Quantitative Research Report

Quantitative Research Report

Abstract

The role of the research was to find out whether deeply studied items are remembered more than shallowly studied items. The role of memory in remembering information or items cannot be ignored. Memory is described as a mental operation that enables an individual to acquire, retain and recall information and thoughts experienced. The ability of an individual to learn and constantly put that learning into practice depends on our capacity to process, store and retrieve information from our memory (Skehan, 2015). In the research, items were studied deeply and shallowly to determine which one is remembered more.

The study group involved 84 participants who took part in the assessment. Among the participants, 19 were male, and 65 were females about 80 students and 4 educators. The students were group into two about 40 members each. One group was taught deeply while the other was taught shallowly. They were then tested, and the results were tabled and analyzed. The result indicated that deeply studied items are remembered more than shallowly studied items. Various scholars supported the claim that deep study involves going beyond memorizing to understanding the important concept about an item or information (Edmonds & Kennedy, 2016). Deep learning also consists of breaking down aspects into essential details that can be learned and remembered easily. However, the limitation of the study was that there were more females than men. The research was also limited to a few numbers of people.

Introduction

A good memory is an important aspect of learning especially to remember studied aspects or items. To start with, a study carried out can either be deep or shallow depending on the principles applied. The deep study involves exploration in greater details, desire to understand primary principles and ability to contribute to the items. On the other hand, a shallow study of items consists of memorizing instead of understanding without a proper contribution or argument (Skehan, 2015). In regards to this, it was important to determine whether deeply studied items are remembered more than shallowly studied items. To carry out the research, a study group consisting of 84 members was chosen. Among the 84 members, 4 were teachers while 80 were students in various programs within the institutions. The 80 participants were divided with one taking a deep study on selected items while the other taking part in a shallow study. The student’s participants were tested and resulted analyzed. Based on the result, it was evident that deeply studied items are remembered more than shallowly studied items.

Methods

It represents how the research was performed. As stated above, the role of this research was to discover and prove whether deeply studied items are remembered more than shallowly studied items. The research involved the use of various materials, students and educators participants, design and procedure. These aspects are distinctly discussed below;

  • Materials
  • Participant
  • Procedure
  • Design

The research used surveys to collect data from participants. The scholars developed the questionnaire consisting of 60 questions. Most of the questions were obtained across the classes lecture notes after a series of learning. These questions addressed the items that were studied in class. Some questions were based on after class study methods of the students. These categories of questions were projected to assist in understanding if the students went further in learning the units taught during lectures. Some questions were projected on end-unit questions to find out whether the student attempted to address the questions. In addition, educators were also asked on their understanding of the impact of the deep study on items and shallow study on items to the aspect of remembering the content. It is apparent that the educators were helpful in the research especially during the collection of data from the students’ tests.

These represent the people who took part in the research. The participants were college students and their educators, and they were about 84 in total. Among them, 19 were males while 65 were female participants. The men who took part in the research were between 20 to 50 years whereas their female counterparts were between 19 to 55 years. Among the participants were 4 lecturers who played an important role in the research. All the participants were randomly selected from all the departments within the institution. The educators were also informed of the role of the study to allow them to create a good environment for the process.

The study selected a sample of the population of college students from the departments of courses across the institution. They were to respond to questions about they have learned in class. The students were grouped into two; students who had a deep study on the items and the students who had a shallow study on the items. The students were tested using the prepared questionnaire template questions (Edmonds & Kennedy, 2016). They were supposed to respond to the questions based on their understanding. The educators helped in carrying out the test to make sure that there were no irregularities. The data that was collected from participants were coded on SPSS, descriptive statistics and frequencies for the main variable were computed and used for the analysis.

The study was carried out using a survey design. It was accomplished through the use of a descriptive rating, Likert-type survey offered by the NSDC and standard inventory assessment which was used to collect quantitative data from educators in the institutions. This methodology enabled a systematic analysis of the data (Edmonds & Kennedy, 2016). The standard inventory assessment also proved to be an effective means of gathering data without introducing threats to reliability that can happen with other collection means. The study used a survey design to gather quantitative data.

Considering the nature and length of the research, observation and personal interviews would not have offered the honesty that the anonymous survey enabled. Besides, observation, interviews or focus groups would add the potential for bias and inconsistency in the administration of the survey instrument and data collected would not have given the concrete data required for statistical analysis. The survey’s 60 questions assess an institutions performance in context, process, and content (Nardi, 2018). These questions will be answered by students who had deeply studied and also the ones who had shallowly studied.

Results

  • Performance on different questions
  • Duration of participants take after lectures to study on their own
  • The scores of the students in the test
Question typeDeeply studying students’ scoreShallowly studying student’s score
Application questionsMost students’ passed scored 90%Most students’ failed with a score of about 20%
Questions on list, outline, and stateMost students scored 90% and aboveMost students scored 60%
Explanation questionsMost students scored 80%Most students scored 30% in this field
Type of studyDuration (hours)Number of students (Male and female)PercentageCumulative percent
Deeply studied items (students both male and female)2 hours36 out of 40 students90%90%
½ hour and above4 students10%10%
Shallowly studied items (Students both male and female)½ hour10 out of 40 students25%25%

The table above shows that students take after their lectures to continue the study of their programs. In the deeply studied materials, the students would take ample time to study and learn more from their program. About 90% representing 36 out of 40 students in the first group takes about 2 hours while the rest in the group would take about half an hour. On the other hand, only 10 out of 40 students in the second group representing 25% would take about an hour to study more on the lecture programs. It is apparent that the time can be used as a factor to measure how deep or shallow a study occurs in education. In regards to this, deeply studying students always take 2 hours and above to study compared to shallowly studying students who would take less than an hour.

Type of studyNScoreFMinMaxMeanStdVariance
StatisticsStatisticStatisticsStatisticsStatisticsstatisticsStd errorDeviation
Deeply studying students40 studentsAbove 50%40 students5095890.17824.41545.23
Shallowly studying students40 studentsAbove 50%3 students1060300.16720.81211.15

The result from the table above shows how the students performed from the test given to them by the educators. It shows the scores obtained from the two groups of the students; those who studied deeply compared to those who studied shallowly. The minimum score for students who studied deeply is 50 while that of students who studied shallowly is 10. On the other hand, the maximum score for the students who studied deeply is 95 while that of the students who studied shallowly is 60. In regards to the information provided in the table, deeply studied items are remembered more than shallowly studied items. The student’s ability to remember what they studied reflects on their overall score and performance.

According to the tables, the students who performed well engaged in a deep study while the students who performed poorly engaged in shallow study. The calculated mean score for the students who performed well was 89 meaning that most students were able to score 89 marks which are considered a good performance. On the other hand, the students’ who performed poorly got a mean score of 30 which means that most students in the group scored 30 marks which are considered a poor performance. The standard deviation for the data showed that students who performed well-got scores that were close to the mean. In light of this, the scores mark for most students was close to the mean score of 89.

Discussion

The results of the research showed that the deeply studied items are remembered more than shallowly studied items among the students in the institution. The result proved that deep study of items improves an individual’s ability to remember. The deep study involves exploration in greater details, desire to understand primary principles and ability to contribute to the items. On the other hand, a shallow study of items involves memorizing instead of understanding without a proper contribution or argument. In regards to this, it was important to understand the impact of carrying out a deep study on items. Most institutions are faced with poor performance because most students cannot remember the things they are taught in class; hence they end up with poor performance.

The first group of participants in the study was taught deeply in class while they were also motivated to study more while the second group of participants was taught shallowly and there was no motivation for them to study after lectures. The students who were taught deeply were able to reason out issues effectively even when the questions were twisted. Almost all students who deeply studied performed well in application questions for what they learned in class. During a deep study, they were able to learn and internalize the essential concepts of the items of study. The students were allowed to give their thoughts as far as the items of the study were concerned which enabled them to connect the items of study with applications within the society. However, the students who study shallowly failed in application questions. They only passed in outline, list and state questions which they were able to memorize. It is apparent that these type of questions do not require further understanding of a concept. It was a short cut for most students who did not like to take their time in analyzing facts.

Therefore, as shown in the result of the report that the deeply studied items are remembered more than shallowly studied items among the students in the institution it is important to derive important lessons especially students and educators. The result proved that deep study of items improves an individual’s ability to remember. It is apparent that the major role of every exam or test is to find out whether the students remember all the information. In addition, it is true that the performance of the students depends on their ability to remember the things they were taught. The students who manage to score well is believed to have a strong retention ability compared to the students who get a low score. Thus, as educators and students, it is essential to adopt the principle of deep study to foster for good performance in schools.

Limitations of the study

First, as seen in the study, there were more females and males. Among the 84 participants including the 4 teachers, there were 65 females and 19 males. It is evident that this can invite critics on the gender balance issue. For instance, some people can say that females are more responsible and collected hence the ability to study for long hours affecting overall performance. The result would be more reliable if there were an equal number of females as men in the study. Also, the study evaluated a sample of students within our institutions. The students are surrounded by different cultural rules and regulations that govern major operations within the institutions especially in matters to do with ethics (Chao, 2015). Most of the students gave similar answers to the questions which indicated some aspect of irregularities. Moreover, the study did not consider other aspects that influence the performance of students. For instance, the educational background could affect the performance of students. The students who had a good background tends to perform well compared to those who poor background in matters of education.

Conclusion

The primary purpose of the research determines whether deeply studied items are remembered better than shallow studied items. The role of memory in remembering information or items cannot be overlooked. Memory is described as a mental operation that enables an individual to acquire, retain and recall information and thoughts one has experienced. The ability of an individual to learn and constantly put that learning into practice depends on our capacity to process, store and retrieve information from our memory. To perform the research, about 80 students and 4 teachers were selected to participate. Questionnaires were developed to assist in collecting data as far as the study was concerned. The questions were sampled with the aid of teachers on the programs the students were taught.

The results of the research showed that the deeply studied items are remembered more than shallowly studied items among the students in the institution. The result proved that deep study of items improves an individual’s ability to remember. Based on the result obtained, the students who performed well engaged in a deep study while the students who performed poorly engaged in shallow study. The calculated mean score for the students who performed well was 89 which means that most students scored 89th mark which is considered a good performance. On the other hand, the students’ who performed lowly got a mean score of 30 which means that most students in the group scored 30th mark which is considered a poor performance. Therefore, it is important to note that for students to understand and perform well in class, the educators must carry out a deep study on items while the students must study deeply because of the ability to remember lies in deep study.

References

Chao, C. C. (2015). Rethinking transfer: Learning from call teacher education as consequential transition. Language Learning & Technology, 19(1), 102-118.

Edmonds, W. A., & Kennedy, T. D. (2016). An applied guide to research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Sage Publications.

Forawi, S. A. (2016). Standard-based science education and critical thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 20, 52-62.

Nardi, P. M. (2018). Doing survey research: A guide to quantitative methods. Routledge.

Skehan, P. (2015). 11 Working Memory and Second Language Performance: A Commentary. Working memory in second language acquisition and processing, 87, 189.