WW_Martin,+Oglesby,+and+Powell-Schager_Types+of+Data

Wiki Works Peer Review Template

http://research2010fall.wikispaces.com/

https://spreadsheets0.google.com/viewform?hl=en&formkey=dDUzaXp1Vm1jN3NRSmZLUW1DVlByaVE6MA#gid=0

submitted on sep 29, about 10 days late.
 * || Martin, http://martin8484.wikispaces.com/Problem+Statement+%26+Research+and+Methodology

Types of Data & Collection: Samples of student writing will be collected in both classes at the beginning of the unit and at the end. Each writing sample will be evaluated using a state-wide writing rubric to measure changes in student performance. A minimum of three teachers will apply the rubrics and complete the evaluations on each student writing sample which will increase inter-rater reliability. I will also collect additional data to provide additional data as is suggested by case study research methodologists (Johnson & Christensen, p. 409). I will gather participant observation which will include e a checklist of observed behaviors relating to student engagement in various stages of the in-class writing process. || Oglesby, http://oglesbyresearch8484.wikispaces.com/Types+of+Data

I will be using surveys, interviews, and questionnaires to collect data for the research project. I will be using teachers to complete the instruments. The data that I will be lokking for is any indication that teachers are receiving the support that they feel is needed from the Media Center in regards to differentiated instruction. Is the media center/media specialist locating resources that are appropriate for the units that are taught. It is possible that I would be able to include data that shows that resources provided by the media center were effective in increasing student achievement, but that would depend on what tests I could use the results from in the Spring. || Powell-Schager, http://bpowell1-8484-research.wikispaces.com/Research+Methods

The pre-test scores of both control and experimental groups will be analyzed to ascertain whether the two groups are comparable to in their pre-experimental content knowledge. First the median and mean scores for each group will be determined. It is anticipated that if the two groups are demographically similar and there has no prior instruction in the topic then the pre-test scores should be comparable for both groups. Means and medians for the post-test scores for the two groups will be derived and used to see if there is significant difference in scores using t-tests. It is anticipated that there will be a significant difference with the experimental group scoring higher than the control group. The scored rubrics will also be compared in a similar fashion to see how well each group did in synthesizing the content to create an original work. (The null hypothesis is that there will be no difference between the experimental and control groups. The alternative hypothesis is that there will be a significant difference between the two groups.) The teacher and student surveys contain scaled data (qualitative data that has been quantified) and open-ended questions that will be coded categorized to identify themes and draw conclusions. (Johnson & Christensen, p. 554). The emerging themes from these analyses will help the researcher develop the end of project interviews of the two teachers and representative students. These interviews will be recorded using Audacity, then transcribed, coded, and analyzed per the steps identified by Johnson and Christensen (2008). || Martin, the Types of Data & Collection section has a few typos and redundancies. For instance, the letter "e" is hanging in the last sentence of the passage. In one sentence, "additional data" is written twice. In terms of clarity, can you tell us which "state-wide writing rubric" will be used to measure student writing? Or, perhaps describe the rubric. What does it measure and how? Overall, it's a solid passage, but it needs proofing, which I am sure it will get before it's submitted. My own stuff is very rough, and I think that as we grapple with these new research concepts, obsessing over all ps and qs is not the priority, in the same way that academics don't worry about spelling and grammar too much when they are churning out research drafts. That's the easy part you do at the end. So, really, the passage is solid. I think it might benefit from a little expansion in places where possible. Just think, you can also chop it out later. :) || Types of Data-- Oglesby, the first question I would ask is what for you is the difference between your surveys and questionnaires? Can you give some specific examples of the types of questions these tools seek to answer? And, keeping in mind that I am a novice researcher (knowing very little!), I would like to say that I think that there are a lot of variables that will interfere between the treatment of instructional consultations by the media center and student achievement. I am not sure I understand how you intend to show a relationship between the two, given the complexities of the school environment. Perhaps the relationship between media specialist instructional consultation and, say, teacher satisfaction with library media services would be an easier research target. Heck, what do I know? Measuring "satisfaction" may be a huge can of worms. The passage needs some cleaning up, but I know you'll be ready to do that when it comes time to submit our proposal. Everyone is a little rough in their writing here at the beginning. || Types of Data-- Powell-Schager, your research seems quite solid to me. As I read, I feel like I understand what you are doing. If I understand correctly (and I went back and read more than just the "types of data" section), you are basically having two groups of students do the same lesson where they create a movie. But the control group will be teacher-led through the lesson (traditional instruction, I guess), and the treatment group will have access to video tutorials/podcasts that will teach them the same thing as the teacher-led method. With this approach, the teacher can wander and help students as needed, rather than going through the lock-step of direct instruction. Sorry if I am just repeating back what you're doing, but sometimes that's what we have to do to clarify.
 * **CRITERIA 1: Quality of Wiki Works (TOPIC) posted. (Please provide a thorough explanation to support your review) * ** || Types of Data--

In terms of types of data, then, you are using the movie artifact, as graded by a rubric. You are also using pre-survey data of students' prior knowledge related to the topic. And then you will use a post-test.

Overall, I can find nothing wrong with your research. It sounds ambitious, and I would say it's one of the more tight designs I have seen among our classmates, wouldn't you? :) ||
 * **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 will both be using some aspect of case study methodology, and I will be coding some data with others and hope to achieve inter-rater reliability, too. || We are both using interviews to an extent, although mine informally pipe into the evidence pile. We are also both using surveys. || In terms of similarities, we are both using survey data as well as qualitative student artifacts. ||
 * **CRITERIA 3: Differences of elements used in the Wiki Works submission to your own work. (Please provide a thorough explanation to support your review) * ** || We both use student artifacts as evidence in our research, but you are measuring writing ability, while I am measuring patterns among ideas presented. || My interviews are informal in nature and do not directly relate to the research body. || My artifacts don't have a rubric by which to grade them, however. And, my surveys are more of perceptions than of skills. ||
 * **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 probably won't intentionally borrrow anything from this wiki works submission. Mine is similar enough. || I probably won't intentionally borrrow anything from this wiki works submission. Mine is similar enough. || I will borrow your tight organization and clarity, if you don't mind. :) ||
 * **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 probably won't make any changes to my submission as a result of this. What I really need to do it read the textbook. And keep on writing for clarity. Also, I plan on borrowing more from the style of the published articles I have read than from my peers. || I probably won't make any changes to my submission as a result of this. What I really need to do it read the textbook. And keep on writing for clarity. Also, I plan on borrowing more from the style of the published articles I have read than from my peers. || I will be borrowing her tight organization and clarity of expression. ||
 * **D. What other comments related to this Wiki Works submission review that you want to share with your professor? * ** || I think I have said everything I can. :) || I think I have said everything I can. :) || I think I have said everything I can. :) ||

x