WW_Bailey,+Bowen,+Doughman_Data+Analysis

Wiki Works Peer Review Template

http://research2010fall.wikispaces.com/


 * || Bailey || Bowen || Doughman

|| Bailey, on your homepage, you write "We are making the shift from teachers as providers of information to facilitators of learning. This new generation of learners demands the expanded use of technology in education. Teachers who use technology have found that most students possess increased motivation, enthusiasm and self-esteem. Students are more receptive to exploring information, more prone to take risks and can also extend learning to a greater breadth and depth of information." Are there any research references you can attach to these statements? I think it would lend credence to them.
 * **CRITERIA 1: Quality of Wiki Works (TOPIC) posted. (Please provide a thorough explanation to support your review) * ** || Quality of Wiki Works:

As for your data analysis section, I think that it is well-written. The methods you have selected to use seem like a good choice to me. || Bowen, on your homepage, you write "Children have many different learning styles. Based on this fact, technology can address the visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and many more of the different learning styles." Are there any research references you can attach to these statements? I think it would lend credence to them. Overall, the wiki submission is well written and seems well thought out. A little guidance on when you are switching from qualitative methods to quantitative might be helpful. || Doughman, you and I are a lot alike. Looking at your wiki homepage, where you give your overview, you use the words "I feel" repeatedly. What I would recommend is that as you become more famililar with the research you pulled that you start inserting some related quotes to support some of what you're saying (or change what you're saying based on what the research says!). As it is, we read a list of statements prefaced by "I feel." Again, I do the exact same thing. For me, I do it when I am uncertain about or new to a given topic. (I know you're not new to reading, but maybe you aren't sure who is saying what in the literature.

As for your "data analysis" section, you will want to include a page number in your APA reference where you directly quote. Your research design sounds solid to me, and your data analysis is well-explained. ||
 * **CRITERIA 2: Similarities of elements used in the Wiki Works submission to your own work. (Please provide a thorough explanation to support your review) * ** || We are both using mixed methods research, as we have to collect both qualitative and quantitative data. || We are both using mixed methods in our research. || We will both be working with mixed methods research. ||
 * **CRITERIA 3: Differences of elements used in the Wiki Works submission to your own work. (Please provide a thorough explanation to support your review) * ** || My wiki works is currently a mess, and Bailey's is better laid out with headings and such, which ultimately better translates into a research proposal that others can read. || Your approach is looking directly at student achievement. My research has me looking at other factors "around" student achievement but not directly at student achievement. || Your approach is looking directly at student achievement. My research has me looking at other factors "around" student achievement but not directly at student achievement. ||
 * **CRITERIA 4: Elements you would like to borrow from the Wiki Works submission you are reviewing or have not thought to add or include in your own work. (Please provide a thorough explanation to support your review) * ** || I am going to borrow Bailey's use of headings in my wiki works submission. || I like the way in which you have organized your wiki navigation bar. I think that mine is too cluttered and needs some clarification which will in turn allow my research to flow more smoothly. || I like the way in which you are already writing your paper. I had earlier said I liked the way a classmate had broken things down into little chunks on their wiki, but I think I prefer your method of getting the paper written (combining sections together). ||
 * **CRITERIA 5: Things you would like to change in your own work after seeing this Wiki Works submission. (Please provide a thorough explanation to support your review) * ** || I am going to add headings in my wiki works submission. || I may revisit my wiki navigation. I need to break down my pages more like what Bowen has done. || I have to get back to my wiki. It needs lots of work. I need to look globally at all of the elements I have put on it and harmonize them. ||
 * **D. What other comments related to this Wiki Works submission review that you want to share with your professor? * ** || I have nothing to add. || Nothing to add. :) || Nothing much to add. Unfortunately, the higher-level we go in the research concepts, the more fish-out-of-water-like I feel. I feel like I can be helpful with topic selection, but when we're at the data analysis phase, gosh, I just don't know. I am struggling with my own study and consulting all you smart people for help, and even you puzzle over it (not you in particular, Dr. B, but another prof). I don't feel I have enough know-how to really critique at this level. And if there are problems at the foundational level (topic selection, research question, etc.), it seems like that's where they need to fix stuff. ||

x