EDU 6975 Applying and Interpreting Educational Research I

Tuesdays, 4:30-7:05 p.m., Demaray 255

Autumn Quarter 9/27/05 – 12/6/05

Academic Vision of SPU

Seattle Pacific University seeks to

educate students to make a difference

in the world Goals include

graduating

People of Competence

People of Character

People of Wisdom

People of Grace

School of Education

Mission Statement

To prepare educators for

service and leadership

in schools and communities by

developing their professional

competence and character

within a framework of

Christian Faith and values

Graduate Student Goals

The School of Education seeks to

graduate educators who demonstrate

Effective Leadership

Clear Communication

Analytical and Problem Solving Skills

Foundational Knowledge and Skills

A Positive Impact on Student Learning

Professionalism

PROFESSOR:

WILLIAM E. NAGY

Office: Peterson 409

Hours: By appointment

Phone: 206 281-2253

Fax: 206 281-2756

Email: wnagy@spu.edu

SNOW HOTLINE: 206 281-2800:

An attempt is made to provide word on the snow hotline of a campus closure for evening classes by 2:00 pm. Your safety is of primary importance. If you believe it is unsafe to you to travel to SPU, don’t come. If possible, also notify me at wnagy@spu.edu or 206 281-2253.

EMERGENCY PROCEDURES:

If it is necessary to evacuate the classroom, we are to re-assemble at the 5^th Avenue Streetscape, that is, the paved area east of Demaray this side of Marston-Watson. If this area is inaccessible, the secondary assembly point is in the Nickerson Parking Lot, between Emerson Hall and Nickerson Avenue.

DISABILITY SUPPORT SERVICES:

Students with disabilities need to contact Disability Support Services in the Center for learning to request academic accommodations. Disability Support Services sends Disability Verification Letters out to all your professors indicating the appropriate accommodations for the classroom based on your disability.

Course Objectives:

All course objectives are for the purpose of helping students address the four commitments of the School of Education’s Conceptual Framework - competence, character, service, and leadership – and the skills and attributes outlined in the Graduate Student Goals. The primary focus of this course is to build competence through foundational knowledge – basic concepts, procedures, and vocabulary in the area of educational research – and skills for evaluating and planning research. The concepts and procedures of research also serve as essential tools for problem solving, and the vocabulary of research is needed for clear communication concerning the critical evaluation of research findings and their application to educational practice. Above all, the ability to understand and apply educational research is an essential requirement for ongoing professional development that will enable our students to exercise effective leadership among their colleagues, and to have a positive impact student learning.

The specific course objectives are:

• To develop an understanding of the role of research in education
• To develop an understanding of concepts, procedures, and vocabulary of quantitative educational research
• To apply knowledge of research design and procedures in the development of a research proposal

Course requirements:

Required Texts:

McMillan, J. H. (2004). Educational Research: Fundamentals for the Consumer (fourth edition). Boston: Pearson Education. Text website: http://www.ablongman.com/mcmillan4e

Handout Packet: A coursepack containing handouts for the course is available at the bookstore.

Quizzes: Five quizzes will be given during the course, covering material from lectures, handouts, and the textbook. What will be covered in each quiz will be made clear in advance through the “It might be on the quiz” handouts. The questions on these handouts specify the concepts and terminology that must be known for the quiz, and will serve as the basis for class discussion. The actual questions on the quizzes will be different in form and in specific wording, but will address the same content. Dates for quizzes are given in the Proposed Course Schedule below.

Outline of a research proposal: The main written assignments for this course are a research proposal outline. The outline will describe an original research project. The project might be purely hypothetical, or it may be one you hope to carry out. For this course, no data needs to be collected or analyzed. The purpose of this assignment is to give you an opportunity to apply what you are learning about experimental design to the development of a study to test a quantitative research hypothesis in an area of your choice. To determine what constitutes a reasonable research hypothesis, you will need to know what other scholars have written about that topic. It is therefore essential that you start working on your research proposal outline immediately, so that you will have plenty of time to refine or modify your hypothesis on the basis of your reading.

The outline should be no longer than 5 pages and should include the following sections:

1. Purpose and Objectives of the Study

2. Relationship of the Study to Preview Research

3. Literature Search

4. Sampling

5. Variables

6. Instruments / Measures

7. Research Design

More detailed information about the proposal, and examples of sections from proposals, are given in handouts.

Evaluation:

Grades are determined by the following criteria:

Participation in class discussions 15%

Quizzes 60%

Research Proposal Outline 25%

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY:

Students at Seattle Pacific University are expected to demonstrate academic integrity in their work.  Both the students and the instructor have obligations to report and to prevent cheating, plagiarism or other academic misconduct.  Guidelines for how academic dishonesty will be handled are printed in the Graduate Catalog (pp. 25-26).  In this class, no credit will be given for an assignment or exam in which it is determined that the student has copied other students’ work, represented someone else’s work as one’s own without properly citing the author, used notes on an exam for which use of notes was not permitted, or any similar infraction.  If such an occurrence is repeated or occurs in the final written assignment, no credit will be given for the course. 

RESPECT FOR DIVERSITY:

Intellectual integrity requires that even though it may at times be necessary to be ruthless with ideas, we must always be not just civil in our discourse, but respectful and gentle with all persons. This respect is especially important when we communicate about, or across, differences of race, ethnicity, gender, and class.

ASSIGNMENT FOR THE ELECTRONIC PORTFOLIO SYSTEM:

The SPU School of Education is using the Chalk and Wire system for electronic student portfolios. These portfolios play an essential role in the process of assessment necessary for the School of Education to maintain its accreditation with the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE).

Items posted to electronic student portfolios are evaluated in terms of the 15 standards set for graduates of the Masters degree in Curriculum and Instruction. Although each standard applies to the program as a whole, for the purposes of accountability to NCATE, each standard will in most cases be assessed on the basis of a particular assignment for a particular course.

In this course, the Research Proposal Outline is the assignment to be posted to your electronic portfolio. This assignment will be evaluated in terms of a rubric derived from Standard 11, Inquiry/Research. In this rubric, the assignment is evaluated on the basis of three criteria, and assigned to one of four levels (Not attempted, Insufficient, Proficient, or Exemplary) for each criterion. These criteria overlap with, but are distinct from, the criteria used for assigning grades. Note that the third criterion requires the student to submit a written reflection on the assignment, in addition to the assignment itself.

The rubric to be used for the Research Portfolio assignment and specific standards for placing an assignment on a given level for each criterion are given below.

Rubric for Electronic Portfolio Assignment Evaluation

Standard #11a	Inquiry/Research: Competently consumes and produces where necessary empirical data to guide educational practice.
Courses	Interpreting and Applying Educational Research I and II; Accountability Research and Measurement
Criterion 1 Title	Conceptualizing an original study
Criterion 1 Description	The student can formulate an original research study appropriate for testing a hypothesis about an educational practice or issue.
Level 1	Label	Not attempted
	Score	0
Level 2	Label	Insufficient
	Score	1
	Description	The student’s proposal lacks explicitness or clarity in one or more areas, such as the relationship of the hypothesis to earlier research, description of the research design, variables, and procedures, how the research design addresses potential threats to internal or external validity, and limitations of the study. The literature review fails to include important relevant articles, and deviates from APA format.

Level 3	Label	Proficient
	Score	2
	Description	The student is able to formulate an original hypothesis that builds on existing research, and addresses a specific educational issue or practice. The literature review is in APA format, and includes recent and high quality research on the topic. The student is able to articulate how the study described in the proposal contributes to the field, and provides a clear and explicit description of the study. The research design is appropriate for the hypothesis, and the student is able to identify and articulate threats to internal and external validity, and other limitations of the proposed study.
Level 4	Label	Exemplary
	Score	3
	Description	The student is able to formulate an original research hypothesis that builds on and contributes to existing research and addresses issues of both theoretical and practical importance. The literature review covers the best and most relevant research on the topic. The student is able to articulate how the study described in the proposal contributes to the field, and how it addresses specific weaknesses or gaps in earlier research. The student makes effective use of the principles of research design to minimize threats to internal validity, and is able to articulate how and why the elements of the research design contribute to its effectiveness.

Criterion 2 Title	Locating and interpreting relevant research
Criterion 2 Description	The student can use electronic and other information sources to locate research relating to an issue or evidence concerning the effectiveness of an instructional practice.
Level 1	Label	Not attempted
	Score	0
Level 2	Label	Insufficient
	Score	1
	Description	The student is unable to evaluate the quality of sources. The student’s bibliography did not include the required number of scholarly peer-reviewed journal articles. The student did not make adequate use of subject databases such as ERIC and PsycINFO to conduct their literature search.
Level 3	Label	Proficient
	Score	2
	Description	The student is able to evaluate the quality of sources and choose which quality sources are relevant to their research proposal. The student’s bibliography has the required number of scholarly peer reviewed journal articles. The bibliography evidences appropriate use of subject databases such as ERIC and PsycINFO. If Internet sources are included in the research proposal, they are from reliable, quality websites.

Level 4	Label	Exemplary
	Score	3
	Description	The student is able to evaluate the quality of sources, choose which quality sources are relevant to their research proposal, and articulate why these choices were made in their portfolio reflection. The student’s bibliography has the required number of scholarly peer reviewed journal articles. The student used subject databases such as ERIC and PsycINFO to locate research on their topic, and includes a section in the portfolio reflection describing their research process, which databases were utilized, how they narrowed or broadened their search strategy, and how the database’s thesaurus and descriptors (subject headings) aided the research strategy for each database used. If Internet sources are included in the research proposal, they are from reliable, quality websites and the student includes a statement in the portfolio reflection explaining what criteria they used to judge the quality, authority, and currency of each Internet resource cited.

Criterion 3 Title	Reflection on the assignment(s)’ relation to the standard
Criterion 3 Description	Student’s own reflection on how the assignment relates to the criteria above and demonstrates competency on this aspect of the overall standard
Level 1	Label	Not attempted
	Score	0
Level 2	Label	Insufficient
	Score	1
	Description	Unedited reflection remarks. Does not show that the student understands how the assignment relates to standard 11-1 (see Criterion 1 title and description above).
Level 3	Label	Proficient
	Score	2
	Description	Reasonable attention to quality of written communication. Demonstrates that the student understands how the assignment relates to standard 11-1 (see Criterion 1 title and description above).
Level 4	Label	Exemplary
	Score	3
	Description	Exceptional thoughtfulness in relating the assignment this standard.

PROPOSED COURSE SCHEDULE:

Date of class session	Topic	Quizzes / Assignments due on this date	Readings to be completed before this class session
Sept 27, 2005	Module 1: The nature and purpose of educational research		Chapter 1
Oct 4, 2005	Module 2: Variables and hypotheses		Chapter 2
Oct 11, 2005	Module 3: Electronic literature search	Quiz 1: The nature and purpose of research	Chapters 3 & 4
Oct 18, 2005	Module 4: Sampling	Draft of Sections 1-3 of Research Proposal Outline	Chapter 5
Oct 25, 2005	Module 5: Descriptive statistics	Quiz 2: Sampling	Chapter 6
Nov 1, 2005	Module 6: The normal curve and probability	Draft of Section 5 of Research Proposal Outline	Chapter 6
Nov 8, 2005	Module 7: Educational measurement	Quiz 3: Descriptive statistics and probability	Chapter 7
Nov 15, 2005	Module 8: Research design	Quiz 4: Educational measurement Draft of Sections 5-7 of Research Proposal Outline	Chapters 8 & 9
Nov 22, 2005	Module 9: Experimental validity		Chapter 9
Nov 29, 2005	No class meeting
Dec 6, 2005	Module 10: Synthesis / Presentation of Research Proposals	Quiz 5: Research designs and experimental validity Completed Research Proposal Outline