After our lunch, we went back inside the room and continued the lecture. The facilitator began talking about research, in the afternoon of November 8, 2025.
The facilitator explained the tasks of the research. We should identify the problem, gather data, analyze data, interpret the data, and finally draw the conclusion. The problem statement is simply pertaining to the issue that my capstone will solve. In my case, some of the problems that can be solved by using a blockchain technology is to attempt to eliminate fraudster activities, the hash of each block is chained together and the hash value of the succeeding block depends on the hash value of the first block. Gathering data pertains to the process of collecting information from multiple resources that can help give answers to the problem. Interpret data is the process of reviewing the collected or gathered data to look for a pattern, trends and somewhat draw conclusions with this information. Data analysis is the process of removing duplicate information, looking for patterns, test hypotheses and draw evidenced-based conclusions.
Another important topic the facilitator talked about was the research proposal. Questions need to be considered by asking questions, are you genuinely interested in the topic? Do your strengths match the expertise needed by the topic? Are research materials available? Can you come up with the resources that will be needed? Are there experts on this topic who can be consulted? In my case, I am interested in anything related to cryptography that talks about encryption, hashing, diffie-hielman and networking. I am not interested in web development however I might consider it especially in Web3 framework applications. I have already read 1 article about blockchain technology but I know it is not sufficient for my research. There are available research materials for the chosen topic and I can come up with the research materials that are needed.Currently, I have no contacts with any expert related to blockchain as this is a new career in our country.
Furthermore, the facilitator started discussing the research process. A literature review wherein the research problem and research questions must be conducted. A survey by doing interviews, design, creation and experimenting based on the data you gathered related to the problem falls under this review, we can call this as quantitative. A minimum of 30 literature reviews based on what I heard from him related to the topic I have chosen. In my case, I have chosen blockchain thus, 30 literature reviews must be conducted. I did 1 already and the subject is Blockchain Technology Application:Challenges, Limitations and Issues by Neil Efren Villanueva. Initially, I only thought about the things good about solving fraud by using this technology without thinking about the challenges and limitations of blockchain. In this reading, my mind opens up to other vectors that I must consider. More readings to come on my behalf this coming months. For the conceptual framework, we have to take a look at the case study, action research, grounded theory and ethnography method. I opted out for this method, the literature review is much applicable on my topic of research.
We shifted the discussion to the research proposal and the template to be used for the topic. The proposed topic is the main area of interest of the study. The introduction usually has one to two pages by providing a brief background of the research topic and showing the importance
and the reason for choosing the topic. The purpose of the study has 1 paragraph wherein you state your objectives of the capstone project, that is it is trying to address and accomplish.
Another page is for the specific research issues providing at least 4 questions. The next page is designated for the proposed methodology that gives the plan of making the study, design, collection of data, and analysis used to answer the research questions. A list of readings must be provided about the topic. The expected significance of the study must be included wherein you show how to expand the existing literature of the subject, lessons can be learned by making this research.
I have reviewed the presentation slides of the facilitator and learned more things. How do you critically evaluate peer-reviewed literature for relevant research topics? I was stung at first and thought that I must be vigilant and looking for the information and I must hand pick the information that I am getting to ensure the quality of the research. I saw the documentation about the guidelines to help me answer the question. The researcher must establish a research topic. Having clear research questions is essential before you begin evaluating the literature.
This will assist you in determining the data you require and the standards you should employ when evaluating anything. Another guide suggested utilizing academic databases like Google Scholar or PubMed to search for papers that are relevant to your research issue. To focus your search, you can also use terms and phrases. Consider the source carefully before reading the article. Verify the validity of the publication and the author to make sure they possess the training and experience required to write on the subject. Read the abstract to get a quick idea of the content of the article and see whether it relates to your research question. Read the introduction and conclusion to have a better understanding of the article’s overall structure, main points, and author’s position. Read the methodology section: It contains a description of the study’s research techniques. This can assist you judge the validity and reliability of the study.
Read the results: The study’s conclusions are presented in the result section. Consider whether the information provided is pertinent to your research topic when you evaluate the data. Read the discussion section to get a better understanding of the author’s viewpoint by getting an interpretation of the findings. Assess the article’s merits and flaws, as well as the caliber of the research techniques, the sample size, the applicability of the findings, and the study’s constraints. In order to evaluate the article’s contribution to the field, compare and contrast it with the other works on the same subject. Make conclusions: Based on your assessment, make judgements regarding the article’s applicability to your research issue. Make use of the article’s material to guide your own study. Paying close attention to the research topic, study design, findings, and potential biases is necessary for critically analyzing peer-reviewed literature. By following these procedures, you can find pertinent material to back up your research, guarantee that your work is founded on credible academic research, and find relevant literature.These are the guides I have learned on the slides document of the facilitator.
Another tip by the facilitator is to pick a journal or conference that is well-known in your industry, attracts a sizable readership, and offers the greatest fit for your study. Remember that the submission procedure can be competitive, so make sure you properly craft your book or presentation and abide by the submission requirements.
Publishing the ideas is good as well. This will give you a source of feedback from people who read your papers. It establishes you as a member of the research community (useful for getting a job down the line). It forces you to clarify your ideas and to fit them in the context of the current state of research in your field. Preliminary ideas and work in progress are more suitable for a workshop or symposium. Well-developed, extensively tested ideas are more appropriate for a journal. One way to decide where your paper should be submitted is to read papers in potentially appropriate publications (e.g., last year’s conference proceedings and current journal issues). Another method is to show a draft or outline of the paper to your supervisor or other colleagues and ask their advice. These guides are all included in the presentation slide of the facilitator, take my word you will learn a lot about this research topic.
Here comes the hard part of me, networking. Not the networking about connecting computers and route them to other sites, but networking on people. I am a bit shy and usually work alone facing computers. However, project management is all about team effort, connecting to people thus, I must overcome this. The facilitator taught us how to network. It’s good to break into the research community by attending conferences, connecting to other researchers and maybe start making myself known(I wish). It is a learned skill and one shouldn’t expect to be an expert on it immediately, this helps to be a successful member of the research community. An effort is needed to meet and build relationships with other researchers by presenting papers. With that community, there is a big chance you meet people whose presentations match your interest.
Having conversation to the research interest as much as possible to improve, experience and learn. The learnings about your research must be summarized and you must know it by heart in case someone questions you about it. Connect to the people, especially to those who express an interest in your work by simply using email.
The facilitator continued discussing and by this time he started on the contents that we should put on our capstone project. The capstone project contents are deadlines, contacts, funding sources, instructions, publishers, acknowledgement, abstract, background, related work, implementation, results, interpretation, further work, summary, bibliography and appendix.
Furthermore, we also discuss the manuscript template to follow. It must contain the title page, executive summary, table of contents, list of figures, list of tables, list of notations, also the introduction page wherein you will find the context of the project, purpose/description, objectives, scope and limitations. The review of related literature systems must include the technical background, methodology, requirement specification, analysis, design, development and testing. The researcher must also include the results, discussion, recommendations and implementation plan. Lastly do not forget to include the appendices which may include relevant source code, evaluation tool, sample input / output reports, user guide and curriculum vitae.
That day, the gravitational pull of sleep was almost overwhelming. The late nights spent preparing for the week seemed to catch up all at once, but I forced myself to listen—every word, every slide. Why? Because I know that these foundational learnings are the bedrock upon which
my entire Capstone project will stand. They are the essential tools that will not only equip me to successfully defend my approved proposal but also ensure the integrity of my final work.
If my memory serves me right, the facilitator delivered a particularly critical segment on the types of ethical violations in research. These aren’t just abstract concepts; they are professional pitfalls we, as aspiring Masters, must navigate carefully. The violations discussed and highlighted on the slides included:
Violating Disclosure Agreements: Breaching non-disclosure or intellectual property contracts. Breaking Confidentiality: Failing to protect sensitive participant or client data.
Plagiarism: Presenting another person’s work or ideas as one’s own. Misrepresenting Results: Manipulating, fabricating, or selectively reporting data. Deceiving Participants: Misleading subjects about the nature or risks of the study. Avoiding Legal Liability: Neglecting to comply with all relevant laws and regulations.
While the ethical discussion was vital, I was primarily—and excitedly—anticipating the section on execution. The facilitator’s slides contained what I consider to be the holy grail for a capstone student: a detailed structural blueprint for the paper itself.
Two days after our class, the moment finally arrived. The slides were uploaded to the UVE (University Virtual Environment), and I immediately opened them, eagerly scanning for the practical guidance on the how-to-write portion of the discussion.
I found exactly what I was looking for—a detailed, prescriptive guide that effectively serves as a map for my Capstone journey:
Data Collection Techniques: A clear breakdown of different methodologies (qualitative, quantitative, mixed) and the specific techniques (surveys, interviews, observation, experiments) that are appropriate for various research objectives.
Methodology/Proposed Solutions: The core section describing how the research will be conducted. This includes details on the research design, the setting, the participants, and—crucially for an IT Capstone—the detailed steps for developing, implementing, and testing the proposed solution or system.
Discussion and Results: A guide on presenting the findings clearly and then interpreting them—linking the results back to the initial research questions and literature review, and discussing their implications.
Concluding Remarks: The final flourish, detailing how to synthesize the entire study, state the key contributions, address the limitations, and provide a roadmap for future research.
This 4th written blog entry will now serve as my personal, high-level reference guide. By internalizing both the ethical guidelines and the structural requirements, I am confident that I can transform my approved proposal into a quality capstone outcome—a significant step toward complying with all academic requirements and finally earning my Master in Information Technology diploma.