De La Salle University Manila

SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS

Course Syllabus

Course Code and Title : METHODS OF RESEARCH (METRESE)

Term/Academic Year : Term 1, AY 2018-2019
Pre-requisites :Microeconomics 1 (MICREC1), Macroeconomics 1
(MACREC1) and Econometrics (ECONMET)
Class Schedule : Section V24, TH 11:00-12:30pm, Rm. L208
Section V25, TH 9:15-10:45am, Rm. L208
Professor : Alellie B. Sobreviñas, Ph.D.
alellie.sobrevinas@dlsu.edu.ph

COURSE DESCRIPTION
METRESE is a core course that gives students an opportunity to integrate their coursework
in economics and, as a group (maximum of 4 members), produce a complete, professional-
standard research proposal. METRESE is the first link in a three-term chain of subjects
(METRESE, THSECO1, THSECO2) through which students will fulfill the Economics
programme’s thesis/research assistantship requirement.

The vast majority of groups in METRESE go on to pursue “discovery-based” research

problems in economics – i.e., those that involve estimating parameters and testing
hypotheses. This is natural since most of their training in Economic Statistics (ECOSTAT) and
ECONMET conditions students toward these types of problems. However, a growing number
of groups have done purely theoretical work or have used methods not taught in the formal
coursework (e.g., agent-based simulation, input-output analysis, etc.). Students will have
plenty of opportunities to explore these research possibilities and discuss issues fully with
the instructor as well as their prospective thesis panelists.

Through a series of consultations, workshops, writeshops, presentations and lectures,

students are expected to produce a properly-formatted proposal that contains an abstract, as
well as introduction, review, theory and method chapters. This proposal shall be presented
to the faculty of the School of Economics and other students in a METRESE conference near
the end of term.

METRESE: Methods of Research (Term 3, AY 2017-2018) Page 1

 School of Economics
Expected Lasallian Graduate
Attributes (ELGAs)
Intellectual Inquisitiveness
Technical Proficiency
Globally Competitive
Agent of Positive Social
Change
Learning Outcome
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4
METRESE: Methods of Research (Term 3, AY 2017-2018)
Learning Outcomes (LOs)
On the completion of the course, the student is
expected to do the following:
LO no. 1: Evaluate industrial/financial/development
market issues and analyze the workings and history of key
industrial/financial/LDC markets and institutions using
economic models
LO no. 2: Implement the scientific method on economic
problems: developing hypotheses, envisioning data
requirements, analyzing with mathematical and statistical
tools
LO no. 3: Adopt to new situations and respond maturely to
setbacks
LO no. 4: Consistently work well with others, participate in
multidisciplinary discussions with an open mind and
respect for others’ views
Required Output Due Date
Writing exercises/Assignments/
Week 1-13
Consultations
First complete draft of proposal Week 9
Group presentation 1 Week 10
Revised draft of proposal (Writing exercise) Week 12
Group presentation 2 Week 13
(METRESE Conference) (December 3)
Final research proposal Week 14
Page 2
The standards and mechanics for each output are described below:

Abstracts. APA format; 120 words; As a general guide, the first sentence summarizes
general interest and conventional wisdom; The second sentence describes research gap; The
third sentence proposes research strategy (theory, method, and data); The fourth sentence
describes H1; Includes key words and JEL classification

Writing exercises. APA format; Writing should follow conventions for sentence-level clarity,
paragraph-level cohesion, emphasis, and style found in Williams (2011); Presentation of data
should be according to conventions for constructing descriptive tables/charts and writing
out statistical results found in de Dios (2004)

First draft/Final proposal. APA format; Contains title page, abstract page,
Introduction/Review chapter (1,750 words/seven pages), Theory chapter (1,000
words/four pages), Method/Data chapter (1,750/seven pages), Bibliography and relevant
Appendices

Presentations. Follow the structure of written abstract; With design principles that follow
de Dios (2004) and similar resources; Should be delivered without notes.

COURSE GUIDELINES

1. The marking scheme for METRESE involves two elements: (1) the
professor’s/professors’ evaluation and (2) each group’s consolidated members’
assessment.

For the first component, the breakdown is as follows:

Writing exercises/Assignments/Week-on-week revisions 25%
First complete draft of proposal 20%
Group presentation 1 (Class presentation) 10%
Final research proposal 25%
Group presentation 2 (METRESE Conference) 20%

The following grading scale will be followed.

Grading Scale:
95.00 – 100.0 4 75.00 – 79.99 2
90.00 – 94.99 3.5 70.00 – 74.99 1.5
85.00 – 89.99 3 65.00 – 69.99 1
80.00 – 84.99 2.5 00.00 – 64.99 0

METRESE: Methods of Research (Term 3, AY 2017-2018) Page 3

For the peer assessment component, each group shall agree on each member’s performance
collectively using a scale of “N – x” where N is the grade of the member/s who did the most
work and x is the point reduction (on a scale of 0.0 to 4.0) for members who did less work.
Example: The group agrees that Members 2 and 4 did most of the work, both
receive “N”; Member 1 who did a bit less, gets N – 0.5, and Member 3, who did
not deliver consistently, gets N – 1.5, etc..

When the two components are put together, those members who were assessed N will in
effect receive the full grade given by the professor. Those who were assessed N-x shall have x
deducted from the full grade given by the professor. Note that for course credit, the
minimum grade is 1.0 (i.e., with equivalent score of 65%).

2. Deadlines (date/day and time) for submission of required outputs will be strictly
followed. Students who submitted an output late but within the day of the deadline will
earn only 65% of the score given for that particular output. Outputs submitted the
following day (or days after the deadline) may not be accepted and hence, will merit a
score of zero for that requirement.

3. Lecture notes (in portable document format [pdf]) will be provided through the
specified online platform.

4. Class attendance will be monitored and the Student Handbook’s provisions on

attendance shall be followed.

METRESE: Methods of Research (Term 3, AY 2017-2018) Page 4

LEARNING PLAN:
Learning Outcome Topic(s) Week Learning Activities
No.
LO no. 1 1. Introduction to Research: The 1 Lectures/discussion
Empirical Tradition to Economic Home readings
Research
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 2. Formulating a viable research 2-3 Classroom Library
problem; Use of library resources, Instruction
online materials and databases Lectures/discussion
Consultation
Home readings
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 3. Reviewing the literature; Reading 4 Lecture-writeshop
strategies; Home readings
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 4. Linking theory, method, and data to 5 Abstract writeshop
one’s research problem; Writing an Home readings
Abstract
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 5. Refining and sharpening hypotheses; 6 Lecture-writeshop
Completing the Introduction chapter Consultation
Home readings
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 6. Writing in clear and coherent 7 Lecture-writeshop
manner; Completing the Review of Home readings
Literature chapter
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 7. Developing the research framework; 8 Lecture-writeshop
Writing the Theoretical Framework Consultation
chapter Home readings
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 8. Troubleshooting method and data 9 Lecture-writeshop
issues; Writing the Methodology Consultation
Chapter Home readings
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 9. Revising drafts for clarity, coherence 9 Lecture-writeshop
and style Home readings
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 10. Presenting one’s work informally 10 Class presentation
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 11. Finalizing drafts and presentations 11-12 Consultation
Lectures/discussion
Home readings
LO nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 12. Presenting one’s work 13 METRESE
professionally; Reflection, feedback, Conference
preparing for next steps Lectures/discussion

METRESE: Methods of Research (Term 3, AY 2017-2018) Page 5

 RUBRICS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF RESEARCH PROPOSAL (FIRST DRAFT AND FINAL VERSION)
Criteria Exemplary
(90-100)
Introduction, Presents economic reasoning in
thesis accurately; Introduction provides
statement context for the rest of the paper, thesis
(20%) statement is insightful and detailed
Synthesis Covers vast studies/ literature on the
and review topic; Provides a clear research gap;
of related Well-selected points of comparison
literature and/or departure among the texts,
(20%) clearly explained relationships among
the texts that support thesis
Methodology Identifies appropriate methodologies
and and research techniques (e.g., justifies
Theoretical the sample, procedures, and
Framework measures). Data analytic plan is
(20%) suitable to test study hypotheses.
Provides appropriate justification for
controls. Project is feasible. Presents
clear theoretical framework
Coherence Thesis is clearly stated and developed;
and specific examples are appropriate and
Organization clearly develop thesis; conclusion is
(20%) clear; shows control; flows together
well; good transitions; succinct but not
choppy; well organized
Mechanics Impeccable spelling,
and citations grammar, word order, word
(20%) usage, and punctuation;
proper citation of texts
METRESE: Methods of Research (Term 3, AY 2017-2018)
Accomplished
(80-89)
Presents economic reasoning but
not in an organized manner;
Introduction provides some context
for the rest of the paper, thesis
statement is implicitly stated
Covers some studies/ literature on
the topic; Provides a clear research
gap but is limited; Points of
comparison/ departure could be
more selective and explicit although
the reader can see how the texts
are related
Identifies appropriate
methodologies and research
techniques but some details are
missing or vague. Presents vague
theoretical framework.
Most information presented in
logical sequence; generally very
well organized but better
transitions from idea to idea and
medium to medium needed
Very few errors in
spelling, grammar, word
usage, and punctuation;
few errors in citations
Developing
(60-79)
Introduction provides little
context for the paper; Thesis
statement is implicit and hard
to find
Little connection between
texts, similarities/ differences
seem to be randomly
selected, difficult for the
reader to see how the texts
are related; Literature is
limited; Provides a research
gap but is not related to the
study
Identifies appropriate
methodologies and research
techniques but many details
are missing or vague. The
methodology is largely
incomplete. Presents some
irrelevant theories for the
analysis.
Concept and ideas are loosely
connected; lacks clear
transitions; flow and
organization are choppy
Several errors in spelling,
grammar, word order,
word usage, punctuation,
and citation
Beginning
(0-59)
Introduction provides no
context for the paper, thesis
statement is not explicit or
not present
No connection is made
between texts, no
similarities or differences are
noted, the reader cannot see
how the texts are related, is
more summary than
synthesis; Literature
discussion is not related to
the topic; No research gap
The methodologies
described are either not
suited or poorly suited to
test hypotheses. The
methodology is under-
developed and/or is not
feasible. Presents irrelevant
theoretical framework.
Presentation is choppy and
disjointed; does not flow;
development of thesis is
vague; no apparent logical
order of presentation
Many errors in spelling,
grammar, word order,
word usage, punctuation,
and citations
Page 6
 RUBRICS FOR THE CLASS PRESENTATION
Exemplary
ITEM (90-100)
Coherence and Thesis is well-developed; shows
Organization control; flows together well; good
(10%) transitions; succinct but not choppy;
well
Organized; An abundance of
material clearly related to thesis;
points are clearly made and all
evidence supports thesis
Delivery(10%) Creative thinking, time management,
and attention to detail are highly
apparent. Error-free grammar, mature
and engaging delivery, strong sense of
narrative and argument, and excellent
grasp of public speaking
Presentation Appropriate use of
Materials/ Visual presentation materials; Easily
aids (10%) understood visual aids which
complement and enhance the
presentation information
Ability to answer Presenters are able to demonstrate full
questions (10%) knowledge by answering question with
explanations and elaboration; Answers
questions well with reference to own
work
METRESE: Methods of Research (Term 3, AY 2017-2018)
Accomplished
(80-89)
Most information
presented in logical sequence;
generally very well organized
but better transitions from
idea to idea needed; Sufficient
information
that relates to thesis;
Creative thinking, time
management, and attention to
detail are apparent. Error-free
grammar, moments of
excellent delivery, narration
and argument, needs training
for more consistency although
effort and interest are clear.
The presentation materials
not as clear and not as well
connected to thesis
Presenters are able to
demonstrate knowledge by
answering questions with
explanations/few details
Developing
(60-79)
Concept and ideas are Loosely
connected; lacks clear
transitions; flow and
organization are choppy;
There is a great deal of
information that is not clearly
connected to the thesis
Shows some signs of creative
thinking, time management,
and attention to detail.
Acceptable grammar and
delivery but needs more
training and maturity, sense
of narrative and argument
needs tightening, effort
shown is adequate.
Choppy use of
presentation materials
Presenters are able to
demonstrate limited
knowledge by answering
explanations without detail or
elaboration
Beginning
(0-59)
Presentation is choppy and
disjointed; does not flow;
development of thesis is
vague; no apparent logical
order of presentation;
Information included that
does not support thesis in
any way
No sign of creative thinking,
time management, and
attention to detail. Error-
strewn grammar, lack of
interest in engaging
audience, toneless delivery,
poor sense of narrative and
argument, overall lack of
effort and practice
Little or no presentation
materials used or ineffective
use of presentation
materials
Little or no evidence of a
clear understanding of the
questions posed.
Significantly short responses.
Sometimes cannot answer
questions
Page 7
 RUBRICS FOR PRESENTATION DURING THE METRESE CONFERENCE
Exemplary
ITEM (90-100)
1. Viability The group is able to highlight the novelty
(50%) of their contribution to their field of
specialization. The group is able to
present a clear hypothesis and research
plan through exhaustively explaining their
data gathering strategy and economic
modelling approach. The group has a
feasible and well- articulated plan to
conduct the research. Methods are
appropriate, with significant adaptation
to the particular problem.
2. Presentation
a. Coherence Thesis is well-developed; shows control;
and flows together well; good transitions;
Organization succinct but not choppy; well
(10%) Organized; An abundance of
material clearly related to thesis; points
are clearly made and all evidence
supports thesis
b. Delivery Creative thinking, time management, and
(10%) attention to detail are highly apparent.
Error-free grammar, mature and engaging
delivery, strong sense of narrative and
argument, and excellent grasp of public
speaking
c. Presentation Appropriate use of
Materials/ presentation materials; Easily understood
Visual aids visual aids which complement and
(10%) enhance the presentation information
3. Ability to Presenters are able to demonstrate full
answer knowledge by answering question with
questions explanations and elaboration; Answers
(10%) questions well with reference to own
work
METRESE: Methods of Research (Term 3, AY 2017-2018)
Accomplished
(80-89)
The proposed research contains
innovative ideas. The group, in
general, has a feasible plan to
conduct research but with minor
issues on some aspects relating to
their data gathering strategy and
economic modelling approach.
Most information
presented in logical sequence;
generally very well organized but
better transitions from idea to idea
needed; Sufficient information
that relates to thesis;
Creative thinking, time management,
and attention to detail are apparent.
Error-free grammar, moments of
excellent delivery, narration and
argument, needs training for more
consistency although effort and
interest are clear.
The presentation materials not as
clear and not as well connected to
thesis
Presenters are able to demonstrate
knowledge by answering questions
with explanations/few details
Developing
(60-79)
Ideas are marginally innovative
but the research plan has
questionable feasibility. Omits
some details or contains items of
questionable accuracy.
Methods address only some
parts of the problem.
Concept and ideas are Loosely
connected; lacks clear
transitions; flow and
organization are choppy; There is
a great deal of information that
is not clearly connected to the
thesis
Shows some signs of creative
thinking, time management, and
attention to detail.
Acceptable grammar and
delivery but needs more training
and maturity, sense of narrative
and argument needs tightening,
effort shown is adequate.
Choppy use of
presentation materials
Presenters are able to
demonstrate limited knowledge
by answering explanations
without detail or elaboration
Beginning
(0-59)
The group is unable to highlight
novelty of their contribution to
their field of specialization. The
group cannot articulate their
research plan. Lacks innovative
content, or lacks a coherent or
realistic plan for success. Lacks
sufficient detail or is incorrect.
Methods identified are
insufficient or inappropriate.
Presentation is choppy and
disjointed; does not flow;
development of thesis is vague;
no apparent logical order of
presentation; Information
included that does not support
thesis in any way
No sign of creative thinking, time
management, and attention to
detail. Error-strewn grammar,
lack of interest in engaging
audience, toneless delivery, poor
sense of narrative and argument,
overall lack of effort and practice
Little or no presentation
materials used or ineffective use
of presentation materials
Little or no evidence of a clear
understanding of the questions
posed. Significantly short
responses. Sometimes cannot
answer questions
Page 8
REFERENCES:
Chong Ho Shon Philip (2012). How to read journal articles in the Social Sciences : a very
practical guide for students, SAGE Publications

De Dios, E.S. (2004). Form and Functions: A Guide to Technical Writing in Economics. The
University of the Philippines Press. Quezon City.

Fish, S. (2011). How to Write a Sentence: And How to Read One. Harper.

Fraenkel, J. and Wallen, N. (2010). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, 7th
Edition, Boston, McGraw-Hill

Galvan, J. (2006). Writing literature reviews: a guide for students of the behavioural
sciences (3rd ed.). Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing.

Kothari, C. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques, New Age International
(P) Limited, New Delhi.

McCloskey, D. (2002). How to Be Human (Though an Economist). Ann Arbor: University of

Michigan Press.

Morgan, S.L. (2007). Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social
Science Research.

Neugeboren, R., & Jacobson, M. (2001). Writing Economics: A Guide for Harvard Economics
Concentrators. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: The President and Fellows of Harvard
University
Williams, J.M. (2006). Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace, Ninth edition. Pearson/Longman.

ONLINE RESOURCES:

Useful for planning and designing academic presentations:

www.garryreynolds.com
www.slideshare.net

NOTE: Supplemental readings may be provided by the instructor throughout the

course.

Noted by:

______________________________________ ________________________________
Dr. Arlene Inocencio Dr. Marites Tiongco
Chair, Economics Department Dean, School of Economics

METRESE: Methods of Research (Term 3, AY 2017-2018) Page 9