From the article : "In this paper the implications of different research approaches and methods are illustrated by using two projects of the authors. Both projects take place in the same context: exploring participatory innovation within Small-to-Medium sized Enterprizes (SMEs). The main aspects coming forward when comparing the research characteristics of both projects are the importance of time and momentum, the structural set up of the project, people or participants and the abilities of the people involved. The research goal and the background of the researcher are main determinants for the chosen research methods. We hope with this paper to make researchers aware of the implications of the research methods and approach on the results of the project."
The current set of research methods on ictresearchmethods.nl contains only one research method that refers to machine learning: the “Data analytics” method in the “Lab” strategy. This does not reflect the way of working in ML projects, where Data Analytics is not a method to answer one question but the main goal of the project. For ML projects, the Data Analytics method should be divided in several smaller steps, each becoming a method of its own. In other words, we should treat the Data Analytics (or more appropriate ML engineering) process in the same way the software engineering process is treated in the framework. In the remainder of this post I will briefly discuss each of the existing research methods and how they apply to ML projects. The methods are organized by strategy. In the discussion I will give pointers to relevant tools or literature for ML projects.
Little is known about the effects of different instructional approaches on learner affect in oral interaction in the foreign language classroom. In a randomized experiment with Dutch pre-vocational learners (N = 147), we evaluated the effects of 3 newly developed instructional programs for English as a foreign language (EFL). These programs differed in instructional focus (form-focused vs. interaction strategies- oriented) and type of task (pre-scripted language tasks vs. information gap tasks). Multilevel analyses revealed that learners’ enjoyment of EFL oral interaction was not affected by instruction, that willingness to communicate (WTC) decreased over time, and that self-confidence was positively affected by combining information gap tasks with interactional strategies instruction. In addition, regression analyses revealed that development in learners’ WTC and enjoyment did not have predictive value for achievement in EFL oral interaction, but that development in self-confidence did explain achievement in EFL oral interaction in trained interactional contexts.
