Category: Perception

Introduction

The world is narrowing down. Nations, previously accustomed to a high degree of disunity, have now become closer than ever, as a result of rapid technological progress, improved infrastructure and ever-expanding communication networks. Due to the enhanced interaction between completely different societies and the rapidly growing orientation to the global market, the acquisition of international experience in cultivating a broad cultural perspective is not only becoming increasingly important in the interests of tolerance and understanding, but also plays an increasingly fundamental role. in almost all aspects of future employment. In addition to acquiring valuable international skills, experience abroad is shown to make a significant contribution to improving the understanding of the present culture (Lee, Therriault & Linderholm, 2012).

The growing awareness of this shift towards more diverse cultural and international thinking can be seen from a number of different indicators, one of which is the growing number of students who choose to participate in many studies abroad programs (SA). Although student interest and increased participation reflect recognition of the importance of such programs, it is surprising that the overall level of participation remains relatively small, since less than 10 percent of Russian students choose to study abroad during their undergraduate studies (IIE: press release, 2013).

With such extensive research, confirming the positive impact of studying abroad on personal horizons, academic performance and career development, it may seem strange that there is a difference between students who choose to study abroad and those who have refused such experience. The following pages will examine in more detail the benefits of study abroad programs and the inconsistency of student participation in undergraduate studies as a result of levels of awareness, fluctuating attitudes and various restrictions. This will be achieved by reviewing existing literature, covering the impact of study abroad programs, in combination with empirical data collected through questionnaires and interviews with students studying in Russia.

Background

The term “study abroad” has a very precise meaning for some, while for others it is rather a general concept. In order not to be too specific or too vague, a definition somewhere in the middle of these two extremes seems to work best.

Programs abroad are all educational programs that are conducted in another country outside the geographical boundaries of the country of origin, offering students the opportunity to receive academic credit on international experience” (Carlson & Widaman, 1988; Kitsantas, 2004, as quoted in Lee et al. 2012, p. 768).

The consistent and significant growth of study abroad programs began to manifest itself in the late 1980s and early 1990s as a result of increasing technology, infrastructure, communications, and increasing attention to tourism (ibid.). The growing growth has provided a significant increase in the variety of activities available for participating SA students, which has led to a wider choice of classes, opportunities for laboratory work, fieldwork in the field, internships, humanitarian assistance efforts and many other options to choose from (Harvard University, nd). As a result of both national and programmatic achievements, the number of students studying abroad increased from 71,000 in 1990 to 283,000 in 2012 (see Figure 1).

While these growing participation rates and the wider availability of study abroad programs can largely be attributed to the collective efforts made by a significant number of European universities, some institutions play a larger role than others.

Aims

The overall objective of this study is to explore the undergraduate ideas of students regarding study abroad programs and to determine the extent to which these ideas correspond to the growing importance that society attaches to multicultural competence. To achieve this goal, first of all, it is necessary to study the documented advantages of study abroad programs and subsequently determine the basic level of students’ awareness of the available programs; (b) the estimated value of these programs; and (c) barriers to participation related to experience abroad. Special attention will be paid to these two last points, since it is believed that they are the most relevant of the three objectives.

Study Questions

The above goal and objectives give rise to several applicable research questions that remain relevant throughout the study:

• How did study abroad programs prove useful for students?
• To what extent are students aware of study opportunities abroad?
• What obstacles, according to students, impede their ability to participate in the study abroad program?
• How accessible, according to students, are study abroad programs as a result of the identified obstacles?

Research approach

Elements of both the case study and the cross-section design are used in the study of the above purpose, objectives and research questions. As part of a case study at Eli Broad Business College at Moscow State University, an example of how the department is a reasonable representative of the collective admission of student entrepreneurs studying at universities in Europe (Bryman, 2012). This group is homogeneous enough to be analyzed in a wider context, with increased attention being paid to variables that are more likely to fluctuate. Thanks to the largest MSU study abroad program, the level of awareness, general knowledge and capabilities in relation to these programs are likely to be more pronounced than in other areas of study.

Thanks to a review of existing literature, the distribution of questionnaires, relevant data is collected, analyzed and presented in the following sections. Using these two methods in combination with each other will help fill potential gaps that could otherwise arise from the concentrated use of a single approach, which ultimately will increase the likelihood of obtaining comprehensive results. The mostly qualitative data collected tends to provide a higher level of understanding of the undergraduate students ’thoughts, opinions and perceptions regarding study abroad programs than a purely quantitative approach. As a result of the implementation of these methods, the most relevant and applicable data were obtained.

Restrictions

Throughout the study, all attempts were made to achieve accuracy, accuracy and attention to detail in anticipation of achieving meaningful and useful results. Despite this, there may remain some factors that limit the general and precise nature of the study. These factors deserve due attention, and it is hoped that, as a result of their consideration, readers will remain free to draw their own conclusions about the completeness of the study. The following are some of the most important factors that may influence research processes or data:

Delivery Method — Since it was almost impossible to put the subjects of this study in the position of mandatory participation, there may be a small risk of potential bias in the resulting data set. It is expected that the likelihood that students will share special personality traits and characteristics unique to those who choose to participate in such a study voluntarily will be minimal.

The frequency of responses to the questionnaires – the physical presence of the researcher to monitor the spread of the questionnaires was impossible due to geographical extremes, which led to the inevitable use of electronic communication. In terms of using the Internet and e-mail to distribute questionnaires, enticing participation has proven extremely difficult, despite the use of various motivational methods. As a result, the response rate achieved is too low to provide comprehensive and convincing comparable data. However, some of the answers were agreed to the extent that they were still useful for the analysis carried out as part of this study.

Available literature. Attempts have been made to include a reference to the existing scope of research already conducted for both those who did and those who did not study abroad. This turns out to be somewhat difficult, since there is a wide range of work aimed at students, but significantly less work focused on students who have not done so.

Significance of research

Many practical barriers to study abroad have been identified by students and universities and beyond. Although these barriers require consideration and require the implementation and use of various strategies to overcome them, they have proved to be largely surmountable. Despite the variety of approaches available to overcome these barriers (scholarships, loans, reduced fares, etc.), there are still many university students who differ from outwardly unfavorable to over-enthusiastic students who complete their undergraduate studies without international experience. This study is an attempt to understand the attitude and prohibitions of students in order to better understand the difference between the well-known benefits of study abroad programs and the relatively low participation rates.

A significant amount of research has been conducted on study abroad programs, participating students and the positive impact that these programs can have on individuals, communities and the country as a whole. Although this approach is useful and useful in many ways, it inadvertently distracts attention from a large group that may benefit from more attention: those who have not studied abroad. With this in mind, the following pages focus on both students who choose to participate and those who do not have to get an idea of ​​the corresponding similarities and differences between the two groups.

Along with a better understanding of student attitudes and limitations, which are perceived as insurmountable for foreign experience, there is an opportunity to inspire action. We hope that the results of this study will provide useful information about the perceptions and opinions of undergraduate students in relation to study abroad, as well as help consolidate and strengthen the totality of studies already conducted in this field.

Basic concepts and theories

Globalization

It is almost impossible to study the attitude of students towards studying abroad without considering the growing impact of globalization on modern society. Regardless of the wide variety of opinions regarding the subtleties of the definition of the term “globalization,” is undoubtedly a significant and effective factor in the growing importance of studying abroad.

As mentioned earlier, advances in technology, communications, and infrastructure facilitate travel and intercultural integration. As this continues, attributes such as knowledge, understanding, and cultural tolerance will be paramount to the development and maintenance of peace, trade, productivity, and the achievements of all types. Taking this into account in connection with the educational context, the market demand for these attributes requires a shift in focus and substantial updates not only in the curriculum taught at universities, but also in the way it is taught (Green; Waks, 2006).

Implementing study abroad programs is often considered one of the most effective tools for providing students with the necessary skills for survival and prosperity in a globally focused atmosphere of the 21st century (Goodman & Berdan, 2013).

H1 Most students don’t know about the program SA.

Cognitive development

In this article, it is necessary to demonstrate the link between international experience and personal valuables in order to create a solid foundation for supporting and promoting study abroad programs (Lee, Therriault & Linderholm, 2012). Fortunately, the research done on the positive effects of studying abroad has been quite extensive, covering many areas. However, despite this, some areas of a more specific nature have become less attentive and focused. One of these areas is the influence of studying abroad on creative processes.

A program abroad enhances creativity both in culture and in general.

Before this study, there were many preconceptions that people who

studied abroad, as well as people who had a strong inclination to study abroad, they had common features, such as a tendency to learn a foreign language or a lower level of ethnocentrism, which may contribute to a higher level of creativity (Goldstein & Kim, cited in Lee et al., 2012.)

H2 The experience of the SA program gives advantages in further career building abroad.

Common Barriers and Solutions

Since studying abroad has not yet become the main subject of the curriculum, it is clear that participation has led to the emergence of numerous barriers. Fortunately, many of these barriers have been reduced and often eliminated through time, research, education, and various other achievements. The next section will present some of the most common obstacles, followed by a limited discussion of possible solutions that can help overcome them. It is also worth bearing in mind that students who cite the following barriers as sufficient justification for not studying abroad can provide either “proof of an active barrier to participation or a retroactive rationale for not participating” (Salisbury, et al., 2008, p. 7).

Personal safety. Caring for personal well-being and security often accompanies the prospect of a trip to an unfamiliar country. Some students who are considering studying abroad for programs have never gone beyond their own country, which makes international travel a bit intimidating. Although this problem can significantly subside depending on the country or place in question, it can easily be overcome by observing trends in a particular area, collecting relevant information and consciously using common sense and awareness (MSU: Health nd)

H3 Financial problems are the main reason preventing you from going through the program SA.

Finance. Money is a serious problem for most people and is regularly mentioned as one of the main reasons for not working abroad. Although some amount of savings or income is beneficial, the problem is too often misunderstood as an insurmountable obstacle. Thanks to various scholarships, loans, grants and other forms of assistance, the financial barrier can be reduced to almost negligible levels (NASFA, 2003). Scholarships alone come in various forms, such as merit-based, student-specific, destination-specific, program-specific and subject-specific. Scholarships may cover some or all of the program, as well as help pay for flights, food, books, or accommodation (StudyAbroad.com, n.a.). According to one source, a little more than half of the participating students plan to use one or another form of financial assistance, while the majority of the remaining students were not aware of this possibility (see Figure 3) (ibid.).

Research methods

Since the essence of this study is mainly research in nature, the search for answers to the research questions raised above is mainly based on an inductive approach. If we take another step forward, then we can say that the abductive approach is a more relevant descriptor, since any theoretical explanation obtained retains its usefulness, since it retains control over the specific reality of this participant. Despite a greater concentration on the inductive or abductive approach, it cannot be said that some deductive elements will not be used, since in most situations it is almost impossible to strictly adhere to one process without some help from another (Bryman, 2012). An addition to this approach will be the significant use of qualitative methods that are consistent with the achievement of the goal and objectives of the study. A much smaller focus is on using quantitative methods that remain capable of providing support and balancing qualitative data.

Research Strategy

Considering the topic of the attitude and prohibition of students to study abroad, the platform, which provides a wider range of original answers and the possibility of education through previously unforeseen elements, is extremely profitable. The qualitative approach not only allows this, but also provides students with an adequate environment for conveying the subtleties of the human state through bending, tone and emotions that contribute to the quality, depth and richness of the data obtained. Perhaps the most widely used method for conducting qualitative research is polling. The popularity of this method is not the result of random occurrence, but rather the flexibility, efficiency and accuracy that are offered through the use of the interview process, which makes it ideal for this study (Bryman, 2012).

The data collected during the survey turned out to be fruitful in terms of reflecting the unique points of view of the participating students in the context of what they consider relevant and important (Bryman, 2012).

Research results and Discussions

New topics and subtopics resulting from a thematic analysis were divided into sections below to maintain clarity and simplicity. Since it turned out that they have a strong influence on subsequent areas, the effect of previous travel experiences on perception is described first. This section is followed by students’ awareness of the opportunities available as a result of such reasoning. Then the discourse moves on to two main areas of attention, the first of which defines various forms of value, which are perceived as related to the curriculum, and ends with a discussion of the obstacles that prevent participation.

21st Century higher education institutions encounter remarkable social, economic, and technological transformations guaranteed to transform students’ educational experience substantially. Analysts ought to proceed with monitoring contemporary and emerging technologies as a way of seeing what equipment have considerable abilities in the classroom, and how open-minded students are to utilizing the identified tools. This assessment takes out a single component of the crucial technological switch within universities by examining how social media is being used in higher education. The current study has reviewed the opportunities linked to the usage of social media tools within classrooms without considering the opinions students have concerning its importance in promoting their educational experience. The article aims at offering an understanding of how educators can decisively include social media tools in the classroom, and how social media usage has the potential of affecting student’s opinion of the instructor and the learning institution. In contrast, this article produced essential outcomes revealing that acceptance to utilizing social media in education, disclose interactive and information purpose for its use, besides offering logical and pedagogical meaning, there are limitations associated with the replication, sample, and generalization of results.

Introduction

The researchers analysed a necessary topic, focusing on student’s perspectives on social media as essential pedagogical equipment. Undergraduate students in sizeable, independent universities pursuing marketing courses were studied concerning their social media usage, choice, and individual opinions concerning the use of social media in higher education. Further qualitative information gathering with students probed into influence for social media use in education, including instructors’ and university’ perspectives (Darvishi, 2020). The paper has a standard and captivating introduction because of its ‘funnel method’ nature. The approach of social media might be significant for every student as it can enable quick access and information retaining, despite being in school or not. However, Stacy Neier1 and Linda Tuncay Zayer (2015) failed to identify and describe their school of thought they considered in their assessment. Such an absence of details can make it hard to replicate their study as a way of further expanding the survey on this type of issue.

Methods

Exceptional methods were used in this survey even though there are limitations to the results. Foremost, the study examined various areas relevant to marketing education.

“Undergraduate students in a midsized, private university taking a marketing course were surveyed about their social media usage and preferences as well as their perceptions regarding the use of social media in higher education” (Stacy and Linda, p. 1, 2015). Further qualitative and quantitative data collections were considered; however, with the small sampled subjects to that were studied. It is challenging to write in generalities about the results to the greater student demographic. In addition, the participants in this survey were from a mid-sized university, which makes it difficult to generalize the outcomes to the greater student demographic. While Stacy and Linda (2015) contend that the study emphasizes on providing empirical awareness for any educator or university seeking to utilize social media, and that the assessment needs to be replicated with a greater population including various learning institutions, the authors failed to discuss how such factors of their survey could be limited.

Quantitative along with qualitative methods should both provide a comprehensive image of the way study subjects perceive social media usage in education (Sadowski, et al, 2017). Limiting research in one region is not worth providing the results that can be used to make a final and generalized conclusion. For instance, the authors were restricted their study in private university and considering a single course, “marketing course were surveyed about their social media usage as well as their perceptions on the use of social media tools in the education.” It consisted of rounds of data collections, former involving “138 surveys completed during Spring 2012,” and the latter involving “135 surveys was collected during Spring 2013” (p. 135). But these are significant counts that can be done from both public and private higher learning institutions before coming into a generalized conclusion.

Results

While applying a qualitative approach, Stacy and Linda consider using in-depth interviews to obtain a detailed view from the students and the influence that compels them to prefer social media in education. They looked for answers to their “grand-tour” questions concerning the topic, as they interviewed not more than thirteen undergraduate students, based on an interview structure championed by who they referring to as “by McCracken (1988).” Such a good strategy ought to be used to examine participant’s experiences and sincerity to the “use of social media in education,” further outline the motive behind social media use as far as education is concerned. More indicatively, it should give a depth evaluation; add onto the quantitative data with quantitative information, worth presenting fine distinction on participants’ (students) stories related to their influences on the topic concerned. Lastly, the research needs to portray student’s perspectives on the way “social media use affects perceptions of instructors and universities.” (Lowe & Laffey, 2011). Each of the mentioned elements is significant to have a whole detained examination of the issue at hand.

Results do not prove any specific school of thought. First, there are possible limitations of the survey. For instance, each student in study attended the same institution, and this was the case with the instructors picked as sample. Participants’ opinions of using social media in education had the possibility of being impacted by the social media attempt their respective institutions are utilizing, and what the current brand perspectives are about the institutions (Kim, 2017). That is, for instance, rather than referring to the institution collectively, they would have referenced their personal universities when expressing their opinions concerning brand perspective along with social media.

Discussion

The outcomes suggested that even though students may not persistently show complete awareness of social media tools, the information from the study suggests that there exists the desire to utilize different classifications of social media. To make an extension of the study implications for the entire high education fraternity, a more investigative qualitative evaluation concerned with the opinions of the instructors and universities using social media, needed to be done. The authors did not target using direct quantification to evaluate the productiveness of the utilizing social media in education. However, participant’s opinions are one of the various considerations for instructors to think of when making the decision to include or exclude these tools in classrooms (Abrahim,et al.,2018). A more extensive survey is required using direct quantification of success and fit for various forms of courses, including teaching strategies, as a way of helping educators in their decisions in utilizing social media for educational roles.

Forthcoming assessment is required to establish and expand the investigative evaluation on the connection between social media usage and the way students see universities. The entire information gathering failed to look after grouping students based on personal character or learning abilities. Instead, the role of the survey involved provision of a wide awareness of students’ perspectives on the use of social media in education (Thurnell-Read, Brown and Long, 572, 2018). The authors admit that the “Past research details how different learning styles are linked to web-enabled teaching methods and the future research should extend their works besides exploring in more depth how specific learning styles match up to preferences for the use of social media tools in education.” Lastly, the research did not directly address engagement.

Engagement, as a term refers to the “the time and effort students devote to activities that are linked to desired outcomes of college and what institutions do to induce students to participate in these activities” (Kuh, 2009, p. 693). Garcias, et al (pp. 2865-2874) outline that less studies in higher learning institutions trie to link social media use with participation but that participation is essential element as far as learning is concerned. In fact, various researcher have proved that positive association between social media usage and participation; even though such is explained in the context if certain equipment (Sweet-Cushman, 763-770, 2019). Some researchers do not find necessary association between “Twitter and engagement,” for instance (Welch & Bonnan-White, 2012). In as much as this study is worthwhile, the forthcoming one ought to go past weighing engagement as it is associated to a particular branded social media tools and exploring a more comprehensive image of the connection between social media usage and students participation in it. Notably, this evaluation offers a ground on which further exploration of the concerned issue as detailed in the article “students’ general perceptions regarding social media in education.”

Conclusion

This article was grounded on a necessary topic in higher education, and researchers should find solution to improve the concern. One of the challenges students encounter, as far as online or use of social media tools are concerned is the social influence, and they need to be guided on how to maximize such for their own academic advantage. This study failed to sufficiently demonstrate how these students can benefit academically after being guided on how to use the various social media tools. Instead the focus was on perceptions, which is not bad, but more could be done about this. In addition, the small sample size and inadequate diversity among participants restricts generalization of the findings. The coming researches should consider diversity as a necessary element to have a more grounded proof for the entire research being conduct.

As previously stated in the introduction the article I have chosen to critically analyse with the guide of Coughlan, Cronin, and Ryan (2007) critiquing framework is the article ‘Perceptions and experiences of community first responders on their role and relationships: a qualitative interview study. This article was written by Viet-Hai Phung, Ian Trueman, Fiona Togher, Roderick Ormer and Aloysius Niroshan Siriwardena.

For Critiquing purposes, I will use CCR (2007) when referring to Coughlan, Cronin, and Ryan (2007).

Writing Style

CCR (2007) asks the question is the writing style of the article I am critiquing, well written, grammatically correct, does it avoid any jargon and is it well laid out? My answer to that is because I could not find any evidence to argue the question, I then compared it to another article written by Peter Kindness (2014) An insight into the demands and stressors experienced by Community First Responders. To which I found that they were both easy to read, well written and grammatically correct and avoided any jargon. When comparing the way, the article I am critiquing was laid out and organised I found the article I am comparing it to a lot easier to read due to the way it was laid out, as well as the Arial font, being a lot bolder making it stand out more.

Author/s

Do I think it’s important for the author/s to have a field of knowledge in the paper I have decided to critique, my answer is yes because in my opinion when reading a journal, it would make it easier to read and understand knowing that the researcher/author had some knowledge on the specific paper he/she chose to write about. Auburn University (2019) back up what I am saying, It is imperative to think about the thought processes and capabilities of writers, they proceed to state that it’s an author’s business to attempt and persuade the reader that their perspective is the correct one. CCR (2007) is asking the do the researchers who have been associated in the research and writing of the journal that I have chosen to critique, have the qualifications or knowledge in the field that they are writing about. The answer I have come up with after reading the paper is, not all of them do. How do I know this, and what evidence do I have to back this up. Under the heading Data Collection and Analysis found on page 2 of the journal, it says researchers Viet-Hai Phung and Fiona Togher have experience and knowledge in qualitative interviews, and along with researcher Aloysius Niroshan Siriwardena also have knowledge in analysing qualitative data. The University of Lincoln (2017) and Researchgate (2019) back the journals claim, and that both researchers do have the knowledge and expertise in qualitative research, furthermore Researchgate (2019) also confirms Niroshans experience in the field of qualitative research all which can be found on their website. Continuing with the authors, the journal then goes on to say Ian Trueman is a trained Community First Responder to which I was not able to find any evidence confirming he is, and that Roderick Orner is a Consultant Psychologist, but the journal does not say whether they have any background in the research field. However, the University of Lincoln (2018) does give information on Ian Trueman including his skills and expertise, to which none of them involves qualitative research. ResearchGate (2019) continues to share the information of Roderick Orner and does state he has a background in psychology but doesn’t give any information on any research background.

Report Title

CCR (2007) asks is the report title clear and unambiguous?. One of the reasons that attracted me to the journal I opted to critique was the title. It was bold, big, not too long and easy to read. After reading the article I found that the title was not misleading, it was clear and accurate. When researching to find any evidence that went against what I was saying, I was unable to find anything. So, my next option was to find some evidence to back up my opinion. What makes a good report title, Kulkarni (2013) says a research title should be able, to sum up, the paper in a few words, and able to catch the reader’s attention. Meehan (1999) continues in an online journal, that a title should be no less than ten and no more than fifteen words. Parahoo (2006) carries it on by saying if a title is too long or short, it can be confusing and misleading to the reader. Hartley James (2005) agrees with both by going on to say the title is the part of the paper that is read the most, and if the title is too long there will be a lot of unnecessary words, and then finishes of by saying if it’s too short it won’t tell the reader what is being studied.

Abstract

According to Slade (2000), an abstract is a precise summary of your entire paper. Slade (2007) continues by saying your abstract should be a brief but precise statement, followed by a description, method, findings, and conclusion. CCR (2007) questions, does the abstract of my journal offer a clear overview including a sample, methodology, findings and recommendations. On reading the journal I found the background, discussion, and conclusion was accurate and well written. From a negative point of view, the method and result contained some evidence of jargon, which I didn’t understand and took me away from the journal briefly whilst I found out what the meaning of the jargon was. In my opinion, an abstract should be easy to read and understand, to avoid any misunderstanding. Cole (2018) backs my opinion up by stating an abstract should avoid acronyms as well as jargon. This is supported further by Elsvie (2019) who says too much jargon makes an abstract difficult and even harder to understand.

The phenomenon of interest /Purpose/significance of the study

CCR (2007) are asking is the phenomenon to be studied clearly identified, and consistent. The phenomenon in the journal to which I am reading is the Perceptions and experiences of a community first responders (CFR) on their role and relationships. Van de Ven (2016) backs me up by saying, a research phenomenon may be a problem, issue, or topic that is a selected subject, of an investigation. CCR (2007) then go on to question, is the purpose of the study or research clearly recognised. The significance of the study in the journal is to explore the background of CFR through a qualitative interview and finding ways of improving relations within the ambulance service and the public. Admin (2018) supports this by signifying that it is critical to a paper to show the significance of the study so that the person who reads, knows and understands the reasons for the research.

Literature Review

What is a literature review.? According to Boote & Belle (2005), a literature review is an appraised report of studies found in the literature, associated with your selected study. CCR (2007) have asked has a literature review been undertaken. Although there is no evidence saying there hasn’t, in my opinion, one has been undertaken. Viet – Hai Phung and the other authors involved in the journal have backed up what Boote & Belle (2005) said. The abstract alone gives a good insight into what the literature review is by covering, the main topic, background, results, discussion, and conclusion. Viet – Hai Phung further backs that up by going more in depth, about the findings further into the journal. All data and research that was done for the journal are well referenced in the study. CCR (2007) does the literature review meet the philosophical underpinnings of the study? Scotland (2012) explains what elements are usually involved in when trying to decide what the philosophical underpinnings are. Scotland (2012) names the elements as, ontology, epistemology, and methodology. Moon & Blackman (2014) gives a brief insight to ontology saying the researcher must decide, does it exist, how certain they can be about the existence, and then finally decide what is real. Moon & Blackman (2014) then say that epistemology is concerned with all aspects of validity, scope, and methods of acquiring knowledge. Brookshire (2018) finishes off with methodology by calling it a general research strategy, that outlines the way research is to be undertaken. To my knowledge to which I am not an expert in this field, I do think the philosophical underpinnings were met. The authors/researchers have gone into a lot a detail where they talk about the (CFR) by saying what they do, why they do it, what is involved. The authors then talk about (CFR) schemes, and that they have been supporting pre-hospital care and working alongside the ambulance service since 1990, s. The researchers then tell the reader how they have conducted and gathered the information, through a qualitative interview study. All participants interviewed, were (CFR,s) from a single rural scheme. Their age ranged from 18 to 74 and had different levels of experience. The authors then finished off by revealing how the data was collected, and analysed, the researcher’s background who conducted the research and finished off by announcing the results they found.

Theoretical Framework CCR (2007) wants to know is the theoretical framework identified, and appropriate for this journal. Anfara & Mertz 2006) highlights the process of authors theoretical framework to their own research. Anfara & Mertz (2006) point out how Merriam (2006) defines the theoretical framework as the “tailoring” component in the study. Merriam (2006) continues to say that the framework in the case being studied will determine the problem that is being investigated, the specific research questions being asked, the particular data that was collected and how it was analysed and interpreted. Viet – Hai Phung adapts a similar approach in this journal, by explaining what the research is about, the methods they intend to use to obtain all the information. Viet – Hai Phung then finishes off by revealing the results and conclusion on what was found.

Sample

Fossey (2002) talks about sampling in qualitative research and what you should be looking for when reading a paper. Fossey (2002) says participants chosen for the research will usually have experience in the area of the study. Fossey (2002) goes on further by stating, samples are often small, and all data gathered from participants can offer a piece of significant information on the phenomenon. In my opinion, the sample size, method, and all the participants identified were identified properly, and suitable for the study. The authors/researchers have said, they interviewed participants of various ages, sex and length of experience. They go on to say initially 23 (CFR, s) showed interest, in taking part in the study, but only 16 went through with it. Under the heading Data collection, and analysis. Each interview was semi-structured, taking around 30 to 90 minutes to conduct. The researchers go on, insisting interviews were subsequently transcribed verbatim, and coded thematically in NVivo 10, using framework analysis.

Ethical considerations

Parahoo (2006) says in qualitative research, the most common way of collecting data is by the way of interviews, and participant observations. Parahoo (2006) goes on by saying, participants involved in the study will usually be known to the researchers, so anonymity won’t be possible. Parahoo (2006) finishes off by insisting the researcher must reassure the participants that their identities will not be revealed and that any data collected will not be disclosed to any third party. Beauchamp & Childress (2001) talks more about ethical considerations, by maintaining that all participants should have the right to give informed consent. Furthermore, they should be fully aware of what the study is about, and the purpose for it. Beauchamp & Childress (2001) finishes by saying the participants should also be made aware of the information being sought, and how they intend to use it. Burns & Grove (1999) finish the discussion on ethical considerations saying that an ethics committee review board should be sought before any research should commence.

CCR (2007) wants to know, was the participant fully informed about the nature of the study. Was confidentiality guaranteed, and were they protected from any harm. Lastly, did the researchers get approval from the ethics committee. My answer to CCR (2007), yes they did gain approval ethics committee, it is printed in the article that the study received ethical approval, from the University of Lincoln School of Health and Social Care ethics committee. Were all participants aware of the nature of the study, were they protected, and was their confidentiality guaranteed?. I would like to say yes, otherwise, they wouldn’t have got past the ethics committee, but at no point in the article do they state this. Unfortunately, I was unable to find any evidence to confirm that it wasn’t.

As previously stated in the introduction the article I have chosen to critically analyse with the guide of Coughlan, Cronin, and Ryan (2007) critiquing framework is the article ‘Perceptions and experiences of community first responders on their role and relationships: a qualitative interview study. This article was written by Viet-Hai Phung, Ian Trueman, Fiona Togher, Roderick Ormer and Aloysius Niroshan Siriwardena.

For Critiquing purposes, I will use CCR (2007) when referring to Coughlan, Cronin, and Ryan (2007).

Writing Style

CCR (2007) asks the question is the writing style of the article I am critiquing, well written, grammatically correct, does it avoid any jargon and is it well laid out? My answer to that is because I could not find any evidence to argue the question, I then compared it to another article written by Peter Kindness (2014) An insight into the demands and stressors experienced by Community First Responders. To which I found that they were both easy to read, well written and grammatically correct and avoided any jargon. When comparing the way, the article I am critiquing was laid out and organised I found the article I am comparing it to a lot easier to read due to the way it was laid out, as well as the Arial font, being a lot bolder making it stand out more.

Author/s

Do I think it’s important for the author/s to have a field of knowledge in the paper I have decided to critique, my answer is yes because in my opinion when reading a journal, it would make it easier to read and understand knowing that the researcher/author had some knowledge on the specific paper he/she chose to write about. Auburn University (2019) back up what I am saying, It is imperative to think about the thought processes and capabilities of writers, they proceed to state that it’s an author’s business to attempt and persuade the reader that their perspective is the correct one. CCR (2007) is asking the do the researchers who have been associated in the research and writing of the journal that I have chosen to critique, have the qualifications or knowledge in the field that they are writing about. The answer I have come up with after reading the paper is, not all of them do. How do I know this, and what evidence do I have to back this up. Under the heading Data Collection and Analysis found on page 2 of the journal, it says researchers Viet-Hai Phung and Fiona Togher have experience and knowledge in qualitative interviews, and along with researcher Aloysius Niroshan Siriwardena also have knowledge in analysing qualitative data. The University of Lincoln (2017) and Researchgate (2019) back the journals claim, and that both researchers do have the knowledge and expertise in qualitative research, furthermore Researchgate (2019) also confirms Niroshans experience in the field of qualitative research all which can be found on their website. Continuing with the authors, the journal then goes on to say Ian Trueman is a trained Community First Responder to which I was not able to find any evidence confirming he is, and that Roderick Orner is a Consultant Psychologist, but the journal does not say whether they have any background in the research field. However, the University of Lincoln (2018) does give information on Ian Trueman including his skills and expertise, to which none of them involves qualitative research. ResearchGate (2019) continues to share the information of Roderick Orner and does state he has a background in psychology but doesn’t give any information on any research background.

Report Title

CCR (2007) asks is the report title clear and unambiguous?. One of the reasons that attracted me to the journal I opted to critique was the title. It was bold, big, not too long and easy to read. After reading the article I found that the title was not misleading, it was clear and accurate. When researching to find any evidence that went against what I was saying, I was unable to find anything. So, my next option was to find some evidence to back up my opinion. What makes a good report title, Kulkarni (2013) says a research title should be able, to sum up, the paper in a few words, and able to catch the reader’s attention. Meehan (1999) continues in an online journal, that a title should be no less than ten and no more than fifteen words. Parahoo (2006) carries it on by saying if a title is too long or short, it can be confusing and misleading to the reader. Hartley James (2005) agrees with both by going on to say the title is the part of the paper that is read the most, and if the title is too long there will be a lot of unnecessary words, and then finishes of by saying if it’s too short it won’t tell the reader what is being studied.

Abstract

According to Slade (2000), an abstract is a precise summary of your entire paper. Slade (2007) continues by saying your abstract should be a brief but precise statement, followed by a description, method, findings, and conclusion. CCR (2007) questions, does the abstract of my journal offer a clear overview including a sample, methodology, findings and recommendations. On reading the journal I found the background, discussion, and conclusion was accurate and well written. From a negative point of view, the method and result contained some evidence of jargon, which I didn’t understand and took me away from the journal briefly whilst I found out what the meaning of the jargon was. In my opinion, an abstract should be easy to read and understand, to avoid any misunderstanding. Cole (2018) backs my opinion up by stating an abstract should avoid acronyms as well as jargon. This is supported further by Elsvie (2019) who says too much jargon makes an abstract difficult and even harder to understand.

The phenomenon of interest /Purpose/significance of the study

CCR (2007) are asking is the phenomenon to be studied clearly identified, and consistent. The phenomenon in the journal to which I am reading is the Perceptions and experiences of a community first responders (CFR) on their role and relationships. Van de Ven (2016) backs me up by saying, a research phenomenon may be a problem, issue, or topic that is a selected subject, of an investigation. CCR (2007) then go on to question, is the purpose of the study or research clearly recognised. The significance of the study in the journal is to explore the background of CFR through a qualitative interview and finding ways of improving relations within the ambulance service and the public. Admin (2018) supports this by signifying that it is critical to a paper to show the significance of the study so that the person who reads, knows and understands the reasons for the research.

Literature Review

What is a literature review.? According to Boote & Belle (2005), a literature review is an appraised report of studies found in the literature, associated with your selected study. CCR (2007) have asked has a literature review been undertaken. Although there is no evidence saying there hasn’t, in my opinion, one has been undertaken. Viet – Hai Phung and the other authors involved in the journal have backed up what Boote & Belle (2005) said. The abstract alone gives a good insight into what the literature review is by covering, the main topic, background, results, discussion, and conclusion. Viet – Hai Phung further backs that up by going more in depth, about the findings further into the journal. All data and research that was done for the journal are well referenced in the study. CCR (2007) does the literature review meet the philosophical underpinnings of the study? Scotland (2012) explains what elements are usually involved in when trying to decide what the philosophical underpinnings are. Scotland (2012) names the elements as, ontology, epistemology, and methodology. Moon & Blackman (2014) gives a brief insight to ontology saying the researcher must decide, does it exist, how certain they can be about the existence, and then finally decide what is real. Moon & Blackman (2014) then say that epistemology is concerned with all aspects of validity, scope, and methods of acquiring knowledge. Brookshire (2018) finishes off with methodology by calling it a general research strategy, that outlines the way research is to be undertaken. To my knowledge to which I am not an expert in this field, I do think the philosophical underpinnings were met. The authors/researchers have gone into a lot a detail where they talk about the (CFR) by saying what they do, why they do it, what is involved. The authors then talk about (CFR) schemes, and that they have been supporting pre-hospital care and working alongside the ambulance service since 1990, s. The researchers then tell the reader how they have conducted and gathered the information, through a qualitative interview study. All participants interviewed, were (CFR,s) from a single rural scheme. Their age ranged from 18 to 74 and had different levels of experience. The authors then finished off by revealing how the data was collected, and analysed, the researcher’s background who conducted the research and finished off by announcing the results they found.

Theoretical Framework CCR (2007) wants to know is the theoretical framework identified, and appropriate for this journal. Anfara & Mertz 2006) highlights the process of authors theoretical framework to their own research. Anfara & Mertz (2006) point out how Merriam (2006) defines the theoretical framework as the “tailoring” component in the study. Merriam (2006) continues to say that the framework in the case being studied will determine the problem that is being investigated, the specific research questions being asked, the particular data that was collected and how it was analysed and interpreted. Viet – Hai Phung adapts a similar approach in this journal, by explaining what the research is about, the methods they intend to use to obtain all the information. Viet – Hai Phung then finishes off by revealing the results and conclusion on what was found.

Sample

Fossey (2002) talks about sampling in qualitative research and what you should be looking for when reading a paper. Fossey (2002) says participants chosen for the research will usually have experience in the area of the study. Fossey (2002) goes on further by stating, samples are often small, and all data gathered from participants can offer a piece of significant information on the phenomenon. In my opinion, the sample size, method, and all the participants identified were identified properly, and suitable for the study. The authors/researchers have said, they interviewed participants of various ages, sex and length of experience. They go on to say initially 23 (CFR, s) showed interest, in taking part in the study, but only 16 went through with it. Under the heading Data collection, and analysis. Each interview was semi-structured, taking around 30 to 90 minutes to conduct. The researchers go on, insisting interviews were subsequently transcribed verbatim, and coded thematically in NVivo 10, using framework analysis.

Ethical considerations

Parahoo (2006) says in qualitative research, the most common way of collecting data is by the way of interviews, and participant observations. Parahoo (2006) goes on by saying, participants involved in the study will usually be known to the researchers, so anonymity won’t be possible. Parahoo (2006) finishes off by insisting the researcher must reassure the participants that their identities will not be revealed and that any data collected will not be disclosed to any third party. Beauchamp & Childress (2001) talks more about ethical considerations, by maintaining that all participants should have the right to give informed consent. Furthermore, they should be fully aware of what the study is about, and the purpose for it. Beauchamp & Childress (2001) finishes by saying the participants should also be made aware of the information being sought, and how they intend to use it. Burns & Grove (1999) finish the discussion on ethical considerations saying that an ethics committee review board should be sought before any research should commence.

CCR (2007) wants to know, was the participant fully informed about the nature of the study. Was confidentiality guaranteed, and were they protected from any harm. Lastly, did the researchers get approval from the ethics committee. My answer to CCR (2007), yes they did gain approval ethics committee, it is printed in the article that the study received ethical approval, from the University of Lincoln School of Health and Social Care ethics committee. Were all participants aware of the nature of the study, were they protected, and was their confidentiality guaranteed?. I would like to say yes, otherwise, they wouldn’t have got past the ethics committee, but at no point in the article do they state this. Unfortunately, I was unable to find any evidence to confirm that it wasn’t.