Possible Exam Questions: 2653: 3 hour exam.
The final exam will be comprised of two essays. Each essay answer will be
graded out of 100 marks. The average mark from both answers will
constitute the final mark on the exam. Students are expected to write in full
essay format, with the exception that direct references in the form of
quotations and page numbers to the texts are not required. Students
should be specific in their references to the relevant texts in their answers.
While stylistic and grammatical issues are not as important in an
examination in which students are asked to give answers under pressure of
time, they remain important aspects of good essays; therefore, it is
essential that students give their best answer for each question.
Three of the five questions from Part One will appear on the final
examination, and students will be asked to answer one question. The
question for Part Two of the examination is mandatory.
Part One: Answer any one of the following questions.
1. In “Retrospective Accounts of Violent Events by Gun Offenders” (Chapter
4 of Pogrebin text), and in “Street Smarts and Urban Myths” (Chapter 7 of
Pogrebin text), the authors claim some allegiance to “Grounded Theory”.
Using these course readings as examples, discuss the strengths and
weaknesses of grounded theory as a qualitative research method.
2. Scientific credibility (in the social science sense of the term) is important
to qualitative and quantitative researchers. Compare and contrast the ways
that both types of social science research seek to demonstrate scientific
credibility. *Requires a thesis*
3. Case studies, as small as one sample, may still make valuable
contributions to our knowledge of a particular phenomenon of interest in social science. Using examples from the Pogrebin text, discuss the
advantages and disadvantages of the use of case studies.
4. Qualitative research usually brings researchers into close and intimate
contact with their participants, and this close contact may have important
implications for the researcher both in terms of their analyses of their data
and in terms of their ethical conduct.