Jeta's Growth as a Researcher

Growth as a researcher
Subjectivity as a Tool
I've been raised in a post-modern generation, one that willingly accepts relative, contextual truths, that has largely abandoned the larger, universal Truths in acknowledgement of the social contingencies of our beliefs. I've grown up in a hyper-culture conscious society that gives great validity to contextual, social influence on truth, meaning, and values. It is therefore not surprising that on the first evening of class when we wrote our definition of "truth," I wrote a very pragmatic definition--truth that is useful to us in a particular context given our particular experience.
Given this conception of truth, I entered into this course more than willing to accept the premise that the "truths" of research are highly contextual, that our subjective experience will always and everywhere be a presence in the work that we do. But, as I came to realize early on in the semester, I began to see one's subjectivity not only as a reality to be accepted but also as a tool to be used to improve our research. In my residency project and mini-inquiry for this class, I have tried to be aware of both how my subjectivity influences the study and how it can be a useful means for getting a fuller, more complex picture of the participants. I am interviewing students at my old school, and I taught the majority of participants when they were in 6th grade. Seeing this simply as a bias that must be acknowledged would not fully appreciate the advantages of having close, personal relationships with the participants. This allows me both to have more open, comfortable conversation with participants and to write about these students' with an ardent level of care, compassion, and respect.
Cohesion vs. Progression
College was hugely influential in my development as a writer. In high school, I had been taught the classic thesis statement method, where I wrote a thesis statement and developed body paragraphs that all supported that original thesis. Spring semester of freshman year, I took my first philosophy class (which would later become my minor), and I started to see writing in an entirely new way—as a logical progression of ideas, ideas which propelled my argument forward rather than continually reverted it back to that thesis touchstone. I say all this because I think in these past few months I seem to be adding to this model of writing. As I’ve been reading qualitative articles this semester with an eye for their writing style, I've started to get an appreciation for the cohesiveness and interconnectedness of the ideas in the writing rather than simply the forward-movement of ideas. I think much of this stems from the kind of research approach that Creswell argues for, where a sound theoretical stance grounds all choices--both methodological and stylistic. In working on my own qualitative paper for this course, I think a lot of my frustration springs from the fact that I feel that I'm not achieving this level of coherence and solidarity. This experience has definitely made me a believer in the need to begin a project with an explicit theoretical stance and to continually confirm and scrutinize my choices through that lens.
Development of Ideas vs. Validation of Ideas
Boote and Beile's scathing critique of doctoral students' literature reviews has, needless to say perhaps, made me hyper-conscious this semester of the quality of my own. Boote and Beile call for a critical synthesis of prior research that artfully and logically situates your own study rather than a blind regurgitation of any and all research on the topic. For these authors, the literature review should construct an argument for your study instead of just showing that you have read everything on the topic.
For myself, I think that early on in this program, I understood Boote and Beile's point of view. I think I have always seen the literature review as an arena for me to make my own argument for the study at hand. In this semester, however, I have actually realized that I perhaps was a bit too self-centered in my literature reviews, too apt at deciding on the argument I wanted to make and seeking out sources to help me make my argument. Working on my residency project and the mini-inquiry for this course, I have gained a new information for the way that other research can develop my argument verses validating what I was already believed. Reading the Godley et al.'s article on language ideologies, I think my willingness to let this article shape and influence my own study has hugely benefited my work. While there remained a temptation to simply "take what I needed" from the article, I made an effort instead to consider how the work of these authors might change or alter my own study. While I think Boote and Beile make a compelling case for the need for thoughtful, critical evaluation in the literature review to make your own argument, I think equal attention needs to be given to researchers (especially perhaps know-it-all doctoral students like myself) being willing and open to the knowledge and experience of others.

Marcia's Sample Articles

Marcia M. Pearce
April 28, 2010
Dr. Turner

Sample Article

What do you like?
What do you find effective?
What structures/rhetorical devices help convince the reader the results are “true”?

Kelly, C. A. (2002). Creating equitable classroom climates: an investigation of classroom strategies in mathematics and science instruction for developing preservice teachers’ use of democratic social values. Child Study Journal, 32 (1), 39-52.

The structure of this qualitative study by Kelly (2002) seems to be straightforward. I do not have to “search” through pages of this study for the theoretical framework. The purpose is the very first sentence:
The purpose of this study was to describe and delineate a series of methods used to prepare preservice teacher candidates to create equitable classroom climates and, ultimately, to better serve all children’s learning needs (Kelly, 2002, p. 39).
What I like about this study is that there is a secondary objective highlighted directly after the purpose statement, which is ethical and honorable--there is no hidden agenda. As Dr. Turner stated during the last class, a study does not have to begin with a purpose statement, but many research reports begin with flowery narrative and unfolding events. The literature review is well developed: it is an in-depth review that provides different views on building democratic environments for preservice teachers. It follows traditional headings so there is no guessing game. In addition to a concrete structure, the language is academic but reader-friendly. The author does not try to go over your head with terms that only doctors and lawyers could understand. A parent or teacher could read it without difficulty. Many times the academic world engages in “gatekeeping” by publishing studies that very few people can comprehend. All of the terms and keywords are clearly defined at the beginning of and throughout the study.

The methodology is clear. Participants are described by grade, level, gender, and race. Their racial breakdown consists of 14 percent Hispanic, 68 percent European American, and seven percent Afro-American. Participants’ ages range from 20 to 54, with the average age being 31. The study’s duration is for three months. Procedures include a full description of the assessment process along with an easy-to-read table. This study is not oversaturated with graphs, but uses just enough to highlight information to help the reader make connections. The use of transitional words indicates a flow from the process (study) to the product (results). The concluding paragraph provides a brief summary of the study with realistic recommendations for preservice teachers. Overall, this study was an excellent example of qualitative research.

Marcia's Partial Self - Review

Marcia M. Pearce
April 27, 2010
Partial Self-Review

Growth as a Researcher (10)
I learned that I can be a teacher and a researcher at the same time. Creswell (2008) states that in order to develop as a researcher there is a code of ethics one must never compromise: do no harm and the participant should know what is going on in the form of a written consent letter. At no time should a study jeopardize the health or well-being of the participant. In the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, black men were told they were receiving treatment when they actually weren’t. These participants were lied to, in the name of research, by the medical community. The do no harm and tell your participants the truth principals were clearly absent. Writing IRB (even just for practice) proved to be helpful: getting that promise for the university, school, and parents, along with consent forms, will ensure the safety of the participants. As a researcher, I learned that this process is long and taxing but necessary to maintain a code of ethics. In addition to the strict adherence to the codes, “good” research effectively outlines the conceptual framework. First, when doing any research, a clear purpose must be stated: What are you asking or looking for—what is the importance of this study? Why did I choose to investigate this issue? In the theoretical framework, definitions of key terms need to be explained plainly. For example, the topic of “democratic values” in the classroom is what I am interested in as an educator. Within my mini pilot project I had to clearly define “democratic values” and how this relates to students’ perceptions. I revised my purpose statement several times and really consider the lens that I will use to code and analyze data. It is a painful process but one that is necessary in order to understand the research question that will lead me to collect the appropriate data to thoroughly analyze. With a well-developed conceptual frame (purpose statement, statement of problem, and rationale for the study) there is a solid focus and a clear direction. It is okay to change the conceptual frame several times until it’s the shape of the appropriate research inquiry. Second, during the research, what role do I play? The role that one play’s has a lot to do with the qualitative approach: narrative, phenomenological, grounded theory, ethnographic, and case study. In addition to choosing the right approach, I learned that “My I’s” definitely influence the role: I am a non-participatory observer—my ethnic I is not compromised and I can focus on the individuals within the study. Reading James’ (2009) section on the “I’s” caused me to question “who I am” and if my essence will have an “impact” on my research inquiry.

Openness to Revising Views (5)
An openness to revise my views was evident throughout this semester. I started with a teacher-centered view of democratic values—as long as the students’ views did not conflict with my ideology everything was fine. Reading Smith (2007) made me realize that in order to improve my pedagogy and provide the best optimal learning environment, I needed to view my students’ views as important in building a classroom where youngsters can express “personal freedoms” along with other values on establishing a democratic classroom to self-reflection (how do I feel) to a clear focus on how students assess this issue. A “true” democratic classroom is built by teachers and students with a mutual respect for each other and ongoing interaction. In addition, during a peer-sharing session on 4/14/10, Dr. Turner and Brian pointed out a theme from the students’ writing. This theme related to the “lack” of personal freedom they were allowed to express in the classroom. With that important knowledge, I decided to question my “one size fits all” policy. Allowing students to be a part of the decision-making process does not mean giving up my authority as a teacher—democratic values and practice are a collaborative effort.

Coding Data: At What Point Should I Know What the Heck I'm Doing?

(this is a bit of me rambling...just trying to articulate for myself why this article has impacted me)

An article I read about 2 weeks ago has now become hugely influential to my project: Godley, Carpenter, and Werner's (2007) " 'I'll speak proper slang': Language Ideologies in a Daily Editing Activity."

Initially reading this article, it was the conceptual framework that was most loudly "whispering my ear." I had been struggling for a few weeks to figure out exactly how I wanted to organize and relate the central ideas of my study--language attitudes, code-switching, AAE, SE, identity. What immediately struck me was that I was that I had a very similar aim to Godley et. al: we both wanted to analyze perceptions and beliefs about standard and non-standard dialects. Godley et. al articulate this as a question of "language ideologies," and as I read, I decided that I did too. Language ideologies, as they define it, is "the assumptions about language that are collectively held by a particular group of people within a particular sociocultural and historical context" (p. 104). They go on to say later how our social identities are inherently embedded in these language ideologies as they are a part of our "particular sociocultural and historical context." I'm now in the process of figuring out how to tinker with this idea of "language ideology" as a means of tying together those ideas from my study I listed above.

Equally important to me was how they were able to codify these seemingly intangible features of "language ideology." These researchers had 3 coding phases. Initial coding was open coding, looking for emerging themes and patterns. Through this initial coding, the researchers arrived at the focus for analysis--language ideology. In the second coding, the researchers decided to code for content of ideology (what opinions were being expressed) and source of ideology (who/what was expressing them). In the third and final coding, the researchers wanted to look at the relationship between the source and the content of the ideologies and used discourse analysis codes to look at this relationship.

A few things I found useful about this:
1) the researchers really didn't know what they were looking at or for until the end of the first round of data analysis. Reading this came as a huge relief to me. As I'm beginning to collect data, I start to feel that I'm in a bit of a fog of different thoughts, hunches, concepts, and questions. It can feel like I'm a bit lost, and in reading this article, I started to feel like that might be beneficial to me.
2) I really liked the way they divided up the 2nd and 3rd phases in coding b/t what they were looking for and then the relationship between these. I think too often I jump ahead to that "relationship between" different concepts. It was a nice model to see how certain topics can be looked at discretely.
3) It's so clear in reading their coding process how these codes are tied to their definition of language ideology--what is believed (content) by a particular group (source). I admire the clarity of that...and maybe I can get there down the road.

thanks for indulging the rambling a bit :)

My Student Survey for "democratic values and practices" in the classroom

Ms. Pearce’s Class
Student survey: Democratic Values(personal freedoms, academic opportunity, and equality)
April 2010
No Name please

1. What is your definition of personal freedom?

2. Can you express your range of personal freedoms in Marcia’s class? Give specific examples.

3. How would you define fair and impartial treatment?

4. Tell of a time or situation where you received fair/impartial treatment or did not receive fair treatment in the classroom?

5. What is your definition of equality of opportunity(academic opportunity)?

6. Give examples of academic opportunity you’ve have in the classroom.

7. Is there anything you would like to change about your current classroom?

The ranges of personal freedoms-I did with my class as a group activity(discipline codes included). In addition, my students wrote essays on their feelings about suspension from listed infractions(Blue Book on discipline codes for NYCDOE). Dr. Turner and Brian provided some coding ideas for the essays and I found another teacher to code the data with me.

Jeta and Christy and Dr. Turner
Are there any questions I need to add(or delete)?

Okay ladies, happy research!!!
Marcia

The Agee and Altariba's(2009) article on computer and literacy

Marcia M. Pearce
CTGE 7194: Qual. Inquiry
Dr. Turner
Article Reflection: All About Literacy practices and the use of computers

Article:
Agee, J., & Altarriba, J. (2009). Changing conceptions and uses of computer
technologies in the everyday literacy practices of sixth and seventh graders.
Research in the Teaching of English, 43, 1.

This study focused on sixth and seventh graders’ literacy practices, which included computer technology skills, in two large school districts. One hundred eighty-nine participants completed a survey on their concept of computer use and how the application of this new literacy impacted their reading levels. Twenty-four of the 189 participants provided researchers with more in-depth information through one-on-one interviews. These researchers really provided a clear picture of the lives and literacy practices of junior high school students and showed how computers impact their world.

“Developmentally, sixth and seventh grade students are at a pivotal point” (p. 364). I totally agree with this statement, junior high school students are at an age where what they do in and out of the classroom will have an impact on their growth both mentally and academically. Agee and Altarriba (2009) highlighted in their study that along with all of the changes that these sixth and seventh graders go through also comes a change in the world of education. The days of just reading, writing, and mathematics are long gone—literacy with computer techniques is a new focus for our youngsters. As a teacher, I feel that “the powers that be”(the higher education community) desire to replace instruction and learning with computer technology. These authors looked at computer technology and literacy in regards to how students incorporate them into their reading practices on the micro and macro levels.

On a macro level, our culture deems youngsters automatically “computer literate” and that this competency in computers leads to proficient reading. What these authors pointed out was that exposure to computers doesn’t mean students are competent in them, in addition, the use of technology may not have a positive impact on them as readers. On a micro level, students’ social and development needs often determine their level of computer usage and competency. Agee and Altarriba (2009) stated that “students who were skilled readers of traditional texts were more likely … to engage in IMING” (p. 391). They also pointed out that “less skilled readers” of traditional texts did not use computers for additional educational purposes—inquiry and gathering information for reports—but preferred to surf the Internet, play games, or engage in visual interactions.

Skilled readers tended to view computer technology as academic support, not just as entertainment. Proficient readers seemed to highlight the importance of activities that do not include computers, such as sports and social interaction with their peers. One of the students in this study stated, “I use it maybe one or two hours a day. I usually have a soccer game or something.” The Internet did not consume every moment in this student’s life. The more skilled readers limited their use of computers (self-regulated) to one or two hours a day. These participants did not value the Internet as the end-all and be-all—their families, peers, and classwork were more important than playing around on the computer. In addition, computer use did not take the place of traditional textbook reading. Some of these youngsters even mentioned that sitting in front of a computer was “physically uncomfortable” and it distracted them from “reading and learning.” Only at the end of seventh grade did these participants find the computer to be an important part of their social lives—“using search tools like Google to complete school research projects” (p. 389).

To my surprise, skilled readers, from this group of sixth and seventh graders, did not value the Internet over one-on-one social interaction with peers and family and outdoor sports. This study made a distinguishment between skilled and struggling readers—the less skilled readers used computers as a tool to support school-related tasks as well as gather information about certain personal interests. The only problem with this study is that the participants do not represent all cultures—these are students from two large suburbs—it is not truly a random sample of the school population.

Ladies(Jeta and Christy), what do you think about literacy practices as it relates to the use of the internet? Does the internet promote or hinder literacy and learning of youngsters in today's society?

Students' reflective writing TOPIC part (1)

Marcia's Data Collection process: Students' reflections

Before students write about their feelings on "democratic values" I decided to allow them to "warm-up" by introducing topics that evoke emotions(about treatment in school as it relates to behavior and reaction from those in authority).

Topic:
The principal(with the recommendation of the teacher) of the local high school has decided to suspend from school for one week children who constantly misbehave. Some people disagree with this decision.

Decide whether you agree or disagree with the principal’s decision (with the teacher's recommendation for a suspension)that children who constantly misbehave should be suspended from school for one week. Write to persuade (the teacher) to agree with your opinion. Explain your reasons. (Essay topic from writing workbook)

Rationale:
When students find themselves in trouble--they loudly proclaim--"You are denying me a right to an education by suspending me. Writing about the articles is okay because I need to provide examples of my data collection and the topics that evoke responses from students.
Was this a good topic for an ice breaker to "democratic values-of fairness"? In addition to digital recording lessons, writing responses and reflectives will be a good source of collecting data.
Triangulation: students' assessment and writing responses, teacher's reflective journals, and digital recording of lessons.

Christy, how are you doing with your data collection process? Jeta, you seem to be doing just fine with your "African American students code-switching" research.