¶ … student engagement within mathematics, create a set of dependent measures. Follow the rules for writing test items, and please include the correct answers, as well. Dependent Measures

Student Engagement

Five Multiple Choice Items

What is the square root of 49?

Which number is not a prime number?

How many degrees is a right angle?

A diagonal line cutting through two parallel lines creates angles which are?

unequal

congruent

immeasurable

What is 3 to the third power?

A composite engagement score would have to be tallied in order to total the average score of all of these variables so that one could assess how all of these variables interacted with one another, giving the researchers a sense of the total and complete interest, enjoyment, capability, and confusion that all students experienced when engaging with these problems, and to determine which variables were most often experienced simultaneously.

Five True-false items

The infinity symbol symbolizes a number

True/False

2. 0 to the Nth power is zero.

True/False

3. An acute angle is smaller than an obtuse angle.

True/False

4. A rhombus has eight sides.

True/False

5. Eight is always divisible by 2.

True/False

Matching Section

Figure

Form

Right Angle

Has four sides

Obtuse Angle

Has 90 degrees

Acute angle

Has less than 90 degrees

Parallelogram

Has between 180-and 91 degrees

2. After reading the article addressing middle school student note taking, discuss the value of each phase of the study. That is, describe the value of the experimental phase, and then do the same for the qualitative phase. Next, be critical of the study. What, in your opinion was lacking? What were possible weaknesses (e.g. you might address the use of the Latin square design)? Finally, comment on the value of using both quantitative and qualitative phases together in a single study. (2 pages)

The experimental phase

The experimental phase of the study on middle school note-taking essentially explored in a mixed-methods approach how the encoding of certain ideas from the text impacted students with learning disabilities when they were taking notes from text on the web. The text passage was one which was constructed by the researchers and it was from this that the students had to take notes: the passage was just under 800 words and talked about a subject regarding certain Australian minerals and was displayed on the screen as a single, continuous webpage for the edification of the students. The three minerals described in the passage were bauxite coal and uranium. In this experimental stage, it was up to the students to engage in a range of different forms of note taking in the form of a word-processing chart which offered them a range of different columns for keeping track of information. Like other computer programs, the tool could be minimized or maximized as the student took notes. Students were evaluated on their note-taking immediately and after a four-hour delay. Students were assessed how much they remembers from the charts that they created, and students were also assessed based on the multiple choice exam that they were given.

This phase was satisfactory. The methods employed were basic and they displayed the most fundamental and rudimentary methods possible to test various forms of note-taking. One of the most striking issues about this phase was that it truly seemed to lack any noteworthy form of innovation and promise. There was a marked lack of inventiveness which was demonstrated by the marked lack of remarkability of the overall results.

The Qualitative Phase

The qualitative phase of the study was made up of interviews which found that students had a preference for copying and pasting their notes for logistical reasons and found that typing notes was generally distracting to them (Igo et al., 2006). This portion of the research was followed up with a textual analysis (Igo et al., 2006). In this sense, it demonstrates how so much of the research construct was based on rudimentary and overused forms of gathering and analyzing data. Little was done that was innovative or ground-breaking. Rather the unremarkable methods only succeeded in supporting unremarkable results.

In my opinion, it would have been interesting and far more illuminating to determine how the students could have reacted to note-taking in a more creative fashion. This experiment simply tested students against constructs which have been tested and retested for decades. If the researchers were really looking for progress, they really should've sought to test a more interesting form of note-taking. Creative note-taking, visual and image-based forms of note-taking are all elements which should have been incorporated into the research.

For instance, if the research looked at tools which were able to engage in word prediction, such an event would be...

That sort of research would look more at some of the tools which are available to LD students so that they can better engage in constructive habits of study. Tools with "…word prediction, which augments spelling and syntax to enable users to make choices, find words, and complete sentences. Word prediction programs display words based on frequency of use, grammatically correct usage of words, and most recently used words. Read & Write 5.0 by textHELP (1999) is an invaluable tool for students with reading and writing difficulties" (Quenneville, 2001). The fact that this most recent research had a truly inadequate means of harnessing and using technology is truly revelatory about the paucity of the research in general and the narrowness of the overall focus. When it comes to LD students, assistive technology for note-taking and general education needs has a tremendous amount of potential. The benefits that it offers include the possibility of enhanced academic achievement through clearer and more cohesive note-taking along with improvements in the overall written expression and in spelling (Quenneville, 2001).
The consequences of such moves are tremendous: it can lead to improved organization and bolstered social acceptance and can help students facilitate writing and other skills that they generally find very frustrating. The fact that there is little to no recognition about the possibility of technology in this research experiment along with the fact that there is almost no recognition of the more advanced forms of technology out there to benefit students, is truly demonstrative of the limited potential of the entire research project.

3. Assume you are creating a Likert-type scale addressing teacher interest of teachers engaged in a professional development activity. Include 10 items and two versions of the anchors -- "one set of four anchors and one set of six anchors.

Likert Scale on Teacher Interest/Engagement in Professional Development Activity

Six Anchors

Completely Agree

Mostly Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Mostly Disagree

Completely Disagree

Four Anchors

Agree

Neutral

Need time to reflect

Disagree

10 Items

1. I am satisfied with my competency within this professional development activity.

2. I am satisfied with my level of knowledge within this professional development activity.

3. I take pride in doing professional development activities to the best of my ability.

4. I have at least one other colleague that I trust completely while doing this professional development activity.

5. My colleagues listen to me attentively throughout the course of this activity.

6. I feel like I have an adequate number of choices when I engage in these professional development activities.

7. If I have a problem or a question during any of these professional development activities, I know that I can get help.

8. I can use these professional development activities to help track and further my own specific goals and needs.

9. These professional development activities help challenge the way that I think.

10. These professional development activities are presented in a manner that is relevant and interesting to me.

4. Using the research website www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/index.php distinguish the differences among Likert-type, Gutman, and Thurstone scales. Next, describe your opinion of their usefulness in research by creating a rank order of them. Describe why you have ordered them that way. In other words, which do you believe is best, second best, and worst? (1 and half pages)

This website on social sciences research methods really is incredibly useful when it comes to distinguishing the differences between a range of research scaling methods. The website is able to truly lucidly distinguish between these different types of scales and what their differences and benefits are. The following order of usefulness has been created: Likert, Thurstone, and Gutman as a personal order of preference and utility.

Likert was selected as the most useful because it excels at presenting information in the most straight-forward and simple to understand manner, which capitalizes on the natural intuition of the user. Likert is one of the most effective an direct uni-dimensional scaling methods which can help one define very cohesively what one is attempting to measure: "it is assumed that the concept you want to measure is one-dimensional in nature. You might operationalize the definition as an instruction to the people who are going to create or generate the initial set of candidate items for your scale" (Trochim, 2006). The Likert scaling process also involves generating items and then rating the items which are generated. This is followed by selecting the items and then applying the scale. In the end, the final score for the respondent on the scale is generally the sum total of all their ratings for all of the items. Essentially, this method is able to…