CHARACTERISTICS OF A GOOD RESEARCH

A. General Characteristics
1. The research problem must have an element of newsness/novelty, that is not
overstudied or saturated, such that is a repetition or duplication of procedures.
2. The research study must be completed within a reasonable period of time,
within the competence level of the researcher, has value to the researcher and impact
to the community (raises the quality of life).
3. The research study addresses priority development issues and concerns
(locally responsive and globally competitive).
4. The research study will benefit many and varied users and beneficiaries,
particularly planners, policy-makers, administrators, researches, etc, in government
organizations and non-government organizations.
5. The research team has capability (administrative, technical, logistics) to
implement the research project.
6. Except in Chapter I, each chapter heading must have a concise introductory
paragraph.
7. The following consists of introductory sentence:
- assumptions
- significance of the study
- definition of terms
- findings
- conclusions
- recommendations
8. Research report be presented in a formal tone, projecting a dignified,
impersonal tone and objectively written.
9. The research report must be presented in logical, coherent, systematic
manner and with consistent ideas.
B. Specific Characteristics
Title
1. It is clear, descriptive, and correctly worded.
2. It is reasonably short but comprehensible.
3. It must be printed in an inverted pyramid format.
4. it must not employ wording of an unscientific, rhetorical, emotional, or bias
character, or catchy title.
5. Phrases like a Critical Study, An Evaluation, An Assessment, A Study before
the problem area is inappropriate, but they may be attached after the problem area
before a column.

Rationale
1. Described the problem situation from the global or national level down to the
local or institutional level that is from macro to micro description (deductive
presentation).
2. Support the problem situation with theoretical and research literature, as well
as legal evidences and documents (constitution, statutes, executive orders, memo-
circulars) as much as possible.
3. The researcher team must indicate what is wrong with the present situation
and explain his/her desire to discover ways of improving/strengthening/enriching the
problem situation.
4. The researcher team should justify his/her study and show why the study is
needed.

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework
1. When the study is founded on certain theory or theories, theoretical framework
is applicable.
2. The theory or theories must be cited including is author and relate how such
theory or theories are related or used in the present study usually an illustration/diagram
is drawn.
3. As general practice, this heading maybe placed in Chapter I before the
Statement of the Problem if the researcher wants to verify an existing theory
assumption, benefits, phenomena, conditions, practices. It may also be placed I
Chapter II after the discussion on Research Literature (related studies) if the researcher
wants to espouse or develop a new theory on the basis of the reviewed literature.
4. Concepts and variables which are found in the paradigm (conceptual
model/schematic diagram) should be properly discussed under the heading Framework.

Paradigm/[
1. The concepts and variables, as discussed in the Conceptual Framework, must
be vividly defected through mapping or diagramming or illustration using preferred
angles.
2. In descriptive studies, 3 boxes of different sizes and sometimes different
shapes are drawn. The first box is the impact variables/concepts; second box,
process/throughput variables/concepts; and the third box is the output
variables/concepts. A box for outcome variables may be indicated if needed by the
study. An arrow head is directed to each box. This approach is known as the semi-
subsystem model or (input-process-output approach). In a true system model or (input-
process-output approach) feedback mechanism is added. Flow-chart system is rarely
used in research paradigm.
3. In inferential studies where significant difference or significant relationship of 2
or more variables are determined, two (2) boxes are usually illustrated; one box for the
independent variable/concepts, and an arrow head is drawn to illustrate their
relationship.

Statement of the Problem

1. The general (major) problem, which is patterned from the Research Title,
consist of the what, who, where, when (seldom) and why (seldom) of the study.
2. The general problem is capable of being broken down/sub-divided into
researchable units.
3. The sub-problems (minor/specific) must be researchable units logically
arranged from factual to analytical order.
4. Each sub-problem must be grammatically worded in the language of research.
5. Each sub-problem must be statistically analyzed; findings, conclusions and
recommendations could be drawn from it.
6. One sub-problems should not overlap or duplicate the others; otherwise, they
are fused or merged as one.
 7. Sub-problems should not be answered by YES or NO. In some institutions,
however, the YES-NO type question is allowed when it pertains to the determination of
significant differences/significant relationship.

Assumptions
1. Any thing that have material bearing upon the problem should be openly and
unreservedly set forth by an assumption.
2. The following matters must be assumed:
a). excepted answers of the sub-problem
b). validity and reliability of the instrument
c). honesty and sincerity of the respondents and subjects.

Hypothesis

1. In inferential studies or where significant difference or relationships are

determined, hypotheses are needed for each sub-problem.
2. A null hypothesis is preferred over an alternative hypothesis.
3. Hypothesis must be correctly worded and stated in declarative form.
4. Usually, hypothesis is followed by the level of significance utilized.
5. Hypothesis is conjectured upon a relationship between 2 or more variables,
empirically testable.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

1. In a delimitation, state the variables or concepts which are excluded (what are
not studied due to certain weaknesses); in a limitation, indicate the variables that
are to be contained/studied.
2. The first paragraph should be a discussion of the scope (coverage) of the study,
such as the variables/concepts to be studied, locale, and period of study and the
persons involved.
3. The second paragraph should consist the delimitation (not covered by the study)
and justification for the non-inclusion of some variables and concepts.
4. A locale of the study or research setting (when needed) can be placed in a
separate heading and accompanied by a map. In the map, the exact location of
the study must be identified by identical colors or some other marks.
Significance of the Study

1. Only those who (individuals, agencies, institutions who are concerned or

affected) should be given a place in this section.
2. Their placement must be arranged in such way that primary beneficiaries/end-
users must be ahead than secondary beneficiaries, tertiary beneficiaries in that
descending order.
3. There must be a short paragraph explaining why the study is important (its
practical value) and what possible effects the results of the study will have on
present conditions. A citation or listing of the individuals, groups, agencies who
may be concerned or affected must appear in this paragraph.
4. In the succeeding paragraph, specify the beneficiaries/end-users accordingly an
state how the study benefit each of them.

Definition of Terms

1. This section must have an introductory sentence or paragraph.

2. The terms to be defined are technical terms which are used throughout or more
often in the study and such they are difficult to be understood by ordinary
readers; or that the terms devote several meanings. Never define a term that is
already universally accepted.
3. When a term is lexically (dictionary definition/authorative definition) defined, the
source must be cited. Operational definition (as used in the study) follow the
lexical definition.
4. Terms are arranged according to their degree of importance or utilization in the
study.

Related Literature

1. This section consists of 2 sub-headings: conceptual literature (related literature)

and research literature (related studies).
2. Only concepts/variables that are relevant or have bearing on the present study
should be emphasized as a standing board for contact.
3. Reviewed materials should be sufficient and recent. In thesis, an average of 5
reviewed studies and reviewed conceptual literature (books, periodicals,
documents) are sufficient. In dissertation, there should be more than enough of
these literature. As to recency, previous studies should not be beyond 10 years;
the more recent, the better. In conceptual literature, 15 years gap from the
present study is still allowable.
4. Related literatures must adopt one style all throughout. The literature may be
arranged chronologically (by year- to start from the recent one); theoretically (by
closeness of topics - to start with very close topic to the present study) or
alphabetically (according to the author’s family name). Some writers place a
heading for every related literature. Refer to the institutional policy as to which
style is adopted.
5. Cite only selected studies pertinent to specific issue; avoid tangential and very
general studies.
6. Avoid non-essential details; emphasize major findings/conclusions.
Recommendations are optional.
7. Summarize clearly and concisely; synthesize coherently and systematically.
8. Indicate at the end of the chapter (last paragraph) the significance/ merit of the
reviewed literature to the present study.