![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.explodingart.com\/arb\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/droppedImage.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nIn undergraduate \u2018research,\u2019 students are largely discovering for themselves things that are widely known in the field, but this does not preclude them from having novel insights nor of discovering this knowledge through their own experience and experimentation. In higher degree research, such as Masters and Doctoral programs, the balance shifts toward big-R research and there is an expected increase in the capacity to do independent work and to make a contribution to the field. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Research methods may be similar for small-r and big-R research but the area of investigation for big-R projects is carefully chosen to afford novel insights and new understandings. This classification is like Margaret Boden\u2019s types of creativity; P-creative (personal creativity – inventive with regard to the person\u2019s previous activities) and H-creative (historical creativity – inventive with regard to humanity\u2019s previous efforts). A similar, and even closer parallel, is a distinction drawn by Howard Gardner between \u201clittle c\u201d and \u201cbig C\u201d creativity. The former being the type of creativity we all engage with in our daily lives and the latter being the kind of breakthrough that occurs only very occasionally. We need, in these discussions, to be clear about the difference between sources of knowledge (primary and secondary), research approaches (methods), and the novelty of the knowledge (discovery and rediscovery). The focus, for this distinction, is on the uniqueness of the insights that research produces; about the new knowledge generated. It is possible to arrive at insights and\/or to express or communicate them in many ways, including through introspection, observation, artistic practice, reading, writing, discussion, measurement, mathematic proof, computer simulation, and so on. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Advancing one\u2019s research capability usually includes getting good at one or more of these methods of inquiry and communication. However, methodological competency does not guarantee big \u2018R\u2019 outcomes even though it makes it more likely. Choosing an appropriate investigative focus is critical because operating at the leading edge (top) of a field is much more likely to result in big \u2018R\u2019 outcomes. Other success strategies include asking the right questions, looking in the right places for answers, understanding \u2018what\u2019s next\u2019 in a discipline, and so on. <\/p>\n\n\n\n