Forum d: Text, Chapter 3. Evidence Based Research (by July 26)
Forum d: Text, Chapter 3. Evidence Based Research (by July 26)
Read Chapter 3, Evidence-Based Practice Chapter 3 will be due the 26th with the same basic homework required except find the opposite of what you found in Chapter 1. If you found something you already agreed with then choose something with which you don’t, find the reference, search . . . .etc.
1. When finished the chapter, find one point idea or principle in the Chapter that you agree with based upon your own experience as a student or teacher/trainer or that you don't agree with, or don't understand, or about something from which you just want more information. Jargon doesn’t count, there’s a Glossary at the back of the book.
I found the section on the three approaches to research on instructional effectiveness to be rather interesting. This section can be found on the pages 51-55 of the book. I found that the sections about the randomized controlled experiments and how experimental comparisons are the most appropriate method when the goal is to determine whether a particular instructional method causes learning confusing as the book did not give more of an explanation to this and I wanted to learn more about it.
2. Then, go to the References section on Page 425, and get the full citation.
Schneider, B., Carnoy, M., Kilpatrick, J., Schmidt, W.H., & Shavelson, R.J. (2007). Estimating casual effects. Washington DC. American Educational Research Association.
3. Track down the source using the CCSU Library, ERIC or any other source and find the information from the original research study cited in the Chapter. Describe what it is, what page its on and why you want to know more about it. Can’t find the source, try another
I found a paper that is close to the citation on page 448 of our book. I used google search engine and it brought me to the oregonstate.edu webspace with a pdf file of the article. The article is titled Causal Effects Using Experimental and Observational Designs and was written by the same five authors. I wanted to know more about the randomized controlled experiments and how experimental comparisons are the most appropriate method when the goal is to determine whether a particular instructional method causes learning.
4. Then, in the original research study, read the relevant part of section of source material and evaluate whether or not the text authors got it right ,or not. If its something you don't understand, is it now clearer from reading the original information in the study, or not? If its something you don't agree with, does the original study give enough evidence to convince you that they may be correct in how they applied that information to the text?
According to this study the type of questions outlines the design of the research. The article also tells us that conducting a small-scale randomized study can determine whether a large scale implementation is needed which I need to keep in mind when writing up a study on VR and OER. This article also talks about randomized controlled experiments and how to make it more effective. The sourced article provided me with an abundance of information which is really helpful and I think the authors of the book applied the information correctly to this section.
Classmates post:
When finished the chapter, find one point idea or principle in the Chapter that you agree with based upon your own experience as a student or teacher/trainer or that you don't agree with, or don't understand, or about something from which you just want more information. Jargon doesn’t count, there’s a Glossary at the back of the book.
In a recent class with Dr. Abed we learned about the importance of visual design and applied design principles. As a visual learner, I was intrigued about the topic of eye fixation in chapter 3, page 54, figure 3.2. This chapter does not get into details; however, this topic is further explained in chapter 5 and identified as the Contiguity Principle – aligning words to corresponding graphics.
Then, go to the References section on Page 425, and get the full citation.
Holsanova, J., Holmberg, N., & Holmqvist, K. (2009). Reading information graphics: The role of spatial contiguity and dual attention guidance. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1215–1226.
Track down the source using the CCSU Library, ERIC or any other source and find the information from the original research study cited in the Chapter. Describe what it is, what page its on and why you want to know more about it. Can’t find the source, try another . . .
The study is about the effects of spatial contiguity principle and the dual scripting principle. Two pairs of information graphics were designed to study the effects of these two principles by means of eye tracking measurements. The data shows that spatial layouts have a significant effect on the readers’ eye movement behavior. The topic is covered on page 2. I want to know more about this topic because I create a lot of handouts/reading materials for my students which include text and graphics. The article explains text-picture integration method, talks about cognitive load, and gives several examples of graphics highlighting/tracking eye movement behavior.
Then, in the original research study, read the relevant part of section of source material and evaluate whether or not the text authors got it right ,or not. If its something you don't understand, is it now clearer from reading the original information in the study, or not? If its something you don't agree with, does the original study give enough evidence to convince you that they may be correct in how they applied that information to the text?
When I first read chapter 3 and looked at figure 3.2, I did not quite understand the concept because the author did not provide details of the research. However, in chapter 5, this topic was more detailed and I was able to then understand figure 3.2 in chapter 3. To me, the original study did provide enough evidence to convince me that an integrated format with spatial contiguity between text and illustrations facilitates integration.
Response to classmates post:
The Figure 3.2 is very interesting as it deals with a printed newspaper or article from a magazine. I found this figure to be accurate. I tend to look at the titles, headings, bold words, and pictures first before looking at the textual content. When I took two design courses in high school that dealt with printouts, website design, and video production there was a difference in design methods when creating content for printouts, mobile and PC screens, as well as video.
