So, as I tweeted, I think you're trying to do too much. To me, each of the three research questions you pose above are legitimate primary questions for their own studies. In other words, you're proposing to do three studies and not one.
If you explore the potential value-add of informal, open PD, you will have done the field of education (and ed. research) a huge service. So, that should be your research question: what, if any, value for professional learning is there to informal, open PD in education?
There are surely a few different ways to go about answering that question. For my money, the question begs a good action research project. You could work with a group/cohort of teachers and go on a professional learning journey together. Maybe you'd identify a dozen or so teachers who are looking to integrate technology more and who would otherwise not have engaged in the sort of PD you'd be studying. Collaboratively, you would reflect on the experience and collect lots of different kinds of data along the way. This is something you might do in your professional capacity anyway; that you would document it for a dissertation would make it even more meaningful.
The Herr/Anderson book is really well-done. I know them both (they're married, FWIW) and they have been at this notion of blurring the lines between theoretical and applied research for a long time.
So, there you have it. I'd be happy to consult more if you're interested. Maybe even over a drink or a meal at NECC?!?!?
Darren Draper
· 6 months ago
Thank you for your thoughtful comments, Jon.
I appreciate the recommendation to slightly alter the research question and am intrigued by your suggestion. However, I don't want to focus solely upon informal open professional development. In fact, I would rather focus on *formal* open PD, as limited now as it may be. The three examples I cite above contribute to a body of probably what: 8-10 different examples of how formal PD is gravitating toward a more open approach. Therefore:
* What is value does an open environment provide to formal professional learning?
Still, I'm not entirely convinced that action research will serve as the most effective methodology in answering this question. While I like the idea of working together with the participants - truly extracting their feelings about the experience - I think other qualitative methods might also fit the bill. And given that I've heard very little about action research by members of my committee, I'm not sure persuading them to shift philosophies is a battle I'm ready to make.
Thanks again, Jon, for taking the time to really think about this. I look forward to speaking with you again at NECC. Will you be at EBC?
Chris Craft
· 6 months ago
Darren,
I believe Jon is correct about the need to narrow focus. However, I'd almost shy away from an action research project. Now, I admit that is because I tend to prefer a mixed methods approach to quantify the effect of a desired intervention.
What if you considered delivering open PD as compared to traditional PD on a particular topic and determine if there was a quantifiable difference between the learning that takes place?
You can still interview before and after, and so on, but this might lend some further evidence to the notion that the interaction in open professional development is the key ingredient.
First off, though, I'd ask you one simple question...
What is the active ingredient in open professional development that makes it better than other forms?
Then, we need to work to isolate that ingredient and see if we're right about it being the right one, or not.
Just a thought.
Chris
Darren Draper
· 6 months ago
Personally, I think the one active ingredient - if there is just one - in OPD that makes it better than other forms is the collaboration that takes place with people from other cultures and backgrounds. There's something about having people from widely different viewpoints in the same learning experience that adds significant value.
How might we isolate that one variable? I'm still not exactly sure.
As for comparing OPD with traditional PD, that's what I have always hoped to do (see the second image/table above). Still, the more I think about this, the more I'm in agreement that I need to narrow focus even further.
Thanks for your input, Chris.
joebires
· 6 months ago
Good luck with your research, I agree with what Jon is saying; you’re trying to do too much. One way of narrowing what you are doing down, isn’t looking so much at what kind of research to do; action research, etc. but rather what research in this field already exists vs. what research is needed. Basically, what can you contribute to these questions that is unique, interesting, and noteworthy, rather than simply personally interesting to you?
I would say that either of these questions is unanswered in the current literature. What are the characteristics of teachers that utilize social software in the classroom? What impact do open professional development environments have on teacher utilization of social software in the classroom?
The problem I see with the “social software” question is that you would have to focus on one specific social software. I think the whole notion of “social software” is vague and treats “social interaction” as a general concept vs. specific to the software (ie. blogging vs. twittering, vs. social bookmarking)
The idea of studying “open PD” is most fascinating. However, you really have to be careful in how exactly you define it. Too narrow and you won’t capture it, too broad and it becomes difficult to isolate as a concept.
Also, considering focusing more on interviews and focus groups as methods for data collection rather than simply surveys. I feel interviews and focus groups get more directly to the purpose of PD; which is changing teachers’ attitudes, rather than hinting at these ‘attitude changes” which often surveys seem to do.
Darren Draper
· 6 months ago
Excellent suggestions, Joe. Thank you for your feedback!
Honestly, the advice given in this thread (and on Twitter) has been very helpful.
Andrew
· 6 months ago
Darren,
My comps topic was similar. It dealt with growth of 'Pedagogical Content Knowledge' (PCK) during student teaching. The comps committee kept hammering me on how it would be measured. It's extremely difficult to make any broad claims of impact because there are so many variables among individuals.
Definitely needs to be a qualitative study. Triangulation could/should be achieved with independent interviews/focus groups and surveys.
Another possibility is a case study because at the outset it's known that this is only ONE possibility. It would be a small but valid contribution to the literature.
Are you still collecting data?
Free Games
· 1 month ago
Hi, I'm wondering about the progress of your dissertation. It is a very interesting topic for me.
Darren Draper
· 1 month ago
Well, slowly but surely I'm plowing away at the Lit. Review - a somewhat intense process because this kind of dissertation is related to so many other fields and topics. Among the topics I am currently reviewing are: effective teacher professional development (linked methods and procedures), OER, educational social software, factors effecting teacher attitude, and educational change theory.
Unfortunately, the work I do with the Canyons District has been incredibly consuming since July (opening a new school district will do that), but I've been able to slowly chip away at the research.
When I get the proposal at a more presentable stage, I'll be sure to share it here.
All Comments
If you explore the potential value-add of informal, open PD, you will have done the field of education (and ed. research) a huge service. So, that should be your research question: what, if any, value for professional learning is there to informal, open PD in education?
There are surely a few different ways to go about answering that question. For my money, the question begs a good action research project. You could work with a group/cohort of teachers and go on a professional learning journey together. Maybe you'd identify a dozen or so teachers who are looking to integrate technology more and who would otherwise not have engaged in the sort of PD you'd be studying. Collaboratively, you would reflect on the experience and collect lots of different kinds of data along the way. This is something you might do in your professional capacity anyway; that you would document it for a dissertation would make it even more meaningful.
The Herr/Anderson book is really well-done. I know them both (they're married, FWIW) and they have been at this notion of blurring the lines between theoretical and applied research for a long time.
So, there you have it. I'd be happy to consult more if you're interested. Maybe even over a drink or a meal at NECC?!?!?
I appreciate the recommendation to slightly alter the research question and am intrigued by your suggestion. However, I don't want to focus solely upon informal open professional development. In fact, I would rather focus on *formal* open PD, as limited now as it may be. The three examples I cite above contribute to a body of probably what: 8-10 different examples of how formal PD is gravitating toward a more open approach. Therefore:
* What is value does an open environment provide to formal professional learning?
Still, I'm not entirely convinced that action research will serve as the most effective methodology in answering this question. While I like the idea of working together with the participants - truly extracting their feelings about the experience - I think other qualitative methods might also fit the bill. And given that I've heard very little about action research by members of my committee, I'm not sure persuading them to shift philosophies is a battle I'm ready to make.
Thanks again, Jon, for taking the time to really think about this. I look forward to speaking with you again at NECC. Will you be at EBC?
I believe Jon is correct about the need to narrow focus. However, I'd almost shy away from an action research project. Now, I admit that is because I tend to prefer a mixed methods approach to quantify the effect of a desired intervention.
What if you considered delivering open PD as compared to traditional PD on a particular topic and determine if there was a quantifiable difference between the learning that takes place?
You can still interview before and after, and so on, but this might lend some further evidence to the notion that the interaction in open professional development is the key ingredient.
First off, though, I'd ask you one simple question...
What is the active ingredient in open professional development that makes it better than other forms?
Then, we need to work to isolate that ingredient and see if we're right about it being the right one, or not.
Just a thought.
Chris
How might we isolate that one variable? I'm still not exactly sure.
As for comparing OPD with traditional PD, that's what I have always hoped to do (see the second image/table above). Still, the more I think about this, the more I'm in agreement that I need to narrow focus even further.
Thanks for your input, Chris.
I would say that either of these questions is unanswered in the current literature.
What are the characteristics of teachers that utilize social software in the classroom?
What impact do open professional development environments have on teacher utilization of social software in the classroom?
The problem I see with the “social software” question is that you would have to focus on one specific social software. I think the whole notion of “social software” is vague and treats “social interaction” as a general concept vs. specific to the software (ie. blogging vs. twittering, vs. social bookmarking)
The idea of studying “open PD” is most fascinating. However, you really have to be careful in how exactly you define it. Too narrow and you won’t capture it, too broad and it becomes difficult to isolate as a concept.
Also, considering focusing more on interviews and focus groups as methods for data collection rather than simply surveys. I feel interviews and focus groups get more directly to the purpose of PD; which is changing teachers’ attitudes, rather than hinting at these ‘attitude changes” which often surveys seem to do.
Honestly, the advice given in this thread (and on Twitter) has been very helpful.
My comps topic was similar. It dealt with growth of 'Pedagogical Content Knowledge' (PCK) during student teaching. The comps committee kept hammering me on how it would be measured. It's extremely difficult to make any broad claims of impact because there are so many variables among individuals.
Definitely needs to be a qualitative study. Triangulation could/should be achieved with independent interviews/focus groups and surveys.
Another possibility is a case study because at the outset it's known that this is only ONE possibility. It would be a small but valid contribution to the literature.
Are you still collecting data?
intense process because this kind of dissertation is related to so many
other fields and topics. Among the topics I am currently reviewing are:
effective teacher professional development (linked methods and procedures),
OER, educational social software, factors effecting teacher attitude, and
educational change theory.
Unfortunately, the work I do with the Canyons District has been incredibly
consuming since July (opening a new school district will do that), but I've
been able to slowly chip away at the research.
When I get the proposal at a more presentable stage, I'll be sure to share
it here.
Thanks for your interest. What's your background?