EDU 647 – Statistical Thinking & Application
EDU 647 was a full face-to-face facilitated class. It aimed to teach students a basic understanding of qualitative research. In achieving its desired outcomes, content areas in basic statistical concepts and operations were covered, including causality, constructs, variables, research questions, measurement concepts, research design and research validity, descriptive statistics, and inferential statistics. Activities included quizzes, class lectures, articles summaries, and a final project that encompassed a research proposal covering content areas.
Considering this was my first quantitative research course, nervously taking this class at first is an understatement. Besides, the class was a traditional lecture class with quizzes and classwork, which was not new to me but quite surprising. It was surprising because I have just completed my MSc with blended courses and online courses and thus swamped myself in that mode.
Nevertheless, I couldn’t wait to grasp the basics of quantitative research. I was intrigued by basic quantitative research terminologies, measurements, and applications. Those basic quantitative research terminologies included variance, standard deviation, range, and standard of measurement used in descriptive statistics, just to name a few. Also, terminologies used in inferential statistics measurement, which included confidence intervals, standard error, type I, and type II errors, and effect size, just to name a few. In the statistical analysis application, I remembered using R application software to analyze data using t-test, ANOVA, and Chi-square.
My nervousness healed at the end of the class when I applied my learned knowledge into a final project. It was not the best project I must acknowledge, but by applying the basics of quantitative research through a research proposal was empowering. The Professor’s feedback was motivational, and I believe I can do better moving forward.
Development in IDD&E:
Moving forward in IDD&E with my focus on multimedia integration in instruction, I used knowledge learned in this course to design a final project, which was a research proposal. That final project’s research proposal was about implementing multimedia design instruction and its impact on effective teachers’ pedagogy practices. There were three research designs employed to address this topic from varieties of quantitative research perspectives.
The Quasi-experimental research study design offered an instructional intervention by professional development after a pretest data results of two groups (control and experimental). This, then followed a post-test to measure multimedia instruction impact via professional development on teachers’ pedagogy practices. The experimental research study design also proposed an instructional intervention and this time without a pretest. The intervention is intended to manifest through random sampling of samples followed by professional development and post-test. On the other hand, the correlational research study design was formulated to predict if the training offered and teachers’ prior knowledge and application of multimedia could result in expected students’ performance outcomes.
This course has prompt me to consider at the end of my study to design a multimedia intervention through a model or metrics to help teachers integrate and implement multimedia instruction.
IDE 841 – Design of Inquiry
This IDD&E Doctoral Research Core Requirement course focused on the processes and designs of empirical research. In synopsis, it explored three research designs (i.e., True Experimental Design, Cross-sectional design, and Ethnographic case study design) to give students a comparative understanding of problem development and argument construction in empirical research for each design. Activities that enriched this course included articles review and summaries, research design development and presentation of research ideas, and robust feedback from peers and the instructor. The final project in this course pieced the content into three research design proposals.
I have read many articles written from several research design perspectives, never have I care to notice the authors’ process in developing those articles. For the least, I did care about the content and not until this course became the first to expand my curiosity into understanding the processes and designs of research papers.
My curiosity was extended positively and constructively to think profoundly and recognize within published research work, the problems and questions, and how they are linked to a comprehensive literature review thus leading to systemic data collection, data analysis guided by specific research design. I left this class as it was intended to construct an argument and make the right choices about the research method that aligns with that argument. Specifically, learning to write a quality research problem, including a research statement and questions and searching the literature and connecting my argument to empirical foundations. Also, organizing my ideas under research designs that were taught in the course.
More to my takeaway from this course was the motivational lectures and presentations by guest lecturers. They shared their research experiences and research design and processes they used or are using in research projects. One guest lecturer who presentation I still reminisce talked about the struggle to find a research topic/area during doctoral study. That lecturer reassured us that though it is tough arriving at a topic, with constant time spend in the literature and guidance from the scholarly community, we will arrive at a passionate research topic.
Development in IDD&E:
Obviously, with words from guest lecturers, feedback from peers and the Professor, and content delivery through textbooks, it was prompting that I tried to connect all of that to my development as a prospective researcher. I could not do that any better but to think more about my passionate research phenomena, integrating multimedia in instruction.
Therefore, like the previous courses, my final project focused on multimedia integration, but this time on teachers’ perspectives and the use of multimedia in instruction. My primary objective in this course was to establish an argument about teachers’ perspectives and the use of multimedia in instruction based on the literature. In this case, the literature has been evident in pointing that research in technology integration has focused on teachers’ training and environmental factors that influence the efficiency of technology in the classroom (Nelson et al. 2019; Barton & Dexter, 2019; Mouza & Wong 2009). The literature also pointed out that multimedia has been the most of those technologies that have been integrated into the classroom (Amaka & Goeman, 2017; Courts, B., & Tucker, J. 2012; Falk & Carlson, 1992). Thus, I questioned myself fundamentally how it fits into the general idea of IDD&E.
My final project then proposed three research designs under the three research designs taught in the course. The first, True Experimental Design, focused on multimedia and its influence on teachers’ perceptions of multimedia integration in instruction. The second Cross-sectional design focused on teachers’ perceived usefulness and ease of use of multimedia influence during the integration of multimedia into instruction. And the third, ethnographic case study design, which focused on teachers’ application of multimedia in instruction in reflection to the impact of teachers’ training courses on multimedia use.
Somewhat, at this point, I have started some level of consistency in my research thinking though I was not confident how my idea will sync with the current trends of research in IDD&E.
Amaka, I. H., & Goeman, K. (2017). Selecting media for effective learning in online and blended courses: A review study. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 26(1), 29-59.
Barton, E. A., & Dexter, S. (2019). Sources of teachers’ self-efficacy for technology integration from formal, informal, and independent professional learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 1-20.
Courts, B., & Tucker, J. (2012). Using technology to create a dynamic classroom experience. Journal of College Teaching & Learning (TLC), 9(2), 121-128.
Falk, D. R., & Carlson, H. L. (1992). Learning to teach with multimedia. THE Journal (Technological Horizons in Education), 20(2), 96.
Mouza, C., & Wong, W. (2009). Studying classroom practice: Case development for professional learning in technology integration. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 17(2), 175.
Nelson, M. J., Voithofer, R., & Cheng, S. L. (2019). Mediating factors that influence the technology integration practices of teacher educators. Computers & Education, 128, 330-344.
IST 617 – Motivational Aspects/Info Use
As the course nomenclature label (Motivational Aspects of Information Use), so was the course designed around motivational theories and models and the use of information in impacting learning.
It focused on enabling students to understand the traditional and innovative applications of motivation theories and models to improve their learning and workings in virtual and face-to-face environments. In order to accomplish its core purpose, there were readings, online discussions, videos, and class activities and assignments (group assignment and final individual project) to help students understand the variety of motivation challenges they will face as information professionals. The final project allowed students to choose a topic to apply the newly-learned knowledge and skills to an authentic experience related to their profession or field of studies.
IST 617 did not seem much like walking into a surprise, especially with Motivation as a core concept of this course. The fact is, I have learned from IDE 632 during the MSc study that Motivation, along with satisfaction and perception, is among key factors of diffusion. Diffusion that is a valuable process in instructional design, is how an innovation is adopted and obtains acceptance by members of learning or working communities. With that background, my quest for motivation theory this time was how to apply motivation theories to improve learning. Specifically, when innovation is accepted, a comprehensive application of that innovation by using Motivation might raise the probability of acceptance for the future use of the innovation. Something this course demonstrated so well through its pedagogical approach and course design during the semester.
During the course, the weekly readings and activities had a connection to every student in different fields of study taking the course. A robust, engaging weekly discussion board demonstrated this. I could connect my reflections about motivation theories with students from different fields. The weekly pre-recorded lecture was splendidly clear, even for someone whose English was their second language. Besides, there was a caption to help ease translation and accessibility issues. Not to mention the regular assessment before each module in the form of advance organizer that sets the stage for the week’s lesson.
As expected, it delivers a practical approach to teaching and motivation theories. It prompted me to go beyond just good design to a better design designed to sync with the audience, regardless of their profession, ethnicity, or orientation.
Development in IDD&E:
As I thought genuinely about design, it was apparent that I was concern about how this course supports my development in IDD&E. For the most part, studies have shown that Motivation and learning processes have demonstrated a deep connection in learning and working environments. Therefore, nothing could be more convincing then understanding that motivation theories are core to my development, especially when it is defined as a “process to make a start, guides, and maintains goal-oriented behaviors” (Gopalan, V., Bakar, et al. 2017) which aligns with IDD&E proffering of change in human performance through instruction. The connection between the two (motivation and learning process) is naturally bonding and needed for my development.
During this course, I thought about how my research interest “multimedia use in instruction” could benefit from using motivational theories to help teachers integrate multimedia in their instruction. The course presented theories to aid with that thought; theories like, the Expectancy-value theory developed by Jacquelynne Eccles and her colleagues (Eccles et al., 1983; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Wigfield & Eccles, 2001) which posit that achievement-related choices are motivated by an aggregate of people’s expectations for success and subjective task value in particular specialties. The course also presented the ARCS Model of Motivation (Keller, 1999a, b) developed by John Keller. The ARCS model based on four categories of motivational concepts, attention (A), relevance (R), confidence (C), and satisfaction (S), provides guidance for investigating the motivational properties of learners and designing motivational strategies based on empirical results.
Overwhelming with these pieces of knowledge and many more, my final project sort of addressing the perception gaps perceived by teachers concerning modeling skills and knowledge learned in courses and fieldwork that used prescribed technology integration standards. In this case, my project addressed pre-service teachers’ perception to model ISTE Standards for educator created by the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). To address the perception of modeling, the project sort of investigating how the ISTE Standards for educator was/is currently use/integrated into teachers’ training program course. Furthermore, my project sort to query from pre-service teachers if using the standards in their training inspire a desire to model same, to maintain goal-oriented behaviors for their prospective students.
If this study is implemented, the expected results would support a previous study by Parra, J. et al., (2019), which suggest that “When designing and implementing curriculum for students who intend to become future teachers, it is critical to acknowledge that teachers tend to teach the way they were taught.” The results could also disagree with Parra, J. et al., (2019) and shows that teachers just do not tend to teach the way they were taught, instead, the design of the course which includes proper integration of the right standards or principles to enhance its implementation might influence teachers desires to model or teach the way they were taught.
Gopalan, V., Bakar, J. A. A., & Zulkifli, A. N. (2019). A Review of motivation theories, models and instruments in learning environment. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(6), 2020.
Parra, J., Raynor, C., Osanloo, A., & Guillaume, R. O. (2019). (re)imagining an undergraduate integrating technology with teaching course. Techtrends, 63(1), 68-78. doi:10.1007/s11528-018-0362-x)