Welcome to the world of quantitative and qualitative research methodologies!

Check, check, double check. And check again…

Blog #7

(Galvan, Ch 14 Self-editing checklist)

Reflections on self-editing

Galvan’s comprehensive self-editing checklist helped me to be thorough and accurate with the content, materials, and format of my final draft. So often, I focus on proper paraphrasing and citing that I overlook those SMALL significant details that can distract readers from the content. The 90-question outline is an impressive and essential tool applicable to all forms of writings – from basic essays to manuscripts for publication.  Although I teach these skills in a college writing center, I always practice what I preach and check, double-check…and check again for accuracy. My best (self) advice is to plan and write in chunks, from brainstorming to outlining to researching to production. The writing process is just that-a process. I follow Galvan’s guidelines step by step to be sure that I cover all writing criteria. I found that I may change ideas and gain new insight on ways to convey my message.

Feedback requested: Show me some love!!!

Blog #6

Galvan Chap. 12, #2

Write five questions designed to guide your instructor or friends in giving you feedback on the content of your review.

1. Should I summarize, synthesize, or critique the sources by discussing a common theme of the literature review?
2. Have I provided enough detail to satisfy readers’ curiosity?  Does my paper have a “wow factor” or answer “What does this mean for me, the reader?”
3. Would my paper work better if I reorganized or moved things around?
4. Was my bias obvious and a significant factor in the review?
5. What should be omitted or added for a richer and balanced literature review?

All feedback requested! Please comment on other ideas or omissions, etc. to better my skills. 

Thanks,

Kathy

Organize, Check, Revise....repeat again and often!

Blog #5 

Galvan, Chap. 11 #2

•         Compare your first draft with the topic outline you prepared.  Do they match?  If not, where does your draft differ from the outline?  Does this variation affect the path of the argument of your review?

In comparing my outline with the first draft, I remained consistent with the organization of the literature review. Actually, it was easy to follow because I had already ordered my arguments and supportive materials in a logical manner. (or, at least, I think!)

•         Find two or three places in your review where your discussion jumps to the next major category of your topic outline.  How will the reader know that you have changed to a new category?

I followed APA format and seriation to transition to new categories.

Feedback, please!

Outline map:  Lit matrix.docx 

First draft: RES 8100 Literature Rev..docx 

Evaluating qualitative research

Blog #4

Galvan, chapter 6 - Analyzing Qualitative  Research Literature

Article:

Gikas, J. & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones,smartphones & social media. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18-26. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.06.002

Gikas and Grant (2013) completed a qualitative research study exploring MLearning strategies and using mobile computing devices. They studied a focus group of university students and their perceptions of using their hand-held devices and the impact of social media during mobile learning. For the study, the researchers used a purposive sample of university professors and students implementing mobile devices in teaching and learning. Gikas and Grant conducted a maximum variation sample to differentiate student characteristics and demographics. Participants were described as undergraduate and graduate students in history, social work and communications courses. The criteria for professors were that they taught in a four-year university, implemented M-learning for instruction for at least 2 semesters, and used mobile devices to facilitate teaching.  Students for the focus group were invited electronically by their professors via email and interviewed on Skype.

Qualitative data analysis was based on three rounds of inductive analysis through constant comparisons. The researchers collected the data and coded it for connections to develop themes and categories of the rich descriptions. To ensure trustworthiness of the data, Gikasand Grant (2013) applied three strategies: review interview transcripts with the participants, peer debriefing, and an audit trail. The researchers reported two specific themes related to information access. Findings revealed participant satisfaction with advantages of using mobile devices for fast communication and content collaboration. However, they expressed frustration regarding anti-technology professors, device challenges and connectivity, and devices as a distraction during teaching and learning.

Although the study was interesting and useful for Mlearning, the major flaw was the small sample size. Considering the data collected,Gikas and Grant (2013) could build upon this study using a mixed methods approach. The categories and themes could become part of questionnaires and surveys, with an in-depth follow-up to explore additional data not included. This methodology could allow for generalizability as the sample size would be larger. There is much-needed research for implementing MLearning in higher education.

Blog #3: Selecting a Topic and Identifying Literature  

After reading Galvan’s chapters 3 and 4 about selecting a topic and analyzing literature, I researched several different databases for scholarly materials. I found that the class session with the librarian helped me immensely when using the databases. Initially, was able to generate a listing of over 100 articles; then I narrowed the keyword and descriptors to refine my search.

I chose two peer-reviewed articles about technology integration in foreign language instruction and responded to the blog questions.

Article #1:

Diaz, A. R., & Hortiguera, H. (2016). TELL-ING IT LIKE IT IS: Practical implications from a critical stance on technology-enhanced language learning. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 22(1), 54-79.

Article #2:

Veerappan, V., Wei, H. S., Wong, S. P., & Paramasivam, S. (2014). Mobile assisted teaching and learning in an institute of higher education. International Review of Social Sciences and Humanities, 8(1), 68-79.

Question 1. Both articles included a summary of the literature review in the beginning. Veerappan et al (2014) had an identified sub-heading section. However, Diaz and Hortiguera (2016) did not identify a section for a literature review, but referenced sources at the beginning and throughout the article. Diaz and Hortiguera (2016) did not have a “methods” section. Their experiment was an action research investigation where the professors were updating and changing the focus to support intended goals. On the other hand, Veerappan et al (2014) presented their aim or hypothesis as research questions at the end of the introduction section and prior to the literature review. Diaz and Hortiguera (2016) argued the methodological gaps between teaching Spanish in the traditional F2F style and integrating technology that could be adapted to suit individual professors’ teaching preferences. Their action research activities outlined efforts to meet teaching and learning needs. Veerappan et al (2014) investigated the readiness of professors and students for using mobile devices during instruction.

Question 2. Using categories and sub-categories, I created an outline for describing my topic.

I. Technology integration in foreign languages

A. Technology-enhanced language learning (TEL)

a) CALL (computer-assisted language learning)

b) MALL (mobile-assisted language learning)

II. Universal design for instruction/learning

A.   Learning (dis)abilities, styles and preferences

B.   Curricula redesign

C.   Instructional methods and strategies

Question 3. I am continuing to refine and sharpen my outline to select my articles to read first. My initial reading list is comprehensive. As I continue to research, I find newer articles updating previous research and/or presenting innovations related to my topic.

A Novice's Review

                                                                                                         

Blog #2

Review Article:

Saglamel, H., & Kayaoglu, M. N. (2013). Creative drama: A possible way to alleviate foreign language anxiety. RELC Journal, 44(3), 377–394. doi: 10.1177/0033688213500597

I selected this article because I am intrinsically interested in oral production of my students in Spanish class.  Many are terrified of speaking for many different reasons, and I have been researching ways to help them lower their affect during oral production. Last year, I came across this article about how Turkish instructors instituted creative drama activities in their language classes. I thought that it was a good article because of the novel and innovate ways to support speaking in class. However, I re-read and analyzed this article through different lens for this activity.

Over a six-week period, Saglamel and Kayaoglu (2013) studied English language learners (ELL) students at a Turkish university to determine if embedding drama activities into lessons could alleviate anxieties during speaking. Based on findings, they concluded that the language anxiety levels of participants in the creative drama program dropped.

Response to Galvan (2014)  p. 8, #1

A. The instrument Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) used was modified as the word “Classroom” was changed to “Speaking” due to the nature of the study.  In addition, the questionnaire was translated into Turkish to support beginning students who could not understand directions in English. Instrument reliability concerns may arise because often meanings get lost in translations. After completed a pilot study, Saglamel and Kayaoglu (2013) administered the Foreign Language Speaking Anxiety Scale (FLSAS) to examine perceptions on oral production to 565 participants who failed the University’s English proficiency exam.  There were 2 participant groups: those took the FLSAS (n=565) and those who participated in the drama program (n=22). Participants’ demographics included gender and age: 240 females, 183 males, 5 with no gender designation, from ages 18-28. Many dropped participation. Placement levels ranged from beginners to intermediate learners. The Cronbach Alpha indicator demonstrated high reliable of the modified instrument. 

B.  Measurement methodology was flawed as the study attempted to measure anxieties and emotions quantitatively instead of using a mixed methods approach to better explain phenomena and correlation. There were sampling problems with the study. Quantitative research was limited to pre and post-test questionnaires of the same participants with no control group.  There also should have tested a larger sample to validate the study and enhance generalizability. Sampling in other universities and languages could improve predictability.

C/D. Saglamel and Kayaoglu (2013) hypothesized that creative drama strategies implemented in ELL courses would reduce students’ anxiety levels during speaking. Their research questions examined language speaking anxiety and 

a.   proficiency level distribution and gender

b.   connection with speaking classes and classroom performance in speaking course grades

c.   apprehension sources in speaking classes

d.   students’ affect in foreign language speaking classes through creative drama techniques

Considering using a quantitative questionnaire instrument, I think the researchers limited their scope since emotions and feelings may be explained better with qualitative methods. Also, nothing in the findings connected research questions having an impact on their hypothesis.

E. This study makes important contributions to advancing knowledge to improve speaking competencies in foreign languages learning. I selected this article because it discussed innovative ways to lower student affect when speaking Spanish and improve oral communication. Saglamel and Kayaoglu (2013) recommended further studies on identifying language learning anxieties and why certain situations cause them. Another study could consider students’ identities and dramas activities as learners envision themselves as novice speakers.

Plagiarism or a Speeding Ticket: Either Way, You're Busted!

Blog #1

You want to avoid plagiarism like a speeding ticket. Both are serious acts due to carelessness and have grave consequences!

I welcome the challenge to write research papers for several reasons: to investigate something new, practice academic writing, and sharpening my APA format skills. I usually write in stages. First, I read materials, and then rewrite/record them into my words as I understand the information. This is the longest process because I ponder and reflect on new information to express my understanding of it. Although a difficult task, I work hard to not plagiarize. But, in rare moments, I’ll quote directly if I think my interpretation changes the meaning or the author’s actual words are more impactful. Moreover, I like reading because I immerse myself in scholarly language that’s not always part of my daily discourse. In addition, I look for contending sources to compare and contrast topic ideas. Looking at all positions better helps to inform or (dis)prove my arguments. Second, this supports my academic writing skills and organization, and appropriate language required for scholarly papers. Lastly, is the APA style and format. I’m getting better with citing, seriations, tables, endnotes and avoiding bias. The summer workshop sessions helped immensely: Dr. Bowers’ presentations were beneficial.  When I teach, I require my students to submit written presentations in proper academic form. All must complete mandated workshops on avoiding plagiarism through the library portal.  So, I am a “taskmaster” (or mistress) when addressing plagiarism and cheating and must practice what I preach. Overall, I’m fairly confident with skills to avoid plagiarism, but I’m still learning other ways that may apply. 

Creation as participation/participation as creation: Cultural production, participatory politics, and the intersecting lines of identification and activism

Creation as participation/participation as creation: Cultural production, participatory politics, and the intersecting lines of identification and activism

Culture Active

How culturally ready are you to interact within our global community?

Check out this website and see where you fit within the Lewis Model of cultural types.

https://secure.cultureactive.com/help/demo.lasso