Guidelines

Quasi-judicial method

1. State the initial problem and issues as clearly as possible.
2. Collect background information to provide a context in terms of which the problems and issues are to be understood.
3. Put forward prima facie explanations of the problems and issues.
4. Use these explanations to guide the search for additional evidence. If they do not fit the available evidence, work out alternative explanations.
5. Continue the search for sufficient evidence to eliminate as many of the suggested explanations as possible, in the hope that one will account for all of the available evidence and be contradicted by none of it. Evidence may be direct or indirect, but must be admissible, relevant and obtained from competent and credible sources.
6. Closely examine the sources of evidence, as well as the evidence itself. All items should be checked for consistency and accuracy. This is analogous to legal cross-examination in the case of personal testimony.
7. Enquire critically into the internal coherence, logic and external validity of the network of argument claiming to settle the issues and solve the problems.
8. Select the most likely interpretation compatible with the evidence.
9. Formulating the acceptable explanation usually carries an implication for action which has to be worked out.
10. Prepare an account in the form of a report. It should contribute to ‘case law’ by virtue of the general principles employed in explaining the specific case. Source: Robson (1993, p. 376).

<< back to checklists and guidelines