locating and evaluating sources Table chart of the different cases of
Week 3 Short lecture + workshop in
(Bibliography and Literature plagiarism.
28 Jan -1 Feb Library
Review) Bibliography. Guidelines for
literature review.
(LO 2+5)

2
 Comparative chart table qualitative
Defining quantitative &
Week 4 and quantitative methods
qualitative research Short Lecture + Activity
4-8 Feb Aim, scope & limitations
(LO 3+5)
Homework
Submission Bibliography + draft of literature review (8%)

Wed 6 Feb Research Methods I Templates of closed types of Q&A.

Special Lecture Survey, questionnaire and Lecture +activity List of Do/Don’t in interview.
interview. Ethical behaviour (L0 3+5)
Week 5 Research methods I
Draft of interview/questionnaire
11-15 Feb Practice Preparing iPac assignment
(LO 3+4+5)
iPac
12-16 Feb iPac ASSIGNMENT (10%) – Submission Week 6
Research methods I
Week 6 Reviewing the results of FabFeb
Practice LO 3+4
18-22 Feb Assignment
Preparative list for survey
Week 7 Research methods II Short Lecture + Activity
methodology, scope & limitations
25 Feb-1Mar
(LO 3+4+5)
During regular class hours,
Week 8
students are expected to collect
4-8 Mar Research methods I&II Data
preliminary datas and elaborate
Practice (LO 3+4+5)
a methodology plan related to
their own topics
Wed 6 Mar
Critical Thinking Lecture (LO 4+5+6)
Special Lecture
Week 9 Methodology. Objectives. Scope
11-15 Mar Critical Thinking Short Lecture + Activity and Limitation.
(LO 4+5+6)
Homework
Submission
Research data collected during week 8 (10%)
MID TERM (30%)
Week 10
18-22 Mar Holi
Mid Term (30%)
Week 11 Editing contents + Introduction
Research proposal Short Lecture + writing lab
25-29 Mar (L0 7)
Week 12 Abstract
Research proposal Short Lecture + Writing lab
1-5 Apr (LO 7)
Week 13 Synopsis
Research proposal Writing lab
8-12 April (LO 7)
Week 14
Final Submission of Assignments (40%)
22-26

Summative Assessment Components and Criteria

*iPac Assessment Group Quality of interview, 10 Marks Due weeks Learning Outcomes
application of 5&6 3
methodology, variety of
population and pertinence
of questions.
Assessment 1 (*) Individual Research Topic, Aim, 30 Marks Due week 10 Learning Outcomes
Objective, scope, 1-2-3-4-5
limitation, literature
review and bibliography +
RTK updated and
organised + short verbal
presentation
Assessment 2 Individual Submission of completed 40 Marks Due week 14 Learning Outcomes
3
 and revised synopsis with 5-6-7
15 min viva
*Homework Individual or by As given in the teaching Tot. 20 Marks Due week
group plan 2,4 ,9

Assignement 1: Homeworks, iPac and Mid Term – (60%):

Assignement 1 (*) has been divided in multiple *homeworks, an *iPac assignment, and a mid-term
assignment with cumulative marks. Students will be asked to submit on a regular basis homework so to
ensure the continuity of the step-by-step process of the course and that their work is up to date. 4
assignments will be marked on a tot. of 30%:
1 Homework is 2% (week 2)
1 Homework is 8% (week 4)
iPac assignment is 10% (weeks 5 &6)
1 Homework is 10 % (week 9)
These marks will be added to the mid-term Assignment (week 9/10) to reach a tot of 60% (30% +30%)

Mid term:
A well-defined aim, objectives, scope, limitations, a revised literature review and a complete bibliography
(Harvard style). Research Tool Kit updated and well organised. A written account on research methodology
is not yet expected, however the intended research method should be verbally presented during a short
presentation (10 min max)

Assignment 2 (end-term) – week 14 (40%)

A complete synopsis and a title, a 20 min viva presentation of the research project.

ASSESSMENT RUBRIC

LEARNING Exemplary (9) Developed (8) Developing (7) Satisfactory (6-5) Unsatisfactory (5-
OUTCOMES 0)
Assignment 1 Research topic Research topic .Research topic is Research topic Research topic still
1-5 clearly clearly well defined. The fairly defined but unclear, too vague
formulated and formulated and aim is shows some or showing no
showing the will aim clearly satisfactorily. confusions or understanding of
to take risks. Aim defined and belongs to a too the subject.
clearly defined realistic. Objectives are well-worked
and showing presents but are areas. Needs to The aim is
originality. Realistic and imprecise and be narrowed inexistent, or
. pertinent lack organisation. down or better incoherent.
Realistic objectives articulated.
objectives clearly clearly stated, Scope and Objectives are
stated, showing fairly well limitations are The aim has absent or not
pertinence and organised. understood but potential but clearly stated.
complexity, well limited or needs to be
organized Scope and confused or improved or Scope and
following a limitations well uncertain in their redefined. limitations are
coherent stream framed contents, they are absent or not
of thoughts. demonstrating a not linked with Objectives are understood and are
basic research methods vague and not linked with any
Scope and understanding or academic limited, confused research methods
limitations well of the different disciplines. with the aim or or academic
framed fields and repetitive. disciplines.
demonstrating a methods used Basic literature
clear in the research review that Scope and Limited literature
understanding of work. demonstrate of limitations are review of less than
the different essential readings not understood three works.
fields and Bibliography which and are not linked Random sources

4
 methods used in rigorously contextualize with any research with little or no
the research written her/his work. methods or relevance with the
work. following academic research topic.
Harvard Bibliography disciplines. Demonstrate that
standards written following Limited literature basic background
Substantial Harvard review of at least work is lacking.
literature review Literature standards, yet to three general
with a critical review with a be further readings relevant Bibliography
analysis of the critical analysis developed. to the research without format and
sources’ contents, of the sources’ work. showing poor
correctly contents, Expression is contents.
referenced. correctly fairly good, yet Bibliography
referenced. needs to be written following Weak expression
Bibliography improved, show Harvard that jeopardizes
rigorously written Literature some weakness in standards, yet to the understanding
in Harvard review and the structure. be substantially of the contents.
format, that bibliography are developed. Poor Lack of structure.
includes relevant both substantial Evidence of quality references
works of quality updated with undeliberate with no variety in Blatant case of
and of different additional plagiarism. types. deliberate
types references. plagiarism. Poor
demonstrating They include RTK needs to be Weak expression expression that
student’s genuine relevant works updated and but the content demonstrates an
interest for of quality better organized. can still be fairly evident lack of
her/his topic. demonstrating understood. Lack commitment to the
student’s of structure. work.
The work shows a genuine interest Verbal
fluidity in the for her/his presentation: Evidence of
writing style and topic. The methodology undeliberate RTK missing,
a rigorous has potential and plagiarism. empty, poorly
structure. No The work shows demonstrates a filled, randomly
plagiarism. a fairly good basic knowledge RTK needs to be organized or poorly
style and a of the different updated and maintained.
RTK updated and rigorous research methods organized.
rigorously structure. No and tools. Verbal
organized plagiarism. Verbal presentation:
presentation: The methodology is
Verbal RTK updated The methodology absent or non-
presentation: and rigorously is approximate realistic,
Realistic organised. and loosely relies unworkable.
methodology No plagiarism. on research
demonstrating a methods.
clear Verbal Demonstrated a
understanding of presentation: basic knowledge
the different Realistic of research
research methods methodology method.
and tools, and a demonstrating a
preliminary fair
approach to these understanding
methods. of the different
research
methods and
tools, and a
preliminary
approach to
these methods.

Assignment 2 Synopsis Synopsis Elements in Ass 1 Synopsis roughly Elements in Ass 1

5
(End Term) completed with a completed with have been completed, with have not been
Learning definite title a a provisional improved and up an approximate edited/improved.
Outcome 5-7 concise and title, and a to the required provisional title,
efficient abstract. concise and level and the abstract is Incomplete
efficient standards. confusing, too synopsis, with an
abstract. long or too short. approximate
The synopsis The synopsis Synopsis Structure is weak provisional
follows rigorously follows completed with a and contents is inadequate
the standard rigorously the provisional title, unequally abstract.
template. standard and a good distributed or
template. abstract. randomly Structure is
Demonstrates organised, but randomly
visual clarity, and Structure and still workable. organised, and has
a coherence with contents Structure and no coherence with
the table of demonstrates contents Hardly constitutes the table of
contents. visual clarity, demonstrate a a basic contents.
and a coherence with framework for a
Judged good coherence with the table of research project. Can not constitute
enough to be the table of contents. Has potential but a protocol for a
used as the contents. need to be re- research work
protocol of Constitutes a worked unless entirely re-
dissertation for Judged good basic framework substantially worked, section by
next year without enough to be for a research section.
further editing. used as a project, though Presentation is
workable some sections weak but has Presentation is
Presentation well protocol of may need to be potential that weak, the student
articulated, dissertation for further may blossom struggles in linking
dynamic and next year with substantiated. when the student the title or/and the
conducted with some slight gets involved in aim of the
confidence. editing. Presentation the actual project.with the
Demonstrates a fairly articulated research work content of the
rigorous Presentation but need to gain next semester. synopsis or with
organisation of well articulated, in confidence and the project.
the stream of dynamic and a more rigorous Difficulties in
thoughts based conducted with organisation in elaborating a There is no
on solid confidence. the stream of general knowledge of
references to Demonstrates a thoughts. statement research methods
other works. good Difficulties in beyond the and the process of
organisation of elaborating a particularity of her/his own
Clear vision of the the stream of general cases of studies. research project
intended research thoughts with statement Theoretical remains abstract or
work’s scope, eventual beyond the knowledge of inexistent.
progression, reference to particularity of research methods
expected cases of study cases of studies but the process of The idea of the
outcome and or general her/his own expected outcome
limitations. readings. The idea of the research project is too weak, too
expected remains abstract. ambitious –
RTK updated and Fair anticipation outcome is still unrealistic – or
rigorously of the project’s too abstract or The idea of the inexistent.
organised. expected ambitious – expected
No plagiarism. outcome and unrealistic. outcome is too The contents or
limitations. ambitious – part of the contents
unrealistic. of the synopsis
were/was
plagiarised.

6
RECOMMENDED TEXT (Reference Book)

Barrios, O. L. (2016) The Only Academic Phrasebook You'll Ever Need: 600 Examples of Academic Language.
Createspace Independent Pub.

Borden, I. (2005) The Dissertation: An Architecture Student's Handbook (Architectural Students

Handbooks). Architectural Press.

Godfrey, J. (2013) The Student Phrase Book: Vocabulary for Writing at University (Palgrave Study Skills).
Palgrave Macmillan

McMillan K., Weyers, J. (2013). How to Write Dissertations & Project Reports (Smarter Study Skills).
Pearson Education.

Pears, R. (2013) Cite Them Right (Palgrave Study Skills). Palgrave Macmillan.Swetnam, D. (2000)

Ridley D., (2012) The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students (SAGE Study Skill Series). Sage
Publication Ltd

Strunk Jr, W. (2005) The Elements of Style (Dover Language Guides). Dover Publication Inc.

Taggart C., Wines, J.A. (2008) My Grammar and I (Or Should That Be 'Me'?): Old-School Ways to Sharpen
Your English (I Used to Know That ...). Michael O’Mara Books.

Writing Your Dissertation: The Bestselling Guide to Planning, Preparing and Presenting First-Class Work.
Constable& Robinson.

Williams, K. (2009) Getting Critical (Pocket Study Skills). Palgrave Macmillan.

Williams K. (2017) Referencing and Understanding Plagiarism. Palgrave

ONLINE SOURCES

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/administration-and-support-
services/library/public/Harvard.pdf