If You Can't Tweet E'm Join Them

If I’m honest this week’s readings were a considerable challenge, in particular the Straub (2009) and Osiurak, Jarry and Le Gall (2010) articles. This was really my first exposure to the academic discussion of affordances and while I think I get the main idea, drilling down into the theory left me a bit overwhelmed. Straub’s work was so thick with so many layers it seem analogous to a set of Russian nesting dolls.

After yesterday’s class and having read several of my classmates blog posts – in particular Najia’s on the use of cell phones in classrooms and the adoption of technology in general I think I have a better understanding of what Straub was getting at with the notion of adoption. In looking at the article again and thinking about the adoption of technology amongst my teacher friends – particularly their perceptions of cell phone use in schools -- I think there is a glaring omission – When teachers adopt as a means to meet students where they are at or as a means of surrender. (In my case I just gave up after growing tired of losing arguments with 16 year olds, definitely not good on the self-esteem.) And there is a body of new research that looks at how using Twitter can benefit students academically.

So, after some serious reflection I think it’s important to remember that by high school students have become accustomed to phones in their informal environments almost as if they are an extension of themselves.  In a recent conversation with a dear teacher friend of mine he commented on how much more aware kids were about current events. He mentioned how on several occasions students would drop by his classroom after their lunch to ask his opinion on a recent political event – often an event that had just occurred while he was teaching or eating lunch and hadn’t yet seen in his news feed. He credited this access to information and interest in politics to social media and instead of fighting against the use of cell phones in school he embraced it and has worked to do some really neat things with QR codes and current events.

To Percolate, Simmer and Stew

In my reflection from our second class I mentioned the notion of constructivism and how I hoped to grapple with this epistemological viewpoint and its relationship to both technology and research – so I was pleasantly surprised to read Conole and Dykes’s (2004) discussion of affordances of information and communication technologies and the resulting conversation with Boyle and Cook (2004) as it helped to focus my thoughts on the topic a bit.

I read this series of papers through the lens of my own experiences and current research interests which are distinctly influenced by constructivism. Most of my work utilizes Falk and Dierking’s (2000) contextual model of learning. This framework, which often provides the basis for research in the field of informal learning environments, posits that learning occurs in four distinct yet interconnected contexts; the personal, the socio-cultural and the physical all throughout the context of time. It looks something like this:

 (Falk & Dierking, 2000)

This framework of learning is strongly based in the concepts of constructivism particularly as it relates to the structure and design of museum exhibits. Hein (1998) describes the constructivist museum as one which uses the prior knowledge of the learner (personal), considers the accessibility of the exhibit (personal and socio-cultural), makes opportunities for the shared experiences of visitors (socio-cultural) and considers the effects of the learning space (physical).

I’d like to think a little on how Hein might apply a few components of Conole and Dyke's  taxonomy of ICT to a constructivist museum (I’m going to focus on Hein because it is his article I have with me). For the sake of brevity I will look at Accessibility, Diversity, Communication and Collaboration and Reflection. These four concepts were selected due to their current overwhelming presence within a constructivist museum as presented by Hein and their strong relation to the contextual model of learning.

The concept of Accessibility addresses both the physical and personal contexts of learning. Within the museum community the concept of accessibility typically refers to the application of the principles of Universal Design to assist those with physical and mental challenges in experiencing the museum exhibit in the least restrictive manner possible. While important, this definition differs significantly from how Conole and Dyke describe accessibility. To them accessibility references the access people have to vast amounts of information and how they organize and use the information present. In the past access to information at museums was strictly controlled. Objects were selected and labels printed to provide a brief insight into why the curator (the authority) felt the object was significant. With the advent of social tagging, footnotes and QR codes constructivists museums have vastly expanded the amount of information available to visitors. In addition the development of online museums and companion sites have also increased the accessibility of a museum’s holdings to a larger public. To this point museums have done very little to assist visitors in navigating and managing this plethora of information – and I doubt much thought has been put into the process! From the viewpoint of a constructivism museum however, the access to information is a welcomed addition to the learning process. The concept of Accessibility meets both the personal and physical requirement of museum learning.

Diversity rests on belief that technology can “provide a means by which people can be exposed to experiences very different to their own and extend their experiences beyond their own communities” (Conole & Dyke, 117). For Hein the constructivist museum must also address concerns regarding diversity and can utilize technology. Videos and computer applications used to fill gaps of information which a traditionally curated collection might overlook such as the experiences of women and ethnic minorities during a particular timeframe.

Technology increases the ease with which people can Communicate and Collaborate with others. In the socio-cultural context of learning the social group holds a strong influence over the visitors learning experience. Shared experiences are a key part of the museum learning process (Hein, 1998). Between 5-10% of visitors attend museums alone (p. 172) and groups of visitors tend to be either family groups or homogeneous in makeup. Therefor in traditional museum environments there is limited opportunity to communicate and collaborate with those outside of a small social group and for those visitors who attend alone with anyone.  Through the use of technology constructivists museums have begun to incorporate platforms for visitors to record and share their thoughts with those outside of their social group. Social media and the use of hash tags have exposed visitors to a variety of thoughts regarding certain exhibits, pieces of art and artifacts to which they have not been previously exposed. Also museums have begun to incorporate Google Meet Ups, Live Tweets Tours of Exhibits, Chat Rooms and other forms of communication.

Reflection is the final component addressed in this post. Time is the foundation the contextual model of learning (Falk & Dierking, 2000). Visitors not only need time to engage with the exhibit, but hey need time to reflect on the experience after they have left the museum (Hein, 1998; Conole & Dyke, 2004). Technology allows visitors to both capture and return to the experience for further reflection and to continue conversation outside of the museums walls thus extending the discussion and expanding the time available for reflection and learning.*

*My thoughts on how technology can be used for reflection in museums are still being reflected upon. As Hein (1998) would say “Ideas still need to ‘percolate,’ ‘simmer,’ or ‘stew’ if they are to end up more than ‘half baked.’” (p. 172)

Ripped From the Headlines

Let me preface this with a disclaimer: It's been a hectic 28 hours since leaving class, including leaving my power cord in class, an early morning phone interview, and a relatively crazy cross country trek right into the winter wonderland of the New Jersey Pine Barrens.

For my reflection I had initially planned to grapple with my own theoretical leanings in an attempt to better address the final small group question from class about epistemology and the possible views of technology. This is something I need to do especially since I struggle with theory as evidenced by my positivist gaffe in class. (I take small comfort in the fact I didn't to truly embarrass myself by attempting to discuss post-modernism.) I will definitely come back to the question because I think there are some interesting things to unpack about constructivism and technology. I've already started to sketch that out, but for the sake of meeting the deadline and other responsibilities here are a couple of other things that have crossed my mind since class.

While waiting for my flight to board I stumbled across an article by Rob Walker "Why One Man Watched Every Episode of ‘Law & Order’ and Took Screenshots of All the Computers" on Yahoo Tech (which in of itself is a bit surprising since I've not associated Yahoo with much of anything in recent years.) It got me thinking about how technology is such a part of our lives and it can be re-purposed as both a tool and data source.

Walker writes about how visual artist, Jeffrey Thompson watched all 456 episodes of Law and Order - in order - and took screen shots any time he saw technology.  What really stood out for me was Thompson's description of the television show as an inadvertent database of how we view and use technology. It got me thinking about other ways in which technology (and of course the NSA) is cataloging our ideas and beliefs without us paying much attention. To connect this to class, it was interesting to see Dr. Lester's example of how Pinterest can be used as a research tool. In fact everyday Pinterest users are conducting research and using the platform to code their data! Viewing what is seen as a social platform as a source of knowledge might even open up certain doors for data collection. As an example, I'm sure there is something to be learned about how elementary school teachers view social studies by looking at the teaching boards they make and what they chose to pin - I'm just not sure what that might be or how this study might look.

On a different note - I've been thinking about my attempt to define qualitative research with the what/why example and I don't think I did a great job of expressing what I was trying to say. I understand the caution needed when attempting to pose qualitative why questions. Let me see if I can use an example to express more of what I meant when speaking about the "Why" of qualitative research by using Annette Lareau's research on family social status and schooling.

In her book "Home Advantage" Lareau took a truly qualitative approach to look how student's home lives and the attitudes of parents about education affected children's academic success. Through in depth interviews with parents, teachers and students Lareau began to develop a picture of possible reasons for the involvement - or lack there of - of parents in their children's education, reasons that couldn't be quantified. She didn't set out to answer any specific why, but to learn more about the attitudes, values and beliefs of her participants regarding education. She didn't specifically ask parents why they helped or didn't help their children with school work or why they treated teachers in a certain manner - but her analysis was insightful. Through her thick description a picture of why students from affluent homes might tend to do better than their less affluent counterparts began to emerge. (She does position herself in the study and it is open to bias.)

I don't know if this makes my view of the What/Why divide more clear. Maybe what I meant to say was that quantitative research helps to identify certain What's of education and qualitative research helps to capture certain attitudes, values and beliefs which can aid in unpacking specific findings and in the development of theories about why things occur? I still need to toy with this some more to really sort it all out, but hopefully I'm not as far off base as before!

Thanks for making it through this - I'll be more coherent in the future! As your reward here's a Vic Pic for the night:

Victor is none too pleased with IU's season thus far. Or quite possibly he's just irked I've put a scarf on him. You can decide.

Stepping Out of the Shadows

For this week’s readings there were a few key themes I pulled together, namely the discussion/debate about qualitative and quantitative research. A couple of other things stuck out but to a lesser extent; 1. the lack of discussion regarding technology in introductory qualitative texts and 2. the importance of the research proposal.

The biggest thing for me relates to the debate about qualitative and quantitative research. I’m drawn towards ethnographies and case studies thus my research background has developed in a qualitative nature. I find the non-generalizable rich detail and description of an ethnography far more educational and honest than a series of statistics even with a p-value of .01. (I’m incredibly proud to know what a p-value means and am grateful my minor adviser talked me into taking a statistics course if solely for the working vocabulary.) My minor is in public management which involved some courses at SPEA where the attitude towards qualitative research is tolerant at best, disdainful at worst. Mentioning my qualitative background was often met with a figurative pat on the head, an “isn't that cute smirk”, then an attempt to encourage me to focus on quantitative methods. I find the bearish belief in the superiority of quantitative research, especially in the field of education, troubling. Educational researchers are studying human beings, not numbers. Numbers and statistics can tell you lots of ‘what’s’ but provide very few specifics about the ‘why’s’ of a phenomenon. And it is knowing the why that makes change possible. (Which to me should be the end goal of any research!)

After reading both the introductory chapter of the Paulus, Lester, and Dempster (2014) and the Davidson and Gregorio (2011)  history, I’m left wondering if the advancement of technology in the realm of qualitative methodologies will help to increase the level of respect afforded this type of research? Paulus et. al. (2014) suggest that the use of digital tools increases transparency and will increase the trustworthiness of a study (p. 6).  However, I fear, along with Davidson and di Gregorio (2011), that if the qualitative use of digital tools is not emphasized with proper training the use of QDAS and other technologies will simply be seen as “quantitative research in disguise” (p. 35).

As demonstrated in the discourse analysis of qualitative research tests conducted by Paulus, Lester and Britt (2013) there is a severe lack of discussion related to the use of technology in qualitative research at the introductory level. In my own intro courses I've read three of the book described and remember being aggravated with the authors’ lack of discussion related to technology. I found them antiquated and dismissive of the power of technology. How much of this has to do with the authors own fears of technology and the tradition of their own training or the fact that several of the books were in their third of fourth edition is uncertain. (I mention the editions because I might assume that the discussions of technology are added as afterthoughts to the original texts and if not done right can seem patched in place). Even though many professors of qualitative research methodologies are digital immigrants (Palulus et. al., 2014), greater attention to digital technologies for qualitative research need to evolve as digital natives enter the profession.  

Finally, and on a completely unrelated note I was comforted to read the Kilbourn (2006) article regarding qualitative research proposals. It tied directly into the proposal writing class I’m taking this semester and I look forward to doing a more thorough reading as I move further into the process. This article was a nice compliment to both the class discussion and the texts we are reading and hopefully provided some insights as to things to come. Also, I found the clear manner in which the literature review was divided informative and know it will prove useful in developing my own literature review since I am attempting to meld two connected areas of study that have an “abundance of related literature” (p. 555) but for which little empirical literature exists.

Oh and here is a picture of Vic helping me “purr”use a few articles. He’s such a helpful little fella!

References

Davidson, J. & di Gregorio (2011). Qualitative research and technology: In the midst of a revolution. In Denzin & Lincoln The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4th edition.

Kilbourn, B. (2006). The qualitative doctoral dissertation proposal. Teachers College Record 108(4), 529-576.

Paulus, T. M., Lester, J. N., & Dempster, P. (2014). Digital tools for qualitative research. London, UK: Sage.

Paulus, T. M., Lester, J. N., & Britt, G. (2013). Constructing “false hopes and fears”: A discourse analysis of introductory qualitative research texts. Qualitative Inquiry. 19(9), 637-649.

Here We Go Again

Greetings, I'm Rhonda a PhD student in the Curriculum Studies department. My focus is social studies education with a minor in public management. This is my fourth year with the program and I'm trying to jump through those final academic hurdles so I can hopefully begin dissertating (it's a word).

My main research focus is on student's historical understanding - in particular historical empathy/perspective taking and the effect informal learning environments have on the development of this skill. It is a bit of a blessing and a curse that there simply isn't too much out there that bridges these two areas of study. What does exist is happening in Europe and Africa.

Prior to tumbling down this academic rabbit hole I was a high school social studies teacher and track coach. It's dogma that social studies teachers are coaches, you get a team jersey and whistle issued with your teaching certification.  I've also worked at IU as an associate instructor for various social studies methods courses. In fact this is my first year in a decade where I'm not directly in a classroom. I'm working as a graduate assistant for the Center for Social Studies and International Education on an USAID grant designed to promote women's equity and education in South Sudan. If you want to know more the project is called the South Sudan Higher Education Initiative for Equity and Leadership (SSHILED). However, if you have been watching the news the situation in South Sudan is precarious at best but negotiations are happening and actually include women which is a huge step forward on so many levels!

I've dabbled in the world of blogging on exactly two previous occasions - each for various education courses. The notion of online publishing isn't something I've ever personally enjoyed and the more informal environment tends to amp up my already considerable levels of snark. I'll try to keep it under control for the sake of those reading.

So I'm going to make the best of this and really focus on the process of reflixivity - it's something I've spent considerable time with in my teaching practice but not so much as I've transitioned into academia and research. I'm sure it will be beneficial to my development as a researcher so I'm working to keep an open mind with this process. I'm going to approach this as a tool, not as an assessment of my understanding of course concepts. In addition, I struggle to put word on page particularly in an academic sense but I plan to incorporate these blog posts into my writing exercises -which like regular exercise I'm sporadic with at best- so it might get a little weird and I'll apologize in advance.

Also this is my research partner, Victor. He's not all that helpful and honestly he is a bit of a jerk but he amuses me.