Download
1 / 35
350 likes | 444 Vues
research. observing. developing good eyes. Harry Wolcott tells the story of Nathaniel Shaler who, in the late 1800's at age18, began a tutorial in the lab of Louis Agassiz, the eminent biologist-naturalist of his time in US.
E N D
developing good eyes Harry Wolcott tells the story of Nathaniel Shaler who, in the late 1800's at age18, began a tutorial in the lab of Louis Agassiz, the eminent biologist-naturalist of his time in US. [Shaler] was directed to sit at a small table with a rusty tin pan on it. Agassiz placed before him a small fish, directing him only to "study it" without damaging the specimen and to confine his attention to the specimen itself, rather than consulting printed sources or conversing with other individuals in the laboratory.
After about an hour, Shaler...had completed his examination and was ready to proceed to a more challenging task....To his mounting distress, however, Shaler realized that Agassiz...had no immediate intention of returning to question him. Not that day, not the next, not for a week. And so Shaler committed himself anew to the task of observation—and in due course felt he had learned a hundred times more than in his cursory initial inspection….
[O]n the seventh day...Agassiz approached and inquired, "Well?" His question unleashed an hour-long explication, while Agassiz sat on the edge of the table and puffed a cigar. Suddenly, he interrupted with the statement, "That is not right," and walked abruptly away. Fortunately, Shaler interpreted Agassiz's behavior as a test of whether he could do hard, continuous work without constant direction. He returned to his observation task afresh, discarding his original set of notes and working up detailed new ones
for some ten hours a day for another week. And at the end of that time...he had results that astonished himself and apparently satisfied Agassiz, for although there were no words of praise, Agassiz subsequently placed before him a new and more complicated task and told him to see what he could make of it. That task took two months.... (1981, pp. 248-249) So. . . what did you observe on your 5-minute-a-day exercise?
type I and type II error • type I: accepting as true what is really false • type II: rejecting as false what is really true (this is the straightforward plain English version—see Vogt for the more complicated statistical version)
Krathwohl: ch 7causal inference & internal validity • associations and causation • cause: • selecting the salient part of a causal chain for one’s inquiry • is always inferred • Popper’s escaping disconfirmation (falsification): no proof in empirical research • Cronbach’s reducing uncertainty • clocklike vs cloudlike worlds
internal & external validity & cause • generalizability: based on this study what can we say about other cases • is the relationship established in this study • does that relationship exist elsewhere • internal validity (LP) • evidence for relationship between variables in a study • external validity (GP) • whether the relationship generalizes beyond study
operationalization: what we describe in search of the unobservable • to establish internal validity • conceptual evidence • explanation credibility • translation credibility • empirical evidence • findings, results • rival explanations eliminated • credible, logically inferred claims
validity: capable of being justified • internal • does study do what it says it does • model theoretically sound • well thought out operationalizations • accurate descriptions (measurement or narrative) • well thought out design • robust findings • justifiable claims • defensible conclusion
external • do the claims generalize • looking only at study, a judgment call • external validity can really only be established empirically—in fact, do the claims generalize • can study be replicated in different contexts • if we do what study claims we should, do we get the expected result • real question not, do claims generalize, but to what
inferring causation • agreement • what is common • difference • what is different • concomitant variation • do variables vary together • residuals • after eliminating explanations, what is left
ch 8: sampling, etc • sample and population • larger sample needed • the greater the certainty required to infer from sample to population • the more accurate we want to be about target population • the more the units in the sample vary • the smaller the effect relative to normal variation
sampling frame—the list • sampling unit—what is selected (unit of analysis) probability sampling—random • stratified • systematic • cluster
nonprobability sampling • judgmental • purposive • quota • snowball • sequential • the danger of convenience sampling
external validity • (if study has no internal validity, little point in worrying about generalizability) • conceptual evidence • explanation generality • translation generality • empirical evidence • “demonstrated generality” • restrictive explanations eliminated • replicable results
Sieber: Ch 4 • voluntary informed consent • importance of gatekeepers • special populations • legal elements (see p. 33) • effective consent statements (see p. 35) • consent: signed, oral, or behavioral • consent as ongoing • debriefing • community-based research
use active voice • I interviewed the kids. (good) • The kids were interviewed. (bad) use first person to talk about yourself • I interviewed the kids. (good) • The researcher interviewed the kids. (bad) do not begin sentences with “there is” or “it is” etc. • There were three kids who answered… (bad) • Three kids answered the questions. (good)
use who for people, that for things • I interviewed the kids, who all agreed….(good) • I interviewed the teacher that was in…. (bad) pronouns must refer to nouns • I entered the room and found the kids running across the table tops and throwing erasersat each other. That made me nervous. (bad—not clear what made you nervous)
use comma to separate independent clauses in compound sentence joined by a conjunction (e.g., and, but) I interviewed the kids, but they did not appear comfortable. introductory adjectival phrases must modify the subject • Rushing into the room, the class had already begun. (bad) • Rushing into the room, I discovered that the class had already begun. (good)
use “Harvard comma” • apples, pears, and bananas (good) • apples, pears and bananas (bad) do not separate the subject from the verb with a comma • The boys running down the hall in their gym clothes, shouted loudly. (bad) • The boys running down the hall in their gym clothes shouted loudly. (good) • The boys, who were running down the hall in their gym clothes, shouted loudly. (ok)
restrictive (no commas) vs. nonrestrictive (commas) clauses • The kids who answered the questions went outside. (restrictive) • meaning: only the kids who answered went out • The kids, who answered the questions, went outside. (non-restrictive) • meaning: all the kids, who, by the way, answered the questions, went out restrictive clauses (no commas) necessary to the meaning of the sentence, nonrestrictive (commas) not necessary
in American English • periods and commas always go inside quotation marks • He said, “Please go down the hall.” • colons and semicolons always go outside quotation marks • He wrote, “Be back soon”; then he left. • question marks and explanation points—place depending on the meaning • She asked, “Where are you going?” • What did she mean by “antiquated”?
avoid very--get a better word • I was very mad. (bad) • I was enraged. (good) find the right word • Mark Twain observed that the difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.
references: APA 215 ff. paperspresented at conferences Lee, K. (2001, April). Not the united colors of Benetton: Language, culture, and peers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA. articles in press (make sure still in press) Vasconcelos, T. (in press). Conversations around the large table. Early Education and Development.
unpublished dissertations Chung, S. (1999). Unpacking child-centeredness: A history of meanings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. chapter in an authored book Bruner, J. (1990). Folk psychology as an instrument of culture. In Acts of meaning (pp. 33-65). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
best quick getaways • Krannert Art Museum (2 minutes) • Carle Park (Urbana: Iowa St. 3 blks east of Lincoln—15-minute walk) • Hessel Park (Champaign: Kirby St. 4 blks west of Neil—25-minute walk) • Meadowbrook Park (Urbana: Windsor east of Race—short bike ride)
Lake of the Woods (Mahomet—15- minute drive, west on 74) • Salt Fork River Preserve (Homer Lake)—25-minute drive (17 miles east of Urbana) • Allerton (southeast of Monticello—30 minute drive) • Turkey Run State Park—hour drive (east on 74, Indiana exit 15)
bests best cheap places to eat • Thai Eatery at the Y, Wright street (lunch only) • Courier Café, Race St, downtown U • L’il Porgy’s Barbecue, Broadway & University, U • Noodles, Green St., Campus Town best video sources • That’s Rentertainment (6th & John, C) (buy a “block”) • Urbana Free Library (downtown U), free
this week • Th: “analogy as the core of cognition,” Douglas Hofstadter, 7:30 Lincoln Hall theatre, free • Fri: jazz, Iron Post (downtown U), 5pm free • Fri & Sat: Volleyball 7pm, Wisconsin & Minnesota, Huff Hall, free with ID • Sat: Desafinado (jazz, Brazilian bossa nova), Prairie Dogs (bluegrass), 5-9, Allerton, bring blankets or lawn chairs, $ • Sun: UI wind symphony and UI symphonic band I, 7:30, Krannert, $
