7

EL 986 Fall 2008

Wichita State University

College of Education

Department of Educational Leadership

Course Syllabus Outline

COURSE: EL 986 Advanced Field-Based Research I (5 hours)

SEMESTER: Fall 2008

LOCATION: Hubbard Hall

FACULTY MEMBERS: Dr. Jean A. Patterson

Dr. Mara Alagic

Dr. Jo Bennett

Dr. Craig Elliott

Dr. Glyn Rimmington

CONTACT INFORMATION:

Office/Direct Line / Email / Skype
Jean / 105I Hubbard
978-6392 / / Jeanpatterson2
Mara / 205 Corbin
978-6974
107 Jardine
978-6244 / / Maraalagic
Jo / 105M Hubbard
978-5696 / / Jobennett2
Craig / 105G Hubbard 978-5329 / / clelliott1
Glyn / 104 Hubbard
978-6140 / / glyn.rimmington

Department Office: 978-3325

Department Fax: 978-6996

Note: Weather Cancellations – Call 978-6633 (select 2) to obtain information on weather related class cancellations.

CATALOG DESCRIPTION: Provides advanced doctoral students with opportunities to increase their knowledge and experience with field-based research.

PREREQUISITES: Admission to EdD program; EL 981, EL 982, EL 983, and concurrent enrollment in EL 972.

REQUIRED TEXTS:

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Major Topics / Guiding Principles from the Unit Conceptual Framework*
Professionalism and Reflection (PR) / Human Development and Diversity (HDD) / Connection of Teaching Experiences and Assessment (CTA) / Technology (T) / Content Knowledge, Pedagogical Content Knowledge, and Alignment with Standards (CKS) / Collaboration (C)
1. Theoretical framework / X
2. Research design / X
3. Conducting a literature review / X / X
4. Qualitative data collection methods / X / X
5. Analysis of qualitative data / X / X
6. Ethics and politics of research / X
7. Researcher role and identity / X
8. Mentoring first year students / X
9. Technology in the research process / X
10. Working with school district on research process and dissemination / X

http://webs.wichita.edu/depttools/DeptToolsMemberFiles/coedean/revisedCF_2_24_03.pdf

Technology Expectations: Students are expected to have either an Apple or PC laptop computer with an operating system that supports the latest versions of Microsoft Office, EndNote and File Maker Pro. The Internet will be used extensively to conduct searches for empirical research and related literature, to communicate and share information with field study team members, and to collaborate on writing via google docs.

Learner Outcomes: (assessment, guiding principles, guiding program document, professional standards) Program Standards

EdD Program Standards Addressed: / Related Assessment
STANDARD #1: Candidates who complete the doctorate in Educational Leadership have the knowledge and ability to apply inquiry processes necessary to help all students learn through a focus on problems of practice and human relations, and to contribute to the development of diverse learning organizations appropriate for the 21st century. / Field Study Assessment
STANDARD #3: Candidates who complete the doctorate in Educational Leadership have the knowledge and ability to work collaboratively and communicate effectively in multiple contexts with diverse groups. / Field Study Assessment
STANDARD #4: Candidates who complete the doctorate in Educational Leadership demonstrate an understanding of: the potential appropriate/emerging technology creates for transforming learning and the learning environment; and multiple applications and integration of technology in school leadership, research, and communication. / Technology Assessment
Performance Assessment

This course requires participation in and completion of a field-based research study for a local school system. In addition, students are responsible for preparing readings and applying these readings to the successful completion of the field studies, as well as development of their own research proposals.

Both the state of Kansas and national accreditation requires that university programs for the preparation of teachers and other school personnel be performance-based. In particular, this requires that students not only pass required courses/attain certain GPAs, but also receive satisfactory ratings on certain required assessments, many of those embedded within program coursework. One or more of those required assessments occur in this course. A title/description of any assessments and associated rubrics and passing criteria follows:

CLASS ACTIVITIES:

Field Study

Students enrolled in EL 986 are expected to fully participate in a collaborative applied research project with students and faculty, which cover two semesters. This includes taking the lead in proposal development, IRB submission, literature review, data collection and analysis, writing the report, and disseminating the findings. Students in EL 986 are expected to provide leadership, insight, and support in research design decisions and other related research issues for members of the new cohort during field study deliberations. A Field Study Rubric will be used to assess field study participation and progress toward acquisition of a research knowledge indicators noted on the above matrix.

Technology

Students enrolled in this course are expected to use or learn to use EndNote, FileMaker Pro, and Microsoft word software applications for literature reviews, data analysis and management, and presentations. Students are expected to use on-line databases and other electronic resources to assist with the field study literature review. Progress on technology knowledge and performance indicators will be assessed using the Technology Rubric.

GRADING: Students will be required to demonstrate knowledge and apply effective research skills during integrated program requirements in field-based, applied inquiry projects, and class activities (field-based research study) and seminar discussions.

ACADEMIC HONESTY: “A standard of honesty, fairly applied to all students, is essential to a learning environment. Students abridging a standard of honesty must accept the consequences; penalties are assessed by appropriate classroom instructors or other designated people. Serious cases may result in discipline at the college or University level and may result in suspension or dismissal. Dismissal from a college for academic dishonesty, constitutes dismissal from the University.” (WSU Student Handbook)

ADA

If you have a physical, psychiatric/emotional, or learning disability that may impact on your ability to carry out assigned course work, we encourage you to contact the Office of Disability Services (DS). The office is located in the Grace Wilkie Annex, Room 173, 978-3309 (voice, tty). DS will review your concerns and determine, with you, what accommodations are necessary and appropriate for you. All information and documentation of your disability is confidential and will not be released by DS without your permission.

Tentative Course Schedule:

A tentative schedule will be maintained on Google Docs.

SUGGESTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Social Science Research
deMarrais, K., & Lapan, S. D. (Eds.). (2004). Foundations for research: Methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Booth, W. C., Colcomb, G. G., & Williams, J. M. (1995). The craft of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ethnography & Qualitative Research - Theoretical Foundations/ Art & Practice of Doing Qualitative Research
Atkinson, P., Coffey, A., Delamont, S., Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. (Eds.). (2001). Handbook of ethnography. London, UK: Sage.
Becker, H. S. (1998). Tricks of the trade: How to think about your research while you're doing it. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Behar, R., & Gordon, D. A. (Eds.). (1995). Women writing culture. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Bentz, V. M., & Shapiro, J. J. (1998). Mindful inquiry in social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2005). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Erickson, K.C.; & Stull, D.D. (1998). Doing team ethnography: Warnings and advice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gunzenhauser, M. G. (2006). A moral epistemology of knowing subjects: Theorizing a relational turn for qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(3), 621-647.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Noblit, G. W. (1999). Particularities: Collected essays on ethnography and education. New York: Peter Lang.
Noblit, G. W., Flores, S. Y., & Murillo, E. G. (Eds.). (2004). Postcritical ethnography: Reinscribing critique. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Weis, L., & Fine, M. (2000). Speed bumps: A student-friendly guide to qualitative research. New York: Teachers College Press.
Data Collection and Analysis
Bird, C. M. (2005). How I stopped dreading and learned to love transcription. Qualitative Inquiry, 11(2), 226-248.
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (1997). Active interviewing. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method, and practice (pp. 113-129). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes in qualitative data. Field Methods, 15(1), 85-109.
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Action Research
Anderson, G. L., Herr, K., & Nihlen, A. S. (1994). Studying your own school: An educator's guide to qualitative practitioner research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Cooperrider, D. L., Whitney, D., & Stavros, J. M. (2003). Appreciative inquiry handbook. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Stringer, E. T. (2003). Action research in education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Writing Proposals/Research
Becker, H. S. (1986). Writing for social scientists: How to start and finish your thesis, book, or article. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. P. (Eds.). (1996). Composing ethnography: Alternative forms of qualitative writing. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.
Glatthorn, A. A. (1998). Writing the winning dissertation: A step by step guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Locke, L. F., Spirduso, W. W., & Silverman, S. J. (2000). Proposals that work: A guide for planning dissertations and grant proposals (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Conducting Literature Reviews
Hart, C. (2003). Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science research imagination. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Research Quality (Trustworthiness, Criteria for judging Validity, Rigor, Goodness)
Freeman, M., deMarrais, K., Preissle, J., Roulston, K., & St.Pierre, E. (2007). Standards of evidence in qualitative research: An incitement to discourse. Educational Researcher, 36(1), 25-32.
Kvale, S. (1995). The social construction of validity. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(1), 19-40.
Maxwell, J. A. (1992). Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educational Review, 62(3), 279-300.
Merriam, S. B. (1995). What can you tell from an N of 1? Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 4, 51-60.
Peshkin, A. (1993). The goodness of qualitative research. Educational Researcher, 22(2), 23-29.
Schwandt, T. A. (1996). Farewell to criteriology. Qualitative Inquiry, 2(1), 58-72.

Research Ethics/Researcher Position
Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity--One's own. Educational Researcher, 17(7), 17-21.
Punch, M. (1994). Politics and ethics in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 83-97). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.