Assignment 2: Identifying influence of worldview in research design (Individual)

Overview

A worldview is a person’s way of thinking about and understanding life, which depends on their beliefs and attitudes. In research, the study of worldviews is a branch of philosophy that considers the nature, origin, and limits of human knowledge. To distinguish knowledge gained from religious faith from knowledge that came from observable phenomena in the world, western science developed philosophical worldviews (i.e., constructivist, post-positivist, pragmatic or transformative). These different views of what is universally knowable guide how projects are designed to develop new knowledge. However, some knowledge systems have basic assumptions that knowledge relates to situations and that context matters. For example, in common with some ancient worldviews, many modern approaches to Indigenous knowledge can be characterized as relational and do not seek a dichotomy between spirit and mind in making sense of the world. Even within the research and scientific communities, knowledge assumptions influence project design to count and measure for quantifiable knowledge, observe and intervene for more qualitative understandings or use some of both approaches.

For this individual assignment you will work with a partner to develop a written argument that compares and contrasts two research papers or project reports addressing climate action topics, identifying what different worldviews and assumptions might be directing the project design. For each of the comparison papers, you will explore and explain:

what philosophical worldview is demonstrated in the study,
what are the knowledge foundations for that worldview, including a definition, and
how the different worldviews may have shaped the selection of methodologies, data collection methods, and analysis when addressing similar topics.

Instructions

Working with your partner, begin by selecting two credible climate action project reports or peer-reviewed research papers from the list provided (or of your own choice with the instructor’s approval). Papers will be paired that address similar climate action topics while using different methodologies and types of data to develop new knowledge from different knowledge or worldview perspectives. In reviewing your selections, consider what action or research question was addressed and the suitability of the methods chosen to develop new knowledge, considering the worldview that guided the project. Include a summary table to present brief comments on the similarities and differences between the papers. In addition to the comparison papers, you will reference at least six other publications in support of your arguments, including one paper addressing Indigenous knowledge and Creswell and Creswell (2018), who use the term worldview as meaning “a basic set of beliefs that guide action”. (During this assignment you will also make entries in your field notes as you explore your personal worldview as a researcher and reflect on how this will apply to your project design choices.)

Requirements

Work with your partner to discuss your understanding of the worldviews and research reported in the papers you compare. You will each submit an original essay which must be submitted as a Word document of 1500 (+/- 200) words, excluding references.
Your essay must include a table summarizing the similarities and differences between the two subject papers (which can be the same as your partner’s table).
Using your own Zotaro library, you will reference at least six papers in total, including Creswell and Creswell (2018) and one paper considering Indigenous knowledge.
All external sources must be acknowledged using the APA format for in-text citations and references. Citations must be inserted through referencing software such as Zotero to demonstrate your ability to maintain a reference library.
The assignment must be submitted on or before the due date in the activities schedule.

Assessment Criteria

In this assignment, you are expected to:

Describe and apply the principle of how worldviews guide perspectives on science and social issues (Learning outcome 1.3)
Communicate effectively using coherent, synthesized, well organized, edited, logical, and fully supported work (Learning outcome 2.2)
Illustrate the use and limitations of information and theory in the field of climate adaptation (Learning outcome 3.3)

Weight: 20%

Submit: to Assignment 2 dropbox in Moodle

Assignment 2 Assessment Rubric

Course Learning Outcome Assessment Criteria	Excellent (A+ to A)	Proficient (A- to B+)	Satisfactory (B to B-)	Unsatisfactory (F)
Citation and APA format	All citations and APA format are correct.	Most citations and APA formatting are correct.	Some citations and APA formatting are correct.	Citations and APA formatting are not correct.
Describe and apply the principle of how worldviews guide perspectives on science and social issues (Learning outcome 1.3)	The source-paper comparison is thoughtful, well organised and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of clearly defined worldviews represented in the research aim, design and conclusions. The table summarizing similarities and differences is comprehensive and clearly addresses the worldviews presented. References are credible, relevant and current, and sufficient to represent differing perspectives including Indigenous knowledge.	The source-paper comparison is adequate, generally organised and demonstrates a good understanding of well-defined worldviews represented in the research aim, design and conclusions. The summary table captures most elements needed to address the worldviews presented. References are generally credible, relevant and current, and draw on some differing perspectives, including Indigenous knowledge.	The comparison captures many important points but is not well organised and demonstrates only a partial understanding of loosely defined worldviews represented in the research aim, design or conclusions. The summary table misses important elements addressing worldviews. Some references are not sufficiently credible, relevant or current. Indigenous knowledge is only superficially represented and there is little diversity in the perspectives represented.	The research aims, design and conclusions in the source papers are not well represented and related worldviews not sufficiently identified or defined. The comparison table is missing or incomplete. References do not meet the minimum standards to be considered credible, relevant or current.
Communicate effectively using coherent, synthesized, well organized, edited, logical, and fully supported work (Learning outcome 2.2)	The written argument is clear, logical and fully supported by evidence with minimal errors in grammar, spelling, mechanics, and punctuation. Paragraphs are well-organized and adhere to proper academic paragraphing structure.	The written argument is mainly clear, logical and fully supported by evidence with minor errors in grammar, spelling, mechanics, and punctuation. Paragraphs are mainly organized and mostly adhere to proper academic paragraphing structure.	The written argument is somewhat unclear and/or ineffective for potential audiences with multiple errors in grammar, spelling, mechanics, and punctuation. Paragraphs somewhat adhere to proper academic paragraphing structure.	Writing is unclear and ineffective for potential audiences with significant and repeated patterns of errors in grammar, spelling, mechanics, and punctuation. Paragraphs do not adhere to proper academic paragraphing structure.
Illustrate the use and limitations of information and theory in the field of climate adaptation (Learning outcome 3.3)	Key research questions were well identified for both source papers and the influence of worldviews on selection of methodologies, data collection methods, and analysis were well-explained. The comparison used one clear, detailed example in each paper to link with worldview and demonstrate suitability of the reported research methods and units of analysis to develop knowledge for climate action.	Key research questions were adequately identified for both source papers and the influence of worldviews on selection of methodologies, data collection methods, and analysis were sufficiently explained. The comparison used one appropriate example in each paper to link with worldview and demonstrate suitability of the research methods and units of analysis to develop knowledge for climate action.	Relevant research questions were generally identified for both source papers and the influence of worldviews on selection of methodologies, data collection methods, or analysis were sufficiently explained. The comparison used one loosely related example in each paper to link with worldview and to partially demonstrate suitability of the research methods and units of analysis to develop knowledge for climate action	Research questions were not clearly identified for both source papers and the influence of worldviews on selection of methodologies, data collection methods, or analysis was missing or not well explained. The comparison example was not appropriate, or not linked with worldview, or did not demonstrate suitability of the research to develop knowledge for climate action.