Professional Inquiry And Research Strategy

Understanding PLP and its importance in education

Professional inquiry is one of the most important aspects of research and discussion. The recent pandemic has recreated as well as reshaped the education system and it has led to huge amounts of change. This has been done in the manner in which universities and schools have structured the teaching and learning. Everyone in the academy and the field of academy must choose a proper professional enquiry that will help them and their learning throughout their life. It is generally known as the professional learning and performance framework and the main thought process behind PLP is to give cultivation to a culture of collaborative enquiry that helps the people in the academic industry to pursue their professional excellence. Professional inquiry needs to be improved and given more importance so that there are authentic evidences of the research. When there are, questions, which arise about some form of assessment, educators generally, turn to reliable sources of research or evaluate evidence to answer that question (Reid, et al 2018). There needs to be proper research for well-designed studies that has been published in reputed journals. When conducting an enquiry into a research study or researching about policies and practices, the researchers have to see the credibility of the people. There has to be a proper consideration of established the services such as education resources information Centre. There needs to be proper understanding of practices and policies on the opinions of books as well as Educational journals. It should not be taken from social media or the internet. This paper is going to answer different questions about a professional inquiry about three different articles and understand the aspects of the research strategy and the improvements that can be made in the strategies.  

The first paper, which will be studied, is a Dialectical Approach to Strategic Planning written by Mason. This paper generally develops a new form of approach to the process of planning. This paper starts by the examination of a critical role, which is played by the assumption of the planner. This paper is relevant in the professional development because it addresses the questions of dialectical approach. It is studied in the research by the  evaluation of the main two key concepts of the planning technique or firstly that it should expose the assumptions which are underlying an already proposed plan so that the management can understand the plan and secondly it should suggest innovative assumptions upon which the planning can proceed. Already existing techniques generally fail to fulfil this criteria as of planning a process (Mason, 1969). Therefore, there has to be a dialectical approach, which is proposed in this paper, and it tries to satisfy the stated criteria above. The field of corporate strategic planning was chosen in this paper to test the ground for this new approach. There was evidence, which was obtained through the experimentation concerning RMK abrasives strategic planning problem. The main research question in this paper is to see the new methods of strategic planning and process so that it can satisfy the assumptions of the planner and form a new approach to the planning process (Whitaker and Atkinson, 2019).

Analyzing Mason's Dialectical Approach to Strategic Planning

The concept of bringing inclusion to a particular argument or a discourse is extremely important. After several weeks following the proper presentation the dialectical study has started in this experiment. There was a set of particular assumptions which was implemented to plan and bring in closer to the argument. This is to say that there was a set of assumptions that was created that had the proper aspects to use and interpret the data with a proper conclusion. For instance , one of the assumptions which was underlying the planning process was that most of the people staying in the foreign countries were generally motivated to improve their personal standard of living. They also had a perception of the company‘s entry into their own economy as satisfying this need of increasing the social status. Only quantitative analysis is not applicable for a proper research study because both qualitative and quantitative analysis is important to understand all the facets of research (Mason, 1969). This paper had taken proper measures to take interviews as well as research articles and announcements of people to find evidence to substantiate the fact that several members of the corporation did believe the point of  perspective which was created forth by the plan. The case interviews were the quantitative analysis and the research or the public announcement and the magazine articles were the qualitative analysis, which both helped in the progress of the research. There were also indications that some of the executives of the company had favoured the company concentrating the efforts on domestic market and the emphasis of technological advancement. Therefore, there was a counter plan, which was related to domestic technologically oriented applications and the set of assumptions that is formulated in a way that gave the argument a closure. This form of dialectical presentation gives innovation by stimulating the thought process. The two very well developed perceptions pulls the researchers to both forms of assumptions at the same time. The researchers will start to ask questions of how they can gain the best of both assumptions. It becomes the main catalyst for creation of the best plan in order to improve the company or organisation. It gives proper alternatives for a proper solution and reconsiders the corporate goals. Every single organisational design has several disadvantages as well as advantages (Mason, 1969). The main findings and dialectical approach to the planning of a strategy also has advantages and disadvantages. But in these cases there are four circumstances which make the dialectical method a very advantages aspect. These four circumstances are namely where the management is not aware of a significant assumption and is doubtful to adopt both appropriate assumptions and choose a particular plan. In this scenario there is no proper agreement on the several assumptions among the manager as well as the planner. The second is when management agrees and acknowledges the fact that there are more than one interpretations of the data which creates different possibilities and there has to be a choice that has to be made by the organisation. The third is in the case of decision-making with a certain solution and the management has to take the advice of the planner to see the main assumptions upon which the problem can be solved. Lastly the management believes that the cost which is expected and associated with the development of the plan and account to plan as well as the involvement of the development of a new set of assumptions is lesser than the expected cost of the error of an advisor. There needs to be further exploration of the other alternative questions and the principals of dialectical approach.

Importance of credible research and need for both qualitative and quantitative analyses

The second paper is named Dialectical enquiry: A structured qualitative research method. This paper presents dialectical inquiry as a proper structured qualitative research method for the study of what is the current models of organisational process. This is why it is important for professional development. The research studies the phenomenon by proper method is generally implemented through secondary data on the transfer of technology and subject matter experts in a huge organisation compile it. The dialectical inquiry generally used assumption that the instrument of a dialectical structure will be able to produce other theories which can be used by organisations (Berniker and McNabb, 2006). There were three models which were discovered through the research of the data. Each and every model was analysed with relation to the other two models and there were assumptions as well as counter assumptions which had come up. It has been seen that each model gives the proper truth and logical explanation is but it is not complete and it would fail due to contradictions in the internal data (Macagno, 2018).

The main  concepts of dialectical inquiry on discovery generally forces the resources to abandon some of those assumptions. Assume the proper presence of contradicting models and they have to emerge from the already given data. The method of study in this research of dialectical enquiry General imposes a Meta theoretical framework on the process of research. Dialectical enquiry generally makes the ontological assumption of the fact that the organisational actors can function with the sources of multiple models. The meta theoretical structure which is given by a dialectical enquiry is not concerned with the content inside the managerial models but it is concerned with the structure of that model. The main point is that by keeping popular models inside an already present structure the meaning as well as the content becomes evident. For example, if there is an organisation process as a shared aspect cognitive map of all the understandings then that organisational process will accumulate the history of the previous planning which will make the understanding more tacit. The main findings here are the aspect of discovery as well as imposition generally suggests conflicts in the processes of enquiry. Aspect of discovery generally means enquiry from the inside and the aspect of imposition means a priori category. The internal validity meets the main criteria, which is suggested by Winter because it represents the proper meaning of as well as the events of particular individuals as well as group of researchers. The three main modes of technology were very useful and believable and it  presented the data properly. Internal validity does not necessarily imply a special frame of reference (Berniker and McNabb, 2006). There might be other set of alternative models which can also give proper demonstration of the validity and provide newer insights to the complexity of technology transfer. Winter also argues the fact that external validity is not as significant to qualitative researchers as internal validity. The proper quality findings are best related to the creation of proper theories. But in this paper the authors have disagreed and said that the external validity has been proved to be very important in any research study. The conclusions of this paper had addressed two main forms of concern. Those were the outcomes and directed enquiry as a qualitative research method (Richards, 2019). The effort of research was successful and the researchers were successful in explaining the team interview data to the management. The members of engineering management quality improvement team were successful in defining initiatives in the form of the models that were used and see the limitations and challenges of those models. There was no demonstration of the efficacy of dialectical enquiry in different forms of scenarios. This research has represented a unique case in the social as well as organisational environment. The focus was not on the interactions of the organisation but it was on a particular individual process (Soedirgo and Glas, 2020). The outcome of the investigation meets the expectations of the research question because both qualitative and quantitative analysis was used. There was also the usage of dialectical enquiry in the investigation. This model is useful in the research process of direct deal enquiry but it cannot be said to be a scientific construct. It is a theory which is in use by organisational members. It is not connected to any academic theories of organisation. The purpose of the model and the definition was only to give a proper fulcrum for developing a set of assumptions that would define each and every model. The main research goal was to create an explicit content so that organisational actors could understand the challenges of technology transfer. There were two main models which were namely the people model where the technology transfer had occurred when a person expert in the technological field was assigned to a single program and the produced outcomes in that particular program. The second was the communication model where the technology transfer was created to become a communication process which was affected through the record of research and development through databases and seminars. This was more of a creative and iterated process rather than a scientific process (Berniker and McNabb, 2006). All the assumptions of every single model were tested with each other to formulate other counter assumptions. These had given a better clarification of the original planning and assumptions that were made. This was done to distinguish each and every model from each other and understand the strengths and weaknesses of all the models. The three models that would compete with each other were People mover model, Communications model and  Majority of technology model. It was seen that if each model had defined an important truth but all the models were in conflict with each other, then each model was not complete (Lazard and McAvoy, 2020).

The final article is by Roni Berger and it is named Now I see it, now I don’t: Researchers position and reflexivity in qualitative research. This article is about the effects of reflexivity of the researcher’s social position which can be gender, race, age immigration status or sexual orientation as well as political and personal beliefs. This evaluation of the race, culture and biases important for the professional development. This is studied in the research and addressed  because reflexivity is a huge strategy for quality control in qualitative analysis and it also helps in understanding of how the analysis can impact the experiences and characteristics of the researcher and vice versa. There are benefits as well as challenges to the aspect of reflexivity under three types of position of the researcher and these are illustrated in this paper through different examples. The main concepts and  three scenarios are firstly when reflexivity is seen as the researcher is sharing the experiences of the participants in the study. There is also reflexivity when the researcher goes from the position of an outsider to the position of an internal researcher in the course of the study and finally reflexivity when the researcher does not have any personal  similarity and experience with what is being researched. The different strategies in this paper are offered for creating benefits of the familiarity of the researcher with the subject and to eliminate any negative effects. The main goal of this article is to give argument and illustrate the fact that reflexivity in a qualitative research is influenced by whether the person doing the research has any part in the topic of the research and experience of the participant. Reflexivity has become appreciated and recognised as a significant strategy in the proper process of creating knowledge by using quality research method. For example in the journal Forum: qualitative research had dedicated a full research and paper to the subjectivity as well as reflexivity in qualitative research and there was no problems found in the qualitative methods. The arguments and questions related to reflexivity are a part and parcel of the bigger discourse about ontological as well as epistemological components of the self. Researchers also need to focus on the knowledge of the sales as well as sensitivity in order to understand the role of the individual self in a proper research and creation of knowledge. There needs to be proper self-monitoring of the personal experiences and personal beliefs so that it does not affect the research in a negative way and there is a balance which is maintained between personal as well as universal aspects during research.           

This article is only focused on one particular aspect of understanding reflexivity in an individual context. This was seen in the context of how the position of the researcher in relation to the population group and the problems under the research might affect the process of the research and the position of analysis that the researcher chooses to take. This article gives addition to the research study as a unique contribution to the recognition in the field of qualitative research and the effects that the philosophy of a researcher can have on the research. This research is important because it has been seen that no discourse and research is ever free of stereotypes and viruses as well as assumptions and the influence of the personality of the researcher cannot be separated from the research (Berger, 2015).

The main findings of this research are that Reflexivity is the proper acknowledgement by the researcher that their own biases and actions will have an impact on the meaning as well as the formation of the investigation. There is also the inclusion of the experience of the researcher, which might be similar to the subject of research or might not be similar to it (Anderson, 2021). The degree to which the researcher’s personal familiarity with experience affects the collection of the data helps in the drawing of the conclusion. Reflexivity in the researching of the experience of participants in the topics of immigration or women’s studies generally helps to address the contradictions, which are inherent in the situation. This form of familiarity might also enable a better in-depth understanding of the perception of the participants and interpretation of the individual experiences and which might be impossible in the absence of the familiarity. Even so, at the same time, the researcher has to maintain a neutral and alert stance in order to avoid projecting their own incidents and experiences so that there is no bias and stereotype in the research process. The researcher has to remain neutral so that the experience of the participant is given more importance (Berger, 2015). The knowledge of sensory problems and incidents also enables the dancing of the collaborative nature of the information, which is produced by the research.

Therefore the reflexivity which is under the situations of change positions from outside or into insider which is happened in reported step family‘s research gives a proper opportunity to have more understanding of the impact of position on the research process and the result of the study.  It is also very important to understand that the position of the researcher might be dynamic and might not be static and this will affect the balance in the research process. This is the reason that the researchers have to ask proper questions to themselves about the relation of the study and the repercussions of the position of the research. The researchers have to be aware that they do not put their personal experiences and mix them with the participant’s experiences (Berger, 2015).

There for they have to be measures that can be helpful in increasing and maintaining the proper awareness of the researcher so that the researcher does not put their own experiences with the participants experiences. This article has given an opening to the conversation about reflexivity and the position of the researcher which can be further examined in future research discourses. The final step to the exploration of this topic would be in the sociocultural context. It is very important to undergo the sort of personal and professional enquiries while doing research so that it has authenticity and it can be used for future references.

References

Anderson, A.A., 2021. Universal Justice: A Dialectical Approach. Brill.

Berger, R., 2015. Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative research, 15(2), pp.219-234.

Berniker, E. and McNabb, D.E., 2006. Dialectical inquiry: A structured qualitative research method. The qualitative report, 11(4), pp.643-664.

Lazard, L. and McAvoy, J., 2020. Doing reflexivity in psychological research: What’s the point? What’s the practice?. Qualitative research in psychology, 17(2), pp.159-177.

 Macagno, F., 2018. A dialectical approach to presupposition. Intercultural Pragmatics, 15(2), pp.291-313.

Mason, R.O., 1969. A dialectical approach to strategic planning. Management science, 15(8), pp.B-403.

Reid, A.M., Brown, J.M., Smith, J.M., Cope, A.C. and Jamieson, S., 2018. Ethical dilemmas and reflexivity in qualitative research. Perspectives on medical education, 7(2), pp.69-75.

Richards, I., 2019. A dialectical approach to online propaganda: Australia’s United Patriots Front, right-wing politics, and Islamic State. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 42(1-2), pp.43-69.

Soedirgo, J. and Glas, A., 2020. Toward active reflexivity: Positionality and practice in the production of knowledge. PS: Political Science & Politics, 53(3), pp.527-531.                 

Whitaker, E.M. and Atkinson, P.A., 2019. Reflexivity. SAGE Publishing.