WW_Ray,+Sharp,+Wallace_Collection+and+Instrumentation

Wiki Works Peer Review Template

http://research2010fall.wikispaces.com/


 * || Ray, http://tray8484.wikispaces.com/Overview+%26+Introduction

With this question in mind, I am thinking about blogging as the particular technology in the literacy classroom. I really want to use a pretest-posttest model but the Johnson and Christensen(2008) gave information on page 258 that makes me think that only a posttest is needed for my research. I really like the idea of multigroup pretest and posttest. I need some guidance on this issue. I really want to use blogging for one class (my own class) and use another teacher and classroom that does not use blogging. I would ensure same academic levels, same material, and same pretests and posttests. I would like to conduct this same approach several times to get a good representation of score differences. I would appreciate any suggestions on how to improve my approach. Johnson, B. & Christensen (2008). Educational research: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications
 * How does technology integration in the literacy classroom affect student learning?**

( I am still learning how to use the wiki. I will seek help tomorrow from coworkers) I just wanted to give you the information to comment on so you don't get behind because of me. I have to see things in black and white which makes me look at experimental quantitative approach. As I look at the direction I am going I can see where I will gather groups based on several types of information and then use the same instructor with provided technology to present to one group and instruction without the technology for the teaching of a unit. As I look at pretest and posttest, I will gather information to help me look at progress made by both groups. As Johnson and Christensen (2008) state on page 312, pretest-posttest control-group design is an excellent design. It involves two groups. One groups is controlled and the other is experimental. I think my research findings would be better if using this type of approach. If I find that I cannot collect similar data on two groups, I will have to fall back on quasi experimental, but at present, I think I will be able to justify groups to use int he pretest-posttest control-group design. I am still thinking and studying which technology integration I will actually use. I think blogging would probably be one I would like to see used and find if the integration affects student learning. Johnson, B. & Christensen, L. (2008). //Educational research: quantiative, qualitative, and mixed approaches//. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
 * Research Approach**

My research will involve fifth- grade students’ comprehension skills. I would like to use a quantitative method of study with the use of pretests and posttests. I have been thinking about how to use the tests in the most valid and reliable ways. As Johnson & Christensen (2008) state, tests are commonly used for performance of research participants. They go on to say that the researchers may generate their own tests to measure specific skills. I would like to create pretests and posttests for a chapter book that I select for the classes. I would like to use edhelper premade tests for reviewing the material and then create my own pretests and posttests in multiple choice form from the tests. Edhelper creates questions on five chapters at a time which would enable me to test multiple times throughout the chapter book study to ensure that findings are valid. Another teacher and I will read a portion of a chapter book and all students will receive a pretest to complete. The students will then begin their discussions with the use of a premade test from Edhelper.com. There will be differences in the type of discussions in the classrooms. My classroom will use blogging to help with answers and discussions, whereas the other class will use traditional ways to answer and discuss. Definite questions and points will be emphasized by the teachers to ensure reliability and validity of information obtained from the posttests that will be given later on. After testing throughout the chapter book in the same manner, posttests will be analyzed and charting the scores will begin to be organized to evaluate achievement of traditional and technology-based classrooms. || Sharp, http://8484wikiworkskas.wikispaces.com/3+Research+Methodology

I will be gathering information from teachers for the purpose of designing courses that teachers would find beneficial as measured by the implementation of professional development concepts in their classroom instruction.

My plan involves taking a mixed approach to research. Quantitative data will be collected in the form of teacher surveys. Questions will focus on the positive and negative past experiences with staff development experiences. In addition, I plan to ask questions about what they hope to learn in the future.

According to Table 14.2 Characteristics of Four Qualitative Research Approaches (Johnson and Christensen, 2007, p. 394), I will also be using elements of Phenomenology (i.e. in-depth interviews, identifying significant statements) and Case Study (i.e. multiple methods) to conduct my research. A random sample of surveyed teachers would also be asked for more detailed personal interviews. These interviews would allow me to develop generalizations amongst respondents to determine characteristics of quality staff development.

I am combining the two methods for the purpose of complementarity. The interviews will serve to clarify the results of the quantitative survey (p.451). In addition, I will complete a thorough literature review to determine what has already been deemed effective. || Wallace, http://medt8484-wallace.wikispaces.com/6.++Strategy_Instrument_Tool

According to our reading, teachers will "continue to be pressured to include technology as an integrated part of their curriculum (Rogers, 2002). Following the guidelines of the experimental research method (or quasi-experimental method), the data collected should be in the form of a diagnostic test, pretests, posttests, and follow-up tests. The participants need to be randomly sampled to participate in the research. I may need to utilize quota sampling, making sure that my participants follow the same breakdown of results utilized on the state CRCT tests (male, female, black, white, economically disadvantaged, special needs). A diagnostic test needs to be given to identify student levels and areas of difficulty in mastering math concepts (Johnson & Christensen, 2008, p. 162). This test can be a written test, or it can be done with testing software (Schoppek & Tulis, 2010). This test needs to follow the following principles of questionnaire construction outlined in our test (Johnson & Christensen, 2008):


 * • Principle 5 - Items should be clear, precise, and relatively short**
 * • Principle 14 - properly organized and easy for the participant to use**

A pretest will then be administered to both the experimental group and the control group on material to be taught in the classroom. I plan on having my experimental group receive computer -assisted instruction in a lab setting for 30-45 minutes on material that they are having difficulty with. This will be in the form of individualized instruction for each student, using the computer to teach and enhance material already presented in the classroom and tested for on the pretest. After completing the unit, all students will be retested using the posttest. The data collected will be in the form of scores on the pretests, and the scores on the posttest will be a measurement of skills obtained by the experimental group receiving computer assisted instruction (CAI). ||
 * **CRITERIA 1: Quality of Wiki Works (TOPIC) posted. (Please provide a thorough explanation to support your review) * ** || Collection Strategy or Instrumentation--

Ray, you say "I would appreciate any suggestions on how to improve my approach." I wish I could confidently help you, but alas I am in the same boat. :) With that said, I hope my feedback here is of some use to you.

The first question that arises when I read about your research is this: "how do you know that the differences you find are caused by the delivery method (blogging tool versus traditional discussion methods) and not the teacher (you versus the other teacher)?" That's a question of controlling variables. To control this, I would recommend that you either only use one teacher who teaches 2 sections with blogging and 2 without; or you train all involved teachers.

I think it may be appropriate to use both a pretest and a posttest to measure comprehension. I know you said the pretest may not be necessary, but I would think you might use it to get a baseline of student knowledge.

I think you want to be super clear with your definition of the blogging treatment versus traditional discussion. Traditional discussion will vary widely across classrooms.

Overall, keep up the good fight, which we're all fighting and struggling with. It's an uncertain business, but we're learning a lot. :) || Collection Strategy or Instrumentation--

Sharp, your selection is well written, and I think I understand what you are doing. Will there be any sort of post-survey to measure teachers' perceived satisfaction with the professional development treatment? I like the way in which you are using the two methods for "complementarity." || Collection Strategy or Instrumentation--

Wallace, it sounds like you are really thinking hard about what types of data to collect, and your research design seems solid. I am curious about the topic of the computer-assisted instruction. Is that something you can specify at this point? ||
 * **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 seeking to improve student learning through technological intervention. || We have in similar our interest in teacher professional development. || We are both seeking to improve student learning through technological intervention. ||
 * **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 research uses a presurvey of perceptions rather than skills. Your pretest would probably measure comprehension. || A key difference in our approach to teacher professional development is that it is your primary focus, whereas it may be a focus in my research if preliminary results show that it's necessary. || My research uses a presurvey to gauge teacher perceptions and postsurvey to do the same. We have a similar design in that we are using pre-and post-test measures. However, you are using a skills-based test, I believe, while I am using a softer survey. ||
 * **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) * ** || none || none || none ||
 * **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) * ** || n/a || n/a || n/a ||
 * **D. What other comments related to this Wiki Works submission review that you want to share with your professor? * ** || I have nothing else to add. :) || I have nothing else to add. :) || I have nothing else to add. :) ||

x