Now that I have been introduced to both quantitative and qualitative educational research, I can see the difference between the two. When looking at different research studies to reflect on my own practices as a teacher, I am now able to see what procedures an author followed, find the results, and see what the significance of the study. I am not sure I will produce my own research studies, but you can never say never to what may be in the future. I can now see what kind of critical thinking goes into producing a research proposal. Learning the skills that go into research studies I am now able to evaluate published articles and try to find data to support any practices I am interested in doing in my classroom as a teacher. After reading a research article I able to evaluate the article, and design my own. If I was ever asked to evaluate my practices using evidence-based research, I would now be able to find and use peer-reviewed journal articles to help collect data to support my practices. Also when attending professional developments or county-wide staff meanings, and being told data to reflect our success in different areas (AYP, SOLs), I can now have a better understanding of the statistical techniques (such as measures of central tendency, standard deviation, and correlation) being used to explain that data. As a teacher ethical principles are always something to think about when making a decision about a situation that deals with any person. When it comes to researching any person, it’s also important to keep these principles in mind. Overall this course was a good experience as an “eye opener” to what is and what goes into educational research.
This reflection is from the 16 components of this course:
~ Introduce the fundamental terms, concepts, and designs characteristics of both quantitative and qualitative educational research.
~ Learning and application of skills that will enable you to design your own research studies and critically evaluate published research articles in an effort to encourage data-driven reflections.
~ Evaluate the methodological procedures that an authored followed.
~ Evaluate the results that were reported.
~ Evaluate the practical significance of the study.
~ Ability to comprehend common research designs, methods, and procedures.
~ Communicate the research results clearly, concisely, logically, and in a coherent manner.
~ Read and critically evaluate scholarly journal articles as well as design your own research investigation.
~ Compare and contrast quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods approaches to research.
~ Explain what experimental, quasi-experimental and non-experimental research designs entail and describe their application to different research questions.
~ Explain descriptive statistical techniques such as measures of central tendency, standard deviation, and correlation.
~ Explain the ethical principles that pertain to research involving human subjects and research conducted in educational settings.
~ Select a research problem and formulate appropriate research hypotheses and/or questions.
~ Conduct a review of educational literature from texts, journals, and computer library databases.
~ Write a coherent synthesis of such literature as it relates to the research problem.
~ Prepare a viable research proposal.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Compare and Contrast phenomenological and ethnographic research designs
*this chart was made in word and inserted using Capture*
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Key Characteristics of Qualitative research
For this blog I am using Paul G. Schempp’s study of the acquisition of a teacher’s knowledge to help explain the key characteristics of qualitative research.
Natural setting is the setting in which the participants are in a daily routine and the behavior being research is naturally happening. The setting the study takes place is in a rural high school, in PE classes, following a specific teacher. The research went to the high school to collect data, interviewed and observed.
In direct data collection the researcher is collecting data directly from the source. The researcher again, went to the school to collect the data himself. Data included observations, artifact and documentation analyses, video, interviews, and field notes.
Rich narrative descriptions are in-depth narrative discussion of what the behavior are occurring and the setting it is happening in. The study gives in-depth details about the findings. He goes into long direct quotes from the participant to help show the findings from the study.
Process orientation is the explaining why and how the behavior is happening. The researcher describes what pedagogical content knowledge is, then goes on to link this to the participant of the study.
Inductive data analysis happens after data is collected, analysis of the data occurs to find generalizations. The data collected in the study was analysis by first reviewing the data to determine tentative categories. Then the data was coded using the tentative scheme, and then finally a copy was present to the participant to get this comments and reactions.
Participant perspectives focus on the details of what the participants are doing and understanding of what they are doing in the context. In one part of the study the participant talks about how his perspective to his teaching, and how it links to more of his undergraduate experience. He also bases the success of the lesson on the enjoyment of the students.
Emergent research design happens as the research going on it changes and evolves into a different research design. The research during the study was constantly analyzing data he was receiving. Doing this allowed him to tailor the data that was being collected for specific themes that were emerging throughout the data collection period.
Natural setting is the setting in which the participants are in a daily routine and the behavior being research is naturally happening. The setting the study takes place is in a rural high school, in PE classes, following a specific teacher. The research went to the high school to collect data, interviewed and observed.
In direct data collection the researcher is collecting data directly from the source. The researcher again, went to the school to collect the data himself. Data included observations, artifact and documentation analyses, video, interviews, and field notes.
Rich narrative descriptions are in-depth narrative discussion of what the behavior are occurring and the setting it is happening in. The study gives in-depth details about the findings. He goes into long direct quotes from the participant to help show the findings from the study.
Process orientation is the explaining why and how the behavior is happening. The researcher describes what pedagogical content knowledge is, then goes on to link this to the participant of the study.
Inductive data analysis happens after data is collected, analysis of the data occurs to find generalizations. The data collected in the study was analysis by first reviewing the data to determine tentative categories. Then the data was coded using the tentative scheme, and then finally a copy was present to the participant to get this comments and reactions.
Participant perspectives focus on the details of what the participants are doing and understanding of what they are doing in the context. In one part of the study the participant talks about how his perspective to his teaching, and how it links to more of his undergraduate experience. He also bases the success of the lesson on the enjoyment of the students.
Emergent research design happens as the research going on it changes and evolves into a different research design. The research during the study was constantly analyzing data he was receiving. Doing this allowed him to tailor the data that was being collected for specific themes that were emerging throughout the data collection period.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Two Studies on inclusion
Benefits and Risks of Reverse Inclusion for Preschoolers with and without Disabilities: Perspectives of Parents and Providers
Rafferty & Griffin
Study design: This research design consists of surveys given to teachers and related service providers in a reverse inclusion preschool program and the parents of the preschoolers (with and without disabilities) in the program.
Participants/sample: 118 teachers and related service providers working on private, community-based reverse inclusion preschool program. Also 161 parents of preschoolers with disabilities and 76 parents of preschoolers who are typically developing in the same program were part of the sample (383 surveys went home to parents, only 237 returned the surveys).
Data collection methods: The researchers gave an envelope with a survey, a return envelope, and a cover letter to each teacher and related service providers. Then the same survey, with return envelope and cover letter were sent home to all parents. A reminder package was sent 2 weeks later. Two scales were developed for the survey. The participants reported to the extent they agreed or disagreed with each item.
Data analysis: The researchers used Analysis of variance techniques to compare the total mean score of the teachers/providers to the parent groups on each attitude measure. Analysis of variance techniques were also used to examine attitudes towards inclusion by job category. Chi-square tests were used to compare providers’ and parents’ attitudes for hypothetical children with various types of disabilities and severity. Zero-order correlations between demographic characteristics of providers and their scores on each attitude were presented.
Conclusions: Parents and providers are concerned about staff training and adequacy of resources. Also providers should be concerned about what the parents concerns about inclusion and address them. Increase the knowledge of staff to work with certain students is wanted. Information on effective inclusion practices to the providers. For an inclusion program to be supportive of both students with special needs and students without the program quality needs to be acceptable and appropriate services are being provided.
The conclusions are valid for this particular program. If the sampling group was bigger and the location was not just one specific program (suburban area in New York State) there may have been different answers. This study would be able to be more generalize to all reverse inclusion settings. This seems to be a very large reverse inclusion program and they received a good response. It would be interested to see responses from other reverse inclusion programs in different states.
Elements of Successful Inclusion for Children with Significant Disablities
Cross, Traub, Hutter-Pishgahi, & Shelton
Study design: Qualitative research design, this study took place over a long period of time (2 to 6 months to collect data for each site). The researchers were flexible and it took place in the participants’ natural environment. Detailed interviews and follow-ups also occurred with this study.
Participants/sample: 7 young children who meet the criteria had been identified. Parents and providers were interesting in participating in the study; a researcher went out to the setting to confirm it would meet the criteria for the study. The participants are the providers who provide services, supports, and education to the 7 students with disabilities. 43 interviews took place with therapists, ECSE/ECE teaching staff, and family members.
Data collection methods: Interviews, observations of the normal routines, and written records. Each researcher took sole responsibility for one or more sites. Interview included open-ended questions and probes, and lasted between 45-90 minutes. Each interview was tape-recorded or documented with hand-written notes. Interviews were also followed-up with phone calls, emails, and site visits. 3 to 5 observations took place for each child, at each site. The observations were about 2 hours long. There was no interaction with the researcher during the observations. Data collected varied by setting. Data collection included IEP/IFSP goals, outcomes, and accommodations, parent-provider communication books, posted notes in classroom, and program descriptions. The data collection was photocopied or documented in hand written notes.
Data analysis: The researchers used coding, data display, and pattern coding to analysis their data. They used data triangulation and investigator triangulation. They used 3 stages to analysis the data. The first stage was meeting of the research team to review coding strategies, emerging clumps of data, and associate labels. The second was to identify the dominant elements of practice in the coded content, using investigator triangulation. The third stage an in-depth examination of each element.
Conclusions: Four elements associated with successful inclusion of children with significant disabilities: attitudes, parent-provider relationships, therapeutic intervention, and adaptations. Each child’s success in inclusion involved a large number of adults. Parents, therapists, and teachers need to work together to ensure inclusion is successful for that child and they need to be able to be flexible in the setting. To include children with significant disabilities in community settings requires looking into their services, goals, and placements to ensure the benefits for successful inclusion can go passed the early childhood years of the child.
The conclusion is valid of the study design. The researchers had a specific criterion they were looking for when starting this study. They reminded flexible to what they found and used triangulation to link all the data together to come to their conclusions. The settings used in this study were different but still the same where they were all inclusion settings. Each researcher took one at least one setting or more and no other researcher conducted interview/observations at that particular site, it did not change the perspective of someone else who did not know the situation (child). This helped to validate the conclusion based on this qualitative study.
references
Griffin, K.W., and Rafferty, Y. (2005). Benefits and Risks of Reverse Inclusion for Preschoolers with and without Disabilities: Perspectives of Parents and Providers. Journal of Early Intervention. 27. 173-192. doi: 10.1177/105381510502700305
Cross, A.F., Hutter-Pishgahi, L., Shelton, G., & Traub, E.K. (2004). Elements of Successful Inclusion for Children with Significant Disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 24(3) 169- 83.
Rafferty & Griffin
Study design: This research design consists of surveys given to teachers and related service providers in a reverse inclusion preschool program and the parents of the preschoolers (with and without disabilities) in the program.
Participants/sample: 118 teachers and related service providers working on private, community-based reverse inclusion preschool program. Also 161 parents of preschoolers with disabilities and 76 parents of preschoolers who are typically developing in the same program were part of the sample (383 surveys went home to parents, only 237 returned the surveys).
Data collection methods: The researchers gave an envelope with a survey, a return envelope, and a cover letter to each teacher and related service providers. Then the same survey, with return envelope and cover letter were sent home to all parents. A reminder package was sent 2 weeks later. Two scales were developed for the survey. The participants reported to the extent they agreed or disagreed with each item.
Data analysis: The researchers used Analysis of variance techniques to compare the total mean score of the teachers/providers to the parent groups on each attitude measure. Analysis of variance techniques were also used to examine attitudes towards inclusion by job category. Chi-square tests were used to compare providers’ and parents’ attitudes for hypothetical children with various types of disabilities and severity. Zero-order correlations between demographic characteristics of providers and their scores on each attitude were presented.
Conclusions: Parents and providers are concerned about staff training and adequacy of resources. Also providers should be concerned about what the parents concerns about inclusion and address them. Increase the knowledge of staff to work with certain students is wanted. Information on effective inclusion practices to the providers. For an inclusion program to be supportive of both students with special needs and students without the program quality needs to be acceptable and appropriate services are being provided.
The conclusions are valid for this particular program. If the sampling group was bigger and the location was not just one specific program (suburban area in New York State) there may have been different answers. This study would be able to be more generalize to all reverse inclusion settings. This seems to be a very large reverse inclusion program and they received a good response. It would be interested to see responses from other reverse inclusion programs in different states.
Elements of Successful Inclusion for Children with Significant Disablities
Cross, Traub, Hutter-Pishgahi, & Shelton
Study design: Qualitative research design, this study took place over a long period of time (2 to 6 months to collect data for each site). The researchers were flexible and it took place in the participants’ natural environment. Detailed interviews and follow-ups also occurred with this study.
Participants/sample: 7 young children who meet the criteria had been identified. Parents and providers were interesting in participating in the study; a researcher went out to the setting to confirm it would meet the criteria for the study. The participants are the providers who provide services, supports, and education to the 7 students with disabilities. 43 interviews took place with therapists, ECSE/ECE teaching staff, and family members.
Data collection methods: Interviews, observations of the normal routines, and written records. Each researcher took sole responsibility for one or more sites. Interview included open-ended questions and probes, and lasted between 45-90 minutes. Each interview was tape-recorded or documented with hand-written notes. Interviews were also followed-up with phone calls, emails, and site visits. 3 to 5 observations took place for each child, at each site. The observations were about 2 hours long. There was no interaction with the researcher during the observations. Data collected varied by setting. Data collection included IEP/IFSP goals, outcomes, and accommodations, parent-provider communication books, posted notes in classroom, and program descriptions. The data collection was photocopied or documented in hand written notes.
Data analysis: The researchers used coding, data display, and pattern coding to analysis their data. They used data triangulation and investigator triangulation. They used 3 stages to analysis the data. The first stage was meeting of the research team to review coding strategies, emerging clumps of data, and associate labels. The second was to identify the dominant elements of practice in the coded content, using investigator triangulation. The third stage an in-depth examination of each element.
Conclusions: Four elements associated with successful inclusion of children with significant disabilities: attitudes, parent-provider relationships, therapeutic intervention, and adaptations. Each child’s success in inclusion involved a large number of adults. Parents, therapists, and teachers need to work together to ensure inclusion is successful for that child and they need to be able to be flexible in the setting. To include children with significant disabilities in community settings requires looking into their services, goals, and placements to ensure the benefits for successful inclusion can go passed the early childhood years of the child.
The conclusion is valid of the study design. The researchers had a specific criterion they were looking for when starting this study. They reminded flexible to what they found and used triangulation to link all the data together to come to their conclusions. The settings used in this study were different but still the same where they were all inclusion settings. Each researcher took one at least one setting or more and no other researcher conducted interview/observations at that particular site, it did not change the perspective of someone else who did not know the situation (child). This helped to validate the conclusion based on this qualitative study.
references
Griffin, K.W., and Rafferty, Y. (2005). Benefits and Risks of Reverse Inclusion for Preschoolers with and without Disabilities: Perspectives of Parents and Providers. Journal of Early Intervention. 27. 173-192. doi: 10.1177/105381510502700305
Cross, A.F., Hutter-Pishgahi, L., Shelton, G., & Traub, E.K. (2004). Elements of Successful Inclusion for Children with Significant Disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 24(3) 169- 83.
Monday, March 8, 2010
threats to internal validity
Quantitative research question: What are the advantages of reverse inclusion setting compared to full inclusion setting for preschoolers with disabilities based on their meeting their outcomes of annual goals and objectives?
I have taken each threat to internal validity and explained how each one may affect the quantitative research question stated above.
History would affect the study because of any unplanned event that would happen at school. The study would have to take place in a school setting based on the comparing of the two different settings of reverse inclusion to full inclusion classrooms. This would include events like fire drills, snow days, and other events that would cause the school to shut down.
Selection would affect the study because the participants in the study are young preschoolers and the sampling of the participants would depend on the parents’ willingness and consent for them to participate. Also with that said it would be very hard to get a good sampling of participates with the same background and characteristics.
Maturation would affect the study because of the setting being a place for intervention. Early childhood special education is to help students with developmental disabilities or other disabilities to receive intervention to help in areas they are deficient in. The study is actually looking at if they are able to accomplish these achievements in a specific setting more then another setting.
Pretesting would have an affect on this study because the students would not be tested in any way. Data would be taken of their goals and objects to see how they have made progress, then again to see any changes that may take place through out the period of the study.
Instrumentation would affect this study by having different people being observers in the classrooms. It would be more reliable if you could have one person be the observer in all participating settings. A way to help instrumentation would be to possibly video tape each participant in the settings. This way one person could be the observer and rater. They could also be using the same instrument to rate each participate in the settings.
Treatment replication would affect the study because of the participants being in different schools, and settings. Their teachers and teaching methods may not be same. Different interventions or different strategies would happen depending on how the teachers or therapist or the response of the individual student.
I would hope subject attrition would not affect this study but it is a possibility. Participates can move from area to another. Participates may also achieve their goals and objects, and may no longer need the special education services. Since this study is looking at students with disabilities who would meet the requirements to receive services, they would need to be receiving early childhood special education services in either of the settings being looked at. Because the participants are young, the parents could also decide to pull them out of the study.
Statistical regression may affect the study if the participants in the study are not making any progress on their goals and objects in their specific study. If there is no progress or the participant digresses in their abilities rather than making improvements there is a statistical regression.
The diffusion of treatment would affect the study possibly if the settings were possibly in the same school. Because of how uncommon a reverse inclusion classroom is, having the settings in the same school not be likely. If the settings were in the same school the teachers may be collaborating together. If the teachers are working collaboratively then they may be using the same intervention strategies in their classrooms.
Experimenter effect of the study may include the observer possibly being the teacher, who is documenting the data of students with a disability. Because the study is focused on trying to find the benefits of reverse inclusion, a teacher who is for reverse inclusion may be bias for that specific setting.
Because this study is on preschoolers, if a person were to come in to observer the classroom or a specific student, the student (participant) may either perform better then what they would normally do or they may perform worst then what they would normally do. This is called subject effects; the behavior of the student is changing because of just being in the study. A way to have this not affect the study is if the participant is video tape without their knowledge. The parents of the preschooler would be made aware of the video taping but the student would not be. This would help capture the true behaviors of the student in the specific setting.
I have taken each threat to internal validity and explained how each one may affect the quantitative research question stated above.
History would affect the study because of any unplanned event that would happen at school. The study would have to take place in a school setting based on the comparing of the two different settings of reverse inclusion to full inclusion classrooms. This would include events like fire drills, snow days, and other events that would cause the school to shut down.
Selection would affect the study because the participants in the study are young preschoolers and the sampling of the participants would depend on the parents’ willingness and consent for them to participate. Also with that said it would be very hard to get a good sampling of participates with the same background and characteristics.
Maturation would affect the study because of the setting being a place for intervention. Early childhood special education is to help students with developmental disabilities or other disabilities to receive intervention to help in areas they are deficient in. The study is actually looking at if they are able to accomplish these achievements in a specific setting more then another setting.
Pretesting would have an affect on this study because the students would not be tested in any way. Data would be taken of their goals and objects to see how they have made progress, then again to see any changes that may take place through out the period of the study.
Instrumentation would affect this study by having different people being observers in the classrooms. It would be more reliable if you could have one person be the observer in all participating settings. A way to help instrumentation would be to possibly video tape each participant in the settings. This way one person could be the observer and rater. They could also be using the same instrument to rate each participate in the settings.
Treatment replication would affect the study because of the participants being in different schools, and settings. Their teachers and teaching methods may not be same. Different interventions or different strategies would happen depending on how the teachers or therapist or the response of the individual student.
I would hope subject attrition would not affect this study but it is a possibility. Participates can move from area to another. Participates may also achieve their goals and objects, and may no longer need the special education services. Since this study is looking at students with disabilities who would meet the requirements to receive services, they would need to be receiving early childhood special education services in either of the settings being looked at. Because the participants are young, the parents could also decide to pull them out of the study.
Statistical regression may affect the study if the participants in the study are not making any progress on their goals and objects in their specific study. If there is no progress or the participant digresses in their abilities rather than making improvements there is a statistical regression.
The diffusion of treatment would affect the study possibly if the settings were possibly in the same school. Because of how uncommon a reverse inclusion classroom is, having the settings in the same school not be likely. If the settings were in the same school the teachers may be collaborating together. If the teachers are working collaboratively then they may be using the same intervention strategies in their classrooms.
Experimenter effect of the study may include the observer possibly being the teacher, who is documenting the data of students with a disability. Because the study is focused on trying to find the benefits of reverse inclusion, a teacher who is for reverse inclusion may be bias for that specific setting.
Because this study is on preschoolers, if a person were to come in to observer the classroom or a specific student, the student (participant) may either perform better then what they would normally do or they may perform worst then what they would normally do. This is called subject effects; the behavior of the student is changing because of just being in the study. A way to have this not affect the study is if the participant is video tape without their knowledge. The parents of the preschooler would be made aware of the video taping but the student would not be. This would help capture the true behaviors of the student in the specific setting.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
What are all of the reasons that causation should not be inferred from comparative or correlational designs?
In a comparative study design causation should not be inferred first because a relationship can be proved to exist in variables. There can also be significant differences in the groups, but this is not a causal relationship between the variables. In Legette’s study he compared results between to public school systems. One of which is a city public school, the other is a county public school. In the city school they thought ability and effort were more important, where in the county school class environment was more important in music. There is a significant difference in each of these groups, and the environment would be different from an urban school compared to a rural school.
In a comparative study you can also logically establish a causal connection between the independent and dependent variables because of this causation can not be inferred. Again in Legette’s study, the comparing of the two types of schools (county and city). There could be many other variables that come into play when just looking at the differences between city public schools and county public schools. In the study there was a difference in the results between the city schools and the county schools. This would probably have to be broken down even more to determine the real cause of this difference because of all the other possible factors involved (ethnic background, social economical status, school staff, etc).
In correlation studies causation can not be inferred because the direction of possible causation is not clear. Also causation can not be inferred in correlation studies because other variables associated with a particular variable that is not included in the study may affect the relationships and may be causally related. You also have to be careful when looking at the variables and not to infer causation between them, they may imply causation but in reality they do not.
In a comparative study you can also logically establish a causal connection between the independent and dependent variables because of this causation can not be inferred. Again in Legette’s study, the comparing of the two types of schools (county and city). There could be many other variables that come into play when just looking at the differences between city public schools and county public schools. In the study there was a difference in the results between the city schools and the county schools. This would probably have to be broken down even more to determine the real cause of this difference because of all the other possible factors involved (ethnic background, social economical status, school staff, etc).
In correlation studies causation can not be inferred because the direction of possible causation is not clear. Also causation can not be inferred in correlation studies because other variables associated with a particular variable that is not included in the study may affect the relationships and may be causally related. You also have to be careful when looking at the variables and not to infer causation between them, they may imply causation but in reality they do not.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Ethical Princples to Educational Research
Although all ethical principles are important when it comes to research with human subject, there are a few points that stick out the most. The most important point for a researcher to keep in mind when conducting educational research on human subjects would be subjects should be protected from physical and mental discomfort, harm and danger. Anything that would cause harm to someone else should not be performed. Also if there is a risk of any physical and/or mental harm the task should be avoided or the subjects should not be put at risk. The point of educational research is not to cause harm or danger to others but to study different topics to help in education.
It is also important that a researcher has informed consent of all subjects before conducting their research. If the subjects are younger they should have parental consent and disclosed what the research is about. You would not want to have subjects participating in something that they would not want to be part of or documented about. If you were the one who was participating in the research you would want to give your consent for your information to be used.
Along with getting consent of the participates in the study, all data collected from participates should be confidential. Although the data collected will be reviewed and reported, all names should be left out and only needed information should be known. All information participates are willing to share or observations are made should be considered private and not shared with anyone else.
Human beings are fragile both mentally and physically, just because we want more information about a subject through a study does not cause a need to harm others. We also need to keep in mind confidentiality and also informed consent out of respect for those participating in educational research.
It is also important that a researcher has informed consent of all subjects before conducting their research. If the subjects are younger they should have parental consent and disclosed what the research is about. You would not want to have subjects participating in something that they would not want to be part of or documented about. If you were the one who was participating in the research you would want to give your consent for your information to be used.
Along with getting consent of the participates in the study, all data collected from participates should be confidential. Although the data collected will be reviewed and reported, all names should be left out and only needed information should be known. All information participates are willing to share or observations are made should be considered private and not shared with anyone else.
Human beings are fragile both mentally and physically, just because we want more information about a subject through a study does not cause a need to harm others. We also need to keep in mind confidentiality and also informed consent out of respect for those participating in educational research.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
