Now I can claim why I got an EXT(=incomplete requirements) in my Quali-R course. My teacher gave me an EXT for lack of forum participation which may earn me a grade lower than 2.0, the EXT is to allow myself to catch up with the DB's but I chose not to because back then, I just got overwhelmed with finishing my paper in time for presentation at Singapore. After 2 semesters, here I am and thinking why the EXT is well deserved--- it is only now that I am learning what it means for Quali-R to be valid and credible. My concerns then was how to structure the paper, and come up with thick descriptions, while working with a co-writer at that.
In the usual view of doing a course, one is to complete requirements to show evidence of learning. However, in the context of lifelong learning, most often genuine learning comes after the course when one is completely satisfied with one's evidence of learning. Back then, I knew I missed out on something when I did that SOC research. And it's only now that I am seeing what I missed because now I've raised questions about validity and reliabilty.
With this new research endeavor on Teaching Presence,
it turns out, my current questions about Quali-R are in fact valuable and indicative of learning something new--and in my own time and effort.
Key words to remember:
internal validity and credibility
In the context of Quali-R, validity is the goal and not the product.
There is no objective reality and data do not speak for themselves.
Instead the researcher is the instrument of data gathering--hence it is through 'I'="me" that reality is interpreted by purposive sampling, making use of multiple data gathering methods, choice of data analysis methods and discussion/interpretation of findings--the researcher becomes the instrument of data collection closest to the data available from which a certain reality shall be examined or constructed.
How does that come into play then? How does my 'view'/'reading' of a certain situation become valid. One is through triangulation, achieved through multiple data sources, multiple methods as well, multiple perspectives/theoretical lens to view my data. For example as planned, in choice of exemplary teachers=sampling is purposive--there is consideration given to consultation with AA of WizIQ alongside public profile and data provided from user interface.
In terms of multiple data sources--I am currently gathering data from: chat/textbox---audio, video. Next level would be looking into the interactions. I also plan to gain member response--go back to the teacher samples about some observations and ask them about it.
In a post modern perspective however, it is crystallization one is after and not triangulation---the idea that what you interpret depends on the angle you choose in order to build/establish a certain reality.
This is my quote:
It is in the process of knowing that one is thing is made known which will mostly like be unknown unless the interpreter makes it known.
Thus the interpretion of that one which makes it a valid act.
Hence internal validity= "how congruent are one's findings with reality(participant's perspectives)"--"are the results consistent w/ data collected and NOT whether research findings can be replicated...
Another strategy I can make use of is "adequate engagement" in data collection... sufficient time spent in collecting data such that data become saturated.
MUST DO's:
1) I need to exhaust the data--until no more themes arise. So does that mean I have to observe more recordings per teacher or do I go for recordings across all teachers until I exhaust the data? Do I treat 1 teacher as 1 sample until I exhaust one or the the totality of recordings as samples until I exhaust all?
2) I have to do this systematically if my goal is to be better with my research technique--hence focusing on one teacher at a time will allow me to do so. I have to keep files, carefully match chat w/ audio then video observations---do printouts of all these transcripts. Then do my usual notations.
3)I have to take this slow and enjoy the learning and self-practice for a purpose.
4) I have to do this systematically because I am accountable---this is not my usual research of my school/classroom practice nor simple pursuit of my curiosities in the area of instructional approaches nor self journey type of narrative. This is about an excellent platform--with a decent award; excellent teachers and I am under a university grant--I have to do better than my prior research undertakings. This is not even about getting published at all. This is something that is meaningful and should matter not just to myself but to the teachers and to WizIQ.
5) I am ready to tasking for weekly accomplishments.
Next read would be reliability...
No comments:
Post a Comment