Categories
Uncategorized

Ethical Synopsis

How might ethical issues be managed?

I think researchers should follow the golden rule, “Do unto others as they would do unto you.” All researchers should think of possible scenarios that could happen during their research and hypothesize what they might do in those cases. Gay, Mills and Airasian (2009) say that qualitative researchers should consider ethics before the research begins “to ensure that you will be prepared to respond in an ethical, caring manner if difficult situations arise” (p. 22).

Researchers need to discuss these possibilities with participants before seeking their consent to participate in the study. Because qualitative research can be more unpredictable than quantitative research, researchers must ensure that they continue an open and honest dialogue with their participants as the study progresses. The study should never be valued more than the welfare of the participants. This includes the avoidance of physical and emotional harm. In order to ensure that researchers adhere to certain ethical standards, they should submit their research proposal to a governing body such as UBC’s Behavioural Research Ethics Boards.

Researchers need to be fair in how they report data but at the same time protect confidentiality of the participants. Flinders (1992) suggests this may be more difficult in qualitative research due to its descriptive nature. I think participants should be informed of how they will be portrayed before research is published.

Reflect on how our individual and collective ideas about education research have evolved over the past thirteen weeks.

I’ve learned to look at all research with a critical eye no matter who conducted it or who published it. This includes looking at the research methods and at the logic of the study. The ability to think critically is a skill I want to share with my students because I think it is important for to have in life. Students should question authority and analyze information given to them instead of accepting it passively as truth.

Flinders, David J. (1992). In search of ethical guidance: constructing a basis for dialogue. Qualitative Studies in Education, 5(2), 101-115

Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., & Airasian, P.W. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Categories
Uncategorized

Ethics

I chose to discuss ethical issues in Beck and Fetherston’s article because after I read it, I couldn’t help but feel very badly for the participating teacher. In the chapter on ethics, Gay, Mills and Airasian (2009) give an example of students who reported negative comments about the teaching methods of their math teacher which sounds very similar to the complaints about the writing process from the students in Beck and Fetherston’s study. Gay et al. say that researchers can avoid these awkward situation if they reflect on their values at the beginning of the study. There is no indication of this in Beck and Fetherston’s study. In fact, I hypothesize that the first time the teacher heard about the private comments made about her was probably when she read the study. No where in the article does Beck and Fetherston mention that they discussed the students’ attitudes towards the handwriting program with the teacher. Gay et al. say that “researchers must consider whether participants would have consented to the study had they known about the type of data collected…” (p.23)

Because a small number of students were selected from a split year ¾ class, it would be obvious to other teachers and administrators of the district who the participating teacher was. Therefore, the confidentiality of the teacher was not well protected. Gay et al. say that “Confidentiality is important for protecting research informants from stress, embarrassment, or unwanted publicity…” (p. 23)

I argue that the publication of this article would have caused harm to the participating teacher. Flinders (1992) says researchers need to ensure that their participants are not physically harmed. However, he goes on to elaborate “harm” as including psychological stress and even damage to one’s reputation.

On a side note, the text describes a study done in the 60s when “researchers lied to participants, telling them to apply high levels of electric shock to another (unseen) person who as apparently in agony, although no shock was really applied and the unseen person was simply pretending” (Milgram, 1964 as cited by Gay, Mills & Airasian, 2009, p. 19). Then, in the next paragraph, the text says that this type of study wouldn’t be conducted today due to ethical issues. However, I just watched a documentary on the Passionate Eye (tv show) that did, in fact, replicate this study but in front of a live audience in the form of a game show. The point was to assess how long people would obey authority even if it goes against their values. University researchers participated in the study but I’m not sure how it was funded so perhaps it was able to happen because it didn’t have to seek funding from a peer review board. Here’s the link: http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/passionateeyeshowcase/2011/gameofdeath/

Beck, N., & Fetherston, T. (2003). The effects of incorporating a word processor into a year three writing program. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 139-161. Retrieved from: https://www.vista.ubc.ca/webct/RelativeResourceManager/Template/Module02/module_2/BS0.pdf.

Flinders, David J. (1992). In search of ethical guidance: constructing a basis for dialogue. Qualitative Studies in Education, 5(2), 101-115

Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., & Airasian, P.W. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Categories
Uncategorized

https://cacoo.com/diagrams/NkOYl9HLpHtHyWB3

The following concept map is based on the observations below:

https://cacoo.com/diagrams/NkOYl9HLpHtHyWB3

2:51 I am sitting at picnic table with my daughter who is in an orange umbrella stroller which I positioned in front of me to conceal my notepad and pen on my lap. We are at a new “play for all” playground which was recently installed in front of an old neighbourhood rec. centre. The playground is accessible to the physically disabled so there are many low set features like swings or spinning chairs that someone in a wheelchair could access. It is also a great park for small children for this reason. It is chilly with grey skies today so the playground is empty. I’ve been here for about ten minutes and have seen many small children walk by with one of their parents but they continue into the rec centre.

2:52 A mom with two small children around the age of three and four, and a dog pass by the playground. The children want to play but the mom hustles them along saying, “It’s too cold.” Two boys about the age of 11 or 12 come darting out of the rec centre to the playground. Boy 1 jumps on the tallest feature on the playground and immediately goes to the top. He is wearing a maroon puffy down jacket, jeans, and white sneakers. He has sandy coloured hair, buck teeth, and big eyes. He looks gangly because he is tall and thin. Boy 2 is wearing the same jacket but navy blue. He has darker jeans on and black winter boots. He has brown hair. He is heavier set than the other. There are no parents around.

PC: I wonder if they’re brothers because they have the same jacket?

Boy 2 runs to one of the two low circular shaped swings and stands on it. Boy 1 follows and stands on the other circular swing next to the first boy. Both grab the ropes suspending the swings and use their bodies to get them moving.

2:54 Boy 1 lies down on the swing while it’s still in motion. Then he gets off and gets back on the swing but facing the rec centre this time. Boy 2 is still swinging but also turns direction to face the rec centre. Boy 1 is going much higher than Boy 2.

Boy 2 looks at me. Boy 1 jumps off his swing and is oblivious that I’m here. Boy 2 gets off and walks to a different structure in the shape of a sea serpent which he climbs. Boy 1 is still swinging fairly high.

Two little children and their mom walk by.

PC: I wonder if there is a swimming lesson going on since these two look to be the same age as others who’ve walked by since I’ve been here.

Boy 1 moves to a small, red spinning seat. Boy 2 climbs on to the head of the sea serpent. He seems cautious and starts to cautiously lower himself to a lower part of the head instead of jumping from the top. Once to the lowest part of the head, he calls to his friend (brother?) to get his attention. Boy 1 doesn’t see him and goes back to the circular swing.

PC: Boy 2 was trying to get his friend’s attention so Boy 1 would watch him jump off the head.

Boy 2 walks to the other circular swing and stands by it. Boy 1 jumps off his. They’re talking but I can’t hear what they’re saying. Then Boy 1 says, “Let’s see who can jump the farthest!”. Both get on the swings in a standing position. Boy 1 starts swinging first and is going very high. Boy 1 says, “Bet I can get higher than you! You can jump whenever you want.” He jumps and falls (on purpose). He then stands where he fell to mark his spot. Boy 2 jumps but not very far at all. He hops a bit further once on the ground then quickly moves to the spinning seat.

PC: Boy 2 was trying to make his jump look longer by taking small hops after he initially touched the ground. He was trying to avoid playing the game again by moving to a different structure.

Boy 1 pushes him around on the seat then goes to a structure that looks like a boat. Boy 2 goes to a swing made to hold a wheelchair and balances on it while standing. He doesn’t swing. Boy 1 goes to the spinning seat and spins himself.

Boy 2 looks at me. Boy 1 doesn’t.

PC: I wonder if Boy 2 feels self-conscious that I am here. He must notice me watching at them. He is obviously not as athletic as the other boy and an audience might make him feel nervous. I wonder if Boy 1 is unobservant or confident enough in his athleticism that he doesn’t care who watches.

Boy 2 lies down on the swing while Boy 1 moves to that structure and pushes him. Boy 2 looks back at him because Boy 1 is behind him. Boy 1 changes the side that he is pushing on to face Boy 2 now.

PC: I think these two have a fairly respectful relationship even though they are quite different. I don’t think they would choose to play together at recess at school because Boy 1 would choose a sports game and Boy 2 would probably choose to read or walk around. This further strengthens my guess that they are brothers.

Boy 1 moves to a spinning pole and then walks away, exploring other small noise making features with his hands as he goes. Boy 2 is still swinging on the wheel chair swing but is going slower now because no one has pushed him for a bit.

Boy 1 is standing by a feature that you shout into. It looks like a periscope. He says, “I have a secret to tell you that I’ve never told anyone.” He walks over to the wheelchair swing to help Boy 2 who is struggling to get off. Boy 2 looks at me as he gets off the swing awkwardly.

Boy 2 walks over to a different periscope. Boy 1 says, “I can not tell anyone.” Then he speaks into the periscope feature. Boy 2 makes noises (animal sounds) back into it. Boy 1 says, “Come on. Let’s go.” They both walk off the playground and boy 2 gives a noogie to boy 1.

PC: I feel bad for Boy 2 because it must be tough for him to be around other boys at school who are more rough and tumble than him. I find myself thinking he is probably successful in academics. However, that shows me that I can stereotype students as either being athletic or academic.

End 3:05

Categories
Uncategorized

Action Research Plan

I plan to do an action research case study on the integration of an interactive whiteboard (IWB) in my lesson planning. From being in the MET program, I’ve learned a lot about learning theories and have realized that I have prepared many teacher-led IWB lessons. My goal is to shift my teaching practices to reflect student centred lessons. The broad theory of constructivism will serve as the foundation for these lessons. I also want to structure my lessons so they use the affordances of the IWB. I don’t want to use the IWB as a traditional presentation tool. Some guiding questions I have for my self-study are:

Will I lose valuable class time by focusing on student-centred learning with the IWB?
What will the other students be doing when some are at the IWB?
What are the affordances of the IWB?
Are my students able to use the unique affordances of the technology or are they too young?
Will my students become bored by the IWB over time?
Are my students more motivated by the affordances of the technology or the hands-on tasks?
Is it more effective to use the IWB in small group or whole class instruction?
How do my students use the IWB differently when I am present compared to when I am not?

I intend to collect data by using a reflective journal, video tape, and student questionnaires. I would like to share my results with my staff because IWB are becoming increasingly popular at my school and I don’t feel that there has been enough Pro-D available for teachers to analyze the above questions. Pro-D that I have participated in was strictly about how the IWB functions and not about teaching practice. I want to record my journey of pedagogic change that IWBs enable to potentially help others do the same.

Categories
Uncategorized

Informal Critique: Tatar and Robinson

For extra practice, I thought I’d start an informal critique thread for the article by Tatar and Robinson (2003). Feel free to also comment on the pros and cons of quasi or experimental research.

Cons of the study:

-lack of random assignment of students to groups
-multi-aged groups whose experience would affect results. We don’t know how many students of each age were in each class (differential selection of participants).
-novelty effect- were the students motivated by the newness of the digital cameras? Maybe the study should’ve been carried out over a longer period of time until the students got used to the cameras.
-table 3- the control group has 19 students and the experimental group has 10. Why? Am I reading that correctly?

Tatar, D., & Robinson, M. (2003). Use of the digital camera to increase student interest and learning in high school biology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(2), 89-95

Spam prevention powered by Akismet