LTEC 6516 Summer 2018 Blog Posts

Final Post: What have I learned about CMDA and Advanced Qualitative Analysis in general? 

Before this course I never took into consideration the roll that Computer Mediated Discourse Analysis (CMDA) might have on Simulation Based Training (SBT). To be honest I never really considered the effect CMDA could have on any research and as an educator that is shameful. I know you always start with a check for prior knowledge and build upon that when teaching. Why would research be any different? I should be checking for what that prior knowledge is and taking into account CMDA that could be occurring. Interestingly enough once I started to pay attention to CMDA, I started to relate it to SBT and see some antidotal social media posts beging to show up on how SBT can help engage and increase communication. So needless to say my brain started processing this and I have begun to start digging for research and articles that tie the two togthere.

Via my first foray into data scraping using social media I am finding more and more that the online writing is either formal or informal. Almost always in Twitter the data I have been coding and cleaning up I find those who are promoting a product are formal in how they write and try to engage the public. Where when they are individuals speaking about an experience it's more informal and to me more relateable or believable, because you can tell it's from their own experience and not vetted by a public relations or marketing team. My original keyword search returned 787 data fields, when I removed the text that appeared more than once or was a retweet (RT) it dropped to 395. When I furthered analyzed and removed any that were obvious not related to simulation based training (SBT = AR/VR/MR/360 Videos) but just training or were for registration about a conference it dropped it down further to 201. The formal ones have URL links to their website either for the company, a online article, or own blog. Where the informal tell about experience and then sometimes link to what referring to. 

Interestingly they also have a photo usually in the Tweet and this maybe something that I will need to go back and add to the data and code if has image or not. Because of the old adage that "a picture is worth 1,000 words". When approaching it from CMDA view point the photo help mitigate any misunderstanding about what the Tweet is about. Sometimes the image can be even more engaging than the text and make the reader want to learn more about it. For me that is what happens to me and why I "follow" certain people  for my own "personal learning network". That's the beauty about it, you get to decide what you want to learn and how in depth you want to take it. 

I have seen #subjectXYZ used in course where instructors want to engage students in discussions with not only their classmate but others on Twitter that follow that hashtag. I currently have an instructor using GroupMe so that he and his students can "text" each other in a more secure environment. He is using it to pose informal assessments about what is this a picture of? Students can ask questions about the online course issue like tests not opening. All in what is more real time than an online discussion forum. He feels it allows him to communicate better and faster with is students and build a better community in his online class. It's been very fun and interesting for me to watch the engagement of these students with him. Their response or questions are usually short but concise and informative. I know how much I have learned through the process and in future maybe need to team up with him to study the affect using a tool like this has had on his students.... Hummmm    




Post #6 : Vetting data to ensure it meets the high quality required for qualitative analysis

Coding can be a complicated process but only when it comes to setting it up because you have to ensure quality. Getting a group of three people together and agreeing upon the coding to be used is imperative if you’re going to end up with data that is accurate and useful. I know this as a “norming session”, and this is something we do in my department at least once a semester. We use the rubric that has been established to be used to assess online course design. The whole department of Instructional Designers each reviews courses that have been pre-selected, we make notes and “rank” according to the rubric. Then we sit down as a whole and go through the process of explaining what we gave and explaining why. I have found this is essential for our group so that the twelve of us can clarify and then come to an understanding of the most balanced critique or analysis of what is best practice in course design as established by the department. There will always be some critiques that are higher or lower than what the group norm ends up being but that is normal and helps make sure that the process is still authentic but balanced. This is important practice because when an ID sits down with a professor to go over the results, we need to listening to what the professor is explaining as to why they have tings set as they do. Sometimes it because they just don’t know how to setup or use a tool and need our help doing this. Other times it can be because what they are doing makes more sense to them and their students. There is no one perfect way to do something, it all depends on the experience and the needs those in that class. As an ID I must make sure I am helping my professors meet the needs they have, not as just defined in a rubric.

I see this process be essential for any team of three that is coding. This participation of three coders helps meet the need to triangulate the data for the most balanced understanding or accurate data coding. I see the best method to establish norm is to perhaps separately code the first 3 pages of transcript or 5 minutes of interview, then come together to discuss what and why you coded as you did. This incorporates the more postmodern methods of making sure that data collected based on the participants knowledge and not off the knowledge or “expertise” of the researcher that can contaminate the data. That will help ensure a “norm” for the group and if someone is overly high or low, you can explain reasons why. If it is not justified or the explanation not accepted and agreed upon with the group, then you know that you need to access how you are coding. This epistemic practice or approach to data collection allows those researching or coding to take the time necessary to relate the knowledge or data gathered and helps ensure they understand and are able to construct accurate results or knowledge gained from this. This is better than just taking the average score of the group because it helps you to ensure rigor in the coded data. Data is no good, not matter how much time you spend collecting it if it’s isn’t quality. If you don’t work to ensure quality then you will end up providing fodder, so to speak, to those who still view qualitative research as being controversial and less reliable than quantitative. Quantity does not trump quality, especially in research. We have to make sure that we are doing everything we can to ensure quality especially in how we code and report the data we have discovered and not what “we want to find” based upon our own potential bias towards a subject.

I have discovered that this process of ensuring quality is a process that is not quick, if you want to do it properly. I have recently scraped data form Twitter over simulation-based training in an effort to find what the current attitude is towards it. I started with 787 data points and once I took the time to remove those that were most likely to have been generated by a bot I ended up with less than 200 Tweets or text data to analyze. Nowadays it is easy for someone to write a program or bot that auto-populates information based upon their own agenda or product trying to “sell” to others. As researchers we have to be aware of this and take steps to ensure the data isn’t that is a result of this isn’t used in our analysis because that is supporting the bias of a small group versus studying the truth of the larger whole population. To do this I removed Tweets that came from users not curated to at least 20 lists because when you are on a list, this means your more likely to be an actual person with actual information that others find to be of worth. I also removed and text that ended up being a ReTweet and using the most original one to then qualitatively code the attitude as I saw it. Now I need to find two others who would be willing to also code, to ensure reliability and quality of this data. 

Post #5 : Quantitative- Positivist versus Qualitative- Non Positivist. 

I had never before heard the term “wholest” (hope I spelled that correctly) but I had positivist, when used to describe how one approaches research. It makes sense though because in education there has finally been a shift more recently into studying and meeting the needs of the “whole” child. That the snap shot of the standardized test, which to me is positivist research probably at it’s worse. To only use, this to gauge a student’s knowledge growth isn’t fair because so much can change in a year. The test does not take into account or know if significant changes have happened to that the student in the past year or heck even weeks. Things that can’t be measure from looking at the child. Perhaps the students’ parents just divorced, broke up with significant other, has to now work 20+ hrs to help family met bills, etc… Can you say “ah-ha moment”?!? It just now clicked for me just why qualitative analysis is important. We need to see the whole or big picture. We need to study more than just the surface of what we can see and really try to dig into the “WHY” of it. 

When I first started teaching I had a “W-H-Y” poster up in my room that was for W-hat we are learning or doing; H-ow is it useful to you and how we will go about doing it, and Y-es you will this will be for a grade either soon or use it later on in class or life to do “XYZ”. I had made this up and used it when explaining my lessons to students. Because I realized that explaining why we were learning something, other than it is a TEKS that Texas said I had to teach. That I needed to explain better to my students why I was trying to teach them this and not just give it as an assignment because it was required for my gradebook. That they needed a point of context or reference so that they could start to internalize and really learn.

Qualitative research is the WHY and I need learn to embrace and utilize it because it leads to deeper understanding beyond the surface level of what I can see or easily compare in a pre/post test. I need to use it so that I can really learn about the subject and not be biased off my experiences or senses. It would be easier to not have had this “ah-ha moment” as to WHY I need to use this type of research. It is because positivist quantitative research is easier to conduct and explain than qualitative research. ARGH

Post #4 : How did your view of qualitative research change or not based on discussion tonight? What about reducing bias in research?

Class tonight itself hasn't changed the way I view qualitative research, probably because I just had Dr. Warren for LTEC 6512 Qualitative Analysis this past spring 2018. I still think more quantitatively because of all my years in STEM/engineering field. Thankfully I have also been in education for 23 years and the qualitative makes sense to me because the understanding of WHY something is the way it is or WHY you do"things this way" is more important than knowing facts. I need to teach students how to think and when it comes to my won research that is the role qualitative serves or acts is for me. It forces me to dig deeper than just numbers and their relations, but as to why they are related. This has led to me focusing my research to the attitudes that people have towards SBT in education/training. 

The project you had us do on creating a subjectivity statement where we had to answer the following really helped me start to form and understand my own potential biases and how to find ways to counteract or at least recognize them and to try to not fall for my own pre conceived notions. Those were the:
1) clearly define what studying or the What is
2) What does this mean for my reflection activities and design?
3) What else do I expect to find or see? 
4) What do I already know about this topic?
5) Challenge of what I think I already know?

Ideally to really avoid bias I need to have 2-3 others code the same data I collect, preferably with someone who thinks that SBT does not have application use in education/training. If we get the same results then I know my data is good. Hopefully in this class I will find a classmate who might want to team up with me on coding a) Twitter data I have already scraped and b)forming & conducting a survey/interviews about this subject.

Post #3: CMDA and qualitative data analysis potential use in my dissertation

As I have advanced in my PhD studies one potential free resource for data gathering has been Twitter. I use Twitter for professional uses and as such fall more under the "stalking side", in that I follow people who I have greater knowledge in certain subjects. People who post about things that I want to learn more about or that I feel I can use for educational purposes. Plus the whole being able to search for something via its hashtag, or pound sign for those of us who are older, is a research gold mine. This form of micro-blogging where the number of letters or words you can use constricts the Twitter authors Tweet into what really matters the most. If it is retweeted or liked by others then you know it has struck a cord is of importance to them in some way or another. You can't easily quantify or measure what exactly that importance is and that is where the qualitative analysis needs to be utilized. The extent to which Twitter is now used in things like politics, marketing, social presences is something that intrigues me and I want to see if I can use it to discover if their is belief or feeling if you will about the use of simulation based training in education, CTE specifically. What way do they think SBT and education can be used? What impact do they think it will have, be it positive or negative? What does the public think are pros or cons of using SBT in educational settings? Are there differences in how vendors, teachers, students, parents feelings towards the use of SBT in educational settings?

In my nativity I thought gathering Tweets by subject or hashtag would be easy. I quickly learned otherwise. By the way there are many companies who all they do is data mine Twitter and get paid quite well to do this. I can understand why as getting the coding to run in the online tutorials I found for Python, Tweepy, Twurl, Ruby, R studio just never worked for me. I can see why a company would pay others to mine the data and provide them with an analysis report. It's not as easy as you and I thought. Since I am a student and educator, paying for this just wasn't in my budget and goes against my "I can do this" attitude. So I spent 20+ hours researching ways to just get data, not even beginning to study that data. I finally found in my searching https://birdiq.net/twitter-search/, which allows you to pull up search topic and then export it to Excel for further cleaning up and analysis into programs like SPSS, after you code the data. All the other ones I found would only go back 7-10 days, I wanted to get at least a years worth of these in hopes that I can find if there are any trends on how SBT is being viewed.   

I am currently in the process of coding data according to the search terms, if it was made by vendor, educator, parent, or student. Was it retweeted or a retweet. If it's a RT go back to the original tweet and find out how often it was RT. Then I can analyze the actual tweets to see what qualitative data I can find, which I know will actually take the most time and I need to find a fellow PhD student who is interested in this same data, so that we can both study it and compare our findings to ensure reliability. Hopefully in this class I will find that person.

PS: If you are looking for just some data visualization tools about what is being Tweeted recently, you can use these tools. They don't export but they will allow copy/paste or print to PDF for use. 

https://www.csc2.ncsu.edu/faculty/healey/tweet_viz/tweet_app/

http://www.socialmention.com/
https://www.exporttweet.com


Post #2: What I learned about CMDA from the assigned readings & class discussion.

I guess that I already knew that most online interactions take place by using text. After all nowadays people text more than they call. Social media like Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc...often use a photo and then text explanation or message. So that part didn't really surprise me and makes sense to me the we need to have study approach or research style such as Computer Mediated Discourse Analysis because this is how we can access or ensure that communication happens that leads to knowledge gained or relationship being built. What stood out the most to me was the reminder that "text can only tell us what people do", that we shouldn't use it as a way to measure who that person fells or thinks. Unless of course they specifically say I fell XYZ because of 123 (Herring, 2004).

Also for me "grounding' or how the online group finds a common ground that allows them to effectively communicate with each other. In face to face environments we can use face and body language that lets us know how it is going (Paulus, 2007). Online we don't have that unless it's a video conference, perhaps this is why we had the birth of emojis? Just an point to ponder.

Interesting to me is that to have a good CMDA research question it shares the same four main characteristics as a good qualitative one:

1- Empirically measurable for data: That the text evidence provides examples of when this happens. The example is you can measure how often jokes where told but you can't measure if they were having fun.


2- Isn't trivial: It shouldn't be something that is already known or proven as fact and it should be beneficial or something that others also would want to learn more about.

3- Motivated by hypothesis: The question shouldn't be worded so that the answer is already given. Often the researchers has a hunch about something and this should be used to drive the hypothesis.

4- Is open ended: These are not questions than can be answered by a simple yes or no. It should be more of the what, why, when, where, who, how style.

Lastly temporal sampling over a time period, preferably at least a year, will result in some observations that can be made about these interactions made by the same people/group or person over a period of time. Allowing to observe if changes happen or not.

What this has done for me is helped me to realize that I need to study the frequency that simulation based training is mentioned on Twitter by how often tagged in education, STEM, and then CTE. Track if it is from an individual or company marketing product, individual are better for me to study because they aren't trying to sell a product. Then finally if it's well received by others. If it gets retweeted or liked by others I can use that to measure that it had a positive reaction with people on Twitter.

Herring, Susan. (2004). Computer-mediated discourse analysis: an approach to researching online communities.               Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning. 316-338.                                      
             10.1017/CBO9780511805080.016. 
Paulus, T. M. (2007). Online but off-topic: negotiating common ground in small learning groups. Instructional 
             Science, 37(3), 227-245. doi:10.1007/s11251-007-9042-5

Post #1: What is my personal view of research?

a. What is my general worldview in terms of what I think can be known, why that is the case, and how we can best understand the world?

The statement "the more I learn, the less I know" is so very accurate. Just because I think I know the answer or correct way, doesn't mean that it's the only or even the best way. I've learned to listen and build relationships first, so that I understand where the other persons perspective because when I do this, I always learn something new. I know that I need to be open to learning and new experiences, if I am ever going to be able to help others. 

b. What is research to me? What is its purpose? Do I prefer numbers or narratives or both?

Research is a way to gain and then share knowledge. I may have an idea or what I think the outcome will be, research is needed to prove or disprove this. Honestly the majority of my career numbers have been what I prefer because they are easy to understand, they don't change no matter your language, culture, etc.. However, after 23 years in education I have learned that I need to know more than just the number. I need to understand the background, the why, the how so that the numbers have a deeper meaning.

c. What is your main focus in terms of what you are planning for future research? Are you higher ed, K-12, corporate, or other? Are you looking to switch your focus to a new setting?

To be honest I'm still not 100% sure what my focus is going to be on. It depends on where my career takes me in these next few months. I'm finding that I more invested in the doing or practitioner part of education than I am in research. The thought of constantly researching and writing doesn't equal as much joy as when I help a someone transform into a teacher or conquer a new skill that they couldn't do before. I know that we don't have enough teachers and our students suffer because of this. Why I'm drawn so to simulation based training/AR/VR so much. I see it as being a tool that can bring more chances for learning to others who otherwise wouldn't have the opportunity to learn it. I also see it as a need because of the safety issues that are faced in many lab based courses and in industry. I taught wood and metal "shop" to grades 7-12 for seven years. As a teacher I wish I had such a way to allow my students to practice a skill without worrying that if they make a mistake they cut off something or blow up something. I then moved to HS engineering and graphic design for twelve years where I had students struggle with learning concepts that when I could get  them access to a 3D model of it = they got it. These last four years I have been in higher education as an instructional designer for online courses. Where I have seen the need. For me I only know that I strongly believe simulation based training has the potential to help so many learn new things. 

My UNT LTEC 6512 Blog- Theory and practice of qualitative research methods in Learning Technologies

Reflections: What have I learned and what's next 

Qualitative research for someone who has spent the last 23+ years focused on reporting things empirically and through quantitative research has been challenging. My pre-educator career back ground was commercial steel construction and there was only "X" is what you do because otherwise "Y" happens. I then went into teaching in the Career and Technology Education (CTE) fields of manufacturing, architecture, and STEM. Of those only architecture has freedom to research and to ask why or explore the feelings. At the beginning if this course that is what to me that's what qualitative was. However, as we have progressed I have come to realize it's more of an observational method. It allows me to observe or ask others to explain to me what something is/means/etc... It then helps take out your own personal bias towards a subject. Qualitative leads to a deeper understanding towards understanding why something is a certain way. Quantitative is still important and needed when it comes to applying the knowledge gained from qualitative in experimental methods. qualitative studies can result in new questions or ideas that you never would have come up with on your own. 

I have already begun to start to create a questionnaire and come up with interview questions that can actually be used in my dissertation. For now I think my study will be over Simulation Based Training (SBT), safety, and learning in Career and Technology Education (CTE) classroom and/or industry training programs. After this class I now realize that this may change based upon my findings from observations and/or interviews. As such I have scaled this back from researching from the point of view that it will improve and instead I am asking for other teachers input about SBT:

1) When you hear about SBT be using in education what is your response or feelings about that?
2) Do you think SBT could be used in this education/class setting? For example the one you felt had safety issues or that could be potentially dangerous?
3) What place could SBT have in a learning environment like the one you just told me about that had danger or safety issues?

I then plan on using this data to guide me in asking students similar questions in research of how students perceive it. Then if these two studies support the need, experiment that proves or disproves how SBT affects learning and safety.     



What was the experience of doing the shared coding like?

Watching how you processed or worked through the coding process was very beneficial. It helps to see how others do this. The color-coding actually makes a lot of sense, so that everyone working on coding for comparison can see how they ranked or coded that part of the interview. Also deciding as a group what looking for in the interview, so that you can code for example. Student paying attention 1/-1, teacher using technology 2/-2, or students working on projects 3/-3. I realize it’s just going to take a lot of practice and have to do it in a team to ensure rigor or accuracy. 

What did you think of the interviewing example with qualitative using semi-structured interview questions? Would you prefer people do more yes/no type questions to speed things up? What did you like about it?

I feel like I am unlearning everything I learned in undergrad and masters when it comes to data. I am actually learning to adore the semi-structured interview method, mainly because it brings to light things that I might not have thought about. It’s great especially in the formative stages to make sure that you are actually focusing on the right things. I would rather spend an extra 3-4 hours on the front end of a study or research topic finding out what matters. Versus wasting 3-4 months working on it, only to find out there was no need for the study or what I was researching had no value to others. What I work on, I do so to help others and not just get published or for my own self. This method can help ensure I am doing this. The person I did my practice interview with, to be honest I didn’t expect him to have any input on Simulation Based Training to help improve safety in classroom/training experiences. However, he was available, willing to be interviewed, and I know he has high technical background. So I knew I would at least learn how he viewed SBT and/or it’s uses in general for education fields. To my surprise he had an experience and great example of where SBT would have been useful for safety. I never thought of it reference to outdoor sports, only as it applies to industrial settings and skills needed. This brought to my attention that maybe I should interview people from all of the different curriculum areas and not just CTE. They may have some thoughts, examples, problems I can research that I otherwise would have missed just asking CTE teachers or industry folks. Quantitative type questions are faster when it comes to deploying, gathering, and “crunching” the data. After all it’s a one or two, A or B, etc… That’s easier to process and prove connections or patterns for study than interview. Interview requires coding and asking someone else to the same to ensure accuracy in what you have interpreted or gathered from the process. It still has a place in my studies but I find this to be equivalent to using standardized tests to judge if a student has learned something. Something that is a “pet peeve” as an educator. That one tests affects students worth for the whole year and doesn’t take into account any of the other projects they have done, ability to apply or use the knowledge. It’s just 1 or 2 days, judging them for the whole year. If this upsets me so much, why would I do the same to my studies and/or participants. I see the need to use qualitative even more so now and to not just rely on quantitative data. They are both needed and have use in conducting  a full study. Sometimes I do just need to report age, area of expertise, pass/fail rates, etc… Then there are times I need to dig deeper and find out what could have caused or why it’s important, needed, how it could be used, etc…

How do you know something you saw or read was true? Validity of the research?

        When I think of how I know something is true or valid, I first think of to what extent I trust the source it is coming from. There is a saying that "opinions are like ____  and everyone has one." When doing research we have to distinguish between opinions and knowledge, depending on what it is that you are studying that is.  This means that I need to carefully select or write the question, ask the question in the most logical manner (survey, interview, etc..), and selection of the data source. I would not want myself to be used as a data source for someone who is studying nutrition and how to best lose weight in women over 40.  Simply because I have not been successful at that, I can answer my struggles but not on how to do it. Likewise, asking people about class room management, who have never taught in a classroom before. You have to get to know the people involved in the research, so that you will know if they actually have knowledge of how to do what you are studying. Now if you are studying how it has affected or influenced them versus actually working, then yes you would ask anyone. Your questions and direction of your research is going to drive how you check and/or do your best to ensure validity of your work.

         My research area of interest is simulation-based training(SBT)  and how it can be used to help teach/train in concepts that are dangerous and/or not financially responsible to offer to those new to it. So that we can ultimately increase safety and production in the real world work force. When I ask what his or her feelings or thoughts are about the potential use of SBT, then this is open to anyone who has taught or trained. However, if I want to find out how well SBT actually works to teach, I need to work with those who have successfully taught or completed the SBT learning. If they have never incorporated or used SBT, they cannot tell me how it worked, did it work, would they change anything, etc… To make sure I am doing my due diligence and practicing rigor, I need to ask people who have experience in SBT at varying grade levels and/or subjects. Obviously, there could be skewed data if I just asked computer science majors versus elementary social science. I have to be aware of where my data could be skewed or where I need to increase or ensure rigor has been practiced, BEFORE someone else points it out to me. Otherwise, why would they continue to read my research or believe any of my findings?

        For me rigor comes from knowing up front any strengths or weaknesses that your study could have and finding balance between both. Truthfulness comes from asking people who have experience and not just an opinion about the question.  Validity comes from using the best method to seek the data or questions. None of this can be completed affectively in a bubble or on your own, peer review and assistance is a must. Just like we can catch simple spelling or grammar mistakes for others, others can see where we might be too focused on what we think the research will be versus what it actually needs to be. 

Blog #5: Qualitative Topics of Inquiry for Simulation Based Training (SBT)  

Topic #1:  Can SBT be used to affectively meet the four main areas of need for a experiential learning environment? 

• Community Centered

        Small classroom

        Large real world industry, school, etc…

• Learner Centered

        What do they bring to the educational experience, not the teacher

• Knowledge Centered

        More the big ideas and not just details or skills

      Concentrate learning process, development of knowledge in ways that they can use it,  and authentic problem solving or real world problems

• Assessment Centered.

   Formative – meaningful feedback that is ongoing through the whole process; part of reflection & internalizing of the knowledge; self-assessment process

     Summative – comes at the end or conclusion, the grade, yes/no student is ready to move onto next level

                 Perhaps an argument as to why the experiential  learning method is required first, but the inquiry based process that this method utilizes usually requires no convincing. People all agree that yes you learn by doing. So the question then becomes can SBT be used to provide that learn by doing? Does it provide for building of community? Is it really centered on what the student brings to the experience and how to best provide them with more knowledge or skills? Does it just focus on made up problem or real world scenario that students can understand? Is the student done when they pass a certain level or test, or does it keep evolving to meet even greater needs?

Potential References

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R., National Research Council, National Research Council, & National Research Council. (2001). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Constructivist learning environments. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://leocontent.acu.edu.au/file/ad4c28f6-329b-41fa-a625-bb4dccb18a26/1/html/ped_1_20.html

Topic #2: Do the teachers/students feel that SBT could train as well or better than traditional methods? 

• More comfortable because they know that a mistake doesn’t equal real world injury?

• If they do make a mistake, can they learn from it quickly?

       Than waiting for let’s say summative test score?

       They can try again and again until they get it right?

• Allow more time practice due to limited: 

        Equipment,  Supplies, Lab, Teacher

• Is there still a need or want for the instructor to be there and guide the process?

• Is there still need for learning expectations to be given before start of training or allow       the students to set these goals?

                This question can apply to teachers, students, administrators, parents, legislators, etc… Do we feel that SBT can do as good job or perhaps better that traditional classroom methods? Do we feel safer because no real world injury will happen? Is feedback quicker? Can student reflect and learn faster? Does it make up for lack of equipment, supplies, labs, teachers? Do you still want the teacher present? Do you still want the learning expectations clearly outlined? All of these need to be followed with the caveat questions of why they feel this way.

Potential References

Magana, A. J., Brophy, S. P., & Bodner, G. M. (2012). Instructors' Intended Learning Outcomes for Using Computational Simulations as Learning Tools. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(2), 220-243. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb00049.x

Topic #3: What about SBT excites/concerns teachers/students?

• Does it affect student confidence in what they learned?

• Does it affect student satisfaction in what they learned?

• Does it affect motivation to learn?

• Do they feel that SBT is user friendly or have anxiety about it? 

• Do they feel that SBT skills really transfer to real world or work place?

• Worried will lose job or not be hired because used SBT?

          This question can apply to teachers, students, administrators, parents, legislators, etc… What excites or concerns them about the use of SBT? Do they have confidence in what they learn via SBT? Are the satisfied? Do they want to learn more? Does SBT cause any anxiety? Will the skills really transfer to the real world and equal employment or in teachers case loss of employment? All of these need to be followed with the caveat questions of why they feel this way.

Potential References

Murray, C., Grant, M. J., Howarth, M. L., & Leigh, J. (2008). The use of simulation as a teaching and learning approach to support practice learning. Nurse Education in Practice, 8(1), 5-8. doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2007.08.001

Blog 4 –Different Theoretical Models

Personally I lean towards Inquiry-based learning process or constructivist learning theory. That we learn by actively constructing the knowledge from our experiences and environment. We learn from doing and expereincing. Each learner brings their own past experiences and culture into the process of constructing or learning the knowledge that you are trying to provide for them. It is not so much how they are taught; so much as, it is prior knowledge and how they processed it so that they could understand and retain that knowledge. Which of course means the each person will be different to varying degrees. Which as an educator makes it essential to assess prior knowledge and make sure that the students have connected or constructed a strong base for knowledge, before they acquire more. Of course then you get into who’s view of the knowledge is best? How do you assess to see if they have the knowledge base they have? How do you meet the different needs and levels your students are at? Thankfully I never taught just level or AP students, my classes where all mixed and so I had to start off assessing where my students were at knowledge or skills wise for every unit we did. I learned quickly that just giving pretest was not going to work at least not every time. That it had to be about the skills the students could demonstrate to me. There are multiple ways to draw a circle using ACADD. If I only assessed asking about the two key method, I would leave out the ability or skills using the ribbon or quick access bar. They all work and for students used to 2 + 2 always = 4 this is often hard to get them to understand. For me it is always about can you explain to me how or why used the process you did? Can you perform a task safely and effectively? Then you prove to me you have constructed a good knowledge base and we can move on to the next level. Students struggled with explaining WHY or HOW, but they ended up able to do more when they did this.

Unfortunately, this often put me counter culture of the standardized testing regimen. Having to justify or give proof of how I was helping to prepare students for the state tests. Also, most software certification exams will only accept one way to complete a task. Which is how the programmers themselves would do it and not how the users actually do it. So as much as I hated it, I would have done my students a disservice if I didn’t help them with overcoming the testing only view. I learned to find questions from practice exams and incorporate them into each unit. So that students had the experience with the knowledge in more than just one way and could construct away to turn that into knowledge they could then retain. I just never assessed them only on how they answered questions but made sure that I also assessed based off what they could do to prove they had the knowledge.

If you had asked me if I would be open to learning or at least giving another teaching style/method a try I would have been hesitant or even said no. I would have said something like that I knew what was the best method for my students. However, now I know each student constructs the knowledge gained in a different ways. That doesn’t make the way right or wrong. As long as it’s safe, efficient, and works then its right for them. I’ve gone from a very structured, there is only one or two ways to doing something, to being open to try different methods. There are some things that are factual like certain chemicals will explode when combined or if you don’t follow the proper steps for lighting a cutting torch it can blow up. So I need to ensure that my students understand WHY this result happens and help just aren’t reciting back to me something they learned short term and then forget because it lacks context to them. Why I feel strongly that simulation based training can help students. By allowing them to safely experience, things that could have negative consequence like harming them. Allowing them to build or construct knowledge about the skill BEFORE we utilize the dangerous equipment.

So yes, I would be open to at least attempting to learn or construct my own knowledge about the method or approach. Then I would be willing to work with and apply what was asked of me to the best of my abilities. This is something I feel can only come from experience and the ability to admit that you do not always know everything. When I was younger I thought I knew all that I need to, as I get older I realize I know actually little. Someone having different views or ideas does not negate or endanger my own personal ones. Instead, it is an opportunity for both of us to learn more.

Blog 3 – Ethics and Technology

“Do no harm” applies to more than just medical fields or a line for white witch to say in a

movie. I also applies heavily to education technology use and research. Technology has great implications to either improve or harm those who use it. There are ethical questions when it comes to the use of technology that many do not think about at first.  

It is not about technology for technologies sake:
We have think first is the technology use applicable for not only the subject matter, but also the instructor teaching needs or style. The question must always first be will the use of technology in this case must add to or benefit the students. If the answer is no, then you should not use the technology, even if it is the official approved technology or software. Sometimes the technology is not available equitably to all users. Something education constantly has to work on balancing for all aspects and not just technology.

Honesty:
Unfortunately, in today’s age there are more ways to “hack” a system than there are to catch them. You have to be aware and do your best to ensure that the person you are teaching or collecting data from is the actual or real person they are presenting themselves to be. It is sad but identification is needed for proof be it in online or face-to-face interviews. It is not always about cheating for a higher grade. When monetary, even small amount are involved there can be the potential that someone will repeat the study multiple times to receive the funds.  

Protection:
We know that we have to protect our participants and provide either anonymity or confidentiality. The smaller the pool size is of participants, the harder this is to do. It is no longer just about protecting the responses or answers they provide. It is also now about protecting their identities from theft by those who can use what you have collected for study and use it to figure out how to access the participant’s social and/or financial accounts.   So unfortunately, we have to take great care to protect to ensure that the tools used to collect the data that we provide themselves are not vulnerable to being corrupted and used to harm the participants. You also have to be prepared for people to sign up to participate with the sole intention of access you the researcher’s social and/or financial accounts. Security is no longer just about keeping data or photos locked up in cabinets. It is about protecting and locking down everything. Just think about how much damage could be done if someone hacked into your phone and accessed your data using it. This is reason enough for us to welcome the use of not only passwords but that and bio-metrics like finger print, eye scan, facial or voice recognition's to be used to protect all of those involved.

Unintended Consequences:
We use the technology to improve or make things better. To provide education that a student might not have access to otherwise. To teach concepts or skills that can be hard to learn or possibly dangerous. The problem lies not in the intent of the teacher or researcher to find ways to use technology; it lies in how others use the technology. My own studies focus on simulation based training to teach basic hands on experience to gain skills that otherwise could cause physical harm to learn. Most agree that this is definitely something that needs to be studied and used. What happens if it is proven valid and then school administration decide to only use it and not add in the advanced actual hands on component needed to learn the skill for the real work place? What happens if students only want to learn via simulation and not real world and then get lost in a simulation that is more fun or fulfills a need they have and stops interacting with the actual world. These are not what I think will happen because of my studies, but these are things that could happen and I need to be prepared for ways to counteract and educate during the use of technology to avoid this happening.
  

  

Blog Post #2 - What do you think about qualitative research based on your experience gathering and doing initial analysis together?

Ok now I believe that now I have a better understanding of why or how qualitative research is useful. I guess I always confused it with a method that only worked in social applications. For my brain to process things, I have to use examples and for me the best example is when we worked with NASA in the HUNCH design and prototype program. My advanced engineering design students who worked with astronauts to solve issues they experienced on the ISS and it was my job to be the guide and the “why” person. Always asking them why they picked this handle or why do you think Velcro is best used here?

The HUNCH and NASA/ISS experience:

My training in science and engineering still understands quantitative, and quantitative or repeatable experiments is what I have been trained to do all these years. You apply X to see if Y or Z happens, record what happens and then rerun the experiment multiple times to see if you get the same outcome. It does not 100% guarantee that it will happen that way always but if you can reproduce the same outcome, then you can be confident that your findings are valid and true. For example, I know we can only use certain types of metals and no plastics when designing space flight ready equipment. We know we cannot use plastic because it has caught on fire when used in past experiments. There are simple facts or numbers that we follow because of past scientific experiments or experiences recorded in data.

NASA deals only with quantifiable numbers right?
I didn’t realize it at the time but I was teaching and applying qualitative practices to my CHS HUNCH students, especially in the beginning. A qualitative practice happened when my students would sit down with the astronauts and ask them to tell them what “bugged them” the most while working on the ISS. What piece of equipment or process did they struggle with the most? I had the students both write down and video record this so they could go back if needed, not knowing that was a qualitative procedure. Usually they would get a list together of these issues and go back to school with them. Then they’d decide what problem they wanted to tackle for the year and formed teams of 2-4. Once this happened they would begin to research and find anything they could about it, they had to build a folder with 30+ references and come up with questions to ask the astronauts about. Then we’d usually video conference in with the astronauts on the ISS and the students would ask them the questions, ask to be shown what they were doing and be explained or shown how it was a “pain”. Did the astronaut have any ideas or preferences to materials to be used? Then they’d have to get with NASA engineer to get rules that they’d have to follow to meet the safety guidelines.

The students would then begin to apply and build prototypes for what they thought would solve the problem the ISS astronauts were facing or dealing with. They’d present the first draft that year, go through the whole interview process again, ask questions, get input on design changes, etc.. from astronauts in person. Then go back for second round of prototype design. Sometimes refinement and precision manufacturing needed to happen and sometimes they had to start all over again. All based off of what they observed and learned from the astronauts needs.

Qualitative skills and processes learned from the experience:
This ended up ultimately teaching my students and myself that full research and application when dealing with people not machines is a long process that sometimes can take years. I know I had 4 different teams tackle how to best crush food containers for storage over 3 years. For one experiment table to be manufactured and actually deployed to space it took one school I know 3 years and 8 prototypes before they got it right for flight. This is all because you are dealing with humans and their needs, they will not all be 100% the same. Our job is to find the best solution that meets their needs not what we perceived to be the. I never really connected that this was qualitative research because we always built our prototypes based off material and calculations made on what was needed for it to work properly. However, everything that was done qualitative the only truly quantitative work was in selection of materials approved for space flight and the physics mathematical equations students would have to work out to prove it met the safety requirements. For me this is quite “eye opening” and I am seeing where on how I apply qualitative research daily in life and my PhD studies but just wasn’t self-aware that was what I was doing.

CHS HUNCH Program link

Blog Post #1 - What I think I know about qualitative research:

Qualitative research is for finding trends, opinions, observational research. It's about the qualities that make up what you are researching and it can't always be repeated or measured in an experiment. Coming from a quantitative background in engineering/STEM this has been a research method that I have struggled with. I understand how to take data or numbers and find statistics from that. Whereas, with qualitative your more concerned with how you are going to start investigating something you think could be a research problem. Thankfully being in education for 22 years, I have made many decisions about how to best teach my students based off how I have observed them in actions. What worked or didn't, willing to ask questions and find out what is going on. Versus just going by their grades on traditional work like tests and instead look at the skills they show me they can do. This is probably why I am so drawn to to educational technology applications, because I have seen how they improved my students ability to learn. Now if only I can balance that with my empirical nature that wants concrete data or numbers to use to explain the WHY my students do better when technology is used as a tool in my classes. I am hoping that by the end of this class I will find balance and that qualitative research finally makes sense to me like quantitative does.