Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
Sign In Skip to Content

Teaching and learning

Accreditation period for Units 1–4: 2025–2029

Unit 3: Designing and conducting research

Unit 3 Area of Study 1: Thinking about arguments

Outcome 1: On completion of this unit the student should be able to analyse and evaluate arguments.

Examples of learning activities:

  • Construct three simple arguments and one complex argument from your own research using the Toulmin argument chain model (a simple argument will include an outline of claim, grounds and warrant while a more complex argument will include analysis with additional outline of backing, qualifier and rebuttal). These may be arguments for why the research is important and significant, an argument for the selection of methods or some aspect of the research design. Key justifications for each component of the Toulmin argument chain should be based on research literature and referenced. If you are unable to construct an argument of your own, you might like to analyse an argument based on an article from your literature review.
  • Example icon for advice for teachersCreate a list of pros and cons for and against an assumption, reason or argument, that you believe is central to your research. List what supports the claim and what evidence or reason there is to think otherwise. You may wish to choose a plausible rival hypothesis. Then, evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each list and state which you believe is stronger. You may question the strength of the research methodology or design, the method or whether the data is strong enough to support the finding of the research.
  • Identify the premises and conclusion in an example of an argument relevant to your research. Analyse the argument for assumptions that have been made by considering the following questions:
    • What is this author assuming or what is taken for granted?
    • How can I determine whether this assumption is accurate?
    Then, assess the scale and nature of each assumption to decide if it is a reasonable assumption for a non-specialist audience. Also consider:
    • Do you need to provide further justification?
    • Is it a weak assumption that cannot be avoided or a problematic assumption?
    Research various cognitive biases outlined in the Cognitive Bias Index Code (or do your own online research). Find a research article in your field of study in which one particular type of research bias could be a consideration or factor in evaluations of the research. For example, the bandwagon effect may be an influential factor in focus group research methods. Observer-expectancy effect may be influential in interpretation of data. Consider:
    • Did the research seek to reduce the effects of bias through any design of research features?
    • Could there be some further design elements incorporated into the research to avoid such bias and improve the reliability of the research?
      • Now choose the cognitive bias that is more relevant or could foreseeably impact upon your own proposed research. Consider:
    • How and in what way could bias enter into your research?
    • How could you develop a research design or develop a step in the research process to limit the potential for this bias?

  • Complete one or more of the Learning Modules from Critical Thinking Web. Complete the associated tutorial, including critical thinking exercises, and record responses in your Extended Investigation Journal.

    Now apply one or more of the critical thinking skill/strategy or technique (the most useful one) to a particular aspect of your research. Detail how you could incorporate this skill in your application of critical thinking for the next week. For instance, use the skills of argument mapping to construct a complex argument within the research literature. In your Journal, write up a reflection on how this critical thinking skill relates to your research and how it could best be implemented as part of ongoing research planning and future goal setting.

  • Identify facts and opinions in an aspect of your research area. First, write a paragraph about an aspect of your particular research area (for instance: what is known, what has been discovered, what is unknown, key theories, etc.). Then re-read this paragraph, highlighting statements of fact in one colour, and statements of opinion in a different colour. For each statement of fact, clarify whose idea it is, with further supporting evidence or reasoning (where possible) and justification of why it should be considered ‘fact’. For each statement of ‘opinion’, decide if it is your own or someone else’s opinion and how the statement is contested by other studies or evidence. You should also include referencing to support fact or opinion distinctions.

  • Generate a set of critical questions designed to assess the plausibility of a conspiracy theory. In developing such questions, make links and draw upon critical thinking skills such as logical fallacies (for instance, hasty generalisations, correlation-causation fallacy, etc.), falsification, cognitive bias or other evaluate techniques.

    Then sketch out a research plan (as if you had unlimited resources and time) that seeks to disprove the conspiracy theory in question. How would you seek to develop a research plan that would disprove the central claims of the conspiracy theory?

  • Find a number of arguments relating to research that are based in expert authority. An argument based in expert authority will look something like this:

    P1. X is an expert in the domain of Y.

    P2. X believes that Z in relation to Y is true.

    C. Therefore Z is true (or Z is plausible).

    Outline these arguments in your Journal and evaluate them based on the following critical questioning criteria:

    • Is the authority cited an expert in the field?
    • If so, is this field relevant to the issue under discussion?
    • If so, is the authority cited to be trusted?
    • If so, can the argument be supported or corroborated by other experts in the field or other evidence or research?
    • If so, is the strength of the conclusion reached appropriate? (Or, what further evidence or data would be needed to substantiate the conclusion?).

  • Apply the TRAPP Test Evaluating Sources Checklist as developed by Evaluating Sources LibGuide from the ANU library to assess the reliability and appropriateness of information for your research area. Evaluate at least five sources and include them in your Extended Investigation Journal.

Example icon for advice for teachers

Detailed example

Pro-Con Table

A Pro-Con table is a way for students to develop and structure their own ideas for and against a proposition. For this activity, students are required to create an open-ended question relating to their research area.

For example:

How can the Victorian Government ensure the quality of life for the elderly? Does duration of sleep effect cognitive abilities?

Then, students are required to turn the question into a proposition that could be argued for or against. For example:

The Victorian Government should increase funding and services so that the elderly can remain in the family home (in the same community with familiar neighbours, surroundings and amenities.).

Students can copy and paste the below table into their Extended Investigation Journal, and complete it in relation to their own proposition. An arrow indicates that it responds to a particular argument.

The proposition to be analysed (For example: the Victorian Government should increase funding and services so that the elderly can remain in the family home.)

 

Pro

Con

1

pro argument 1

←

rebuttal of pro argument 1

2

rebuttal of con argument 2

→

con argument 2

3

pro argument 3

→

rebuttal of pro argument 3

4

rebuttal of con argument 4

←

con argument 4

 

Examples of learning activities:

The proposition is placed at the top of the table and each argument for or against the proposition is given a row in the table. An attempt is made to rebut each argument with a counterargument. Ideally, a Pro-Con table should fit on one page so that all the arguments can be reviewed together.

The above table models the structure of a Pro-Con table. The arguments for or against are given a numbered row and presented in plain type. A rebuttal of an argument is presented in italics and an arrow indicates that it responds to a particular argument.

After completing their Pro-Con table, students undertake a final reflection and evaluation. A Pro-Con table can be used as the basis for thinking through a judgment or sustained evaluation on an issue or proposition. One of the ways of judging the quality of a Pro-Con table is to critically assess how balanced and even-handed it is. Can a particular view be gauged from the table above? It is hoped that what the writer thinks cannot be gleaned from the Pro-Con table. In their final evaluation, students develop a reasonable position based on the most decisive and relevant arguments and rebuttals in relation to the proposition. In developing their final reflection and evaluation, students should use the elements of argument.

Students can also be asked to consider:

  • Are there reasonable arguments that are not included?
  • Are there better rebuttals than those presented here?
  • Are there counters to the rebuttals?

Unit 3 Area of Study 2: Developing a research question

Outcome 2: On completion of this unit the student should be able to propose and justify a research question and methods of investigation.

Examples of learning activities:

  • Example icon for advice for teachersDevelop a mind map that explores a particular field of interest, indicating components of research that may be of relevance. Firstly, brainstorm everything known about an area of interest. Add questions about things that are not known, would like to be known and/or remain contestable in the field of study. Organise these notes into categories, looking for common questions or themes. Formulate at least ten questions about your area of interest.
  • Analyse a set of research questions of varying quality and focus. Example research questions might be sources from past Critical Thinking Test questions. Your task is to assess each question using the criteria for ‘Developing a suitable research question’ on page 10 of the study design. Then, choose two weaker research questions and rewrite these to improve them based on your knowledge of suitable research questions. Write or discuss a justification for how the reformulated questions are improved with reference to the research question suitability criteria. Work individually or in pairs to rewrite questions that are deemed to be weaker. As a whole class activity, compare the reformulated questions and discuss them in light of the criteria.
  • Examine topics and questions using the Goldilocks thinking tool. Brainstorm and explore possibilities by posing questions about the issue that are based on controversy, size and complexity.
  • Apply the Question Formulation Technique as created by the Right Question Institute to brainstorm and develop skills of questioning. As a class, use a stimulus selected from a general or student-specific research paper (a key claim, evidence or finding). Then follow the steps as outlined in the ‘question formulation technique’. Repeat this process in smaller groups based on a stimulus selected from other class members’ research problems or articles.
  • Justify your research design in your Extended Investigation Journal, by giving reasons and justifications to develop and draft each aspect of the research design:
    • Why is your research area important?
    • Why might findings be significant and to whom?
    • What features make your research area complex as opposed to simple?
    • What research methods are you proposing to use?
    • How will you research this area?
    • What difficulties do you anticipate with the data collection?
    • What other practical considerations should you take into account to ensure the effective and accurate collection of research data?
    • What possible bias could influence your research?
    • How will you avoid this?
    • What ethical issues have you considered that are relevant to your research?
    • How will you deal with these?
    This research is to be presented to a non-specialist audience. What difficulties do you foresee in talking about your research area? How might you translate complex terms into non-specialist language? Give an example.
  • Present to the class a 3–5-minute rough outline of your research problem, research question, research design and the scope of the study. Ensure that you clarify the boundary between what the research will include and what the research will exclude, and why. Aim to put forward reasons and arguments to justify why the research will contain some evidence or data and exclude others. The class as a whole can ask 5–10 questions to seek to clarify the scope and parameters of the study. Questions might include the parameters of database searches, size of data sets, the focus of the problem, research methods used, variables of the study, practicalities of undertaking the research, or other clarification questions on the parameters of the study. Questions begin with ‘Does your research include …?’ or ‘Will your research be looking at ...?’. When responding to questions posed by each student, others should aim to qualify research intentions, justifications, scope of the study and consideration of a suitable balance of depth, precision and practicalities of the study.
  • Explore a range of questions and methods before discussing which question and method are best suited to each other. Use a Pro-Con table to further unpack strengths and weaknesses of proposed questions and methods selected.
  • Consider the following ethical situations that a researcher may encounter and develop a plan of action:
    • A researcher is investigating perception on career pathways and proposes a focus group interview with students from their own school. Participants respond inaccurately just so that they could be liked or think that they would be better accepted. The researcher wishes to encourage discussion and participation while also allowing the opportunity for a range of perspectives and deeper discussion.
    • In the final stages of research, a researcher discovers significant research findings that are contrary to their developed conclusions. To what extent should the researcher present these findings in the final report and presentation?
    • A researcher is conducting an ethnographic study of online K-pop culture and aims to immerse themselves in K-pop communities. The researcher has developed informed consent processes but key members of the online community use pseudonyms, data anonymisation practices and they do not reply to informed consent research invitations. What should the researcher do?
    • A researcher wishes to investigate influential factors for organ donation in Australia. A survey is developed as part of the research proposal. What ethical steps are necessary to ensure that risks are negligible?

    Now describe a relevant ethical consideration or situation that you foresee in your own research and outline ways you might anticipate the problem and actively monitor and address this in your own research. In developing your response try to make links and refer to the Australian Code of Responsible Conduct of Research 2018 or The National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2018.

Example icon for advice for teachers

Detailed example


Mind maps

The development of mind maps can form an integral part of the research process. Mind maps can be used to encourage students to explore the relationship between different ideas and to deconstruct the details of concepts. They are useful at the start of the unit, enabling students to sketch out connections between concepts related to their area of interest. As they begin to read more, students can add more content to this relational tree. Further continuation and addition to mind maps can also enable reflection on the development of their own thinking and the connection between the aspects of their research. Some suggested uses for this kind of thinking activity include the following.


Mind mapping to explore research fields

The purpose of this activity is to explore the relationship between intersecting or interrelated research fields. This can be used in two ways: to discover a research area or to refine a field of interest. When assisting students to develop their research ideas, teachers should keep in mind that the students need to be looking for a sufficiently ‘meaningful’ idea that would benefit from research.


Literature review map

Literature review maps can be used to help students understand the relationship between different research results. Students map out research fields based on their research area and locate each of their readings within one or multiple fields. They draw connections between various pieces of literature based on shared or contrasting methodologies, perspectives, opinions, findings, etc.


Russian dolls mind map

This task focuses on understanding the components of a topic. Students create an initial list of key ideas for a research topic. They then expand on this by generating sub-questions or sub-topics from the initial list. This process can be replicated two, three or more times, highlighting the complex connection between ideas within a topic or research area.


Mind mapping to create a focused research question

Students write their proposed question in the middle of the page. They then sketch out definitions, existing knowledge, ideas, and questions related to each aspect of the question. This can be further expanded through adding more knowledge and ideas related to each of the sub-concepts. The following questions may prompt the development of this mind map:

  • What interests me about this topic?
  • How is the question relevant to society?
  • Why is this question significant?
  • What are potential research methods and approaches that I might use?

Mind mapping the scope of the study

Use a target board concept map to define and justify the scope of the study proposed. Evidence and data placed in the centre of the target board are of central importance and value for the study, while evidence and data on the peripheral sections of the target board indicate less importance and value for the study. Scoping your research refers to the set of reasons and arguments put forward to justify why your research will contain some evidence or data and exclude others. Another way of putting this is to think of scoping as the act of defining the space in which you will generate evidence to answer your research question. After completing the target board concept map, develop reasons and argument to the following prompts:

  • Why will some things fall within your focus and why will you exclude others?
  • What are the key limitations preventing the evidence and data from being objective and/or feasible. What research design features could be used to mitigate these limitations?
  • How will you limit the research design to make it viable while still being able to produce meaningful data?

Unit 3 Area of Study 3: Planning and commencing the investigation

Outcome 3: On completion of this unit the student should be able to write a detailed research plan, commence their investigation, explain their investigation and justify the selected research methods to an educated non-specialist audience.

Examples of learning activities:

  • Construct a two-minute presentation on a research question, focusing on potential avenues of data collection and justifying why the research area is of value. After the presentation, class members can ask: ‘Clarification questions’ (Would you say a little more about …?), ‘Main Point questions’ (Let me see if I have this right. Is your main point …?), ‘Reason seeking questions’ (Could you elaborate more on why you believe that ...?) and ‘Relevance questions’ (How does that support the claim/conclusion?).
  • Create a flow chart for the research method, detailing what knowledge issues need to be addressed. Then transfer this flow chart to a yearly calendar, planning and identifying milestones for the collection of data, its analysis and the writing-up stage.
  • Develop a specific and testable hypothesis or prediction about what you expect to happen in the proposed study, based on reading and analysing the research literature. Construct a table in which one column speculates on what type of evidence or data would support your hypothesis (and why); a second column speculates on what type of evidence or data would disprove or falsify your hypothesis (and why); and (if possible) a third column speculates on what data or evidence would support a null hypothesis.
  • Develop a terminology glossary by making a list of key words or phrases related to the area of research. Write definitions for each glossary word using precise and technical explanations appropriate to the academic field. Reference and make links to key concepts, theories, research or thinkers in the discipline. Paraphrase and develop a separate explanation for an educated non-specialist audience. Note and highlight where definitions differ across the literature as a means of entry into the literature review.
  • Develop a SWOT analysis of your proposed investigation project. How do you plan to address each weakness? How do you plan to avoid identified threats?
  • Provide a brief description of the data you intend to collect. Provide a clear explanation of the data you intend to gather with reference to variables, key concepts and phenomenon (where relevant). Provide an explanation of how the data will be used as evidence in your investigation. What aspect of the research design will the evidence be relevant to? If possible, you may like to include an explanation of the way you intend to analyse the data in order to create your evidence.
  • Organise and break down key research milestones using a timeline or Gantt chart. The timeline should include key dates for tasks such as: drafting and piloting of data collection, commencement of data collection, conclusion of data collection, analysis of data, timeline of literature review, ethical approval (where necessary), key SAC and external assessment due dates, first and second drafts of research report, final written report, preparations for oral presentation.
  • Make a list of key concepts, phrases or categories relevant to research area. These should not be confined to technical terminology, but relate to features such as methods, major concepts, major figures or research traditions. For each idea, find at least two direct text references in the form of quotations or findings from the literature. Then write at least 20 separate sentences about the research, making explicit use of key terminology, evidence or ideas central to their investigation. These sentences and ideas can then be used in the construction of written research plan.
  • Construct a draft of your table of contents indicating the main section of your final written research paper. Then use this as a basis for development or research milestones and timelines for the coming month.
  • Example icon for advice for teachersDevelop a research hypothesis using a Hypothesis Draft Template to develop research thinking and planning.

Example icon for advice for teachers

Detailed example

A Hypothesis Draft Template to develop research thinking and planning

Development of a research hypothesis is a valuable component of research planning to frame and clarify research thinking and design. A hypothesis is also an important reference point for later findings, assessment and evaluation of the research. In essence, a research hypothesis provides an objective anchor from the research problem to speculations that can further guide design.

The teacher may introduce the value of hypothesis development in research by modelling examples where a hypothesis a) helps to test a theory, b) guides the research design for testing of hypothesis, c) clarifies the evidence and data requirements of the study, d) clarifies variables and the relationships between phenomena and/or e) guides the analysis of the data and evidence.

Following this, teachers can use and/or adapt the following template as a learning activity for students to develop and justify a research hypothesis.



In the research on the topic of





I have learned the following:





These studies/literature/thinking led me to pose the following question:





This question has several plausible answers. For example, scholars/expert literature such as

and

have claimed that





The methodological approach and design of these studies included (scope, parameters of the research, population, sample, other relevant design features):





The findings from this/these studies supports the argument that:




It is also possible to argue that:




While the above answers are plausible, they have several weaknesses. These weaknesses include:




My own hypothesis to the question is as follows:





My hypothesis is supported by the following piece of evidence:



Reference:


My hypothesis is further supported by:



Reference:

(Add more as necessary)


My hypothesis is significant because it modifies and/or adds to the current thinking on this topic in the following ways:




Unit 4: Completing and reporting research

Unit 4 Area of Study 1: Thinking about research

Outcome 1: On completion of this unit the student should be able to evaluate evidence and reasoning in the research of others and in their own investigation.

Examples of learning activities:

  • Select a passage from your review of the literature that involves an argument of importance. What kinds of questions would you ask about this particular claim in deciding whether or not to believe it, or at least find it plausible enough? Use the following structures of critical questioning to develop and guide a range of critical questions:
    1. Are the claims acceptable, i.e. likely to be true, or likely to be accepted as true or plausible by the community of researchers in the field of inquiry.
    2. Are the claims or evidence relevant to the conclusion that the arguer is seeking to establish?
    3. Are the reasons sufficient for establishing the conclusion?
    Organise these questions based upon priority of importance from most important to least important. Now that you have formulated these critical questions, place yourself in the position of the original researcher. How would you seek to defend or further develop a rebuttal to posed critical questions? What other research in the field could be used to further strengthen a response to these critical questions.
  • Write a short piece (maximum 200 words) in your journal, in which you use an analogy to provide your audience with a visual representation of the relationship between research ideas. Select an important and complex idea that will be central to your research and will need explanation in later written and oral assessments. Outline the things being compared and the similarities and differences of the things being compared. For instance, how is the relationship between A and B similar in relevant and decisive ways to the relationship between X and Y?
  • Use the Critical Thinking matrix as designed by Ellerton and the University of Queensland Critical Thinking Values of Inquiry Project to self-assess your most recent research draft document. First, identify the cognitive skills that are of most importance for the development of your research inquiry. Then self-assess your drafting document according to criteria (accuracy, precision, depth, coherence and breadth). You could use a colour-code system such as traffic lights for such self-assessment. For any areas that were identified as central to the research and needing further improvements, use the guidance included in the critical thinking matrix to prompt reflection and planning on how these elements could be included in the research process and future drafting process.
  • Select a passage from your review of the literature that involves an argument of importance. What kinds of questions would you ask about this particular claim in deciding whether or not to believe it, or at least find it plausible enough? Use the following structures of critical questioning to develop and guide a range of critical questions:
    1. Are the claims acceptable, i.e. likely to be true, or likely to be accepted as true or plausible by the community of researchers in the field of inquiry.
    2. Are the claims or evidence relevant to the conclusion that the arguer is seeking to establish?
    3. Are the reasons sufficient for establishing the conclusion?
    Organise these questions based upon priority of importance from most important to least important. Now that you have formulated these critical questions, place yourself in the position of the original researcher. How would you seek to defend or further develop a rebuttal to posed critical questions? What other research in the field could be used to further strengthen a response to these critical questions.
  • Identify a claim (central to your research area) for which there is a plausible counter argument or rival hypothesis. Some guiding prompts to identify and develop counter arguments are:
    • Does the conclusion follow from the premises? Could a different conclusion emerge from the reasons used?
    • Is the data strong? Is it biased? Does it really support the conclusion?
    • Can one question an assumption or premise of the argument?
    • Other objections or counter arguments might include: a key term is used unfairly, certain evidence is ignored or played down.
    • Then, develop a rebuttal that responds and is able to deal with the outlined counter argument. What is lacking from the counter argument:
      • Does it miss the point?
      • Has it misunderstood the aim of your research?
    Sometimes a counter-argument might be strong and indicates that a qualification or reclaim of the original argument is needed. It could be that there is some limitation with your argument and the counter-argument requires that you change, re-develop and make qualifications through a reclaim or alteration of your conclusions.
    • Do you need to change, qualify or limit the conclusion of your own argument? (This can often lead to further precision and clarity of research.)
  • Select one important finding of your research thus far. Outline the evidence supporting this research finding. Develop an argument that supports the validity and relevance of the evidence used in support of this main finding. The following prompts can be used as a guide:
    • How are your findings relating to the other findings, studies and theories in the broader literature? Do they corroborate or challenge theories or key claims under investigation?
    • How are you interpreting the findings? How are these interpretations justified (with reference to reason, evidence and the literature)?
    • How are you citing other evidence to compare, contrast and build succinct discussion?
    • Does the evidence directly support the finding(s) or does it require further linking inferences to support the finding(s)? If so, what explicit inferences are needed?
    • To what extent is the research design appropriate as an accurate and unbiased objective measure and/or conforms to accepted norms of the discipline?
  • Create a list of pros and cons for and against an assumption, premise or argument, that you believe is central to your research. What evidence or reasoning supports the claim and what evidence or reason is there to think otherwise? Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each list and state which you believe is stronger. You may like to question the strength of the research design, the method, or whether the data is strong enough to support the finding of the research.
  • Create a list of steps you can take to protect yourself from the negative effects of bias in research. For instance, this might include strategies to identify hidden or confounding factors in other research papers or one’s own research, and steps to limit or mitigate these effects. A confounding factor is a variable that is not taken into account in the research design. It is something that distorts and alters the association being studied between variables.
  • Use the hook-and-eye techniques to develop coherence and logical flow of research and argument. You might like to start by viewing an illustration of the hook-and-eye technique from Creswell (2014) ‘Research Design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. (p. 97-201). Then select a passage from a relevant paper and map out the coherence of the text using the hook-and-eye technique. To apply this technique, connect the words and sentence of a passage using circles for key ideas and lines to connect these key words/ideas from sentence to sentence. Finally, apply the hook-and-eye technique to a draft your Introduction section (or some other section written report drafting) or swap a report draft with a partner and map out each other’s draft. The key idea of one sentence should connect to a key idea of the next sentence. If the sentences do not connect, then re-draft using explicit transition words to connect and link sentences. Paragraphs should also be connected with hooks and eyes as well as individual sentences.
  • As a class, brainstorm and list the various ways that research can go wrong in the a) Planning stages, b) Analysis Stage and c) Discussion and Conclusion Stages.
    • For each stage, include an example from the media or within your specific field of research demonstrating how statistical research can be used incorrectly or inappropriately.
    • You might also like to refer to ‘The Art of Statistics: Learning from Data by David Spiegelhalter or watch a Presentation from David Spiegelhalter or consider examples from ABC Fact Check website.
    • For each example of incorrect or misuse of statistical data, suggest a stronger or more robust method of statistical research.
Example icon for advice for teachersDevelop an Argument chart based on key arguments of your research. This can be done in table form with suggested headings: Claim/Contention; Evidence/Data; Justification; Backing; Counter argument; Rebuttal; Reclaim.
Example icon for advice for teachers

Detailed example

Argument Chart

Students develop an Argument Chart based on the key arguments of their research and using the framework below as a guide. As students develop depth and scope of research, they can complete further iterations of the Argument Chart to demonstrate the progress and development of research and critical thinking.

The Victorian Government should target an increase in funding and services for Tiers 1 and 2 (lower heath service needs) so that such identified elderly people with lower health needs can remain in home care and thus enjoy a greater quality of life.

*The above sources and arguments do not reflect actual research; they are meant to suggest and model the kind of evidence and elements of argument that a person might use for such a project.

Claim/Contention


Key claims and the overall conclusion that you wish to argue for

Evidence/Data


Evidence gathered to support the argument

Justification


Explanation of why or how the data supports the claim and/or the underlying assumption that connects your data to your claim


Backing


Additional logic or reasoning that may be necessary to support the justification

Counter argument


A claim that challenges or disagrees with the thesis/claim

Rebuttal


Evidence that negates or disagrees with the counterclaim

Reclaim


(If necessary) a re-statement of the claim with any alterations or qualification

Example Argument 1: The Victorian Government should increase funding and services so that the elderly can remain in the family home (home care) for as long as possible.

A 2023 survey study conducted by Jones with a sample size of 983 elderly United Kingdom participants, found a strong correlation between quality of life for elderly people and remaining in family home as compared with residential care.The quality of life survey used by Jones (2023) is a valid quantitative research design in the field that applies a five-point survey scale measuring the key five quality of life categories. It is implemented by other prominent research studies in the field, such as Ahmed (2022) and De Vos (2000). Nations or states of comparable health service demographics and cultural norms and beliefs relating to aging also have comparable relevance of research to inform and justify government policy.

Recent Victorian Health statistics indicate that 60% of elderly people experienced significant health conditions in the last year and economic Victorian Government modelling indicates that future funding costs for appropriate health services would be more than 10 times higher if all elderly people remained in home care.

A modelling matrix by Moran (2020) developed a 4-tier sliding scale to differentiate the level of need for elderly health services. Tiers 1 and 2 elderly health scales indicate low to moderate health needs. Moran’s (2020) cost-benefits analysis indicates that better quality of life, health care and lower costs can be achieved through targeted funding and services to support Tiers 1 and 2 elderly remaining in home care.The Victorian Government should target an increase in funding and services for Tiers 1 and 2 (lower heath service needs) so that such identified elderly people with lower health needs can remain in home care and thus enjoy a greater quality of life.
Argument 2…
Argument 2…

Unit 4 Area of Study 2: Completing a written report

Outcome 2: On completion of this unit the student should be able to complete a report written for an educated non-specialist audience that presents and evaluates the results of their extended investigation.

Examples of learning activities:

  • Construct a hierarchical list of data and evidence that has been collected and analysed as part of the research study (from most valuable to least valuable). Evaluate the data and evidence with reference to potential errors of reasoning, research bias, reliability and relevance to the proposed research question. Give reasons to defend and justify each evaluation. Identify approximately 3–5 of the most important trends that are emerging from the research findings.
  • Analyse the components and functions of an abstract using the Abstract handout as developed by San José State University Writing Center. Then analyse three or more abstracts from your research field to establish the conventions and common structures of abstracts within your research discipline (to further apply to your own abstract drafting). Identify key phrase examples from the selected abstracts and the ordering of abstract components using the abstract handout. Apply these conventions and structures to the development of your own abstract drafting.
  • Draft paragraphs on selected aspects of your research paper, aiming for succinct and clear writing. Topics to focus on each time this exercise is used may include:
    • project aim, importance and significance
    • introduction to the main field of research
    • key areas of agreement or divergence in literature
    • research design and methods
    • data generated
    • findings
    • discussion and recommendations
    • limitations, reflections and evaluations
    • conclusion.
  • Decide which ‘field’ or ‘discipline’ best describes your research investigation. Research the referencing requirements and conventions for this particular discipline or field of investigation and make notes on these conventions. Then complete an appropriately formatted example reference for each key text type. You might like to refer to Citing and Referencing resources and tutorials from Monash University Library.
  • Locate a complex and technical paragraph in the research literature that expresses a key concept, theory, argument or evidence relating to research field. Highlight complex words and phrases that an educated non-specialist audience would not understand. Then rewrite the sentences/paragraph in simpler language for this audience. Try to be clear and explicit with the linking and explanation of technical terms and how these relate to your own research; then exchange sentences/paragraphs with a partner to check for effectiveness.

  • Consider a number of different avenues for understanding and representing research data; in particular, the most appropriate trends to emphasise in light of the research question. If statistical data is relevant, explore various methods of analysing and representing data and key trends such as: mean, median, mode, range, scatter plot, histogram, box and whiskers plot, Pearson correlation (if aiming to represent the relationship between variable) or other statistical methods. If quantitative data is relevant, consider various avenues to structure key data and trends; this might include a brief introduction and link, outline of trend or key finding, presentation of the evidence (this might include representational or selected quotes or other key findings), and summary or comment to develop depth and discussion. A transition or linking statement to the following topic or trend may also be developed for coherence and development of research.

    Finally, make conscious decisions about what data is the most relevant, and the most effective way to display this to the reader or audience. Reflect on the way you are identifying clear trends and not simply descriptively listing statistics or quotes. Add a reflective comment for each representation of data that seeks to outline its aim, and how it directly relates to the research question and research conclusions.

  • Synthesise your findings. First, state the key research findings of the research (this may be 3–6 key research findings depending on the research undertaken). Then, based on the prior literature, develop explicit and detailed links to discuss and contexualise the research findings with reference to other prior research and studies. This may include:
    • research that supports or disagrees with your key findings (and how they support or disagree with your research findings)
    • similarities and/or differences of research intentions, research design, methods, findings, and/or conclusions
    • key connections between various research studies that you wish to highlight and develop
    • changes in perspective or interpretations of findings that have occurred over time or from different theoretical approaches
    • new findings that you have developed as a result of such synthesis with other research and studies.
  • Visit the University of Sydney Academic Writing Resources webpage developed by the Learning Centre of the University of Sydney. Select an area of Academic writing that you wish to develop and strengthen. Browse through the Resource Modules (Cohesive Writing, Essay Writing, Grammar or Writing in an Academic Style). Select one or more .pdf writing resource document(s) to read and complete academic writing exercises. Then consider how you can apply these writing skills to your report drafting.
  • Example icon for advice for teachersApply the writing skills developed so far to draft a 300-word abstract that provides a synopsis of the central aspects of your Extended Investigation.
Example icon for advice for teachers

Detailed example

Construct a 300-word abstract draft

A clear and well-developed abstract provides a synopsis of the central aspects of the Extended Investigation. Abstracts are also essential for the research paper reader as an overarching reference or anchor point to assist the reader in understanding the key components of the investigation. Development of a clear and succinct abstract can also assist as a blueprint in the editing stages of the established central arguments, design and evidence of the research paper, and how they fit together. As such, students should be encouraged to develop and fine-tune abstract drafting.

Students can begin abstract drafting by creating a single sentence that states the main purpose of the investigation. Students may try to finish the following sentence:

‘The main purpose of this investigation is to ...’

Then they outline and develop reasons, evidence and inferences to connect and support responses to the following questions:

  • What is the problem or question that your research addresses?
  • Why is it important? What is the aim or purpose behind the research?
  • How was the investigation undertaken?
  • What are the key findings or results?
  • What is the conclusion of your research (based on your finding)?
  • What are your recommendations for future actions or change based on your research?

In abstract drafting, students can also be encouraged to apply elements of argument to develop explicit links and explain core components of the research. Some argumentative terms can be suggested for precision of argument, such as: ‘therefore’, ‘if … then’, ‘because’, ‘a limitation of X is that …’, ‘however’, ‘but’, ‘since’, ‘data suggests that ...’, ‘it follows that …’, ‘an assumption of X is that …’ etc.

Students can use answers to these questions to generate a 300-word (approximately) abstract for the research paper.

Unit 4 Area of Study 3: Presenting and defending findings

Outcome 3: On completion of this unit the student should be able to explain their investigation to an educated non-specialist audience, critically evaluating their research process and defending their findings.

Examples of learning activities:

  • Form pairs and sit at opposite sides of a table. Each pair is given an issue and for two minutes, one person argues the affirmative and the other, the negative. After five minutes, the pairs swap places, physically and argumentatively. You cannot, however, use any of the arguments for the position that your partner has just used. The purpose of this exercise is to develop flexibility and spontaneity in thinking and speaking.
  • Example icon for advice for teachersDraft a practice Oral Presentation and present it to the class with some extra leeway of time for further drafting and finetuning. The class as a whole can then ask as many questions as they like. Follow-up questions are of extra value and encouraged. These questions might include Clarification questions (Could you explain the concept A more and why this is important for your research?), Justification questions (Why did you select A in your design … and did you consider other approaches?), Reflection/Evaluation questions (What is the biggest strength or weakness of the research? What would you change in the research design and why?).
  • Practise explaining complex concepts. Your teacher will provide the class with a list of complex concepts. For instance: ‘objectivity’, ‘subjectivity’, ‘qualitative’, ‘quantitative’, ‘contestability’, ‘differences of degree’, ‘difference of kind’, ‘research ethics’, ‘synthesis’, ‘evaluation’, ‘transferability’, ‘variables’ and ‘generalisability’. Your teacher will then model different approaches to explaining a complex concept and breaking it down for a non-specialist audience. This might include using an analogy, metaphor, examples, explaining the essence of a concept (‘in a nutshell’) or breaking it down into components or steps. Next, select one or two complex concepts and apply this process. Share your explanations with the class and discuss what approaches work well and why.
  • Select and edit your PowerPoint slides. PowerPoint slides are available as an option to use in the Oral presentation to help the audience keep in mind key points of your presentation. Draft and develop your slides to communicate the key aspects of your presentation that you wish to highlight. Consider:
    • What quotes, definitions of terms, maps, graphs or data, might help your audience keep a clear idea of the main steps in your research?
    • A slide for your research question might be useful at the start.
    • Be aware that fewer slides are often preferable, so as to avoid your audience getting lost and suffering information overload.
  • Discuss and evaluate the limits of your research with reference to the research problem under investigation (What can’t your research result tell us?). Ensure that you can describe each limitation in detail and explain why the limitation exists. Consider the impact of each limitation on your findings, and provide valid reasons as to why each limitation could not be overcome. From there, develop some recommendations about how future research could be conducted in order to overcome these limitations (with unlimited resources, if necessary).
  • View one or more past VCAA Top Talks video presentations. As a small group, identify and analyse the techniques used in the Top Talk presentation to:
    • introduce the research problem and research question
    • explain complex ideas, evidence or concepts for a non-specialist audience
    • develop and defend the research design and findings
    • signpost key elements of the presentation
    • make links and clarifications upon various research components and/or other key research studies
    • use the elements of argument to develop and justify research design, key claims, recommendations and/or conclusions
    • reflect upon and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the research.
    How successful were these techniques for presenting the research? What techniques are transferable to drafting and planning for your own research Oral Presentation?

  • Develop a mock presentation around an unfamiliar topic. In this task you have 15 minutes to research and prepare a three-minute speech presenting a position on a given topic and defending this position, followed by three minutes of questions.

    Possible topics for these mock presentations include:

    • the importance of research integrity
    • the value of evidence-based research
    • the distinction between science and pseudoscience
    • justifications for or against government censorship of social media.

    The purpose of this presentation is to familiarise yourself with talking about different aspects of research, and to build confidence in anticipating and answering questions from an audience. It is not the purpose of the mock presentations to answer the questions completely and accurately and you should feel comfortable enough to say ‘I don’t know’ or ‘I will need to do some research into that’.

Example icon for advice for teachers

Detailed examples

Drafting an Oral presentation

In developing a draft and adapting components from the written report students will need to consider key differences of format, purpose and assessment between the Written Report and the Oral Presentation. The following dot points can be used as a prompt to guide the drafting of the Oral presentation:

  • You will be presenting the core of your research; that is, the reasoning you had for the key points.
  • The number of words. You will not be able to squash everything in. Don’t try!
  • Technical language. You will need to really consider the language you use. You may need to define key technical terms.
  • Evaluation of your own research. Acknowledge problems you aimed to overcome and problems that you recognise in hindsight.
  • What are the findings and what are the implications of your findings for how things should or could change in the future.
  • Evaluation of your research design. Now that you have some time to critically reflect on the design of your investigation, what have been the strengths and the weaknesses of the research?

After you have developed a draft, practise presenting the Oral to other class members or teachers under timed conditions. Ask others to provide feedback with the following checklist as a guide:

  1. Has the researcher introduced the research problem and question? (high, medium, low)
  2. Has the researcher developed and explained links to prior research and studies (including key theories, thinkers, research, disagreement and/or gaps in the literature)? (high, medium, low)
  3. Has the researcher justified the importance and significance of the research? (high, medium, low)
  4. Has the researcher outlined reasons to justify the design of the study? (high, medium, low)
  5. Has the researcher demonstrated consideration of design elements for the investigation (for example: biases, sample size or variables)? (high, medium, low)
  6. Has the research explained key findings and evidence for findings? (high, medium, low)
  7. Has the researcher linked findings back to prior research and literature? (high, medium, low)
  8. Has the researcher unpacked what the results mean with regard to the research question? (high, medium, low)
  9. Has the researcher developed plausible implications of this study (with regards to how we should change future practice, policy or thinking about the research under investigation)? (high, medium, low)
  10. Does the researcher provide plausible limitations of the research design or findings? (high, medium, low)
  11. Has the researcher critically evaluated the strengths and weakness of the research design and the reliability of the findings? (high, medium, low)
  12. Has the researcher presented the research with a coherent and succinct structure? (high, medium, low)
  13. Has the researcher clearly linked and demonstrated reasoning and argumentation throughout the presentation? (high, medium, low)
  14. Has the researcher explained key components of the research for audience understanding? (high, medium, low)

Then, further develop and finetune drafting of the Oral Presentation in light of comments and feedback from the presentation of your practice Oral Presentation.