Before getting any feedback from my committee chair, Dr. An, I was planning to use a modified experimental/manipulative approach for my research, though I was still open to gathering a little bit of qualitative data (observations and open-ended survey questions). Since I know I am more comfortable with statistics than with literary writing, I felt like I was in the right place. However, Dr. An has suggested that there is not that much known about how mentoring for technology integration works in a classroom setting, so I should consider changing my method to collect more qualitative data and to focus more on teachers' pedagogical beliefs and knowledge. She has suggested a mixed methods approach. Though I understand mixed methods can still be congruent with any of the paradigms, I wonder if my research paradigm will be shifting along with my methodology.
The pragmatic worldview described in chapter one of Creswell (2014) seems like it might fit my situation better. I think once I redefine my research problem, I will be using multiple approaches to try and find out all I can about the problem. I like the idea of researching by focusing on the problem at hand, remaining open to various methods of collecting and analyzing data without deciding between qualitative or quantitative. So, I may be a pragmatist at heart. After I meet with Dr. An on Wednesday, I may have a few more things to say about my worldview and my methodology for my dissertation.
Update: I met with my dissertation committee chair, Dr. An, yesterday. I have now decided to focus my research questions a little more. I will be mentoring science teachers specifically, and the purpose of my research will be to explore the effectiveness of mentoring and group collaboration to create technology enhanced learner-centered classrooms. And, while I will still use parts of Dr. Kopcha's (2010) systems based model as a guide, I will not be implementing and testing the full 2-year model partially due to time constraints. My revised research questions are:
- How does mentoring and group collaboration affect science teaching practice (specifically the change in pedagogy from teacher-centered to technology-enhanced student-centered)?
- How does mentoring and group collaboration change science teachers attitudes toward technology and learner-centered pedagogies?
I will be including interviews and observations along with my surveys, so the methodology will definitely be mixed method. The convergent parallel mixed method design (Cresswell,2014) sounds most like what I want to do since I will be collecting the various forms of data at roughly the same time and merging them to get a complete picture of the situation. And, even more so after this refocusing, the pragmatic worldview is the best fit for my research approach.
In terms of my action research project, I will be collecting data and analyzing it to determine the science teachers current teaching practices and attitudes toward technology and learner-centered instruction. Essentially, I will be doing the pre-testing of the teachers, prior to the mentoring and group collaboration program, as the action research project.
References:
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kopcha, T. J. (2010). A systems-based approach to technology integration using mentoring and communities of practice. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58, 175-190. doi:10.1007/s11423-008-9095-4
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E.(2003). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 163-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
No comments:
Post a Comment