Description
After gathering all of your resources and making notes, it is time to start writing your literature review. While this may seem like an easy task after all the work you have completed, it involves tedious analysis of the resources you have found and careful consideration of the insights and findings of each resource. For this Assignment, you write the first draft of your literature review based on the resources and outline you created for your Capstone Project.
To complete:
Using your resources from Week 5, additional resources you have found, and your literature review outline, write a 12- to 14-page draft literature review. The literature review should include a minimum of 20–25 relevant scholarly articles, research reports, and/or other academic sources. Be sure to follow the literature review guidelines provided in the Machi and McEvoy text.
Note: In addition to the 10–12 resources you located for Week 5, you must locate another 10–12 resources in order to meet this Assignment’s minimum requirement of 20–25 resources.
Reminder: Use APA guidelines for citations and formatting. My Capstone Project is on The Department of Homeland Security
Required Resources
Readings
- Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., Williams, J. M., Bizup, J. & Fitzgerald, W. T. (2016). The craft of research (4th ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
- Part V, “Some Last Considerations”
- “The Ethics of Research” (pp. 271-274)
This section explores one important consideration every researcher should think of when conducting research—ethics. Also, the section provides strategies for teaching research in academic settings.
- “The Ethics of Research” (pp. 271-274)
- Part V, “Some Last Considerations”
- Machi, L. A., & McEvoy, B. T. (2016). The literature review: Six steps to success (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
- Chapter 6, “Step Six. Write the Review” (pp. 133-156)
This chapter explores step 6 of the literature review model, “write the review.” The chapter includes the two tasks associated with this step and provides strategies for completing each task. In addition, the chapter includes an overview of the writing process, information on style manuals, and tips for writing.
- Chapter 6, “Step Six. Write the Review” (pp. 133-156)
|
The following articles provide examples of well-written literature reviews. |
- Johnson, B., & Reeves, B. (2005). Chapter 2: Challenges (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Minnesota Duluth, Minnesota. Retrieved from http://www.duluth.umn.edu/~breeves/med/chp2.html
This report describes a workshop for helping faculty in higher education transition to teaching online. The report uses research literature to identify challenges in online teaching and to support the decisions made in designing the workshop.
- Maguire, L. L. (2005). Literature review – Faculty participation in online distance education: Barriers and motivators. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8(1). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring81/maguire81.htm
This literature review analyzes a collection of research studies that focused on factors that motivated or deterred faculty in institutions of higher education from teaching online. This review also suggests further research questions based on the existing studies.
Media
- Laureate Education (Producer). (2012a). Introduction to scholarly writing: Purpose, audience and evidence [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
Capstone Project Scholarly Resources
Courtnie Walker
Walden University
March 29, 2019
1
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
2
Capstone Project Scholarly Resources
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attack in the U.S soil resulted to an increase in the
governmental and personal expenses in coming up with anti-terrorism strategies to avert the
happening of such a disaster in the future. Efforts were also directed towards program
implementation deemed essential in ensuring a similar occurrence doesn’t happen again in the
U.S soil. Due to the effect of terrorism on numerous aspects of the society including social life,
economy and politics, the states and the federal government through the Department of
Homeland Security has considered counterterrorism to be a very crucial agenda. The purpose of
this capstone project is thus to outline how the Department of Homeland Security has
strengthened itself towards counterterrorism. In achieving this objective, an array of scholarly
resources which revolve around counterterrorism are reviewed to show their efficiency of the
strategies they put forward.
Szpunar 2017 argue that counterterrorism is an effective method of combating terrorism.
The study highlights one of the strategies used by agents of the homeland security and this is the
sting operation. Sting operations are explained as a mainstay of the DHS counterterrorism
strategy, and it involves setting traps to potential terrorists and nabbing them. This source
exhibits its strengths in the way it reconstructs the sting operation and its effective application
(Szpunar, 2017). However, its major weakness is that it suggests a counterterrorism strategy
which is controversial and despite admitting the fact, the ways of navigating the same aren’t
mentioned. However, it remains to be a relevant and important source for the study. John Yen,
2004 also asserts that technologies can be used as a useful tool in the counterterrorism agenda by
the DHS. Through the use of technology, intelligence can be gathered and warning disseminated,
cyber infrastructures can be protected and can further aid in a quicker response in case
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
3
prevention fails (John Yen, 2004). This study material is essential as it gives in-depth detail of
technology and how DHS can well utilize it. The weakness of this source is that it fails to
acknowledge the ever-increasing technological prowess of the terrorists and how the same can be
countered. However, it is a credible source and useful for this study.
The U.S National Strategy for Homeland Security unveiled some months after the
occurrence of the terror act is also a crucial source in the capstone project. This source highlights
the key strategies which include collecting intelligence and warning, border and transport
security and emergency preparedness. This source exhibits great strengths as it highlights
workable solutions. Since it further highlights on the government efforts to counter terrorism as
stipulated by the federal government makes the source credible. The weaker part of it is that it
highlights many goals which have to be achieved. Kogut et al. 2004 explain how software
agents can be used in the counterterrorism endeavor by the DHS. The software agents are
deemed essential in collecting the anticipated information which can be relayed to the DHS and
help it combat terrorism (Kogut et al., 2004). The source is strengthened by the fact that it
presents an epic solution towards counterterrorism. However, the challenge is that the proposed
strategy is costly and difficult to implement. Monahan, 2010 focus on the DHS commitment of
creating the fusion centers to aid in assessing threats and sharing information. This source is well
researched and much detailed hence providing all the relevant information and making it credible
(Monahan, 2010). However, it asserts that the process of assessing threats and information
sharing may be marred with abuse but fails to delve further on the nature of the abuse hence
weakening the paper.
Kemp 2012 highlights the efforts carried out by the DHS highlighting its past, the present
as well as the future. The DHS according to Kemp has resorted to citizen assistance and support
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
groups as a form of counterterrorism. It is undeniable that citizens’ participation in the war
against terror is fundamental. The study exhibits its strengths in highlighting all the relevant
support groups as well as their role they play in counterterrorism (Kemp, 2012). However, in as
much as the research believe that the actions stated are for counterterrorism I feel like most of
the approaches are reactive; hence the paper slightly deviates from its original intention.
Although Brattberg, 2012 in his source drift a bit from the topic of counterterrorism, he focuses
on how DHS can improve its coordination form different contingencies as a means to minimize
the impact of any attack (Brattberg, 2012). The source is crucial as it highlights systematic
coordination among different key players hence solving the puzzle witnessed in the immediate
aftermath of the 9/11 terror attack.
Edwards, 2015 addresses the subject of radicalization as a factor to breeding terrorist in
the U.S. The study thus highlights on the distinct ways in which radicals are radicalized and
highlights on some ways the DHS can utilize in ending the occurrence of the same. The study
presents a stronger argument and is very detailed as it highlights the concept of radicalization
and how it can be stopped in a bid to counter terrorism (Edwards, 2015). However, the study
doesn’t provide specific solutions; instead there are general solutions which may be hard to
implement given the wider population in the U.S. May 2011, on the other hand, asserts that
strong policies are essential in making a stronger DHS and putting across counter-terrorism
strategies. The study goes to indicate how weak systems can result in the failure of even the
strongest strategies. The strengths of the paper are exhibited by how it articulates the argument,
but it has a weakness of drawing general policies which may be hard to implement (May 2011).
Keeney et al., 2011 highlights on the homeland security objectives and the metrics needed to
measure each objective. Through a homeland security model, the study provides a real feel of
4
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
how the objectives can be formulated as well as measured (Keeney, 2011). However, the
challenge is that the presented model is very complex to be achieved to its entirety.
5
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
6
References
Szpunar, P. M. (2017). Premediating predisposition: informants, entrapment, and connectivity in
counterterrorism. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 34(4), 371–385.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2017.1319966
John Yen, J. G. (2004). Emerging Technologies for Homeland Security. Communications of the
ACM, 47(3), 32–35. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=12456346&site=ehost
-live
US National Strategy for Homeland Security. (2002). Military Technology, 26(12), 36. Retrieved
from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9215391&site=ehostlive
Kogut, P., John Yen, P., Yui Leung, P., Shuang Sun, P., Rui Wang, Mielczarek, T., & Hellar, B.
(2004). Proactive Information Gathering for Homeland Security Teams. Communications
of the ACM, 47(3), 48–50. https://doi.org/10.1145/971617.971644
Monahan, T. (2010). The Future of Security? Surveillance Operations at Homeland Security
Fusion Centers. Social Justice, 37(2/3), 84–98. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eft&AN=65441998&site=ehostlive
Kemp, R. L. (2012). Homeland Security in America Past, Present, and Future. World Future
Review (World Future Society), 4(1), 28–33.
https://doi.org/10.1177/194675671200400105
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
7
Brattberg, E. (2012). Coordinating for Contingencies: Taking Stock of Post-9/11 Homeland
Security Reforms. Journal of Contingencies & Crisis Management, 20(2), 77–89.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5973.2012.00662.x
Edwards, J. J. (2015). Figuring Radicalization: Congressional Narratives of Homeland Security
and American Muslim Communities. Communication & Critical/Cultural Studies, 12(1),
102–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/14791420.2014.996168
May, P. J., Jochim, A. E., & Sapotichne, J. (2011). Constructing Homeland Security: An Anemic
Policy Regime. Policy Studies Journal, 39(2), 285–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15410072.2011.00408.x
Keeney, R. L., & von Winterfeldt, D. (2011). A Value Model for Evaluating Homeland Security
Decisions. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 31(9), 1470–1487. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=s3h&AN=66139032&site=ehost
-live
Literature Review Guidelines
The literature review will be a central component to your Capstone Project,
regardless of the type of research paper that you select. The literature review is
seen as an essential feature of any research project, and it will be a separate
deliverable, as well as a part of your Capstone research paper. While the
literature review should generally conform to the guidance laid out in Machi and
McEvoy’s (2012) The Literature Review: Six Steps to Success, the exact
organization and logic may vary somewhat between papers and projects.
Here are some other selected Web sites with suggestions and guidance on
literature reviews:
1. University of Wisconsin Writing Center. (2014). Conducting peer reviews.
Retrieved from https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/PeerReviews.html
2. University of California Santa Cruz. (n.d.). Write a literature review.
Retrieved August 28, 2014, from http://guides.library.ucsc.edu/write-aliterature-review
3. Washington & Lee University. (n.d.). Information fluency & quantitative
analysis. Retrieved August 28, 2014, from
http://info.wlu.edu/literature_review/literature_review.html
4. North Carolina A&T State University. (2013). What is a “literature review”
anyway? Retrieved from http://libguides.library.ncat.edu/literaturereview
Note: These Web sites are optional and not required for you to complete your
Literature Review.
In this course you will be expected to produce a robust literature review of the
topic and organization that you are addressing. The process will include keyword
and vocabulary strategies, topic selection, search strategies, setting up your
research argument, building evidence, surveying the literature and evaluating
research methods and data collection, critiquing the literature, and steps in
writing the review. You have an opportunity to evaluate the appropriateness and
veracity of the sources and research that you select and their relevance to your
topic and research question.
Keep in mind the importance of learning how to understand the structure and
function of a literature review. Many public administrators, researchers,
consultants, and leaders will either need to review or create literature reviews to
comprehend the knowledge base of organizations or issues/policy development.
Engage the process and use the opportunity to dive deeply into your subject and
organizational literature.
© 2014 Laureate Education, Inc.
Page 1 of 1
Running head: RESEARCH QUESTION
Research Question
Courtnie Walker
Walden University
1
RESEARCH QUESTION
2
Research Question
What are the effects of the privacy and civil liberties policies on the operation of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)?
Viability
The research question can be held as viable for the scope of this course since it entails an
interest of one of the topics of the course. According to Booth et al. (2016), the identification of
interest of a given topic forms the basis of generating a viable research question. Thus, due to my
interest in the public policy, I was in a position to develop a viable research question that relates
to my selected agency precisely the Department of Homeland Security.
Challenges
One of the challenges that I encountered when conceptualizing issues as a research
question was developing a rational argument. The literature review process requires the
development of an appropriate argument that matches with the research interest (Machi &
McEvoy, 2016). Thus, this requirement of formulating an argument that is in line with the
research interest proved to be challenging while drafting the research question. Ensuring a
balanced nature of the research question was another challenge that I confronted when
conceptualizing issues as a research question. An optimal research question is characterized by
the aspect of being neither too broad nor too shrink (Empire State College, n.d.). Thus, ensuring
that the research question was neither too extensive nor too narrow proved to be challenging.
RESEARCH QUESTION
3
References
Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., Williams, J. M., Bizup, J. & Fitzgerald, W. T. (2016). The craft of
research (4th ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Empire State College. (n.d.). Developing a research question. Retrieved August 28, 2014,
from http://www8.esc.edu/esconline/across_esc/writerscomplex.nsf/0/f87fd7182f0ff21c8
52569c2005a47b7
Machi, L. A., & McEvoy, B. T. (2016). The literature review: Six steps to success (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Capstone Project Scholarly Resources
Courtnie Walker
Walden University
March 29, 2019
1
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
2
Capstone Project Scholarly Resources
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attack in the U.S soil resulted to an increase in the
governmental and personal expenses in coming up with anti-terrorism strategies to avert the
happening of such a disaster in the future. Efforts were also directed towards program
implementation deemed essential in ensuring a similar occurrence doesn’t happen again in the
U.S soil. Due to the effect of terrorism on numerous aspects of the society including social life,
economy and politics, the states and the federal government through the Department of
Homeland Security has considered counterterrorism to be a very crucial agenda. The purpose of
this capstone project is thus to outline how the Department of Homeland Security has
strengthened itself towards counterterrorism. In achieving this objective, an array of scholarly
resources which revolve around counterterrorism are reviewed to show their efficiency of the
strategies they put forward.
Szpunar 2017 argue that counterterrorism is an effective method of combating terrorism.
The study highlights one of the strategies used by agents of the homeland security and this is the
sting operation. Sting operations are explained as a mainstay of the DHS counterterrorism
strategy, and it involves setting traps to potential terrorists and nabbing them. This source
exhibits its strengths in the way it reconstructs the sting operation and its effective application
(Szpunar, 2017). However, its major weakness is that it suggests a counterterrorism strategy
which is controversial and despite admitting the fact, the ways of navigating the same aren’t
mentioned. However, it remains to be a relevant and important source for the study. John Yen,
2004 also asserts that technologies can be used as a useful tool in the counterterrorism agenda by
the DHS. Through the use of technology, intelligence can be gathered and warning disseminated,
cyber infrastructures can be protected and can further aid in a quicker response in case
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
3
prevention fails (John Yen, 2004). This study material is essential as it gives in-depth detail of
technology and how DHS can well utilize it. The weakness of this source is that it fails to
acknowledge the ever-increasing technological prowess of the terrorists and how the same can be
countered. However, it is a credible source and useful for this study.
The U.S National Strategy for Homeland Security unveiled some months after the
occurrence of the terror act is also a crucial source in the capstone project. This source highlights
the key strategies which include collecting intelligence and warning, border and transport
security and emergency preparedness. This source exhibits great strengths as it highlights
workable solutions. Since it further highlights on the government efforts to counter terrorism as
stipulated by the federal government makes the source credible. The weaker part of it is that it
highlights many goals which have to be achieved. Kogut et al. 2004 explain how software
agents can be used in the counterterrorism endeavor by the DHS. The software agents are
deemed essential in collecting the anticipated information which can be relayed to the DHS and
help it combat terrorism (Kogut et al., 2004). The source is strengthened by the fact that it
presents an epic solution towards counterterrorism. However, the challenge is that the proposed
strategy is costly and difficult to implement. Monahan, 2010 focus on the DHS commitment of
creating the fusion centers to aid in assessing threats and sharing information. This source is well
researched and much detailed hence providing all the relevant information and making it credible
(Monahan, 2010). However, it asserts that the process of assessing threats and information
sharing may be marred with abuse but fails to delve further on the nature of the abuse hence
weakening the paper.
Kemp 2012 highlights the efforts carried out by the DHS highlighting its past, the present
as well as the future. The DHS according to Kemp has resorted to citizen assistance and support
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
groups as a form of counterterrorism. It is undeniable that citizens’ participation in the war
against terror is fundamental. The study exhibits its strengths in highlighting all the relevant
support groups as well as their role they play in counterterrorism (Kemp, 2012). However, in as
much as the research believe that the actions stated are for counterterrorism I feel like most of
the approaches are reactive; hence the paper slightly deviates from its original intention.
Although Brattberg, 2012 in his source drift a bit from the topic of counterterrorism, he focuses
on how DHS can improve its coordination form different contingencies as a means to minimize
the impact of any attack (Brattberg, 2012). The source is crucial as it highlights systematic
coordination among different key players hence solving the puzzle witnessed in the immediate
aftermath of the 9/11 terror attack.
Edwards, 2015 addresses the subject of radicalization as a factor to breeding terrorist in
the U.S. The study thus highlights on the distinct ways in which radicals are radicalized and
highlights on some ways the DHS can utilize in ending the occurrence of the same. The study
presents a stronger argument and is very detailed as it highlights the concept of radicalization
and how it can be stopped in a bid to counter terrorism (Edwards, 2015). However, the study
doesn’t provide specific solutions; instead there are general solutions which may be hard to
implement given the wider population in the U.S. May 2011, on the other hand, asserts that
strong policies are essential in making a stronger DHS and putting across counter-terrorism
strategies. The study goes to indicate how weak systems can result in the failure of even the
strongest strategies. The strengths of the paper are exhibited by how it articulates the argument,
but it has a weakness of drawing general policies which may be hard to implement (May 2011).
Keeney et al., 2011 highlights on the homeland security objectives and the metrics needed to
measure each objective. Through a homeland security model, the study provides a real feel of
4
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
how the objectives can be formulated as well as measured (Keeney, 2011). However, the
challenge is that the presented model is very complex to be achieved to its entirety.
5
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
6
References
Szpunar, P. M. (2017). Premediating predisposition: informants, entrapment, and connectivity in
counterterrorism. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 34(4), 371–385.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2017.1319966
John Yen, J. G. (2004). Emerging Technologies for Homeland Security. Communications of the
ACM, 47(3), 32–35. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=12456346&site=ehost
-live
US National Strategy for Homeland Security. (2002). Military Technology, 26(12), 36. Retrieved
from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9215391&site=ehostlive
Kogut, P., John Yen, P., Yui Leung, P., Shuang Sun, P., Rui Wang, Mielczarek, T., & Hellar, B.
(2004). Proactive Information Gathering for Homeland Security Teams. Communications
of the ACM, 47(3), 48–50. https://doi.org/10.1145/971617.971644
Monahan, T. (2010). The Future of Security? Surveillance Operations at Homeland Security
Fusion Centers. Social Justice, 37(2/3), 84–98. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eft&AN=65441998&site=ehostlive
Kemp, R. L. (2012). Homeland Security in America Past, Present, and Future. World Future
Review (World Future Society), 4(1), 28–33.
https://doi.org/10.1177/194675671200400105
CAPSTONE PROJECT SCHOLARLY RESOURCES
7
Brattberg, E. (2012). Coordinating for Contingencies: Taking Stock of Post-9/11 Homeland
Security Reforms. Journal of Contingencies & Crisis Management, 20(2), 77–89.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5973.2012.00662.x
Edwards, J. J. (2015). Figuring Radicalization: Congressional Narratives of Homeland Security
and American Muslim Communities. Communication & Critical/Cultural Studies, 12(1),
102–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/14791420.2014.996168
May, P. J., Jochim, A. E., & Sapotichne, J. (2011). Constructing Homeland Security: An Anemic
Policy Regime. Policy Studies Journal, 39(2), 285–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15410072.2011.00408.x
Keeney, R. L., & von Winterfeldt, D. (2011). A Value Model for Evaluating Homeland Security
Decisions. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 31(9), 1470–1487. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=s3h&AN=66139032&site=ehost
-live
Literature Review Guidelines
The literature review will be a central component to your Capstone Project,
regardless of the type of research paper that you select. The literature review is
seen as an essential feature of any research project, and it will be a separate
deliverable, as well as a part of your Capstone research paper. While the
literature review should generally conform to the guidance laid out in Machi and
McEvoy’s (2012) The Literature Review: Six Steps to Success, the exact
organization and logic may vary somewhat between papers and projects.
Here are some other selected Web sites with suggestions and guidance on
literature reviews:
1. University of Wisconsin Writing Center. (2014). Conducting peer reviews.
Retrieved from https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/PeerReviews.html
2. University of California Santa Cruz. (n.d.). Write a literature review.
Retrieved August 28, 2014, from http://guides.library.ucsc.edu/write-aliterature-review
3. Washington & Lee University. (n.d.). Information fluency & quantitative
analysis. Retrieved August 28, 2014, from
http://info.wlu.edu/literature_review/literature_review.html
4. North Carolina A&T State University. (2013). What is a “literature review”
anyway? Retrieved from http://libguides.library.ncat.edu/literaturereview
Note: These Web sites are optional and not required for you to complete your
Literature Review.
In this course you will be expected to produce a robust literature review of the
topic and organization that you are addressing. The process will include keyword
and vocabulary strategies, topic selection, search strategies, setting up your
research argument, building evidence, surveying the literature and evaluating
research methods and data collection, critiquing the literature, and steps in
writing the review. You have an opportunity to evaluate the appropriateness and
veracity of the sources and research that you select and their relevance to your
topic and research question.
Keep in mind the importance of learning how to understand the structure and
function of a literature review. Many public administrators, researchers,
consultants, and leaders will either need to review or create literature reviews to
comprehend the knowledge base of organizations or issues/policy development.
Engage the process and use the opportunity to dive deeply into your subject and
organizational literature.
© 2014 Laureate Education, Inc.
Page 1 of 1
Running head: RESEARCH QUESTION
Research Question
Courtnie Walker
Walden University
1
RESEARCH QUESTION
2
Research Question
What are the effects of the privacy and civil liberties policies on the operation of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)?
Viability
The research question can be held as viable for the scope of this course since it entails an
interest of one of the topics of the course. According to Booth et al. (2016), the identification of
interest of a given topic forms the basis of generating a viable research question. Thus, due to my
interest in the public policy, I was in a position to develop a viable research question that relates
to my selected agency precisely the Department of Homeland Security.
Challenges
One of the challenges that I encountered when conceptualizing issues as a research
question was developing a rational argument. The literature review process requires the
development of an appropriate argument that matches with the research interest (Machi &
McEvoy, 2016). Thus, this requirement of formulating an argument that is in line with the
research interest proved to be challenging while drafting the research question. Ensuring a
balanced nature of the research question was another challenge that I confronted when
conceptualizing issues as a research question. An optimal research question is characterized by
the aspect of being neither too broad nor too shrink (Empire State College, n.d.). Thus, ensuring
that the research question was neither too extensive nor too narrow proved to be challenging.
RESEARCH QUESTION
3
References
Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., Williams, J. M., Bizup, J. & Fitzgerald, W. T. (2016). The craft of
research (4th ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Empire State College. (n.d.). Developing a research question. Retrieved August 28, 2014,
from http://www8.esc.edu/esconline/across_esc/writerscomplex.nsf/0/f87fd7182f0ff21c8
52569c2005a47b7
Machi, L. A., & McEvoy, B. T. (2016). The literature review: Six steps to success (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Categories: