Every research conducted has implicit and explicit limitations that are inherent to the hypothesis provided, the collection of data, the process of the study, or limitations pertinent to the generalization of the results. As such, it is of absolute salience that the limitations of any research are stated. This precept is fundamental to the field of research because it provides a rationale or framework for future research in the same field. In other words, limitations of research are important since they direct future research on where to focus their efforts. Furthermore, limitations provide criteria under which the study results should be interpreted and comprehended. Limitations also measure the credibility and validity of the research conducted. Ultimately, a clear discourse of the limitations gives a clear message that the researcher has a holistic and in-depth knowledge and perception of the research and the associated metrics.
Limitations of the Sample Study
In the research study, proper statistical techniques for sample selection to eliminate bias were not followed. In essence, there was no randomization in the selection of the sample, and as such, there were imbalances in the representation of ethnicity where the number of white doctorate students was dominant as opposed to other races. In this regard, the above drawback had the potential of giving bias to pre-survey and post-survey results despite going through the module. Also, there were inconsistencies in the conduction of the research with regard to the sample size. The specified sample size in the research design was 35, but the number of students participating in both surveys as indicated in the data section was 39.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Furthermore, from the description and outlay of the research, the initially intended sample size was to be the entire doctorate class of 42 students but this changed due to absenteeism and lack of returning surveys by some of the students. In light of the potential biases alluded to above, there are no specified measures and contingencies of eliminating the same. Similar to the overrepresentation of whites in terms of ethnicity and race, there was an overrepresentation of the female gender with numbers of 35 to 4. This overrepresentation also creates the potential for implicit bias, especially regarding cultural competencies and precepts pertinent to gender thereby impugning the credibility and validity of the research. Elaborately, with such overarching numbers in favor of the female gender, it is statistically difficult for the modules to change all the biases, stereotypes, and generalizations of all the students regarding cultural coherencies relating to dominant and non-dominant groups, the concept of privilege, and implicit bias.
Other than bias, the research is lacking specific objectives meant to be achieved by the study. However, the objective has been alluded to in the hypothesis section stating that the study is intended to evaluate whether there is an increase in the knowledge of doctorate students regarding cultural responsiveness upon exposure to social and cultural concepts module. As such, this then implies that the research hypothesis is wrong and by face value incorrectly formatted. Moreover, the research study lacks research inquiries meant to be answered by the research discussion and conclusions. Subsequently, there is a dearth of coherent data analysis for the provided data, and as such, there is no way that the research hypothesis, despite being erratic, could be accepted or rejected. Furthermore, a lack of conclusion also implies that the research study has no way of ascertaining the hypothesis or the objectives.
The fact that the research study depicts an overrepresentation in terms of ethnicity and gender implies the results of the study, if any, would not be generalized for the entire population. Corroborating this assertion is the fact that there are other ethnic communities such as the Alaska Natives, Pacific Islanders, and other sexes that have not been included in the study. As such, generalizing of the results is impossible. Even though there was some level of anonymity ensured by the researcher(s), other ethical considerations of the research participants such as informed consent are not specified. Moreover, the fact that the research is non-experimental challenges the evaluative purpose of the research study. Ultimately, the research lacks descriptive statistics but uses quantitative data thereby violating its descriptive design
