Posted by University Student on 04/02/07 12:45

On Apr 2, 3:48 am, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
> I would think if this were a research paper you would want a more
> scientifically selected group of respondents. Anything you get by
> posting like this in usenet groups is not going to be scientifically
> accurate, nor is it going to be repeatable. And thereby it will be useless.
>
> And if I were your professor and found you acquired your statistics this
> way I wouldn't even bother to read any further in your paper, because
> any results gathered this way are meaningless and therefore not worth my
> time.

Thanks for the advice. I understand what you are saying, but this
isn't a paper that is intended to be scientifically accurate with no
flaws etc. The results, obviously, aren't going to be submitted to a
journal or publication; it is a smallish module paper that is aimed
really at getting us to look at some aspect of web technology.

My professor already knows how I aim to go about getting the results,
which to me clearly indicates he knows and doesn't intend this to be
some kind of repeatable, scientific experiment to gather indisputable
results to show to the world!

I will certainly take on board what you've said though, and what the
other poster pointed out about comparing language and framework. I
have tried to stay away from calling them both languages (obviously
not successfully), instead comparing them as approaches to a possible
solution. I'll be sure to mention both these flaws in my report - it
should give me something else to write about.

Thanks.

[Back to original message]