1 / 8

From Research Questions to Study Designs

On June 24th, during day #6 of the CEP 955 Summer Hybrid workshop at Michigan State University, facilitator Jack Smith guided participants through key concepts in research design and validity. The session aimed to deepen understanding of study designs and explore threats to validity as outlined by Campbell and Stanley. Key discussions included the nuances of descriptive and causal research, and the significance of sampling. Participants reviewed real-world examples and engaged in critical dialogues to enhance their practical research skills, with an emphasis on ethical considerations in research involving human subjects.

stella-walsh
Télécharger la présentation

From Research Questions to Study Designs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. From Research Questions to Study Designs Day #6, June 24th CEP 955 Summer Hybrid 2013 Jack Smith Michigan State University

  2. Overview • Access to Google doc? Problems? • Brief roundtable (for Jack): In my 955 study this weekend, I focused on…. [finish the sentence with an option of one more] • Daily goal #1: Deepen our knowledge of types of study designs • Daily goal #2: Understand different threats to validity (Campbell & Stanley’s list) • For both, will work “close to the texts” today • Our collective challenges on Day 6 • RQs may still be moving • Hard to be clear about study design • Suggestion: Think about pairings of RQs and study designs

  3. RQ Lab • Joel’s revised RQs [max 20 minutes]

  4. Descriptive studies • Sounds simple • SRIE discusses two primary types of descriptive research • Large randomized (national) samples & well-tested measures • Smaller, purposeful samples • Neither are likely to work for you; convenience samples • But there is much more to sampling than its type • Critical reading: Box 5.2 (page 107)

  5. Causal studies • SRIE likes experimentation and large-scale experiments with random assignment • Hard to do with well-established theory suggesting causal relationship • According to SRIE, what is necessary to assert a causal relationship? • What does the footnote on p. 109 do to that view? • What does the footnote suggest about complex relationships between related variables

  6. Threats to validity • Brief listing in C&S, with exemplification in numbered study types • Our discussion: Put the threat in our own words • Someone else: Give a different example of each threat • Mention of these issues in other readings?

  7. Theory Bite(s) • Introducing Emiko’s Practicum • Amy: Etienne Wenger, communities of practice • Q&A; discussion • Introducing Laura’s Practicum • Laura: learning via self-explanation • Q&A; discussion

  8. Homework for tomorrow • Focus: Sampling; sample & population; ethical issues (human subjects) • Sampling is crucial for all traditions of research • We all know the story about non-random assignment and limits of generalizability • That does not help you think about other issues related research samples and how to think about your results • Texts: Gall, Gall, & Borg, chapters 3 and 6 • Read chapter 6 first, carefully in sections that directly relate to your design • Turn to chapter 3, read and skim • Lots of ethical issues when you engage your teachers and students as research participants

More Related