UNIVERSITY OF
SOUTH FLORIDA
COLLEGE OF
EDUCATION
DEPARTMENTAL
COURSE SYLLABUS
|
The College of Education CAREs The College of Education is dedicated to the ideals
of Collaboration, Academic Excellence, Research,
and Ethical Practice. These are key tenets in the Conceptual Framework of the
College of Education. Competence in these ideals will provide
candidates in educator preparation programs with skills, knowledge, and
dispositions to be successful in the schools of today and tomorrow. For
more information on the College’s Conceptual Framework, visit:
www.coedu.usf.edu/main/qualityassurance/ncate_visit_info_materials.html |
1. Course Prefix and Number: EDF 7410
2. Course Title: Design of Systematic Studies in Education
3. Course Prerequisites (if any): EDF 7408 or CI
4. Course
Description: EDF 7410 is a
required course in the Measurement-Evaluation doctoral program. It serves as an
elective course for students in other doctoral and educational specialist
programs. This course is designed to
familiarize students with the logic and dynamics of the research process in
education and provide students with the opportunity to develop skill in posing
research questions, designing studies, collecting and examining data, and
interpreting and reporting research results. Advanced quantitative techniques
used to analyze quantitative data in educational research will be examined, as
well as the integration of qualitative methodologies into mixed methods
studies. A strong focus will be placed on the complementary nature of
qualitative and quantitative methodologies for mixed methods studies
5. Course Goals and Objectives: The overall goal of this course is to provide the student with the opportunity to acquire the skills, knowledge, and strategies necessary to construct and to utilize advanced research designs and to interpret statistical and qualitative data. Students will be taught to conduct critical evaluations, to use the findings of published research in educational settings, and, most importantly, to design an educational or educationally related research study. Attention will be focused upon developing the skills and knowledge needed to formulate dissertation-format mixed-methodological research questions in which quantitative and qualitative data collection, analysis, and interpretational techniques are utilized simultaneously or sequentially. All course objectives are designed to enhance the student's ability to become both a consumer and producer of educational research. By the end of the semester, the student will be able to:
a.
Understand the
concepts, purposes, and methods that are fundamental to conducting systematic
inquiry.
b.
Understand the
major types of educational research designs.
c.
Understand
sampling techniques, the meaning of statistical inference, and the
interpretation of
statistical tests.
d.
Understand the
fundamental concepts and issues in educational and psychological measurement.
e.
Critique research
studies in education.
f.
Conceptualize and
develop a research problem statement in the student's substantive field.
g.
Apply concepts
and methods learned in the course to the conduct of a small collaborative
research study using data provided by the instructor.
h.
Make an oral
presentation of the research study with colleagues in the collaborative
research group.
6. Content Outline:
Overview of the dissertation
process
Overview of dissertation proposals
Overview of American Psychological Association (APA) style
guide
Introduction to mixed method and mixed model studies
in the social and behavioral sciences
Mixed methods research questions
Rationale and purpose of mixed methods research
Review and critical evaluation of the literature
Quantitative research designs
Qualitative research designs
Mixed methods research designs
Sampling in mixed methods research
Data collection techniques in mixed methods research
Fundamentals
of measurement: reliability, validity, trustworthiness, legitimation
Internal and external validity
in quantitative research; legitimation in qualitative research
Validity Issues in Mixed Methods Research
Quantitative data analysis
Qualitative data analysis
Mixed methods data analysis
Inferences in mixed methods research
Unresolved issues in mixed methods research
Future of mixed methods research
7. Student Outcomes
All
course objectives are designed to enhance the student’s ability to become both
a consumer and producer of educational research. On completion of the course, the student will
be able to:
1. Describe the philosophical
underpinnings and logic of justification underlying the quantitative,
qualitative, and mixed methods research paradigms.
2. Define terms and concepts commonly
utilized in quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research.
3. Identify quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed research designs.
4. Describe
the strengths and limitations of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods
research designs
5. Identify criteria for selection of
research designs.
6. Demonstrate basic skills with
electronic information-retrieval systems and effective use of library resources
7. Identify and describe the major
sections and subsections of research reports and dissertations.
8. Demonstrate knowledge of the major
steps involved in conducting a thesis/dissertation study.
9. Identify
ethical and legal considerations involved in the conduct and reporting of educational
research.
10. Identify appropriate statistical
procedures and tests to use for various research hypotheses.
11. Analyze data using appropriate
statistical program software (e.g., SAS)
12. Describe how to undertake mixed
methodological analytical techniques.
13. Demonstrate ability to critique
published research studies
14. Demonstrate ability to do a
literature review
15. Demonstrate ability to develop a
research proposal
16. Demonstrate skill in writing using
APA format.
17. Demonstrate
ability to conduct a research study and prepare a written report of the
study.
18. Demonstrate ability to collaborate
with peers in the conduct of a research study.
19. Demonstrate ability to make an oral
presentation of the findings of a research study.
Evaluation
of Student Outcomes:
Evaluation
of student outcomes will be based on the following components:
1.
Dissertation
proposal
Each student is required to develop and write a
research proposal in her/his area of research and, which, if possible,
represents a potential dissertation/thesis topic. The proposed investigation must
integrate quantitative and/or qualitative research methodologies. Specifically,
the dissertation proposal must include an introductory chapter (i.e., Chapter
1), comprising background information, theoretical framework/conceptual
framework, rationale of the study, statement of the purpose, grand tour
questions, research question(s), null and/or alternative/statistical
hypotheses, educational significance, limitations, delimitations, and organization
of remaining proposal chapters. In
addition, the dissertation proposal must include a literature review section
(i.e., Chapter 2) and methods (e.g., participants, instruments, procedures,
analysis) section (i.e., Chapter 3) for a dissertation. That is, the research proposal should contain
all the major elements of Chapters 1, 2, and 3 of a traditional dissertation.
(See scoring Rubric in Appendix I.)
2.
Mini-dissertation
Each student will be assigned to a cooperative
learning group comprising two or more students. Each group will submit a
complete research report (i.e., a mini-dissertation) using real data provided
by the instructor. The goal is to allow students to practice conducting reviews
of the literature, and collecting, analyzing, and interpreting real data using
mixed-methodological data-analytic techniques. That is, the research report
should contain all the major elements of the five chapters of a traditional
dissertation.
3.
Oral
Presentation.
Each mini-dissertation group will conduct a 20-minute
professional presentation of its mini-dissertation. The goal is to give students an opportunity
cooperatively to present their proposals in a formal setting.
4.
Poster
Presentation.
Each mini-dissertation group will participate in a
poster session, which will be presented to faculty and/or students at the
University of South Florida at a date to be specified. The goal is to give
students an opportunity to share their research findings to fellow
academicians.
8.
Grading Criteria:
The
research projects and assignments will be combined using the following weights:
Dissertation
Proposal 30%
Mini-dissertation
30%
Oral
Presentation 15%
Poster
Presentation 15%
The grading system used in the
course will be letter grades assigned on the following basis
A - Superior
Performance (overall score = 90-100)
B - Average
Performance (overall score = 80-89)
C - Below Average
Performance (overall score =70-79)
D, F- Failure
(overall score 
69)
9.
Textbook(s):
American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication
manual of the American Psychological Association
(5th
ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Gall, M.D., Gall, J.P.,
& Borg, W.R. (2003). Educational Research: An Introduction (7th ed.). Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon
Johnson,
R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2004). Educational
research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed
approaches.
Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Locke,
L.F., Spirduso, W. W. & Silverman, S.J. (2000). Proposals that work: A
guide for planning
dissertations and grant proposals (4th
edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive
approach (2nd.ed.; pp. 117-158). Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Tashakkori,
A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.) (2003). Handbook
of mixed methods in social and behavioral research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Other Course Materials:
Course Packet: Design of Systematic Studies in
Education. (Onwuegbuzie or Hines-Instructors). Available at
ProCopy, 5219 E. Fowler Ave. (near Publix)
Selected Readings:
.
Anfara, V. A., Brown, K. M.,
& Mangione, T. L. (2002). Qualitative analysis on stage: Making the
research
process more public. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 28-38.
Boote, D. N., & Beile,
P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation
literature review in research preparation. Educational
Researcher, 34(6), 3-15.
Chatterji, M. (2005). Evidence on ‘What Works’: An
argument for extended-term mixed-method (ETMM)
evaluation
designs. Educational Researcher, 34(5),
14-24.
Collins, K. M. T., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Sutton,
I. L. (in press). A model incorporating the rationale and
purpose for conducting mixed methods research in
special education and beyond. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal.
Kromrey, J. (1993). Ethics
and data analysis. Educational Researcher,
24-27.
Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004a,
November). A typology of mixed methods research designs.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Mid-South Educational Research Association, Gatlinburg, TN.
Leech, N. L., &
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004b). A proposed fourth measure of significance: The role
of
economic significance in
educational research. Evaluation and Research in Education, 18(3),
179-198.
Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2005,
February). Increasing rigor in qualitative research: The array
of tools for qualitative analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Southwest Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Mihalas, S., Powell, H.,
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Suldo, S., & Daley, C. E. (2005). A call for greater use of
mixed methods in
school psychology research. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2003). Expanding the framework
of internal and external validity in quantitative
research. Research in the Schools, 10(1), 71-90.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Collins, K. M. T. (in
press). A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in
social
science research. The Qualitative Report.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., &
Daniel, L. G. (2002a). Uses and misuses of the correlation coefficient. Research in
the Schools, 9(1), 73-90.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daniel, L. G. (2002b). A
framework for reporting and interpreting internal
consistency reliability estimates. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and
Development, 35, 89-103.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daniel, L. G. (2004).
Reliability generalization: The importance of considering
sample specificity, confidence intervals, and
subgroup differences. Research in the Schools, 11(1), 61-72.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., &
Johnson, R. B. (in press). Validity issues in mixed methods research. Research
in
the Schools.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., &
Leech, N. L. (2004a). Post-hoc power: A concept whose time has come.
Understanding Statistics, 3(4), 201-230.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech,
N. L. (2004b). Enhancing the interpretation of “significant” findings: The role
of mixed methods research. The
Qualitative Report, 9(4), 770-792. Retrieved March 8, 2005, from
http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR9-4/ onwuegbuzie.pdf
Onwuegbuzie,
A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2005a, March). Generalization practices in
qualitative research:
Trends
in the literature. Paper presented at
the annual meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association, Sarasota,
FL.
Onwuegbuzie,
A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2005b). A call for qualitative power analyses.
Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the Southwest Educational
Research Association, Dallas, TX.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2005c,
February). Linking research questions to mixed methods data
analysis procedures. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Southwest Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., &
Leech, N. L. (in press-a). A call for qualitative power analyses:
Considerations in
qualitative research. Quality & Quantity:
International Journal of Methodology.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., &
Leech, N. L. (in press-b). Validity and qualitative research: An oxymoron? Quality
& Quantity: International Journal of Methodology.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Levin, J. R. (2003). Without
supporting statistical evidence, where would reported
measures
of substantive importance lead? To no good effect. Journal of Modern Applied
Statistical Methods, 2, 133-151.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., &
Levin, J. R. (2005). Strategies for aggregating the statistically
nonsignificant
outcomes of a single study. Research in the
Schools, 12(1), 10-19.
Ryan, G. W., & Bernard,
H. R. (2000). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S.
Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook
of qualitative research (2nd ed.) (pp. 769-802). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Shaffer, D. W., & Serlin, R. C. (2004). What
good are statistics that don’t generalize. Educational
Researcher, 33(9), 14-25.
Weems, G. H., &
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2001). The impact of midpoint responses and reverse coding
on
survey data.
Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34(3), 166-176.
Weems, G. H., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Eggers, S. J.,
& Schreiber, J. B. (2003). Characteristics of respondents
who respond differently to positively- and
negatively-worded items on rating scales. Assessment
and Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(6), 587-607.
10. (a) ADA Statement:
Students with disabilities are
responsible for registering with the Office of Student
Disabilities Services in order to
receive special accommodations and services. Please
notify the instructor within the first
week of classes if a reasonable accommodation for a
disability is needed for this
course. A letter from the USF Disability Services Office must
accompany the request.
(b) USF Policy on Religious Observances:
Students who anticipate the necessity of
being absent from class due to the
observation of a major religious
observance must provide notice of the date (s) to the
instructor, in writing, by the
second class meeting.
11. USF NetID Account:
An official USF e-mail account is given to each USF
student when enrolled. Every
official USF
correspondence to students will be sent to your USF e-mail account. To
sign
up for the USF NetID
account and to access your account, go to https://my.usf.edu
12.
Academic Dishonesty:
“Plagiarism
is defined as “literary theft” and consists of the unattributed quotation of
the exact words of a published text, or the unattributed borrowing of original
ideas by paraphrase from a published text.
On written papers for which the student employs information gathered
from books, articles, or oral sources, each direct quotation, as well as ideas
and facts that are not generally known to the public at large must be
attributed to its author by means of the appropriate citation procedure. Citations may be made in footnotes or within
the body of the text. Plagiarism also
consists of passing off as one’s own, segments or the total of another person’s
work.
Punishment for
Academic Dishonesty will depend on the seriousness of the offense and may
include receipt of an “F” with a numerical value of zero on the item submitted,
and the “F” shall be used to determine the final course grade. It is the option of the instructor to assign
the student a grade of F or FF (the latter indicating dishonesty) in the
course. ”
(Source: http://www.sa.usf.edu/handbook/academics/ImportantAcademicPolicies.htm
)
Detection of Plagiarism
.
The
University of South Florida has an account with an automated plagiarism
detection service which allows instructors and students to submit student
assignments to be checked for plagiarism. I reserve the right to 1)
request that assignments be submitted as electronic files and 2) electronically
submit assignments to SafeAssignment, or 3) ask students to submit their
assignments to SafeAssignment through myUSF. Assignments are compared
automatically with a database of journal articles, web articles, and previously
submitted papers. The instructor receives a report showing exactly how a
student’s paper was plagiarized. For more information about SafeAssignment
and plagiarism, go to http://www.c21te.usf.edu
<http://www.c21te.usf.edu/>
. Click on Plagiarism Resources.
For
information about plagiarism in USF’s Undergraduate Catalog, go to http://www.ugs.usf.edu/catalogs/0304/adadap.htm#plagiarism
For information on the
University’s policy on academic dishonesty and plagiarism go to
http://www.sa.usf.edu/handbook/academics/ImportantAcademicPolicies.htm