Investigating Issues in the Caribbean
This domain tests whether you can design and carry out a small-scale investigation of a Caribbean issue. It underpins the Internal Assessment and is also tested in the written paper: formulating a research problem, choosing methods, collecting and analysing data, and reporting ethically and accurately.
Core rules and concepts
- Start with a focused question. A broad topic ('crime') becomes a researchable problem ('How does fear of crime affect evening use of public transport among 16-19-year-olds in a named town?').
- Align aims, hypotheses and variables. Operationalise concepts into measurable indicators; state whether the design is quantitative, qualitative or mixed.
- Sampling must be justified. Random and stratified samples support generalisation; convenience and snowball samples are weaker but sometimes practical. Report size and limitations.
- Instruments have trade-offs. Questionnaires give standardised data but risk superficial answers; interviews and focus groups give depth but are hard to generalise; observation suits behaviour.
- Quality and ethics are examinable. Validity concerns measuring what you claim; reliability concerns consistency; triangulation strengthens both. Informed consent, confidentiality, anonymity and no harm are required.
Worked example
A student investigates youth unemployment in a rural parish. The aim is to examine how young people explain joblessness. A hypothesis might be: 'Young people with secondary qualifications are more likely to attribute unemployment to limited local jobs than to personal lack of skills.' The independent variable is qualification level; the dependent variable is attribution. A stratified sample by age and gender, a short questionnaire plus six interviews, and thematic coding would allow comparison while preserving context. The reasoning: the design matches the question, permits some generalisation, and triangulates survey and interview evidence.
Traps
- Choosing a topic too broad for the word limit.
- Writing leading questionnaire items.
- Claiming representativeness from a convenience sample.
- Confusing validity with reliability.
- Ignoring consent, anonymity or vulnerable participants.
- Presenting data without linking findings to the research question.