Cumulative Scientific Knowledge

Imagine going to the doctor’s office and as you walk in, you see the doctor smoking a cigarette! The doctor continues to check you and gives you medicine that was made in the 1900s. Most people would agree that changes in scientific knowledge is for the best, but some people just won’t allow for change. For example, some people think that the Earth is flat, notwithstanding all the evidence put against them. As scientific knowledge changes over time, society has adapted to the new knowledge for the better. For instance, we have medical knowledge. If medical knowledge didn’t change, we wouldn’t know how to make new medicine. Some people like to keep to the older ways like smoking. Once in a while, there comes someone who won’t use any medicine

The evidence that supports my research question provides some basis as well as stability for my conclusions. Attempting to engage in active research for the first time, and equipped with a question that has been explored to different degrees by reputable educators, it is easy for one to be daunted by the challenge. Yet one can take heart from the wealth of information available, and be encouraged to engage in

In research, there is no right or wrong process; although there are many heuristics that can be passed on. Appropriate use of information requires that we see knowledge acquirement as fluid and varying. (Jones, 1996)

Revans, R. (1958). On "Management and the Scientific method" The Journal of the British Institute of Management. Retrieved May 12, 2015.

This graph provided from Laureate Education depicts overlap of these three factors lets us know that the research is valued and merited, when there is no overlap, this is where consideration and hesitation of the research should be considered (Laureate Education (Producer). (n.d.). According to Norcross, J., Hogan, T., & Koocher, G, professionals and practitioners are having to base their practices which are evidenced based at an increasing rate due to the strong implications that Evidence-based practices have had on the field in relation to practice, training, and policy (Norcross, J., Hogan, T., & Koocher, G. 2008).

This rating scale is used to determine whether or not research is worth putting into practice. During the appraisal of research, there is a different level of evidence that is taking into consideration. There is three quality rating with five different categories. The quality rating is graded from high, good, and low or major flaw level of evidence. A high-quality research requires the study to be well structured and organized with all the necessary elements and definite conclusion. Research is considered good when the result is within normal limits and the conclusion although not conclusive can lead to more research. Lastly, a low-quality rating did not provide much information and stayed inconclusive (Dearholt.& Dang, 2012, p. 12P). There is five level of evidence in which research can fall under. The level is from I to V. the level I includes all systematic review researches that are experimental with a randomized controlled trial. These researches might be randomized with or without meta-analysis.

As you stated the authors mention that caution should be utilized when the results are interpreted. The research methods of questionnaires and self-reporting,

Source: G. C. Britz, D. W. Emerling, L. B. Hare, R. W. Hoerl, & J. E. Shade. "How to Teach Others to Apply Statistical Thinking." Quality Progress (June 1997): 67--80.

Throughout this course I have learned many things about research at an introductory level. Research is a critical part of all of our lives in many ways. God blesses each of us with a degree of common sense and we all learn from observing others even as babies, we learned behaviors and skills by observing our parents. Walking through experiences throughout life teach us a lot we need to know as well but sometimes we have to take a better approach when we need to learn about certain things. Many of us know that what works in some situations or with certain individuals doesn’t always work or is the safest option for another situation. Controlled and precisely organized study allows scientists to compare and examine contrasting methods and concepts, also helps them to discover various approaches and be able to learn from individual’s behaviors and experiences. I will act as the case study throughout this paper in order to observe what I have learned about.

The fundamental theory behind scientific management is breaking down each part of a job to its science (Taylor). In the Principles of Scientific Management, Taylor talks about pig iron handlers, shoveling and bricklaying as a few examples in which he implemented scientific management. He proposed four important elements that are essential to scientific management. In this example Taylor discusses the science of bricklaying. First management must develop the science of bricklaying with standard rules of each task. Every task is designed to be perfect and standardized. The second element is selection and training. This step is important because Taylor wants an employee who is “first class,” meaning that they are the best at what they do, follow instructions and will not refuse to listen or adopt the new methods that management is executing. The third element is teaching the first class employee the science of bricklaying broken down by management. At this stage management is instructing the employee what to do, how to do it, and the best way to do it. Management is there to help them and watch that they are doing it “their” way and not

The scientific approach required several major principles in its application to management: 1st – develops a science for each operation to replace opinion and rule-of-thumb. 2nd

The year 1911 saw Frederick Winslow Taylor publish a book titled ‘The principles of scientific management’ in which he aimed to prove that the scientific method could be used in producing profits for an organization through the improvement of an employee’s efficiency. During that decade, management practice was focused on initiative and incentives which gave autonomy to the workman. He thus argued that one half of the problem was up to management, and both the worker and manager needed to cooperate in order to produce the greatest prosperity.

With those evocative words, Frederick W. Taylor had begun his highly influential book; “The Principles of Scientific Management” indicating his view regarding management practices. As one of the most influential management theorists, Taylor is widely acclaimed as the ‘father of scientific management’. Taylor had sought “the ‘one best way’ for a job to be done” (Robbins, Bergman, Stagg & Coulter, 2003, p.39). Northcraft and Neale (1990, p.41) state that “Scientific management took its

Today’s managers have a growing need to understand scientific findings and incorporate them into decision making. Research always facilitates effective management. At many government organizations research drives every aspect of major decision making. In some organizations, research is so fundamental that management makes hardly any significant decision without the benefit of some kind of research.

The scientific management theory have an assumption that workers are lazy, not smart in analyzing tasks, only prefers simplified work and only works for money (Miller & Form, 1964). According to Taylor (2004), workers are unable figure out the most efficient way in doing work. Therefore, they are thought as replaceable working parts like a machine in the production line and can be trained to specialize in a certain procedure in the production. They are assumed to adopt the Protestant work ethic, working for long hours and not taking any breaks. Whenever a worker or a ‘part’ failed to perform its tasks, they