Browse Courses

BUILDING THE FOUNDATION OF THE PROPOSAL: HOW TO WRITE A STRONG BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

PART THREE

Introduction

These two articles https://researchmethodsclass.com/building-the-foundation-of-the-proposal-how-to-write-a-strong-background-to-the-study/ and https://researchmethodsclass.com/building-the-foundation-of-the-proposal-how-to-write-a-strong-background-to-the-study-2/ have laid the foundation of how to write a strong background to the study. The articles have also explained the level 1, 2, and 3 of the funnel approach as shown below

Global → Continental → Regional → National → Local → Specific problem

This article will focus on levels 4, 5, and 6 and conclude this segment with the background to the study.

Remember, we are using the following hypothetical research title:

 Influence of Teacher-Related Factors on Students’ Academic Performance in Public Secondary Schools in County X, Kenya.

Level Four: National Context explains the situation in the country where the study will be conducted.

In this level, the researcher moves from Africa and East Africa to Kenya. The researcher establishes the national education policies and Kenya’s strategic priorities in education. Lastly, the researcher should identify the institutional and empirical context of the proposed study. Other relevant information includes:

  1. National statistics on the issue under investigation.
  2. Findings from Kenyan studies.
  3. Reports from relevant government ministries, agencies, and research institutions.
  4. The extent to which existing research explains the problem.
  5. Differences between national expectations and documented educational realities.

The researcher should ensure that the information is relevant to teachers and their influence on the academic performance of students.

An Example:

In Kenya, the pursuit of quality education is shaped by national education policies, curriculum requirements, teacher management arrangements and systems for assessing learner achievement. Public secondary schools operate within these national frameworks, but the conditions experienced by individual schools may differ. Differences in staffing, school leadership, teaching resources, professional support and the characteristics of learners may influence the academic performance of the learners.

NOTE 1: To establish the relevance of this issue in Kenya, the researcher should examine national policy documents, available educational statistics and empirical studies on teacher-related factors and student academic performance. The evidence should demonstrate whether a problem exists, what is already known about it, and what questions remain unanswered.

NOTE 2: The researcher must always remember that academic performance of students is a function of very many variables. The researcher must therefore avoid presenting teacher-related factors as the established explanation before conducting the investigation.

NOTE 3: By the end of this level, the reader should understand why teacher-related factors and academic performance are relevant variables within the Kenyan educational context. Therefore, introduce the variables with increasing precision in this level.

Level Five: Local Context – the purpose is to demonstrate why the selected county, institution, community or study site deserves investigation.

The local context is where the background becomes more specific.

For a study in County X, the researcher should explain what is known about academic performance in public secondary schools in that county and why the setting is appropriate for investigating the problem. Relevant evidence may include:

  1. The number and distribution of schools, where relevant.
  2. Verified local performance statistics.
  3. Reports of staffing or resource challenges.
  4. Findings from studies previously conducted in the county.
  5. Official reports or documented concerns from relevant institutions.
  6. Local circumstances that may influence the study variables.
  7. Evidence showing that the problem exists in the proposed study setting.

NOTE: Students often assume that they cannot establish a local problem unless another researcher has already published a study on it. This is incorrect because it is possible to use appropriate official records, administrative data, policy reports, school documents, or other credible evidence to establish that an issue warrants investigation.

For example:

  1. School records may show that examination performance has varied over several years.
  2. Staffing records may show that particular schools have experienced vacancies.
  3. Official reports may document concerns about teacher deployment or access to resources.
  4. Existing research may show that the relationship between teacher motivation and performance has not been examined in the selected setting.

Level Six: The Specific Research Problem. This last level brings the argument to the precise issue that the study will investigate.

This is the most important narrowing stage of the background because it clearly articulates the issue that requires systematic investigation.

At this point, the researcher should move beyond explaining the general importance of the topic and clearly establish:

  1. What specific problem has been identified?
  2. Who or what is affected?
  3. Where does the problem occur?
  4. What evidence demonstrates its existence?
  5. What is already known about the problem?
  6. What remains unknown or inadequately explained?
  7. Which variables will the study examine?
  8. Why is further investigation necessary?

An Example:

Despite the importance of student academic performance and the potential influence of teacher-related factors, the extent to which specific dimensions of these factors and their association with academic performance in public secondary schools in County X remains to be established through evidence from the proposed study setting. …

The final test:

  1. Ensure that the variables explained in the background match the final research objectives, research questions and methodology.
  2. Always ask yourself this question: After reading the background, will the reader be able to explain why the researcher is conducting the study, what will be investigated, where the investigation will take place and what evidence is expected to contribute to understanding the problem? If the answer is yes, the background is moving in the right direction.