This presentation was given during the Georgia Southern University SoTL Academy

Cleveland, Richard E.

English

Georgia Southern University: Digital Commons@Georgia Southern

Georgia Southern UniversityDigital Commons@Georgia SouthernLeadership, Technology, and Human DevelopmentFaculty PresentationsLeadership, Technology & Human Development,Department of11-1-2016Review of Quantitative and QualitativeMethodologiesRichard E. ClevelandGeorgia Southern Univeristy, rcleveland@georgiasouthern.eduFollow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/leadership-facpresPart of the Educational Administration and Supervision Commons, Educational Assessment,Evaluation, and Research Commons, and the Educational Leadership CommonsThis presentation is brought to you for free and open access by the Leadership, Technology & Human Development, Department of at DigitalCommons@Georgia Southern. It has been accepted for inclusion in Leadership, Technology, and Human Development Faculty Presentations by anauthorized administrator of Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@georgiasouthern.edu.Recommended CitationCleveland, Richard E.. 2016. "Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Methodologies." Leadership, Technology, and Human DevelopmentFaculty Presentations. Presentation 8.https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/leadership-facpres/8Welcome to SoTL Academy!Tuesday November 1, 2016Want a .pdf file of this PowerPoint presentation?Scan the QR code to the left, visit richardcleveland.me, or check out @RichieKinz on TwitterGame Plan for Our Time Welcome & Introductions Review of Chapter 5 - kahoot! Points to Ponder Question & Application Time - Starting with the worksheet templateReview of Chapter 5 Using your device, visit https://kahoot.itPoints to Ponder [re: Chapter 5]#1: It is always about your SoTL Research Question. [pg. 46 re: different types of data lending themselves to quant/qual] Avoid getting overly simplistic or reductionistic here. It’s always about your SoTLresearch question. [pg.46 “Your SoTL research question will point you in a direction…”] Yes! Let your SoTL research question guide you. [pg. 46 re: personal style and discipline in determining quant/qual] Yes both of these have a voice/influence in your decision, but once again it should always come down to your SoTL research question.Points to Ponder [re: Chapter 5]#2: Quant, Qual, Mixed – They each serve different needs. [pg. 46] “Quantitative and qualitative designs each answer different kinds of questions.” Yes! Fantastic! [pg. 46 “Qualitative research tends to be less structured and includes….”] Perhaps, but remembering that qualitative is no less rigorous. [Pg. 52 re: Randall, Buschner, & Swerkes (1995)] Reject the lie that somehow qual is easier than quant! [pg. 46 re: research combining both designs] Yes AND we can also consider linking or building. For example, qual informing our quant designs. [pg. 46 re: Quant, Qual, or Mixed] My 3rd grade son asking, “Daddy, which is better, a truck or a car?” Once again – what is your need? Or, for us, what is your SoTL research question?Points to Ponder [re: Chapter 5]#3: All approaches have strengths and limitations. [pg. 48 “None of the methods provides a comprehensive view…”] Again, consult your question, take your first/small steps, then build/link, and/or mixed methods, etc. It’s step-by-step gathering one more piece of the puzzle. [pg. 49 re: strengths/limitations of descriptive] Yes a limitation re: no causal relationship, however still valid especially considering emerging trend/focus on “knowledge mobilization”, informing professional practice, and introduce new/innovative ideas into disciplines. [pg. 50 re: Case Study and the challenging of remaining objective and removing your bias, influence, footprint, etc.] We can’t necessarily avoid limitations of approaches and that’s ok – instead we need to acknowledge and address them in our research.Points to Ponder [re: Chapter 5]#3: All approaches have strengths and limitations. [continued] [pg. 56 re: the challenge of experimental in education] This is not new or specific to SoTL. Has been and continues to be vehemently argued in research. Again, I would argue ours is not to necessarily pick a fight over this, but to recognize and address. This connects to next point… [pg. 58 “SoTL work is rarely truly experimental…”] And once again, that’s fine b/c our SoTL research question isn’t necessarily leading us to an artificial “lab-type” setting. It’s directing us to our own educational setting. [pg. 54 re: Survey Research] Pay attention to the new university policy regarding survey research and distribution via email.Points to Ponder [re: Chapter 5]#4: And, the Leftovers… [pg. 49 re: Online course management resources] I’ll second that emotion. Consider checking out the CT2 courses re: Folio creation, revision, etc. to not only improve/refine your online resources (whether F2F, Online, or Hybrid) BUT also to create a rich source of data for your SoTL research questions. [pg. 51 re: role of questioning in qual] The extreme importance of open-ended questions to generate and collect not only amount of data, but depth of data too. [pg. 53 re: role of group facilitation in qual] The extreme importance of the moderator. Ask for help! Qual expert, colleague in your dept, COUN faculty, SoTL mentors, etc.Points to Ponder [re: Chapter 5]#4: And, the Leftovers… [pg. 57 re: “Think-Pair-Share”] Carefully scrutinize your SoTL research question and specifically what intervention or what you are ‘doing’ for your research. Might it be considered a part of the ‘standard’ instruction or ‘normal best-practices’? If so, you can never receive exempt, but you might (note I said “might”) be able to qualify for expedited status. [pg. 59 re: Involving Students] I like the creativity, I like the free labor, and I also like the idea of student empowerment/student voice. However, I also want to attend to some important aspects of this:1. Removal of student(s) from the n2. Student-as-researcher Bias3. Multiple Relationships (student-student, student-faculty, etc.)4. Power Differential (again, student-student, student-faculty, etc.)Question & Application TimeUsing the worksheet sent out via email, connect with a partner and take turns going through this process:1. Briefly explain your research question and which approach(es) you plan to utilize.2. Articulate how you believe your SoTL research question specifically calls for this type of approach.3. In a friendly, healthy, refining manner, have your partner challenge your decision. What might be another approach that could answer the SoTL research question?Be prepared to share-out to the whole group.Richard E. Cleveland, PhDAssistant ProfessorProgram Coordinator, School CounselingCounselor MEdLeadership, Technology, & Human Development Dept.College of Education, Georgia Southern University(912)478.8022rcleveland@georgiasouthern.edu@RichieKinzrichardcleveland.meThank You!

Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Methodologies

https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=leadership-facpres

Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Methodologies

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Georgia Southern University: Digital Commons@Georgia Southern