Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Social Software Research For Aahrus
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Social Software Research For Aahrus

788

Published on

Review of research metholdogies, hints and tips for PhD seminar at Aarhus University, Denmark. January 2009

Review of research metholdogies, hints and tips for PhD seminar at Aarhus University, Denmark. January 2009

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
788
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
19
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Overview of Research Methodologies for Social Software Research Aarhus
University,
Denmark
January
21,
2009
 Terry
Anderson,
Ph.D.
 Canada
Research
Chair
in
Distance
EducaAon

  • 2. The
context
of
Social
SoFware
 ImplementaAon
 •  DisrupAve
(Christensen,
2008)
simpler,
not
 wanted
by
main
stream
customers
 •  Rapid
gains
in
funcAonality
 •  Cheaper
 •  AdapAve

  • 3. Studying
Technological
Based
Models
 of
Change
 •  Technological
determinism
(Marx,
Zuboff,
 Kurzweil)
 •  Affordances
and
Social
ConstrucAvist
(Bjiker,
 Stewart
and
Williams,
Dalsgaard
 •  DomesAficaAon/AppropriaAon
–(Silverston,
 Ling)


  • 4. Research Paradigms
  • 5. Paradigm
1
 QuanAtaAve
Research

  • 6. •  “those
who
are
seeking
the
strict
way
of
truth
 should
not
trouble
themselves
about
any
 object
concerning
which
they
cannot
have
a
 certainty
equal
to
arithmeAc
or
geometrical
 demonstraAon”
 –  (Rene
Descartes)
 •  Inordinate
support
and
faith
in
randomized
 controlled
studies

  • 7. QuanAtaAve
1
–

 CMC
Content
Analysis
 •  Anderson,
Garrison,
Rourke
1997‐2003
 –  hcp://communiAesofinquiry.com

‐
9
papers
reviewing
results
 focusing
on
reliable
,
quanAtaAve
analysis
 –  IdenAfied
ways
to
measure
teaching,
social
and
cogniAve
 ‘presence’
 –  Most
reliable
methods
are
beyond
current
Ame
constraints
of
 busy
teachers
 –  QuesAons
of
validity
 –  Serves
as
basic
research
as
grounding
for
AI
methods
of
the
 future

 –  Serves
as
qualitaAve
heurisAc
for
teachers
and
course
designers

  • 8. QuanAtaAve
–
Meta‐Analysis

 •  Ungerleider
and
Burns
(2003)
 •  SystemaAc
review
of
effecAveness
and
efficiency
of
 ICT
 •  The type of interventions studied were extraordinary diverse –only criteria was a comparison group •  “Only 10 of the 25 studies included in the in- depth review were not seriously flawed, a sobering statistic given the constraints that went into selecting them for the review.”

  • 9. Is
DE
Becer
than
Classroom
InstrucAon?
 Project
1:
2000
–
2004
 •  QuesAon:
How
does
distance
educaAon
compare
 to
classroom
instrucAon?
(inclusive
dates
 1985‐2002)
 •  
Total
number
of
effect
sizes:
k
=
232
 •  Measures:
Achievement,
Amtudes
and
RetenAon
 (opposite
of
drop‐out)
 •  Divided
into
Asynchronous
and
Synchronous
DE 11
  • 10. Primary
findings
 •  DE
and
CI
are
essenAally
equal
(g+
≈
0.0
to
low
 average
effect)
on
all
measures
 •  Effect
size
distribuAons
are
heterogeneous;
some
 DE
>>
CI,
some
DE
<<
CI
 •  Generally
poor
methodological
quality
 •  Pedagogical
study
features
account
for
more
 variaAon
than
media
study
features
(Clark,
1994)
 •  InteracAve
DE
an
important
variable*
 *Lou, Y., Bernard, R.M., & Abrami, P.C. (2006). Media and pedagogy in undergraduate distance education: A theory-based meta-analysis of empirical literature. Educational Technology Research & Development, 54(2), 141-176. 12
  • 11. Summary
of
results:
Achievement
 Achievement Outcomes *Significantly heterogeneous average effect 13
  • 12. Summary
of
results:
Amtudes
 Attitude Outcomes *Significantly heterogeneous average effect 14
  • 13. Summary
of
results:
RetenAon
 Retention Outcomes *Significantly heterogeneous effect sizes 15
  • 14. Equivalency:
Are
all
types
of
 InteracAon
necessary?
 Anderson, 2003 IRRODL
  • 15. Anderson’s
Equivalency
Theorem
 (2003)
 Moore
(1989)
disAncAons
are:

   Three
types
of
interacAon
 o  student‐student
interacAon
 o  student‐teacher
interacAon

 o  Student‐content
interacAon
 Anderson
(2003)
hypotheses
state:
   High
levels
of
one
out
of
3
interacAons
will
produce
 saAsfying
educaAonal
experience
   Increasing
saAsfacAon
through
teacher
and
learner
 interacAon
interacAon
may
not
be
as
Ame
or
cost‐effecAve
 as
student‐content
interacAve
learning
sequences
 17
  • 16. Do
the
three
types
of
interacAon
 differ?
Moore’s
disAncAons
 Achievement and Attitude Outcomes Achievement Attitudes Interaction Categories k g+adj. k g+adj. 10 0.342 6 0.358 Student-Student 44 0.254 30 0.052 Student-Teacher 20 0.339 8 0.136 Student-Content 44 74 0.291 0.090 Total 2.437 6.892* Between-class Moore’s distinctions seem to apply for achievement (equal importance), but not for attitudes (however, samples are low for SS and SC) 18
  • 17. Does
strengthening
interacAon
improve
achievement
 and
amtudes?
Anderson’s
hypotheses
 Achievement and Attitude Outcomes Achievement Attitudes Interaction Strength k g+adj. SE k g+adj. SE Low Strength 30 0.163 0.043 21 0.071 0.042 Med Strength 29 0.418 0.044 18 0.170 0.043 High Strength 15 0.305 0.062 5 -0.173 0.091 Total 74 0.291 0.027 44 0.090 0.029 (Q) Between-class 17.582* 12.060* Anderson’s first hypothesis about achievement appears to be supported Anderson’s second hypothesis about satisfaction (attitude) appears to be supported, but only to an extent (i.e., only 5 studies in High Category) 19
  • 18.  Bernard,
Abrami,
Borokhovski,
Wade,
Tamin,
 &
Surkes,
(in
press).
Examining
Three
Forms
of
 InteracAon
in
Distance
EducaAon:
A
Meta‐ Analysis
of
Between‐DE
Studies.
Review
of
 Research
in
Educa2on

  • 19. Because
social
soFware
use
is
so
 emergent
need
for

 •  Demographic
studies
 –  Who
is
using
what
for
doing
what?
 –  How
are
they
using
mulA‐use
tools?
 VisualizaAon
of
acAvity
and
relaAonships
 •  Network
analysis
 •  ConnecAon
between
context
and
type
of
use
 •  Data
mining
 • 
  • 20. QuanAtaAve
Summary
 •  Can
be
useful
especially
when
fine
tuning
well
 established
pracAce
 •  Provides
incremental
gains
in
knowledge,
not
 revoluAonary
ones
 •  The
need
to
“control”
context
oFen
makes
results
of
 licle

value
to
pracAcing
professionals
 •  In
Ames
of
rapid
change
too
early
quanAtaAve
 tesAng
may
mask
beneficial
posiAve
capacity
 •  Will
we
ever
be
able
to
afford
blind
reviewed,
 random
assignment
studies?

  • 21. Paradigm
2

 QualitaAve
Paradigm
 •  Many
different
varieAes
 •  Generally
answer
the
quesAon
‘why’
rather
 then
‘what’
or
‘how
much’?
 •  Presents
special
challenges
in
distributed
 contexts
due
to
distance
between
parAcipants
 and
researchers
 •  Currently
most
common
type
of
DE
research
 (Rourke
and
Szabo,
2002)



  • 22. QualitaAve
study
of
Social
SoFware
 •  CriAcally
important:
 –  In
early
stages
of
adopAon
 –  To
track
effects
of
user
competence
and
efficacy
 –  As
contexts
are
personalized
 –  
as
tools
are
appropriated
by
users
for
enArely
 different
tasks
than
those
intended
by
developers

  • 23. QualitaAve
Example
 – Dearnley
(2003)
Student support in open learning: Sustaining the Process
 – PracAcing
Nurses,
weekly
F2F
tutorial
 sessions
 – Phenomenological
study
using
 grounded
theory
discourse
  • 24. Core
category
to
emerge
was
“Finding
the
 professional
voice”

  • 25. QualitaAve
example
2
 •  Mann,
S.
(2003)
A
personal
inquiry
into
an
experience
of
 adult
learning
on‐line.
Instruc8onal
Science
31
 •  Conclusions:
 –  The
need
to
facilitate
the
presentaAon
of
learner
and
teacher
 idenAAes
in
such
a
way
that
takes
account
of
the
loss
of
the
normal
 channel
 –  The
need
to
make
explicit
the
development
of
operaAng
norms
and
 convenAons
 –  reduced
communicaAve
media
there
is
the
potenAal
for
greater
 misunderstanding
 –  The
need
to
consider
ways
in
which
the
developing
learning
 community
can
be
open
to
the
other
of
uncertainty,
ambiguity
and
 difference

  • 26. 3rd
Paradigm
 CriAcal
Research
 •  Asks
who
gains
in
power?
 •  David
Noble’s
criAque
of
‘digital
diploma
Mills’
 most
prominent
Canadian
example

 •  Are
profits
generated
from
user
generated
 content
exploitaAve?
 •  ConfronAng
the
“net
changes
everything”
 mantra
of
many
social
soFware
proponents.
 •  Who
is
being
excluded
from
social
soFware

  • 27. Is
the
extracAon
of
informaAon
from
the
masses
 exploitaAve
or
empowering?

  • 28. •  Why
does
Facebook
own
all
the
content
that
 we
supply?
 •  Does
the
power
of
the
net
further
marginalize
 the
non
connected?
 •  Who
benefits
from
voluntary
disclosure?
 •  Why
did
the
One
Laptop
Per
Child
fail?

  • 29. QuanAtaAve
vs.
QualitaAve
 Paradigm
Wars
Rekindled
 •  Current
research

“more
resembles
the
pendulum
 swings
characterisAc
of
art
or
fashion,
rather
than
 the
progressive
improvements
characterisAc
of
 science
and
technology”
(p.
16).
 •  Slavin
(2002)
in
EducaAonal
Researcher
 •  SoluAon
to
embrace
“evidence
based
learning”

 •  Projected
to
increase
from
5%
to
75%
of
US
Gov.
 funding
by
2007
for
“research
that
addresses
causal
 quesAons
and
uses
random
assignments
….”
Slavin,
2002
 p.
15

  • 30. Do
Either
QualitaAve
or
QuanAtaAve
 Methods
Meet
Real
Needs
of
PracAcing
 
Distance
Educators?

  • 31. But
what
type
of
research
has
most
 effect
on
pracAce?
 –  Kennedy (1999) - teachers rate relevance and value of results from each of major paradigms. –  No consistent results – teachers are not a homogeneous group of consumers but they do find research of value –  “The studies that teachers found to be most persuasive, most relevant, and most influential to their thinking were all studies that addressed the relationship between teaching and learning.”
  • 32. But
what
type
of
research
has
most
 effect
on
PracAce?
 –  “The findings from this study cast doubt on virtually every argument for the superiority of any particular research genre, whether the criterion for superiority is persuasiveness, relevance, or ability to influence practitioners’ thinking.” Kennedy, (1999)
  • 33. 4th
Paradigm
 Design‐Based
Research
 •  Related
to
engineering
and
architectural
 research
 •  Focuses
on
the
design,
construcAon,
 implementaAon
and
adopAon
of
a
learning
 iniAaAve
in
an
authenAc
context
 •  Related
to
‘Development
Research’
 •  Closest
educators
have
to
a
“home
grown”
 research
methodology

  • 34. Design‐Based

Research
Studies
 – iterative, – process focused, – interventionist, – collaborative, – multileveled, – utility oriented, – theory driven and generative •  (Shavelson et al, 2003)
  • 35. Design‐based
research
 •  Methodology
developed
by
educators
for
 educators
 •  Developed
from
American
pragmaAsm
–
Dewey
 (Anderson,
2005)
 •  Recent
Theme
Issues:
 The
Journal
of
the
Instruc1onal
Sciences,
(13,
1,
2004),

 –  Educa1onal
Researcher
(32,
1,
2003)
and

 –  Educa8onal
Psychologist
(39,
4,
2004)
 –  See
bibliography
at
 –  hKp://cider.athabascau.ca/CIDERSIGs/ DesignBasedSIG/
 •  My
ar8cle
at
www.cjlt.ca/abstracts.html

  • 36. IntegraAve
Learning
Design
 (Bannan‐Ritland,
2003)

  • 37. •  “design‐based
research
enables
the
creaAon
 and
study
of
learning
condiAons
that
are
 presumed
producAve
but
are
not
well
 understood
in
pracAce,
and
the
generaAon
of
 findings
oFen
overlooked
or
obscured
when
 focusing
exclusively
on
the
summaAve
effects
 of
an
intervenAon”
Wang
&
Hannafin,
2003

  • 38. Wang and Hannafin, 2003
  • 39. •  IteraAve
because
 •  ‘InnovaAon
is
not
restricted
to
the
prior
design
 of
an
artefact,
but
conAnues
as
artefacts
are
 implemented
and
used”
 •  ImplementaAons
are
“ineviAtably
 unfinished”
(Stewart
and
Williams
(2005”

  • 40. Design
Based
research
and
the
Science
of
 Complexity
 •  
Complexity
theory
studies
the
emergence
of
 order
in
mulAfaceted,
changing
and
previously
 unordered
contexts
 •  This
emerging
order
becomes
the
focus
of
 iterate
intervenAons
and
evaluaAons

 •  Order
emerges
at
the
“edge
of
chaos”
in
 response
to
rapid
change,

and
failure
of
 previous
organizaAon
models


  • 41. D‐B
Research
examples
 Design-Based Research Strategies for Studying Situated Learning in a Multi-user Virtual Environment Chris Dede, 2004
  • 42. •  
Need
to
study
usability,
scalability
and
 innovaAon
adopAon
within
bureaucraAc
 systems
 •  
Allow
knowledge
tools
to
evolve
in
natural
 context
through
supporAve
nourishment
of
 staff

  • 43. Grounded
theory
 •  The
need
for
theory
and
model
building
 •  “There
is
nothing
so
pracAcal
as
a
good
 theory”
 •  We
need
models
and
theories
now
to
guide
 the
rapid
deployment
that
is
taking
place
 •  Be
brave
and
expansive
in
your
conclusions

  • 44. Reasons
for
CriAcal
Mass
in
Networks
 of
PracAce
 Landquvist &Teigland, 2007
  • 45. Personal
Academic
use
of
social
 soFware
 •  Do
create
a
blog
to
document
your
research
 journey
 •  Follow
blogs
of
those
you
admire
 •  Self
archive
and
only
give
your
copyright
away
 under
unusual
circumstances
 •  Support
open
access
journals

ie
 www.irrodl.org

  • 46. Final
Hints
 •  Subscribe
to
IRRODL


www.irrodl.org
 •  Customize
Google
Scholar
to
scan
your
library
 connecAons

www.googlescholar.com
 •  Subscribe
to
my
blog
the
Virtual
Canuck
at
 terrya.edublogs.org

  • 47. Conclusion
 •  EducaAon
research
is
grossly
under‐resourced
to
 meet
the
magnitude
of
opportunity
and
demand
 •  Paradigm
wars
are
unproducAve
 •  Design‐based
research
offers
a
promising
new
 research
design
model
 •  The
semanAc
web
offers
promise
of
greatly
 enhanced
collaboraAon
and
research
 disseminaAon



×