Practitioner methodology for longitudinal case study research, evidence-based documentation, and publication-ready academic writing in AI-assisted development.
Evidence-based research methodology for longitudinal case studies with publication-ready output.
This skill captures the practitioner research approach: practitioner-first, evidence-grounded, visually rich methodology papers that bridge academic rigor with real-world applicability.
| Principle | Description |
|---|---|
| Ship → Document → Promote | Research what you've done, not what you plan. Theory follows practice. |
| Visual Learning | Diagrams are primary evidence. Every architecture decision gets a Mermaid. |
| Structured Abstracts | Background, Objective, Method, Results, Contributions, Significance |
| Dual Audience | Part I: Universal Framework (any reader). Part II: Your Journey (case study) |
| Living Documents |
| Git-tracked, evolving with code. DRY—no duplicate content. |
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': { 'edgeLabelBackground': '#ffffff'}}}%%
flowchart LR
P1["🚀 Ship Projects"] --> P2["📝 Capture Insights"] --> P3["🔍 Notice Patterns"]
P3 --> P4["💡 Publication Potential"]
style P1 fill:#e8f5e9,stroke:#2e7d32
style P2 fill:#e3f2fd,stroke:#1565c0
style P3 fill:#fff3e0,stroke:#ef6c00
style P4 fill:#f3e5f5,stroke:#7b1fa2
The paper architecture follows this template:
Abstract (Structured)
Foundational Insight — Origin story, what sparked the research
Part I: Universal Framework — Generalizable principles anyone can use
Part II: Practitioner's Journey — Your specific implementation with evidence
Appendices — Raw data, project inventory, literature context
| Evidence Type | Example | How to Collect |
|---|---|---|
| Quantitative metrics | 4-6× acceleration, 148 insights | Track actual vs estimated time |
| Project inventory | 62 projects with success ratings | Table with pattern codes |
| Root cause analysis | Anti-patterns and solutions | Chronicle incidents as they happen |
| Literature context | Prior art vs novel contributions | Split table format |
| Portfolio evidence | Public GitHub repos | Links with descriptions |
**Background.** [Problem context. What limitation exists?]
**Objective.** [Research question. What are you trying to answer?]
**Method.** [What you did. Framework name, duration, scale.]
**Results.** [Key findings with numbers. Quantify everything.]
**Contributions.** [Novel concepts introduced. Name them explicitly.]
**Significance.** [Why it matters. What gap does this fill in literature?]
| Concept | Prior Art | Our Extension |
|---|---|---|
| {Concept name} | {Citation}: {key finding} | {How we extended or applied it} |
| Capability | Competitor A | Competitor B | This Work |
|---|---|---|---|
| {Feature} | ⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐ |
Legend: ⭐ = basic, ⭐⭐ = good, ⭐⭐⭐ = excellent, ❌ = missing
| Project | Skills | Success | Pattern | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| {Name} | {count} | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | 🔄 | {Brief note} |
Pattern Codes:
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': { 'edgeLabelBackground': '#ffffff'}}}%%
| Color | Hex | Usage |
|---|---|---|
| Info Blue | #e3f2fd / #1565c0 | Neutral information, starting states |
| Success Green | #e8f5e9 / #2e7d32 | Positive outcomes, solutions |
| Warning Orange | #fff3e0 / #ef6c00 | Attention needed, transitions |
| Special Purple | #f3e5f5 / #7b1fa2 | Unique concepts, outcomes |
| Danger Red | #ffebee / #c62828 | Anti-patterns, problems |
| Diagram Type | Best For |
|---|---|
flowchart | Processes, workflows, architecture |
quadrantChart | Positioning, trade-offs |
xychart-beta | Bar charts with metrics |
pie | Distribution, composition |
mindmap | Taxonomy, categorization |
block-beta | Layered systems, defense in depth |
## Single Author
Author, A. A. (Year). Title of work. *Journal Name, Volume*(Issue), pages. https://doi.org/xxx
## Multiple Authors (3+)
Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title. *Journal*, pages.
## Web Sources
Author. (Year, Month Day). Title. *Site Name*. https://url
Before publication, verify:
Always distinguish:
| Type | Treatment |
|---|---|
| Prior Art | "builds on established research (Citation)" |
| Novel Contribution | "We introduce..." / "This paper presents..." |
| Extension | "We extend [Concept] by..." |
How can [method/technology] help [users] achieve [outcome] over [timeframe], not just [immediate benefit]?
Example:
How can AI help developers get smarter over time, not just faster today?
| Criterion | Practitioner Lens |
|---|---|
| Feasible | Can I do this with projects I'm already working on? |
| Interesting | Will practitioners care? Will academics cite? |
| Novel | What do I know from practice that literature doesn't cover? |
| Ethical | Am I representing my own work fairly? |
| Relevant | Does this help someone else do better work? |
| Anti-Pattern | Problem | Solution |
|---|---|---|
| Theory before practice | Skills written before doing | Ship first, document after |
| Overclaiming | "Revolutionary" / "First ever" | Precise language, acknowledge prior art |
| Buried evidence | Data in prose, not tables | Tables and diagrams primary |
| Stale citations | All references >5 years old | Mix foundational + contemporary |
| Self-selection bias | "All my projects succeeded" | Include failures, analyze patterns |
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': { 'edgeLabelBackground': '#ffffff'}}}%%
flowchart TB
subgraph Practice["Phase 1: Practice"]
A["Projects"] --> B["Insights"] --> C["Patterns"]
end
subgraph Document["Phase 2: Document"]
D["Draft"] --> E["Diagrams"] --> F["Evidence Tables"]
end
subgraph Polish["Phase 3: Polish"]
G["Literature Review"] --> H["Fact-Check"] --> I["Academic Structure"]
end
subgraph Publish["Phase 4: Publish"]
J["Peer Review"] --> K["Revise"] --> L["Submit"]
end
Practice --> Document --> Polish --> Publish
style Practice fill:#e3f2fd,stroke:#1565c0
style Document fill:#fff3e0,stroke:#ef6c00
style Polish fill:#f3e5f5,stroke:#7b1fa2
style Publish fill:#e8f5e9,stroke:#2e7d32
| Session Type | Purpose | Output |
|---|---|---|
| Evidence gathering | Compile metrics, project data | Tables, inventories |
| Diagram creation | Visualize concepts | Mermaid diagrams |
| Literature search | Find and cite prior art | Reference list |
| Fact-checking | Verify claims and citations | Corrections |
| Academic polish | Structure, abstract, conclusion | Publication-ready sections |
| Metric | Target | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Projects in evidence | 20+ | Demonstrates breadth |
| Quantified claims | All major claims | Academic rigor |
| Diagrams | 10-20 per paper | Visual learning |
| References | 15-25 | Scholarly credibility |
| Novel contributions | 3-5 named concepts | Publishable value |
This research method leverages:
Problem: Informal tone, missing academic structure
Solution:
Problem: Thin case study, few projects
Solution:
Problem: Looks like self-promotion
Solution:
This skill was earned through writing AI-ASSISTED-DEVELOPMENT-METHODOLOGY.md — 1500+ lines, 22+ references, 17+ diagrams, fact-checked and publication-ready.