Nabatar Norman E. Nabatar Ms. Victoria Gateworth 18 January 2011 There Is No Hope Of Doing Perfect Research (Griffiths, 97).

Do You Agree? Is there such a thing as a perfect research? At the outset, I am prompted to say, There is absolutely no such animal! Not on earth, neither in heaven, nor in hell! As researchers we are all

too familiar with the uncertain factor or the unknown variable(s). Too often our hypotheses do not catch every unknown and as the research progresses, much less, our empirical formula. Then as we get deeper in the research, the loose ends just get looser looping into endless loops and hope in seeing its end dims. Many a researcher has been faced with the dilemma of the million dollar fund almost spent, with no end in sight, yet. Neither is it uncommon for a researcher to be at his wits end, with his insides screaming and crying, O, God! Let me see light, please. In the end, after what seems to be an eon spent on the research, we find solace in the fact that we have imparted to our readers; yes, even to the most skeptic, the challenge to question our findings and propose a better one. Only in this manner are we vindicated. Whether we are right or wrong, it is only time that will finally judge us. Time, for example, is generally considered an element in any research, as well as a factor. As an element, the time the research is made is observed and recorded. As a factor, results are recorded as time affects the variable(s). Projections are also made over a span of time, periods of time, and so on and so forth. The question of whether your research captured other elements in the time element or not is a question that time will also tell. Similarly, our research projections will be judged overtime. In the long term, if your research validity is still relevant beyond your projections and continues to be so, perhaps, only then may your research be called perfect.

Nabatar Nabatar and Dionio pointed out, Of three leading brands of animal feeds in the market

today, those of Integrated Feed Mills (IFM) offered the best quality for the poultry raisers money. However, it is not certain what the future has in store for IFM, a government-subsidized feed manufacturer, in the current political situation (87). In 1986, IFM would lose its business with the ouster of the late Philippine President Ferdinand E. Marcos in a coup d tat which installed the late Corazon C. Aquino as the duly-elected president. President Aquino abolished crony capitalism in the country. The feeds manufactured by IFM using government funds were of high quality and cost less than the other two leading brands. Majority of micro-scale farmers, who accounted for 75% of poultry production then, used feeds from IFM. IFMs growing mash was cheaper by 7.5% to Julus and 10% to B-Megs. Even short-term objectives began that year, were dashed. A researcher can never underestimate times significance as a factor and it is always an element in the proper perspective of any research finding. Research is not always about employing the scientific method. Legal research, for example, searches for all the applicable law and jurisprudence to a case at bar to establish a relative fact. It is relative because the facts are viewed differently by the contending parties, and the judge or the jury may appreciate the facts from another. The more sensational the case, the more relative are the facts. Nabatar in a case study on the then sensational question of the constitutionality of then president Marcos 1973 Constitution cited the landmark case decided by the Supreme Court of Josue Javellana versus the Executive Secretary, et. al. on March 31, 1973 (7). The courts ruling, justifying the declaration of martial law and the constitutionality of the 1973 Constitution, ratified all the issuances of President Marcos appurtenant thereto (Javellana vs. the Executive Secretary, et. al.) The court also ruled that change is inevitable citing in its arguments, among others, the Greek philosopher Heraclitus, who said, Nothing is permanent except change.

Nabatar In law, the legal arguments may become mere rhetoric, semantics, or a play of words utilizing existing law and jurisprudence to overturn or change a previous decision. In the end, as long as the decision is within the ambit of sanity, propriety and common sense, the judge or jury wields at

its discretion the power to acquit or send an accused to jail or uphold the complainant or exonerate the defendant(s) in a civil case.1 As to whether a research is perfect or not, there may yet be a perfect research as several have already been milestone researches upon which other bodies of knowledge have been built. Man would not have set foot on the moon if it had not built on the results of other peoples researches and trusted in them.

Nabatar Note
1

The dissenting opinion of Justice Claudio Teehankee in the case of Javellana versus the

Executive Secretary, et. al., pointed out at the grossly questionable findings of facts purporting to comply with the requirement of a plebiscite to ratify the 1973 Constitution. He became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court during the administration of President Corazon C. Aquino.

Nabatar

Works Cited Griffiths, Morwenna. Educational Research for Social Justice: Getting Off the Fence. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1998. Print. Nabatar, Norman E. and Dionio, Cesar, N. Jr. A Comparative Study of Julu, B-MEG and IFM Growing Mash on the Growth of Arbor Acre Broilers. University of Southeastern Philippines, 1985. Nabatar, Norman, E. A Case Study on the Constitutionality of the 1973 Philippine Constitution. College of Law, University of Mindanao, 1986. Josue Javellana vs. the Executive Secretary. Supreme Court Reports, G.R. No. L-36142, March 31, 1973. n. page. Web. January 16, 2011.