OU blog

Personal Blogs

H809: Activity 6.2: Effects of audience on research

Visible to anyone in the world

H809: Activity 6.2: Effects of audience on research (1 hour)

In the light of Activity 6.1, look again at the research question you chose for TMA01.

  • What kinds of audience were you assuming for the research findings?
  • How might this research question, and/or the methods you chose, be different for different audiences?

Do first year undergraduate Earth Science students at Keele University exhibit a discrepancy between their actual and perceived core technological literacy skills?

Sub-questions:

SQ1:   What are the students' perceptions of their levels of expertise in word processing, spreadsheets and presentation packages?

SQ2:    How do students perform in analysis of their skills in word processing, spreadsheets and presentation packages?

SQ3:    Is there a discrepancy between perceived and actual core technological literacy skills?

SQ4:    What are students' opinions on their use of word processing, spreadsheets and presentation packages?

 

I wrote about this fairly extensively in the TMA as I was assuming the audience to be lecturers from the Faculty of Natural Sciences. I commented that it affected the research methodology greatly as 'good science' is regarded as that from quantitative research and so I chose three out of the four sub-questions with the aim of analysing them quantitatively. I also wanted some more in depth analysis to inform later work so I slid in a fourth, qualitative, sub-question!

There are other, qualitative ways in which the central research question could be investigated. For example the same question aimed for presentation to the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences would be better received with the depth and detail provided with qualitative analysis. Qualitative analysis can also create openness when the respondents are encouraged to expand on their responses which may open up new topic areas that the researcher had not previously considered.

 

Permalink Add your comment
Share post

H809: Activity 6.1: Audiences podcast (2 hours)

Visible to anyone in the world

H809: Activity 6.1: Audiences podcast (2 hours)

Listen to the podcast, and consider how the issues raised might be reflected (or not) in the Block 1 readings.

Notes:

ESRC concerned in user engagement and that effects how you turn your research idea into something they will fund

Policy-directed initiatives want specific and timely reporting; want guidelines; focused on one area; restrict language i.e. personalise it;

Academics can follow the money so influences research

Research paper for journal - no fixed audience so report on everything

Different types of journals - some have general audience; some specialist

Conference - draw more widely on work you have done; can be seen as stepping stone to journal article

Books - more interactive to write chap of book;

Heavy peer review for journal but lots of informed feedback for book chapter

Static writing of complex social situations is hard to portray; easier in conferences with video, photo and audio.

Can have censoring of policy directed research before allowed to cite elsewhere - may occur after contracting

Interdisciplinary nature of educational technology - can publish in wide area

 

Hiltz & Meinke, 1989

Starr Roxanne Hiltz:

Ph. D. in Sociology, Columbia University, June 1969

M. A. in Sociology, Columbia University, June 1964

A. B., Vassar College, June 1963, magna cum laude, Major in Sociology, Minor in Economics

Robert Meinke:?

Teaching Sociology (TS), published quarterly, provides articles, notes, and reviews intended to be helpful to the discipline's teachers. Articles range from experimental studies of teaching and learning to broad, synthetic essays on pedagogically important issues. The general intent is to share theoretically stimulating and practically useful information and advice with teachers.

Impact Factor: 0.582
Ranked: 75/114 in Sociology and 87/139 in Education & Educational Research

 

New Jersey Institute of Technology / Upsala College (now closed after financial problems in 1980s)

Annenberg/CPB Project funded Virtual Classroom at NJIT.

Annenberg Foundation is private foundation established in 1989, supports non-profit organisations

Wegerif & Mercer 1997

Rupert Wegerif - Dialogical approaches to teaching and learning with ICT

Neil Mercer - BSc (Hons) in Psychology, University of Manchester
PhD in Psycholinguistics, University of Leicester
Chartered Psychologist

Language & Education provides a forum for the discussion of recent topics and issues in the language disciplines which have an immediate bearing upon thought and practice in education. Articles draw from their subject matter important and well-communicated implications for one or more of the following: curriculum, pedagogy or evaluation in education.

The task of the Journal is to encourage language specialists and language in education researchers to organise and present their material in such a way as to highlight its educational implications, thereby influencing educational theorists and practitioners and therefore educational outcomes for individual children.

Open University

Roschelle 1992

Jeremy Roschelle:

  • Ph.D., Education/Cognitive Science, University of California, Berkeley, 1991
  • M.A., Education/Cognitive Science, University of California, Berkeley, 1989
  • B.S., Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1985

The Journal of the Learning Sciences provides a multidisciplinary forum for the presentation of research on learning and education. The journal seeks to foster new ways of thinking about learning that will allow our understanding of cognition and social cognition to have impact in education. It publishes research articles that advance our understanding of learning in real-world situations and of promoting learning in such venues, including articles that report on the roles of technology can play in promoting deep and lasting learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences promotes engaging and thoughtful participation in learning activities, and articles reporting on new methodologies that enable rigorous investigation of learning in real-world situations.

2009 Impact Factor: 1.767
Ranking: 9/44 in Social Science, Psychology, Educational
Ranking: 15/139 in Social Science, Education & Educational Research

The Institute for Research on Learning (IRL) was a research group in Palo Alto, California founded by George Pake in 1986 through a grant from the Xerox Foundation, It was a non profit research organization that looked at learning in a wide variety of settings, including schools, workplaces, and informal settings, using collaborative, multidisciplinary terms. Research questions were based in real-world problems and settings defined in collaboration with the institutions who hired IRL. IRL had a significant impact on education and knowledge management (among many other fields) not only in the US but globally because of the development of the community of practice idea. Aims to construct an integrated approach to collaboration and conceptual change

 

 

Permalink Add your comment
Share post

This blog might contain posts that are only visible to logged-in users, or where only logged-in users can comment. If you have an account on the system, please log in for full access.

Total visits to this blog: 465271