1. Day #2, June 19 th CEP 955 Summer Hybrid, 2013 Jack Smith Michigan State University

2. Getting Started: Checking In Did you sleep? How long? For lodgers: Local exercise and R&R possibilities For road warriors: Still good? James’ question: Adding to the top-ten Reactions to Example Proposals? Nice work on scheduling theory bites

3. Where we stand: the GD table Thanks for your timely work What do you see in terms of similarities and differences (among most if not all)? What Jack sees A few are comfortable with the basic shape of their current proposals Some are in the midst of major rethinking => little from the 901B paper may remain Most between the two

4. How to start? (different views?) Smith: problem statements (educational or scientific problems) Creswell: introductions (chapter 5) Gall, Gall, & Borg: introductions (chapter 2) Shared elements (across the three) Engage the reader Describe the problem the study will address Situate in theory? Outline the approach? The problem can be “bigger” than your study Options: Problem statement only, Introduction only, Problem statement after Introduction What do the Example proposals do?

5. Other Front-End Sections After the introduction/problem statement… Review of Related Literature What are the major trends/results? Importance of synthesis across studies => common results not individual studies In what order to discuss them? Communicate with less-knowledgeable readers Jack’s experience: Very hard section to write Focus: Empirical work (but can engage theoretical issues) Role/importance Show that you have “done your homework” Frame your study (along with theory) Review does not have point singly to one and only one study Bookend (in the research report): In Discussion, how does this study contribute?

6. Structuring your Lit Review Assumption: There is literature that relates to multiple elements in your inquiry, e.g., Research on the nature of your participants Research on constructs or phenomena Issue #1: Deciding the order of discussion (relative to your problem statement) Issue #2: Synthesizing across studies Issue #3: Pointing to issues that you wish had been addressed but have not been

7. More Sections Theoretical and/or conceptual framework Knotty issues here Issue #1: Broad framing theory or specific conceptual framework? Issue #2: What is the theory that frames this work and situates my conceptual framework? Conceptual framework: How are the key concepts in my study (and named in the RQs) related? Example from Jack’s work Examine the front end of the Wentzel article How does the diagram help to focus the reader’s attention?

8. Theoretical issues to work on Issue #1: Characterizing scholarly texts Empirical vs. theoretical; worthy but not sufficient Saw this as an issue in your 901B proposals Tracked it in your top-ten references Review your top-ten references Other types of scholarly work (besides empirical research reports and theoretical treatises)? Additional types

9. More Theoretical issues Issue #2: How does theory (of teaching, learning, or technology) frame or influence inquiry? My work The work of other scholars in my review Examples from your work Joel: Is there work with EBD kids that is more cognitively than behaviorally- oriented? Colin: Are there alternatives to an information-processing orientation to distraction and multi-tasking? Many: If I want my students or teachers to manage their time and effort well, am I adopting all of self-regulated learning theory? Issue #3: Do I need a separate theoretical perspective section? Options Separate section (before or after Literature review) Use (different) theoretical perspective to structure the Lit review Stick with a Conceptual framework only For now, consider a separate theory and conceptual framework section

10. One More Section Purpose statement (see Creswell, chapter 7) The reader needs to read a clear purpose in your proposal Lots of ways to effectively express purpose In its own section As part of the Introduction Just before your RQs Purpose statements need to articulate achievable goals; don’t promise more than you deliver

11. Work time (on your front ends)

12. Theory Bite #1 (Colin) Review the content and the time frame Five slides usually translates into five minutes of talk time You have 10 minutes max (but your job is not to use up 10 minutes) Q&A should be as important for all as the presentation content

13. Homework for tomorrow Focus tomorrow is research questions, the heart of your proposal Review SRIE on this issue Read Creswell, chapter 7 (he gives examples) Jack’s intro to Creswell’s approach Questionable claims: “5-7 specific questions for qualitative studies” Which terms in your RQs are technical and need explication? Where do you do that work in your proposal and are you clear enough?