EDU 738 Research Across the Curriculum

Assignment #5: Final Research Report (Group or Individual)

 

Submit On-Line Presentation: May 5^rd   

Provide feedback to other group’s presentations May 6^th through May 10^th

Final Written Report to be Submitted via GoogleDocs – Due May 12^th

(Optional draft or portions thereof due: May 1^st  or as soon as possible thereafter)

 

The purpose of this assignment is for you to bring the various components of your research effort together into a coherent final report that summarizes what you did and points to next steps and to share your findings with your peers.

 

Please keep in mind that there is never a perfect survey or other data collection instrument or procedure.  This is one reason why instruments and procedures should always be piloted. Furthermore, other than questions on exams like MTEL, and the GRE, most questions do not have neatly packaged answers.  So given the responses or other data you obtained, the best you can do is to try to make sense of the data in terms of your research question(s)/hypothesis(es). Then you discuss limitations based on your instrument(s) and your sample and make suggestions for modifications on the future.  Basically the point of this final assignment is to get you to become “exquisitely aware” of the limitations of making definitive conclusions based on data collection.

 

I. Online Presentation (not graded but required in order to receive a grade on the written paper).

Prepare a brief PowerPoint or similar presentation with narration that covers (1) problem, (2) hypothesis, (3) sample, (4) design, (5) instrument(s), (6) results, & (7) implications.  (You may not have completed your analysis but share what you have.)

 

Here is a link to a tutorial about how to add sound to a PowerPoint or KeyNote presentation and how to share it with your group as it is being prepared.

 

The principal investigator (PI) for each group will be responsible for uploading the presentation to the GoogleDrive and sharing it with us.  (If your file is too large, you may not be able to upload it directly to your GoogleDrive.  In that case, please contact Rocky and I will give you other instructions about uploading your presentation.)

 

The rest of the class will download your presentation, listen to it and then, on the EDU738 Discussion Forum, comment and discuss your report.  This discussion will happen between May 6^th and May 10^th.

 

II. Written Report

The final report should use the format outlined below.  This outline covers content that you have prepared for previous assignments for the research plan assignment with the addition of (1) an abstract, (2) a results section, and (3) a discussion section. 

 

You will however need to revise sections of what you have already written given changes that you may have made in data collection or instruments, etc. For example, in your instrument section, if you used a survey, you can now include information about split-half reliability.  Also be sure that the wording reflects what has been done as opposed to what was planned.  You can also use feedback from the presentation to finalize your report.

1)        

1)     Abstract - The abstract should be no longer than 100 to 150 words.  It should convey the purpose of the study, the hypothesis, the subjects, key findings and key discussion points – all within the 150 word limit!  (Having said that, I’m not going to mark off you go slightly beyond 150 words. Journals vary in their requirements regarding the content and length of an abstract.)

2)     Update as necessary the Problem Statement, Review of the Research, Hypothesis/Research Question, Methodology (Participants, Instruments, Procedures, Design, Analysis, and Budget sections) and the Appendix with the informed consent form, and copies of your instrument(s). – Be sure to provide information about the internal consistency of your instrument (if you used a survey or test) and precise numbers of participants by relevant group, e.g., # of males and females or elementary and secondary teachers.

3)     Results Section - Here are the key things to be sure to include:

a)     Provide basic descriptive results for your surveys or other data collection instruments.  In most cases this will be a table with the items listed on the left and on the right the number and/or percentage of subjects that chose each response option.  If you have two groups, then you should show the numbers and/or percentages for each group.  You can discuss patterns of responses than can be observed from the table, e.g., elementary teachers rarely said ‘strongly disagree’, etc. This table could be presented in the appendix and just referred to in the body of the report.

b)     if you are doing hypothesis testing also include the following:

i)       Indicate the test of significance you used and explain why it is appropriate for your data.
(For many of you, the significance test will be a t-test for two independent samples or the chi-square statistic.)

ii)     Specify whether you used a one- or two-tailed test and why you made that choice.

iii)   Specify your degrees of freedom.

iv)    If you did a statistical test, report the probability (commonly know as the probability value that corresponds to your t-test or chi- square result. Report this value in your results section. Indicate whether accept or reject the null hypothesis that you stated in the earlier section of the paper.

4)     Discussion Section –  Cover the following points:

a)     Summarize findings

b)     Indicate whether or not you think that you would have come to a different conclusion if your sample size had been longer and/or if your survey had been different.

c)     Discuss other potential limitations of your study and possible alternative explanations for your findings

d)     Discuss implications of the findings for your hypothesis/research question and for practice;

e)     Suggest next steps for further research

f)      See these additional guidelines for the Discussion Section on the EDU738 website

5)     Appendix  - Update as needed (It should include your data collection instruments which may have changed since you submitted your research plan, and perhaps data tables.)

 

Grading Procedures

1.     This assignment will be worth 20% of your final grade.  Our main focus will be on the abstract, results and discussion sections but we will assess the entire report using the attached ‘Research Report Rubric”.  Thus, we do expect you to make revisions that we have noted in the Research Plan materials that have been returned to you.  Be sure that your paper flows as a coherent report.

 

If you have any questions, please contact us.   As noted above, the presentation will not be graded but it must be shared with the rest of the class by May 5^th .

 

Note – if you are working in a group, your group prepares a single report and as with the research plan, each member receives the same grade for the final report. The name of each member of the group needs to be on the version uploaded and shared on GoogleDocs. Please send an email to us to indicate when the Final version has been submitted. (If you are having difficulty getting your final report on GoogleDocs, please contact us to make arrangements to submit it some other way.)

EDU38  Final Report Rubric

 

 

	Advanced	Effective/Developing	Less Effective/Introductory	Poor	Comments
Abstract	Abstract includes research question, variables, number and type of participants, major results, and implications/limitations of those results stated clearly and concisely	Abstract includes all essential information but is misleading due to a lack of concise sentence structure, or there may be some information missing.	Abstract is missing essential information or is significantly over the word limit.	Abstract has some incorrect information or does not accurately portray the experiment. Three or more important elements are missing.
Data Reduction	Measurement of the dependent variable (i.e., scoring, quantification) is clear, and any procedures for data treatment are explained (e.g., reverse scoring is discussed if necessary; procedures for data cleaning or handling outliers are presented). If necessary, a coding scheme is clear and appropriate and interrater reliability is computed.	Measurement of the dependent variable (i.e., scoring, quantification) is clear and/or the coding scheme is appropriate. Data cleaning and outliers may not be discussed, or the discussion is not clear. Inter-rater reliability may not have been addressed.	Measurement if the dependent variable is appropriate but not explained clearly and/or the coding scheme is somewhat vague or does not cover all response possibilities (e.g., “maybe” in a Y/N task).	The scoring/quantification of the dependent variable and/or the coding scheme is not appropriate for the design of the study. It may be difficult to understand, even from the Results, how the data were scored/reduced.
Results: Descriptive Statistics	Statistics are appropriate (e.g., means and SD; frequency, etc.) and computed accurately. Tables and figures are correct, organized by relevant variables, and called out in text.	Statistics are appropriate and computed accurately. The figures or tables may have minor errors or confusing aspects.	Statistics are appropriate but may be missing some relevant information (e.g., means but no SD). Figures or tables are redundant with text or omitted when necessary.	Statistics are inappropriate (e.g., means computed on categorical data) or computed inaccurately. Figures or tables are omitted when necessary.
Results: Inferential Statistics	Inferential analysis is appropriate for addressing each hypothesis. Each finding is stated in “plain English” and supported with statistics in APA format.	Results section includes correctly used inferential statistics, but they may be incomplete (e.g., lacking appropriate post hoc tests) or the findings are unclear. Results may not be linked to hypotheses.	Results section includes inferential statistics, but they may be incorrect or incomplete. Results do not seem linked with the hypothesis of the study.	Overall the inferential statistics do not address the hypotheses of the study. Results are reported incorrectly, the wrong test is used, or some critical information is missing.	If inferential statistics are not used, this dimension would be rated as Not Applicable
Discussion: Interpretation	Discussion includes a restatement of the findings. Patterns in the data and relations among the variables are explained and conclusions do not go beyond the data. The explanation/ interpretation is well connected to the hypotheses and to the broader psychological problem as represented in the introduction. Any discrepancies between the expected results and the actual data are explained. The take-home message is clearly summarized at the end.	Discussion includes a restatement of the findings, but the analysis of their meaning may be weak or not well connected to the hypothesis. There may be lack of consideration for the broader psychological problem. Only some results are explained (esp. only positive), or the links to previous literature simply restate the introduction.	The restatement of the results is not clear or is misleading. Only some results are explained (esp. only positive), and the links to previous literature simply restate the introduction. The author may inappropriately generalize beyond the data.	Discussion incorrectly states the results or is a rehash of the introduction without clearly presenting the current study. The take-home message of the study is not clear.
Discussion: Evaluation	Author has considered to what extent the results are conclusive and can be generalized. Potential confounds or methodological limits are discussed as appropriate, and future research is suggested.	Potential confounds or methodological limits are discussed as appropriate, and future research is suggested. Author has not considered to what extent the results are conclusive and can be generalized.	Potential confounds or methodological limits are listed but not clearly discussed, and future research is not suggested. Author has not considered to what extent the results are conclusive and can be generalized.	Potential confounds and methodological limits may be listed but may be inaccurate, incomplete, or very unclear.
References	Reference page includes all and only cited articles. The articles are appropriately scholarly and appropriate to the topic. Sufficient recent sources make the review current, and classic studies are included if applicable and available. Original articles/chapters were clearly read by the student.	Reference list may leave out some cited article or include one that was not cited. The articles are appropriately scholarly but may be somewhat tangential and were likely read by the student. Sources include a good mix of recent and classic, as necessary.	Some references may not be appropriate for the assignment. Key references are clearly cited from other sources and not likely read by the student. Sources do not include a good mix of recent and classic, if necessary.	Reference list is more like a bibliography of related sources. References may not be scholarly sources or otherwise not appropriate for the assignment (e.g., too many secondary sources), or they may not be current.
Previously Submitted Elements of the Report (Problem Statement, Review of Research, and Methods	Essentially all of the shortcomings that were noted in the previous assignments have been fully and adequately addressed.	Most shortcomings that were noted in the previous assignments have been fully and adequately addressed.	Most shortcomings that were noted in the previous assignments were modified but generally not adequately addressed.	Few if any of the shortcomings that were noted in the previous assignments were adequately addressed.	If there were no shortcomings in previous assignments this dimension would be rated as ‘Not Applicable’
Overall	Grade: