"Stake Your Claim"
Last week, in a fit of data analysis self-doubt, I spoke with Tara. I have been thinking about what she said and re-reading my notes of the conversation. Here is what I am taking as inspiration as I sit down to make sense of the eternal question-"now what?"
It is always going to be your work- so stake your claim. Start with the thing that is most compelling.
I started thinking my research was grounded theory until my advisor pointed out that grounded theory really doesn't start from a place of theoretical framework- the framework is constructed by, is "grounded in" the data and the analysis. Fair enough- but way too scary for me. It isn't so much that I doubt my ability to have anything new to say and more that I feel that my question is a bit nuanced and not enough to ground an entire "theory" on (remember, I am used to theory as in ...Theory of Relativity, Theory of Evolution, Theory of Plate Tectonics- these are sort of big ideas and I am not sure of Theory of STEAM teacher as Agent of Change really fits in there). Next stop is/was teacher action research. I have identified a problem and I am gathering data to support that the problem exists and then proposing action to address the problem. That feels right...UNTIL I think about the problems of small sample size and m concern with my study having self-selected for teachers that either agree with me about the "problem" or are just too close to me as colleagues to erase the bias that they may be participating because they already value working with me and just want to do that more.
Enter the new idea, this is is a case study. I have a small sample size but that is inherent in case study. I can tell deeper, richer stories through the data that I could not tell with a large sample size. As long as I am honest about the lens of participating researcher and that my results are really and truly just true of these four teachers in my study then I have no problem. EXCEPT, in order to verify the results I will need to triangulate data between surveys, interviews and observation of the teachers in their own classroom space teaching STEAM and I have not allowed for that in my time or in my recruitment/informed consent. Can observations be a follow-up that just organically springs from the survey and the follow-up interview when/if there are areas that don't "line up" (i.e. a teacher scores high on releasing responsibility in student-centered learning environment yet runs classroom as teacher-directed space).
If I am setting up my "honest framing" I DO have a hypothesis. I have reason to believe (both from the literature and from my personal experiences) that a STEAM teaching specialist in PLC will increase STEM teaching efficacy in general teacher population (this is the basis for my theoretical framework as currently written though an expressed "hypothesis" is not stated)..AND.. I am open to learning that there is no evidence to support that...AND I am open to learning that my study design in inconclusive or somehow bias as to render the findings less than reliable.
I am back to Creswell now, page 465 to be exact, checking in on case study as not-quite-a-subset of ethnography.
Is this small group of teachers my "case"? Is the process of working in collaboration with STEAM specialist the "case"? If this is a case study is it intrinsic, instrumental, collective? More importantly, perhaps, do I need to go back and get more data such as how often are STEM lessons planned in the teacher's plan book,;how many. what type of entries are in the student notebooks...do I have enough data to conduct a case study?
The big take home I got from Tara is just to start the analysis and let the questions come. Be honest that I have an idea, a hypothesis, and I am looking for evidence to support it while being open to the idea that there may be no such evidence. For right now, I am going into the data to code survey responses in one of three possible broad categories:
1. Supports Claim (basically, supports my hypothesis)
These would be Agree, Strongly Agree on positively worded efficacy items and Strongly Disagree, Disagree on negatively worded efficacy items.
2. Does Not Support Claim (basically, does not support hypothesis) These would be Agree, Strongly Agree on negatively worded efficacy items and Strongly Disagree, Disagree on positively worded efficacy items.
3. Inconclusive (basically, does not take a position) These would be Neither Agree nor Disagree on any item. I will need to return to these items in the interview and ask clarifying questions to see if the teacher does, in fact upon further questioning, support or not support my basic premise.
This coding will give me a scoring system of:
From this point, I can go into each category and pull out sub-categories within both strong/weak, positive/negative such as "release responsibility for student-directed learning" or "integrate local issues of student interest"
I am actively seeking guidance on whether I should consider this study to be a case study and whether the initial data analysis I suggest above will effectively get to the question of impact on classroom teacher efficacy as a result of STEAM teacher collaboration in PLC.
It is always going to be your work- so stake your claim. Start with the thing that is most compelling.
I started thinking my research was grounded theory until my advisor pointed out that grounded theory really doesn't start from a place of theoretical framework- the framework is constructed by, is "grounded in" the data and the analysis. Fair enough- but way too scary for me. It isn't so much that I doubt my ability to have anything new to say and more that I feel that my question is a bit nuanced and not enough to ground an entire "theory" on (remember, I am used to theory as in ...Theory of Relativity, Theory of Evolution, Theory of Plate Tectonics- these are sort of big ideas and I am not sure of Theory of STEAM teacher as Agent of Change really fits in there). Next stop is/was teacher action research. I have identified a problem and I am gathering data to support that the problem exists and then proposing action to address the problem. That feels right...UNTIL I think about the problems of small sample size and m concern with my study having self-selected for teachers that either agree with me about the "problem" or are just too close to me as colleagues to erase the bias that they may be participating because they already value working with me and just want to do that more.
Enter the new idea, this is is a case study. I have a small sample size but that is inherent in case study. I can tell deeper, richer stories through the data that I could not tell with a large sample size. As long as I am honest about the lens of participating researcher and that my results are really and truly just true of these four teachers in my study then I have no problem. EXCEPT, in order to verify the results I will need to triangulate data between surveys, interviews and observation of the teachers in their own classroom space teaching STEAM and I have not allowed for that in my time or in my recruitment/informed consent. Can observations be a follow-up that just organically springs from the survey and the follow-up interview when/if there are areas that don't "line up" (i.e. a teacher scores high on releasing responsibility in student-centered learning environment yet runs classroom as teacher-directed space).
If I am setting up my "honest framing" I DO have a hypothesis. I have reason to believe (both from the literature and from my personal experiences) that a STEAM teaching specialist in PLC will increase STEM teaching efficacy in general teacher population (this is the basis for my theoretical framework as currently written though an expressed "hypothesis" is not stated)..AND.. I am open to learning that there is no evidence to support that...AND I am open to learning that my study design in inconclusive or somehow bias as to render the findings less than reliable.
I am back to Creswell now, page 465 to be exact, checking in on case study as not-quite-a-subset of ethnography.
Is this small group of teachers my "case"? Is the process of working in collaboration with STEAM specialist the "case"? If this is a case study is it intrinsic, instrumental, collective? More importantly, perhaps, do I need to go back and get more data such as how often are STEM lessons planned in the teacher's plan book,;how many. what type of entries are in the student notebooks...do I have enough data to conduct a case study?
The big take home I got from Tara is just to start the analysis and let the questions come. Be honest that I have an idea, a hypothesis, and I am looking for evidence to support it while being open to the idea that there may be no such evidence. For right now, I am going into the data to code survey responses in one of three possible broad categories:
1. Supports Claim (basically, supports my hypothesis)
These would be Agree, Strongly Agree on positively worded efficacy items and Strongly Disagree, Disagree on negatively worded efficacy items.
2. Does Not Support Claim (basically, does not support hypothesis) These would be Agree, Strongly Agree on negatively worded efficacy items and Strongly Disagree, Disagree on positively worded efficacy items.
3. Inconclusive (basically, does not take a position) These would be Neither Agree nor Disagree on any item. I will need to return to these items in the interview and ask clarifying questions to see if the teacher does, in fact upon further questioning, support or not support my basic premise.
This coding will give me a scoring system of:
- # strong STEM teaching efficacy/ # weak STEM teaching efficacy
- # positive STEM outcome expectancy/ # negative STEM outcome expectancy
- # inconclusive
From this point, I can go into each category and pull out sub-categories within both strong/weak, positive/negative such as "release responsibility for student-directed learning" or "integrate local issues of student interest"
I am actively seeking guidance on whether I should consider this study to be a case study and whether the initial data analysis I suggest above will effectively get to the question of impact on classroom teacher efficacy as a result of STEAM teacher collaboration in PLC.
Comments
Post a Comment