class 5: 09/26/11 building research skills (cont.)

class 5: 09/26/11 building research skills(cont.)

research is • the process of going up alleys to see if they are blind (anonymous) • searching for invisible needles in infinite haystacks (Geertz) • extremely extended acquaintances with extremely small matters (Geertz)

research is • “the discovery that it is worthwhile rechecking [what is known] by new direct experience, and not necessarily trusting the experience from the past.” (p. 185) • “You must doubt the experts. . . . Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts” (p. 187). Richard Feynman (1999). The pleasure of finding things out. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.

all researchers must • find some small part of the world to explore, describe, and explain • write a narrative that reports their exploration, description, and explanation to an audience • in other words: first find it out, then report what you found

research: to go around again and again • research begins with need to find it out • figure out what your “it” is • figure out what you want to find out about “it” • formulate a big-Q QUESTION (the 10-year agenda) • begin with a little-q question (your dissertation) • figure out the best way to answer the little-q question

one scientific research method: drawing inferences from observations • strength of research depends on • quality of observations (good eyes) • think (main work of researcher) about best ways to observe (precision/accuracy, bias/efficiency, relevant/irrelevant, observation-N, resources, risk, integrity) • logic of inferences • think carefully (main job again) about analysis

findings (and, necessarily, claims) always uncertain (no proof) • methods public (common ownership) • goal: the unobservable • begin with immediately visible • move to visible but noticeable only to the careful observer • explore the invisible, the unobservable

good eyes “learning is what occurs after you think you already know everything” (John Wooden) • scrutinize one’s preferences, prejudgments, etc. • organized skepticism begins with self • scrutinize field’s preferences etc. • scrutinize individual research reports “ if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is” (Alecia Nugent)

K.ch 9:optimizing trade-offs within limits limits • ethical standards • institutional constraints • resources limits criteria to be optimized • audience credibility • relative weighting of internal integrity and external generality • resource allocation

“although we set out to optimize, we end up satisficing” (p. 190) building credibility with audience—validity is subjective, plausibility is what counts, and plausibility in the ear of the beholder in your research • build on accepted knowledge • show knowledge of relevant literature • avoid weaknesses of previous studies • use accepted techniques and methods • justify use of non-standard methods

in the presentation (research report) • provide expected evidence • anticipate and answer questions and concerns • reflect the study’s strengths and weaknesses • convey your integrity

relative weighting of internal integrity & external generality • strengthening internal validity usually diminishes external validity • basic research emphasizes internal validity • applied research emphasizes external validity • Bronfenbrenner’s critique of lab studies: “the science of strange behavior of children in strange situations with strange adults for the briefest possible time”

resource allocation • time, energy, and money • hidden decision making that determines relative strength of various parts of the study

institutional constraints • focus on institution within which research being done resource limits • use resources wisely

Types of errors in synthesizing research in education (Michael J. Dunkin) primary stage errors • unexplained selectivity • lack of discrimination

secondary stage errors • erroneous detailing • double counting • non-recognition of faulty author conclusions • unwarranted attributions • suppression of contrary findings

tertiary stage errors • consequential errors • failure to marshal all evidence relevant to a generalization

“...potential users of syntheses should be encouraged to develop a healthy skepticism toward them. The availability of a typology of synthesized errors should assist in the process” (Dunkin, p. 95)

model: a graphic explanation of a small part of the world constructing a model • hypothesize the factors involved • hypothesize how they might be related • draw the models • evaluate which one explains the facts best • guesstimate the strengths of paths

drawing a model • label the variables • connect the variables • curved, no arrowheads: correlation • single headed: direction of “effect” • parallel single headed in both directions: mutual effect • describe the type of effect • + (positive), - (negative) • describe the strength of the effect • low, moderate, strong

rules • model must be falsifiable • maximize concreteness • explain as much as possible evaluating models • does this model adequately explain new observations • does this model explain observations better than other models

Vogt • Matthew effect • nominal scale • operational definition • outlier • parsimony • path diagram • practical significance • Pygmalion effect

ethics case 2 (needs a title) • what are the ethical issues? • are there problematic issues that are not ethical? • what should Mary do about the references? • can Mary mention the implications of the article for Wright's research to Wright? • what's your question?

Becker ch 2: persona and authority • “Somewhere, probably in college, I picked up that articulate people used big words, which impressed me” (p. 28). • Ideas written so that they are difficult for untrained people to understand. This is scholarly writing (p. 30). • “I am looking for a writing style that makes me sound smart” (p. 31) • “Gee, Howie, if you say it that way it sounds like something anyone could say.” (41)

“To overcome the academic prose you have to first overcome the academic pose” (Mills) • “Some—I favor this persona—take a Will Rogers line. We are just plain folks who emphasize our similarities to ordinary people, rather than the differences. We may know a few things others don’t, but it’s nothing special” ( p.36). • “The author can’t be nobody, so every author will necessarily be somebody” (p. 37).

writing lit review structure • cover page • abstract • intro: repeat title (title not a heading); no heading • describe area of interest. • specific question or problem that your review addresses. • brief but detailed description of data base and strategies. State parameters explicitly. Note possible biases from your search strategy, e.g., one type of journal. • how review section is organized. • review section: explicit & logical scheme, e.g., sections based on topics or types of studies. Explain. End each section with a discussion—strengths & limitations. • discussion: Synthesize review—discussion of discussions. Communicate what you learned. Discuss general strengths and weaknesses of lit. • conclusion: Address original question(s)—changes. Limitations of review. Implications. Areas where more or different research needs to be done • personal reflection: Short discussion of what you have learned in the process of doing the review—about doing research, about yourself as a researcher.

to strengthen writing, simplify • begin sentences with the subject • avoid “throat clearings”: “furthermore,” “to be completely honest,” “therefore,” “in addition,” etc • avoid beginning sentence with “there is,” “there are,” “it is,” etc. • There were three kids who answered. . . • Furthermore, it is incumbent on us as educators to . . .

that vs. which (APA p. 55) • that is restrictive, that is, the relative clause is essential to the meaning of the sentence. • which can restrictive, or nonrestrictive, that is, merely adds further information not essential to the meaning of the sentence • APA suggests using that for restrictive clauses and which for nonrestrictive clauses

restrictive clauses—no comma restrictive The animals that performed well on the first task were not successful on the second task. nonrestrictive • nonrestrictive clauses—comma The animals, which performed well on the first task, were not successful on the second task.

more bests best fine bakery • Mirabelle, Main St, downtown U best downtown square • Monticello (while there visit the Brown Bag Deli) best place to watch a sunset • Philo road south until it ends (2 miles south of Windsor); turn left; go to top of hill (Yankee Ridge) park north side of road (room for 1 car, be careful of the ditch) best place for apples (cider, donuts, pumpkins) • Curtis Apple Orchard, 3902 S. Duncan Rd., C

best Asian grocery stores • Lee’s, next to IGA on Kirby, C • Far East, 5th St south of University, C • AmKo, 1st and Springfield, C • Green Onion, 2020 S. Neil, C

this week free or cheap • Th: Krannert Uncorked. 5pm. free • F: volleyball vs. Indiana. 7pm. Huff Hall • F: soccer vs Indiana. 7pm. Soccer Stadium • Sa: Illini football vs Northwester. 11am. Memorial Stadium (Homecoming) • Sa: volleyball vs. Purdue. 7pm. Huff Hall • Sa: Jeff Helgesen’s Trumpet Mayhem. 9:30pm. Krannert Lobby. Free • Su: soccer vs Indiana. ipm. Soccer Stadium

class 5: 09/26/11 building research skills (cont.)