Evaluating Research Methods

Scenario 1: Ten students are available for in-depth interviews. Participants will be selected based on their involvement with the peer mediation program. They will be observed over three weeks. Analysis will attempt to determine issues concerning peer mediation.

For this scenario, peer mediation would be best researched by using qualitative research. The reason for this is because qualitative designs “…emphasize gathering data on naturally occurring phenomena. Most of these data are in the form of words rather than numbers, and in general, the researcher must search and explore with a variety of methods until a deep understanding is achieved” (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006, p.26). With this scenario, it is evident that the participants will be observed over a period of time, and the observation will occur in a natural setting.

Scenario 2: Two classrooms of students are selected. There are 30 students in each class; each group will have similar demographics—age, sex, race, socio-economic background, etc. Classes will be randomly divided into two groups of 15 students. Of these two groups, one randomly selected group will get training on peer mediation and the other group will not. Thus in each classroom there will be one group that is trained in peer mediation and one that is not. Analysis will occur on which groups have the fewest office referrals.

The best research scenario for this scenario would be quantitative research, because this type of research uses “…numbers, statistics, structure and control” (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006, p. 23). This particular scenario would use an experimental design, because the researcher has manipulated what the participants will experience. In regards to experimental designs, according to McMillan and Schumacher (2006), “The investigator has some control over what will happen to the subjects by systematically imposing or withholding specified interventions” (p. 23). After the experiment is conducted, “The researcher then makes comparisons either (1) between subjects who have had and others who have not had the interventions or (2) between subjects who have experienced different interventions” (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006, p. 23). This type of research fits this scenario because the researcher controls one group on what the subjects will experience and keeps the other group natural, and does not provide peer mediation classes.

Scenario 3: A school counselor is interested in knowing how student attitudes affect the value of peer mediation to decrease the number of office referrals that are being filed for inappropriate interactions.

I believe that this scenario would be best researched with the action research method. According to McMillan and Schumacher (2006), “action research is the process of using research principles to provide information that educational professionals use to improve aspects of day-to-day practice” (p. 174). With this scenario, the counselor conducting the research would use action research to improve the school’s day-to-day practice. In addition, the person in this scenario who conducts the research is the counselor, which is typical in action research. Since this research is only being conducted in one school setting, not in a more general context, it also fits action research because, “the intent of action research is only to address specific actions in a single context, while applied research seeks to have implications for the field more generally” (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006, p. 174). This scenario would best be studied by using action research because since the is on a solution to common every day problems in a school, “the results of action research tend to be localized” (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006, p. 15).

Scenario 4: Peer mediation has become widely used in many schools. The feelings of those involved in the process are little known—either from those doing the mediation or those receiving it. The ZASK-R Acceptance Preference Survey will be given as pre- and post-tests to 40 students participating in mediation. Follow-up interviews will be conducted on a bi-monthly basis.

This scenario requires a mixed-methods approach, in which quantitative research will be used to determine the feelings of people participating in peer mediation or those giving the mediation. Since the feelings will be researched using the ZASK-R Acceptance Preference Survey, the results are quantitative. After giving a pre and post test using this survey, qualitative research will be used by doing follow-up interviews regularly. This type of research design allows the researcher to get a more in depth answer to a research problem, with number results as well as answering the questions “why” and/or “how”. Because there is more than one research method being used, researchers “are not limited to using techniques associated with traditional designs, either quantitative or qualitative” (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006, pp. 27-28). In addition to using mixed methods, this scenario would be using the explanatory approach, where the quantitative method is used first, by conducting surveys, then followed by the qualitative method, where interviews are used, to “elucidate, elaborate on, or explain quantitative findings” (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006, p. 165). The authors also believe that, “The use of mixed-method research designs, which combine quantitative and qualitative methods, is becoming increasingly popular because many situations are best investigated using a variety of methods” (p. 27).
References:

McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (Laureate custom edition). Boston: Pearson.

Writing the Research Questions

Problem Statement

I plan to research if high school students studying Spanish at the intermediate level who use on-line translators and other electronic devices to help them complete their work have higher achievement levels than students who use traditional non-technological ways to complete assignments such as complex thinking skills.

Who: Intermediate high school Spanish students
What: The use of on-line translators to do the work
Why: Impact on student achievement levels when on-line translators and other electronic devices are used instead of complex thinking skills.

My research questions are:

1. How does student work completed from using notes completed in-class and from in-class practice compare to that of a student who has used on-line help to complete their work instead? (Difference question)

2. Does supplemental technology use outside the classroom improve students' achievement in the Spanish classroom? (Relationship question)

3. Is there a positive relationship between technology use in the high school Spanish classroom and student learning (achievement)? (Relationship question)
As a result of the different types of research questions I will be looking at, I will
be using a mixed-methods research approach, using both quantitative and qualitative
methods.

As a result of the different types of research questions I will be looking at, I will
be using a mixed-methods research approach, using both quantitative and qualitative
methods.

General Problem Statement

My general problem statement is as follows:

I plan to research if high school students studying Spanish at the intermediate level who use on-line translators and other electronic devices to help them complete their work have higher achievement levels than students who use traditional non-technological ways to complete assignments such as complex thinking skills.

Who: Intermediate high school Spanish students
What: The use of on-line translators to do the work
Why: Impact on student achievement levels when on-line translators and other electronic devices are used instead of complex thinking skills.

EDUC6711 Reflection

Initially, my personal learning theory I developed focused primarily on the cognitivist learning theory and that students learn best with this theory. Lever-Duffy and McDonald (2008) stated that, “cognitivists focus on learning as a mental operation that takes place when information enters through the senses, undergoes mental manipulation, is stored, and is finally used” (p. 16). To me, that learning theory made the most sense, but after reviewing all the other learning theories, I have decided that not one learning solely working alone is best. I feel that incorporating each learning theory into lessons in different ways maximize learning for all students. I feel that incorporating only one theory all the time is not enough to maximize student learning.

The adjustments I will make in regards to my instructional practice with technology is to try to incorporate it more often. I rarely use technology with my students, and from this course, I have learned about a lot of different options with using technology. Two technology tools I will use with my students are virtual field trips and creating voicethreads. These two technology tools will allow students to work cooperatively and will also incorporate the contructivist learning theory, which is a good addition and will help enhance my students’ learning. Students will also develop a sense of empathy as we explore the Spanish-speaking world using virtual field trips, which is one of our school district’s outcomes and indicators.

The first long-term goal change I would like to make to my instructional practice regarding technology is to incorporate a student-lead technology project for each quarter for each Spanish class (first and second year) that I teach, so students are creating a project using technology tools for each unit (I have four big units each year). The second long-term goal change I would like to make is to not loose sight of which learning theories to use with different technological tools to best help my students learn. Instead of plugging in a technology tool into a lesson, I want to be able to plan it out knowing why I am using the tool rather than just doing it to say I am doing it. I will meet this goal by reflecting on my lessons each year and start planning my activities now, while the information is fresh in my mind from this class.

References:

Lever-Duffy, J. & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical Foundations (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

My VoiceThread!

Here is my VoiceThread URL:

http://voicethread.com/share/883808/

Enjoy!

Connectivism and Social Learning in Practice

Social learning theories emphasize that one constructs knowledge based on the society of which someone is a part. Dr. Michael Orey (2001) believes that in a classroom setting, when teachers choose to implement instructional models based on social learning theories, “the need for collaborating among learners and with practitioners in the society” is stressed. Dr. Orey (2001) also discusses that “Social constructivist approaches can include reciprocal teaching, peer collaboration, cognitive apprenticeships, problem-based instruction, webquests, anchored instruction and other methods that involve learning with others”. All of these instructional methods emphasize the social constructivist learning theory.

Based on my research this week, I found a few ideas that correlate with the principles of the social learning theories. One instructional method I read talked in detail about cooperative learning. Cooperative learning, according to Dr. Orey (2001), “promotes social interactions; thus students benefit in a number of ways from the social perspective. By having the students explain their reasoning and conclusions, cooperative learning helps develop oral communication skills”. A way in which I can use this method in my classroom is to have my students conduct interviews with a partner in Spanish, or in groups of four, and the students will have to share their findings with the class, using some sort of presentation tool to accentuate the presentation (Students can use visuals in PowerPoint, a VoiceThread, iMovie, etc.). In Spanish, students will have to pay attention to correct verb conjugations, grammar and tenses when speaking to one another and paraphrasing to the class.

Another tool which correlates to social learning theories and cooperative learning is using shared bookmarking. According to Pittler, Hubbell, Kuhn and Malenoski, “Now all a teacher has to do is bookmark her best resources on a social bookmarking site and make one link to it that stays at home or at school without having to remember a lot of URLs” (2007, p. 150). My World Language Department will be working on creating a social bookmarking site in two days to which we will all be contributing. Later, we will allow our students to have access to our Spanish resources via our classroom websites.


Another neat teaching tool about which I read this week is working with VoiceThread. This web-based program gets students working collaboratively on a task and then they are able to share their information not only with class members but with the community people all over the world. The projects I will have my students create will allow for each student to be able to receive feedback from the teacher and their peers. One example of using VoiceThread with my students is to have them create a restaurant review. Focusing on the preterite tense in Spanish and restaurant vocabulary, students will record their experience of a restaurant visit, taking pictures of the restaurant and the food they ate to upload to their VoiceThread. I will require students to comment on at least two other VoiceThreads.

References:

Orey, M.(Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Constructivism in Practice

Generating and testing hypothesis and the constructionist/constructivist theories of learning go hand in hand. In this week’s resources, the technological instructional method, generating and testing hypothesis was discussed and I was able to see what this has in common with the learning theories studied this week. As Dr. Michael Orey (2001) states, constructionism “builds on the ‘Constructivist’ theories of Jean Piaget, asserting that knowledge is not simply transmitted from teacher to student, but actively constructed in the mind of the learner. Learners don't get ideas; they create ideas. Moreover, constructionism suggests that new ideas are most likely to be created when learners are actively engaged in building some type of external artifact that they can reflect upon and share with others”. When I remember the classes I took when I was in high school, I seem to always remember the classes and lessons in which the students were taught someone hands-on, where we were able to create our own knowledge and create some sort of project displaying that knowledge of the concepts being studied and what it meant to us. We then were able to present it in one way or another, so others could understand the material in a different way.

The example which uses technology, generating and testing hypothesis, relates to the constructivist/constructionist learning theories because students are not only engaged actively in what they are learning, they are creating something to demonstrate their knowledge, which also proves they know the facts and information dealing with that concept. “When students generate and test hypotheses, they are engaging in complex mental processes, applying content knowledge like facts and vocabulary, and enhancing their overall understanding of the content” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007, p. 202). By using spreadsheets to display the information, this will help students “…[interpret] the data rather than [gather] the data” (Putler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007, p. 203).

I am thinking about some ideas with using technology to use generating and testing hypothesis with my students, but for Spanish class I am actually running into a wall. Does anyone have any ideas on how I can use this instructional method with my students with the Spanish language? I could always have students relate the instructional method with the Spanish culture. Any ideas?

References:

Orey, M.(Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.