At this point a dissertation seems a lifetime away. As I read research within my field, I see how much importance is placed on quantitative research and know that it will play a vital role in my dissertation. I'm enjoying learning more each week about functionality of terms such as correlation studies and descriptive research.
I want to do a correlation of the long term effects of tropical weather on ASU graduate students' productivity. Do you think I can find a grant to fund that??? :)
Monday, September 29, 2008
Monday, September 22, 2008
Descriptive Reseach
In class I shared a few examples of descriptive research that I've used in my workplace including NC Working Conditions Surveys (which are a big push from the governor), school climate surveys that are completed by students, staff and parents, exit surveys, etc. Although many people will find many possible flaws with any survey since they are only a snapshot in time that may not be wholly accurate, I feel that they are a closer glimp into reality than no snapshot at all. For all of their limitations, they do provide some direction and understanding that should guide discussion about what factors and indicators should be more closely analyzed and improved. Some may point out these limitations, but descriptive research, like most other research, provides the researcher with a more accurate focus. The discussions on improvements that follow at least have a perspective.
In Transformative Assessments, James Popham wrote that a flawed assessment is much better than no assessment at all. The assessment, much like descriptive research, gives a better picture than nothing at all and improvement is rarely made on sheer assumptions with no data to back it up.
In Transformative Assessments, James Popham wrote that a flawed assessment is much better than no assessment at all. The assessment, much like descriptive research, gives a better picture than nothing at all and improvement is rarely made on sheer assumptions with no data to back it up.
Monday, September 8, 2008
To be or not to be
To be or not to be? That is a simple enough question unless you don’t yet know what to be. As I have read countless descriptive articles on epistemological stances to research, I have found myself wavering between viewpoints as I saw validity in many of the various paradigmatic approaches to research. At first I thought myself a Marxist Objectivist, but I found that viewpoint to be a little too stringent and restrictive to my viewpoint. I felt sure that the positivist approach to research was most definitely too restrictive, although I do see the value in quantitative research as a whole. As I read beyond some of the selections we were given I began to see myself aligned closer to the constructivism/critical theory standpoint to research, social sciences and education. I see myself as a critical constructivist.
A constructivist viewpoint of reality is that it is not discovered, but constructed by humans as they engage with their world. We don’t create meaning, but instead we construct meaning. In many ways it brings together both the objectivist as well as the subjectivist paradigms. Through the constructivist lens the human experience and prior experiences have a direct impact on the object or experience being observed. Since our prior experiences impact how we view an object, there may be varying interpretations of the same object. What we see as a home in our culture varies greatly from an nomadic tribe’s viewpoint, which also greatly differs from that of an aristocratic family. Each culture has given meaning to the term based on our interaction with the object, but they are not the same meaning.
One major reason that I originally aligned myself with the objectivism/critical theory, also referred to as radical structuralism, approach was its focus on using data to challenge the status quo. In education I have been a proponent of moving from subjective data to more quantifiable data to improve instruction. When No Child Left Behind became ratified it completely changed how and what we do to instruct our students. No longer was growth left to chance, but instead it is now measured and used to improve instructional strategies based upon research based best practices. Using this approach I have been a part of two dramatic reformations in the past 5 years where low performing schools and districts have used data to quantify what is successful with equipping students to be successful in the 21st Century and what is not. Dramatic improvement came about in both situations when this data was analyzed and improvement processes were developed based upon the gaps that truly existed.
Let me now step back down from the soapbox. The experiences that I previously described have had profound influence on what I see as challenging the status quo. I do however see that a strictly objectivist approach looks only at the data in isolation and doesn’t take in to account the outside factors that influence. Data must be looked at as part of the bigger picture including historical perspective of what has brought a school to this point. Using data in a vacuum to describe a successful school for example can be very deceiving. I’ll give you a prime example.
A school that has an 85% proficiency rate on the state End of Grade test in and of itself means nothing. If that school was previously operating at a 65% passing rate then it would seem that it had made tremendous gains and had made successful changes. If however that school obtained proficiency rates of 95% or higher the previous 3 years and now had a 85% passing rate, then there exists issues that would need to be analyzed. Each of these changes in and of themselves viewed in isolation tells little of the story. Maybe district lines were redrawn, or a local industry could have opened or closed that changed the demographics. The school leadership could have changed.
A critical theory approach looks to challenge the status quo and open people’s minds to the possibilities that exist by empowering them with knowledge to a better world. It can be idealistic in its extreme version. This viewpoint looks for potential and possibilities instead of the traditions of status quo. Critical theory looks to raise people’s awareness past illusions and traditions that may hinder growth. It also looks raise their level of consciousness so that they can be equipped with the tools to make positive changes. It builds on collective knowledge and focuses on radical transformation.
All of this said, as of today I choose to be a critical constructivist. This approach to research is aligned with what I see as my personal epistemological viewpoint. I reserve the right to change this stance as my own level of awareness is broadened by my readings, philosophical discussions with my classmates and the high level of instruction I shall receive in the coming weeks.
A constructivist viewpoint of reality is that it is not discovered, but constructed by humans as they engage with their world. We don’t create meaning, but instead we construct meaning. In many ways it brings together both the objectivist as well as the subjectivist paradigms. Through the constructivist lens the human experience and prior experiences have a direct impact on the object or experience being observed. Since our prior experiences impact how we view an object, there may be varying interpretations of the same object. What we see as a home in our culture varies greatly from an nomadic tribe’s viewpoint, which also greatly differs from that of an aristocratic family. Each culture has given meaning to the term based on our interaction with the object, but they are not the same meaning.
One major reason that I originally aligned myself with the objectivism/critical theory, also referred to as radical structuralism, approach was its focus on using data to challenge the status quo. In education I have been a proponent of moving from subjective data to more quantifiable data to improve instruction. When No Child Left Behind became ratified it completely changed how and what we do to instruct our students. No longer was growth left to chance, but instead it is now measured and used to improve instructional strategies based upon research based best practices. Using this approach I have been a part of two dramatic reformations in the past 5 years where low performing schools and districts have used data to quantify what is successful with equipping students to be successful in the 21st Century and what is not. Dramatic improvement came about in both situations when this data was analyzed and improvement processes were developed based upon the gaps that truly existed.
Let me now step back down from the soapbox. The experiences that I previously described have had profound influence on what I see as challenging the status quo. I do however see that a strictly objectivist approach looks only at the data in isolation and doesn’t take in to account the outside factors that influence. Data must be looked at as part of the bigger picture including historical perspective of what has brought a school to this point. Using data in a vacuum to describe a successful school for example can be very deceiving. I’ll give you a prime example.
A school that has an 85% proficiency rate on the state End of Grade test in and of itself means nothing. If that school was previously operating at a 65% passing rate then it would seem that it had made tremendous gains and had made successful changes. If however that school obtained proficiency rates of 95% or higher the previous 3 years and now had a 85% passing rate, then there exists issues that would need to be analyzed. Each of these changes in and of themselves viewed in isolation tells little of the story. Maybe district lines were redrawn, or a local industry could have opened or closed that changed the demographics. The school leadership could have changed.
A critical theory approach looks to challenge the status quo and open people’s minds to the possibilities that exist by empowering them with knowledge to a better world. It can be idealistic in its extreme version. This viewpoint looks for potential and possibilities instead of the traditions of status quo. Critical theory looks to raise people’s awareness past illusions and traditions that may hinder growth. It also looks raise their level of consciousness so that they can be equipped with the tools to make positive changes. It builds on collective knowledge and focuses on radical transformation.
All of this said, as of today I choose to be a critical constructivist. This approach to research is aligned with what I see as my personal epistemological viewpoint. I reserve the right to change this stance as my own level of awareness is broadened by my readings, philosophical discussions with my classmates and the high level of instruction I shall receive in the coming weeks.
Monday, September 1, 2008
No philosopy needed
After our first few courses, I was concerned that I did not have a degree in philosophy, other than that earned listening to scholarly friends at the poker table. This class is more in line with my train of thought.
I found the Crotty and Guba articles to be very beneficial in giving a broad overview of the research process. The Burrell and Morgan piece was a little harder for me to grasp, but I'm sure that the conversations in class will help me to understand.
Each day I realize that I never knew how much I didn't know. You know?
I found the Crotty and Guba articles to be very beneficial in giving a broad overview of the research process. The Burrell and Morgan piece was a little harder for me to grasp, but I'm sure that the conversations in class will help me to understand.
Each day I realize that I never knew how much I didn't know. You know?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)