8113 Week 9 Discussion
Assignment Task #2
· Respond to at least two classmates with a substantive, positive comment that is supported from literature or the class readings.
· Provide at least 2 substantive paragraphs for each colleague response. Cite sources and use in-text Citations APA style.
Colleague#1
Renee Morris
Top of Form
Research methodology serves as a set of procedures or techniques to help identify, collect and analyze information on a topic. Butin (2010) explained that a ”research method is no more than a tool to help answer your research question.” The methodology is the systematic approach of how to conduct the study to complete the objectives of the overall study. The methodology outlines what data would be collected, who the appropriate participants would be, the data collection methods and how to analyze the data. The methodology of research should show justification of the components and be aligned with the research questions to help the study to be valid and reliable.
Ayers (2011) conducted an empirical method research that is aligned to the rubric and checklist. Butin (2010) describes empirical research as “examining specific data, such as test-score results, teacher surveys, or parent interviews.” Empirical research can utilize a quantitative, qualitative or mixed-method design. An empirical method research was appropriate to answer the focus question of the study. Ayers (2011) questioned “whether or not the implementation of SpringBoard had achieved results in raising the level of academic rigor to prepare students in this district to be successful in college.” Ayers (2011) also sought to “examine if there had been an increase in diversity enrollment within AP classes in this district.”
Ayers (2011) explained that the research would take on a conceptual framework through a progressive logic model. A quantitative summary design was used which was appropriate for the research. Ayers (2011) described that the quantitative data would be the focus to answer the guiding questions, “to what extent academic achievement increased, AP participation rates increased, and AP performance scores increased among racial minority students over the 4 year implementation period of the SpringBoard curriculum in one school district.” Ayers (2011) includes a description of the setting and the Florida school district’s population. The population is important for Ayers (2011) to ensure that the results can be generalized to a larger group based on the sample used. Ayers (2011) described the instrumentation useds as two normed and validated instruments used by the district.
As Ayers (2011) research was to show a correlation between two variables. The components of the research coincided with the requirements of the checklist and rubric. The selected method was appropriate to lead to a justified, reliable and valid study.
References
Ayres, K. D. (2011). A summative program evaluation of a systemic intervention on
Butin, D. W. (2010). The education dissertation: A guide for practitioner scholars.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Bottom of Form
Colleague#2
Rachael Stewart
Top of Form
According to Daniel et al. (2017), the research methodology is important for clarifying the research inquiry and explaining why the inquiry is imperative. It explains why a researcher would choose to complete a study in the way they do. The methodology portion of Ayres (2011) project study is incredibly well written and organized. It is easily understood and aligned to the purpose of the study. The introduction reinforces the research questions and purpose of the study while also explaining the organizational pattern.
Research Design and Approach
The research design and approach section of the project study meets all the needs of the rubric by first detailing the research design. Ayres (2011) chose to apply the deductive reasoning and underlying logic model of the Springboard curriculum to determine if the cited curriculum objectives were met. They then qualified the research design by providing a justification for the design method. Justification was provided through the research of Spaulding (2008, as cited in Ayres, 2011) by mentioning that evaluators use the quantitative summative-based research design to assess how programs are meeting designated objectives using data collection. The design was directly derived from the problem as the researcher was interested in determining how a specific curriculum was impacting the achievement and AP enrollment of minorities in a particular school district. The type of evaluation is listed as a quantitative summative-based program evaluation of curriculum objectives.
Setting and Sample
The criteria for the setting and sample section of the methodology were met according to the provided rubric. The setting for the project is described as a school district in southwest Florida with nine high schools and ten middle schools. As the purpose of the study is to specifically focus on the inclusion of minority students in the AP curriculum, Ayres (2011) clearly defines the percentages of students identified in the racial minority as well as participating in the ELL program. This meets the rubric requirement of describing the characteristics of the selected sample. Ayres (2011) chose to use a three-stage stratified random sampling of African American, Haitian Creole, Hispanic, and European American subgroups with both proportional and nonproportional elements. The G Power 3 Analyses was used to determine sample size to support internal statistical conclusion validity and the appropriate threshold of statistical power. The repeated measures ANOVA was used to calculate the statistical power to calculate for internal validity. This meets the rubric requirement of presenting the sample size and supporting by using a power analysis. There is no explanation of the recruitment of participants
Instrumentation and Materials
Ayres (2011) used data collection instruments for the project study that came from the FCAT and the AP Program scores from the Department of Education. This meets the rubric criteria of presenting a description, name, and type of tools for data collection. An explanation for the test was included with reasoning supporting their inclusion and relevancy to the research question. Additionally, the subsets for both tests were explained as there were only specific questions that were analyzed. Data is recorded is accompanying appendices per the rubric requirements.
Data Collection and Analysis
Ayres (2011) used archival data for collection purposes. According to the rubric, students using archival data should explain the procedures for gaining access to the data which was done using an accompanying data use agreement form signed by the superintendent. The data collection process was detailed as well as the types of data collection needed to answer the specific research questions. The independent and dependent variables were clearly defined as treatment condition and minority status. Inferential data was explained by using repeated measure ANOVA to test the main effect for the condition codes. All of this together meets the requirements of the rubric.
Assumptions, Limitations, Scope and Delimitations
The rubric requirements for assumptions and limitations were met as Ayres (2011) mentioned the assumptions that all teachers received professional development and used the Springboard curriculum with fidelity in the classroom. These assumptions were also perceived limitations of the study as they were not verified. Some limitations were partially controlled using the longitudinal panel research design. The scope of the study was clearly defined as one school district with the numbers of students reported. Delimitations were defined as the lack of individualized school data as the data was analyzed as a district on a wholistic scale. As this was an evaluation study, Ayres (2011) also explained the limitations of the evaluation successfully meeting all the requirements for the rubric.
Protection of Participants’ Rights
Only deidentified archival student data was used (Ayres, 2011). A data use agreement form was obtained and signed by the district superintendent. All data collected was under the pretense that Ayres (2011) would maintain confidentiality, anonymity, and protection from harm. In addition, the study was approved through the IRB process to ensure no harm was done to any participants.
References
Ayres, K. D. (2011). A summative program evaluation of a systemic intervention on student achievement and AP participation. Walden University ScholarWorks. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1018&context=dilley
Daniel, B., Kumar, V., & Omar, N. (2017). Postgraduate conception of research methodology: Implications for learning and teaching. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 41(2), 220–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727x.2017.1283397
Bottom of Form