A researcher writes a literature review but does not explain what previous research has failed to address. What key component is missing?

A university implements a voluntary first-year tutoring program. End-of-year analysis shows tutoring participants (participants=127) have higher GPAs than non-participants (participants = 200). The president recommends expansion across the institution. Further analysis reveals: Tutoring participants had higher high school GPAs (3.61 vs. 3.35) before college Participation was entirely voluntary; self-selection likely indicates higher motivation Tutoring participants also attended office hours (68% vs. 42%) and study groups (71% vs. 34%) more frequently First-generation students participated at lower rates (12% of tutoring participants vs. 31% of non-participants) despite identical initial college GPAs Students who participated in tutoring also had higher rates of advisor contact and academic planning discussions The most serious threat to concluding that tutoring caused the GPA difference is:

Why do researchers cite sources when defining variables in quantitative research?

A researcher is interested in studying mentoring programs for first-generation college students. In the literature review, the researcher summarizes 15 articles describing mentoring program outcomes, including retention rates, GPA improvements, and program satisfaction. However, all of the studies focus on measurable outcomes and program effectiveness. None examine how first-generation students personally experience mentoring or how mentoring influences their sense of belonging. The researcher decides to conduct interviews with students to explore their mentoring experiences. What is the strongest justification for this qualitative study?

A researcher randomly assigns students to either an online tutoring program or no tutoring program. At the end of the semester, the researcher compares GPAs between the groups. Why does random assignment strengthen this study?

A qualitative researcher conducts an extensive literature review before collecting data and develops strong expectations about what participants will say. Why might this be considered problematic in qualitative research?

A researcher studies one university’s early alert system to understand how it operates and affects students, using interviews, observations, and institutional documents. Why is a case study the most appropriate design?

A researcher proposes studying belonging among first-generation students with this belief statement: “Belonging is both a measurable psychological variable and a deeply constructed personal meaning that varies by individual interpretation. Students’ sense of belonging emerges from objective institutional structures (program access, faculty diversity, peer demographics) and from subjective meaning-making processes (how they interpret belonging, what experiences signify acceptance). Comprehensive understanding requires measuring belonging patterns across students and exploring how individuals construct meaning from their experiences.” Proposed methodological design: Administer belonging survey to 380 students; analyze and measure relationships with retention, GPA, help-seeking behavior Conduct 24 interviews with students selected to represent high/low survey scores and different demographic groups Use qualitative findings to explain why quantitative relationships exist, identify contexts where belonging operates differently, and explore alternative explanations Synthesize both data sources into integrated conceptual understanding This research design and the researcher’s orientation to knowledge is best characterized as:

Which pairing of worldview and design is correctly aligned ?

A researcher examines one specific high school implementing a new mentoring program. The researcher conducts interviews, observations, and reviews school documents to understand how the program operates in its real-world setting. Which research design best fits this study?