10.23

NOTE: assignments are now significantly different from what is listed on the calendar. DO NOT use the calendar as a reference for what to do next class.  Use the Read/Blog assignments listed at the end of Blog posts as directions for how to prepare for class.

Using Gee's language in our own example.  During the first part of class, we started an analysis of a community of practice (school classroom= students and teachers  in general with some attention to the way we do things in our research methods class ) in terms of the kinds of saying, doing, and being that takes place within that community.  This was an effort to "play the game" (as in the Yu Gi Oh example from your book) as a way to get a more clear understanding of the terms Gee has introduced.  We made a list on the board of the kinds of things we do in the classroom, the kinds of communications we engage in, and the ways we are => in terms of being students and a teachers.  We included information about what we all knew was expected of us in order to be accepted in the classroom (eg the teacher stands at the front of the class and can move about, students will not circulate around the class, during class discussioins students address their comments to the teacher,  etc).  Within this example, this list of what it is OK to say/do/be is the set of practices defined by (or expected) in our classroom (a community of practice).  These ways of saying, doing and being are also important features of  the  Discourses associated  with this community of practice = Discourses for being a student, and Discourses for being a teacher.

After we noted the ways of saying, doing, and being associated with our community of practice, we raised questions about the kinds of building activities language (and meaning making activities associated with language) were associated with what we said, did, and were.
:
1.  what kinds of meanings (significance) were created through what particular kinds of activities & language;

2   what kinds of practices were both created through our talk = and  assumed as normal or important to the functioning of our classroom;

3.  how our physical location in the room, and how the kinds of things we said and didn't say created particular identities (eg. teacher, student)

4. how our use of language, the physical structure of the room, and our agreed upon practices created certain kinds of relationships (where the teacher "gives" up some power in group work - but continues "surveillance" by circulating through the groups)

5.  what kinds of politics are created? the relationships from #4 often are related to the distribution of power or control over social goods (grades, the right to speak, prestige), and we looked at how the "social goods"  created through teacher/student interactions influenced what we would and would not say => as when you observed that students often do not ask about material they don't understand because the social goods of "respect" and "being thought of as a good student=> able to understand the material on your own, may feel more immediately valuable that what might be gained through asking a "stupid" question.

6. We also looked at how the (often unconsciously) agreed upon practices within our classroom created certain kinds of connections between identities (being a good student) and practices (coming to class prepared, answering the teacher's questions, staying on topic, demonstrating knowledge of the teacher's preferred topic) and that sometimes "being a good student" could be an obstacle to student's learning needs (asking questions, going back over material from a previous lesson, going off topic to connect to something the student can use to understand the material on the teacher's agenda).

7. Finally, we might have mentioned the different systems for communicating  (the blog, emails, teacher comments, spoken communications) favored students or the teacher.  We might also have considered how the different modes of communication favored different assumptions, values and beliefs about what needed to be communicated regarding our class activities - and how it needed to be communicated.

The purpose of this exercise was to use Gee's language in terms of an experience you are part of.  The reason for identifying & practicing the use of his terms for the "building tasks" is because you can used an examination of what is created in your data (both for your short analysis, and the research project)= as a way to explore what is happening.  Asking about which building tasks are most important, what they are doing, and how they work in your data can help you identify codes and categories for what your subjects are "saying, doing and being" = and you can use those codes and categories to build your theory.

Form-function correlations, situated meanings, and figured worlds.   After we finished analyzing the classroom in terms of how we talked in class, the way writing was assigned and assessed, and the physical space, we talked through a transcript from an interview with a Kean student who was very experienced with computers and gaming.  The focus of the interview was on defining literacies and gaming practices - and whether there were any points of overlap in these definitions.   We noticed in the talk between Ch and B that Ch very much wanted to identify the kinds of learning, problem solving, and social interaction associated with gaming with academic literacies, and that B was - if not reluctant to do that - then at least he was not initially seeing the connections.  We noted the persuasive moves Ch made and the ways B received those moves.  We also noted B's comments with respect to gaming (fooling around, for leisure & recreation, not as important as work - but at the same time it was his passion) and noted that taken together these two conflicting sets of orientations towards gaming seemed to include assumptions, values, and beliefs about video games that might come from two different figured worlds/cultural stories = one for the mainstream or standard story about of video games as a waste of time or "fooling around,"  and another where they are part of an identity (Discourse) for a group of people who are very good at a set of interactive practices, who see themselves as "outsiders" in some ways (at least outsiders with respect to the mainstream - maybe including school)..  Ch's comments seemed directed toward linking the learning strategies in video games with literacies where literacies are ways to make meanings through practices associated with reading + writing  ("that's literacy. . ." "so you know a lot of software?" etc).  Her assumptions, values and beliefs about games (and literacy) seem to come from a different cultural story => one common among composition teachers and researchers who study learning and new communication technologies.  So in some ways - Ch and B were using the same words = but with different assumptions, values and beliefs attached to them, so they were not really understanding each other.  B would need to re-arrange the way he thought about "gamer Discourse" - in some ways - to receive what Ch was saying about gaming and literacy, and Ch needed to think about the difference B was pointing out in more detail.

At the end of class, we took a minute to do some writing/thinking about the nature of what was at stake for B to remain in his story, and for Ch to get him to change, and vice versa.  Keep thinking about that one - as it brings together the three points in chapter 5 about form-function correlations (how meanings are made with "rules"), situated meanings (how the ways certain uses in particular times & places make meanings) and figured worlds - how the assumptions, values & beleifs attached to certain language and use ALSO make meanings.   


Permission forms and debriefing. We ended class discussion of the permission forms & conferences.  I handed out signed copies of the permission form you need to provide to your research participants.  I role-played (thank you, Tshandi) the kind of talk you need to go through with your research participant to present the permission form, and pointed out the different places on the form that you need to sign and provide contact information.

I have posted electronic copies of the forms to the right.  If you lose the signed copy - you will need to print another copy (from the link to the right) and ask me to sign it.

You will need to give one signed copy to each participant, and one collect one signed copy to give to me.  You should provide me with the signed copies either before or when you begin collecting your data.

We also looked at the de-briefing form.  Be sure to fill in your name, email, and phone information so that your participants can be in touch if they want to.

For next class:
We will be working on interviewing - so come to class with some notes, ideas for the kinds of questions you want to ask your interview subject.

We will also continue to review + apply the material from Gee.  

I will collect signed informed consent forms as soon as you have them ready.  That way - as soon as we finish your interview/research tools = you can begin collecting data. 

Read: Gee 6-8.  Focus on the new terms.  Make notes about concepts you want to spend time going over.  

Blog 15:  Post your best version of your research question for your final research project.  Write a description of what kind of information you want to gather from your research participants, and begin a list of the kinds of questions you want to ask to gather your information.

Blog 16: Post your plan for finishing/revising your draft short analysis.  You should also post any questions/confusions you have about what you need to do to finish the project.  You are welcome to be in touch with me (schedule a conference) as part of your work on this blog.  The final short analysis project will be due.Nov. 6.

NOTE: At this point we are not using the calender in an accountable way.  USE THE BLOG as your guide for how to prepare for the next class.  If you have questions, send me an email.  

We started class with a workshop on the short analysis projects.  You used the worksheet (posted to the right) to brainstorm, focus + develop your analysis for this project.   I circulated through the groups - and by the end of the first half of class everyone seemed to have a clear workable question, some ideas of the codes/categories they would use to describe patterns + develop hypotheses, and some of you had some theories to explain overall patterns.  So GOOD!

Model essay for Senior Seminar reflection piece + writing process as research
During the second half of class we had a discussion of Mary Elizabeth Pope's "Composing Teacher Training."  This essay is both a "model" essay for the kind of writing you will create to accompany your Senior Seminar project for the Writing Option Major, and it is an illustration of how reflective, analytic writing both complements a research process, and IS a research process in its own right.

After we read excerpts from the essay, Teacher Training - we talked through "Composing 'Teacher Training'" with particular attention to the steps Pope took to compose her "Teacher Training."

We noticed the following (below is what we wrote on the board followed by an overview of class discussion):

Activities associated with finding a focus
thinking back on a childhood experience (bad)
a journaling activity where she made a list of topics she would never writ about = conflicted material

freewriting

With respect to these activities, we noted that onflicted  material - things we feel bad or confused about - can often provide good material for research and creative work.  They are "unresolved" = so there is a drive to explore them, and the researcher/writer will have a REASON (other than whatever the assignment demands) for digging into the project. We also noted that freewriting, random associating, talking to friends, browsing the internet, taking a walk = anything that lets material pour into your mind (and turns off your editor) can work as a way to get you to open up new ideas. Putting ideas together in ways you haven't put them together before is central to seeing things "new." 

Research activities

connecting to experience (thinking back on what happend)

visiting physical  places and things associated with your idea

talking to others who were there - or have similar experiences 

peer workshop (discussions with other writers about what connects to your ideas)

As with the "brainstorming" ideas - we noted that the research process seemed to take place through out the writing process . Pope went back and forth between writing - finding more ideas - deciding how to put her ideas into words - writing - and then going through the loop again.  Research activities are not only about reading other texts - for Pope they were about going back to her early experiences.  Psychologists have observed that physical objects - and other people - can serve as "triggers" to detailed memories that might otherwise remain inaccessible.  Photos, places, objects, and other physical artifacts actually seem to "hold" memories for human beings. 

Writing process

trying to write the introduction = part of discovery process

discovery/invention takes place throughout the whole writing process

journaling - to find truth + to craft essay to meet audience demands

clustering = organization association exhaustive categorization/coding

reflective rhetorical analysis = balance between audience + individual truth

We noted that Pope seemed to use her writing process AS PART OF her research process. We also noted that she used her movement among brainstorming, researching, and writing activities as a way to negotiate HER truth into a truth appropriate for her audience.  In some ways, she found what she wanted to say by thinking (and writing) about how BEST to put her feelings into writing.  

Gee and Discourse Analysis

We spent the last half hour of class reviewing Gee.  In many ways this book is very readable - with lots of examples.  You are READING this text as practice for reading other research methods texts - for when you do research on your own => so you can learn new methods through reading what others have written.  

I noted that Gee's book is set up so that it defines terms, uses them, and then used the terms it has already defined to define and illustrate new terms.  You need to be comfortable with the language in the early chapters in order to be able to understand and use the methods described later in the book.  We identified important terms and page numbers - and that was about all we had time to do.

For next class:

Read: Gee, chapter 5

Blog 13 & 14: (this counts as 2 blogs): post your draft short analysis project

In class next week we will go through some of the examples for Gee and as a class, apply some of his tools to our own data sets.  

We will also spend some time working on your data collection tools (many of you will be using interviewing), and  going through the permission forms and talking about how to use them. 

10.9 Writing up analytic research

We started tonight's class by reviewing your research questions.  Those of you who discussed your questions with the class have all chosen topics that fit into writing studies, that are important, and that (hopefully) are interesting to you.  (I felt pretty excited about all of them!)  Keep working on stating your question in a way that can help you identify the particular data you will collect - and the features of that data that will be relevant.  Questions that have the form "what features of . . . correlate with/connect to/ shape/influence . . . ." are usually a good place to start.  Why questions are often to hard - so go for a "how do. . ." question that then suggests particular features.   I will be reading your "completed" research plans (and giving you feedback) on Sunday or maybe Monday - so you will have feedback by next class.

Where Teachers and Students Meet.  We devoted the next part of class to reviewing an essay with a thematic, narrative presentation of data - as opposed to the boxes of categorized data presented in the commenting essay.  I pointed out that this was not a "perfect" essay - and that I felt our class was in a good position to offer suggestions for suggesting revisions.  You worked in groups to describe what each section of the essay "did,"  and then describe what worked and didn't work in each section.  You pointed out that the introduction needed to define and introduce terms BEFORE using them, that the statement of the research question needed to come earlier, that the "researcher's position" perhaps should have been part of the methods section, and that the methods section did not clearly set up the categories (teacher -WAW, teacher - non-WAW, etc).  You also pointed out that the discussion of the findings had organization problems.  You suggested several alternatives to the headings used by the author - each of which would have worked. Your suggestions were all more strongly tied to the categories set up by the research question than were the headings suggested by the author.   Also, you noticed that the conclusion section did not develop a sufficiently detailed discussion of how the data answered the research question.

Overall - this discussion made clear how important the research question is to the written report of findings.  It is necessary for the set up/introduction of the focus, it justifies the methods, it organizes the presentation of the data - and it is the question that the concluding section needs to answer.  The message here is to USE your research question to structure your research AND the write up of your findings.  IF your question is not pressing you to collect adequate or sufficiently complex data => give it more detail - add additional sub-questions!  If your question is to general to structure a paper => tighten it up!

Short analysis essay.  We spent the next part of class working considering the assignment sheet for the short analysis essay (you all seemed clear at least in class = if you find you have questions once you are back at home = send and email to the sallywchandler address).  We then took some time for you to think about which data set you wanted to do - and to work on your research questions for this project.  As I said in class => most of next class will be devoted to workshopping + writing up your draft for this project.

We did not get to Pope's essay.  I handed out the reflective essay that accompanied the creative writing piece, "Teacher Training."  If you missed class and need a copy I have left extras in my mailbox.  We will talk about reflective essays as a version of research in class next week.

For next class.
Read: Gee, Chapters 1-4. Students generally think Gee is an easy read.  So these chapters should go quickly.  Mark any language you have trouble with. Come to class with:
1) a clear idea of the tools & ideas Gee is introducing in each chapter - and
2) a list of questions/confusions we need to talk through to make those tools/ideas so they belong to you.

Blog 11: Identify points in Gee that you want to talk about more in class.  Explore how you might use the ideas/tools he is introducing in your research project

Blog 12: Discuss your Short Analysis Project.  State: your research question, how you plan to answer that question, and indicate how you will meet other criteria on the assignment sheet.

In class, you will begin by workshopping what you have written so far on your short analysis project, and making additional revisions in light of feedback.  By the end of the first half of class you will post your draft project (Blog 13).

During the second half of class, we will have a quick discussion of autobiographical research/reflective writing - in the form of Pope's essay.  As I said in class, those of you who are writing option majors will write a "composing" essay to accompany your senior writing project for Senior Seminar.

We will also go through the points in Gee that you identify in your blog.  We will be working from Gee's book for the next several weeks.  We will be dropping some of the other readings to make sure you have spent enough time on discouse analysis to be able to use it for your research project (I will be posting a revised calendar - hopefully by next week).

Thanks for the good class tonight.  If you want to schedule another conference, or need information - send me an email!  See you next week.

10.2 Practice designing research questions and research projects

Turn in your sample draft with comments if you have not already done so!  Either send it as an attachment to an email - or leave a copy in my mailbox next to the English Department (CAS 301).  

Last week we went over Robin Martin's essay as a model for form.  Today you talked about the essay as a model  content with Simone   in terms of patterns for designing research.  As set up in her introduction, Martin's essay asks the question: how does the form and content of teacher's written comments on student papers affect whether and how they revise their papers.  She uses codes and categories from an earlier study done by Ferris.

After discussing Martin's paper and her system for coding comments  - you put together a list of features/kinds of comments that students liked and disliked.  The lists from the board are reproduced here.

Helpful comments

Direction/Content

Readable comments

Individualized comments (for the writer/not just writing problems)

Specific comments

Techniques

Asking questions rather than assuming

The other class suggested that useful comments included comments on:

 flow - to help develop movement

on organization  - to help plan overall arrangmente

clarity (to help know what needs to be there - if the point came across

point out if there is too much

connect to current ideas of what writing is

help with formal conventions

experessions of interest

encouragement

explanations

references

global suggestions

  

Hated comments

Appropriation

Labeling grammatically incorrect – stylistic choices – demanding a different style

Bloody paper – red marks

Rude comments – (NO, no explanation, etc.)

From the other class:

bigxes without explanation

unacceptable/you don't understand

very long comments

change => but not telling how

disagree + net getting something writer cares about

bloody paper

demanding different styles

As you created the lists of possible research questions, you started a conversation about what DIFFERENT kinds of questions researchers might ask about connections between students' development as writers - and the kinds of written comments teachers note on their papers. 

Some possible questions researchers might ask include:

• what is the role of positive comments (comments that don't request change) in student response?
• how does the directness of the comment affect whether /how students revise?  do different students need different levels of directness (groups should discuss the different questions among themselves)
• how (or do) comments build a relationship to the instructor? does this relationship influence whether or how students revise their paper?
• can comments increase students' engagement with their work?  what kinds of comments contribute to increased engagement?
• what is the cut off between feeling like the teacher is committed to helping the writer - and feeling overwhelmed?  what kinds of comments contribute the most to feeling overwhelmed? how much of feeling overwhelmed is about the students' situations - and not the commenting? 
• how do negative coments affect willingness to advise?
• differences between talk and written comments
• why do teachers make "demanding" comment
• role of positive comments - can too many comments have a negative effect?
• what are the effects of harsh comments connect to teacher expectations
• which comments (what kinds of comments?  what are their features?) do students tend to take personally - and is that good or bad?
• what kind of comments (or what features of comments) hurt student relationships to writing - why?
• what features of negative comments allow them to help (or not) writers to grow as writers/improve their writing?
• how do the writer's need shape the kind of comments a teacher should give?

Some of these questions still need some work before they would be a useful basis for a research project - but they all raise interesting ideas/problems.

Designing a question + using your question to explore data:  You spent the second part of class working in groups to look at the two sample papers with teacher comments - and designing a research question that might tell you something useful about the way different students might respond to similar comments in different circumstances. 

You worked on this task by:
1. reviewing the data, noting general patterns + talking with the group about what the features of the comments suggested for how students might respond
2. forming a research question.  In this step you moved from a general impression of the features of the comments - to deciding specifically which features you wanted to study.
3. coding + categorizing your data (the comments) in light of your research question
4. gathering data from your group on how/whether/why the features you are studying affect students in terms of the focus of your research question [ for example -  how using different kinds of questions as part of a comment affect student relationships to writing, willingness to revise, images of themselves as a writer & relationships to their teachers).
5. posing an answer to your question that is supported by your analysis.

Groups = Joe, Tempie, Stephane, Antoinette, and Christine, Arlene, Jaylecia, Brian.

Your completed analysis of the comments + your group's responses to your comments (if needed for your question) should be posted for Blog 9.  All 4 group members will post the same blog.

Where this class is going:  After Simone & Josh wrapped up the conversation about research questions, we talked about where the class was going for the next couple of weeks.

Short Analysis Project: You are going to be working on polishing your skills for developing research questions and analyzing data by working on the Short Analysis Project.  In that project you will develop your own research question with respect to one of the data sets we have worked on so far (Oral histories, Shaggy dog stories, literacy narratives, & teacher comments), and write up an analysis in the narrative form you will use in your Research Project.  We will work out the criteria for this project - and spend some time developing appropriate research questions next week.

Laying the groundwork for your Research Project: At the same time you are nailing down how to form research questions + analyze data, you will be finalizing the focus of your essay, beginning on your background reading, choosing a site + participants for your study, and trying out versions of the particular research question you will work on.  We will also continue to read model studies similar to the project you will do for this course.  I am going to switch some of the readings so there is better representation for straight writing majors.

Conferences on your projects:  You all signed up for conferences to talk about your research projects (Dee be in touch and we will arrange a time).  All conferences will be held in CAS 324, my office.  Here is the schedule.

Wednesday, October 3
1:30 = Jaylecia; 3:30 = Antionette

Thursday, October 4
1:45 =Christine, 2:15 = Joe; 3:00 = Stephane

Monday, October 8
10:00 = Tempie; 1:00 = Brian

Tuesday, October 9
12:30 Arlene

For next class:
Blog 9: Post your group analysis of some feature of the comments on the sample essays.

Blog 10: (posted after your conference) work on completing a draft for your research plan (see assignment sheet posted to the right)

Think about which of the four data sets (oral history, shaggy dog stories, literacy narratives, teacher comments) you want to use for your Short Analysis Project.

Read: (NOTE = the readings are not the same as on the calendar)
Where Teachers and Students Meet: Exploring Perceptions in First-Year Composition 

Mary Elizabeth Pope's essay = Teacher Training (this is a creative nonfiction piece). In class,  we will look at the research essay she wrote to develop this piece. .