I propose that we lengthen each lesson by 15 minutes, which allows us to end this course on August 16 rather than coming back on Monday, August 19. Last due date for the assigments is August 19, for those students who require the weekend to complete their assignments.

Detailed Lesson Plans and Resources

(Interpretive Inquiry I)

 

Navigation Bar

[JUL 26] [JUL 29] [JUL 30] [JUL 31] [AUG 01] [AUG 02] [AUG 05] [AUG 06] [AUG 07] [AUG 08] [AUG 09] [AUG 12] [AUG 13] [AUG 14] [AUG 15] [AUG 16] [AUG 19]

 

Friday, JUL 26

Lesson topics

  1. Introductions, instructor & participants;
  2. Outline of the course--invite students to articulate possible topics that they want to see covered;
  3. Objectives:
    1. Students will gain better understanding of qualitative research process,
    2. Students will gain better understanding of how to design qualitative studies,
    3. Students will gain better understanding of how to read qualitative studies in a critical way,
    4. Students will gain better understanding of how to interpret data.
  4. Presentation and discussion of the assignment;
  5. Human research ethics--some basics and consent form [for sample form, click here] (For sample completed ethics application click here)
  6. Quantitative versus qualitative research: (1) 5-10 min writing (2) minilecture (statistics; mixed methods [example, Roth & Bowen, 1995]) (this point has not been covered)

[top]

 

 

Monday, JUL 29

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. Quantitative versus qualitative research (Objective: Making the crucial distinction between quantitative (inferential) and (qualitative) interpretive research)
    1. 5-10 min individual writing
    2. discussion of student responses
    3. minilecture (inferential statistics, descriptive statistics (e.g., counting); mixed methods [example, Roth & Bowen, 1995])
  3. Questions, discussion "PART 1: From theory to text" (Chapters 2-3) (Objective: better understanding of key terms and theories introduced by the author);
    1. small-group discussions: students identify key difficult concepts to be addressed in mini-lecture
    2. Mini-lecture (concepts identified by students)
    3. Ethnomethodology ('following instructions'), strucuturalism, symbolic interactionism, discursive psychology (students' talk about the nature of science [ROTH & LUCAS, 1997]), poststructuralism (DERRIDA, text, author/audience), social representations (e.g., language) (this point has not been covered)
    4. dialectic of UNDERSTANDING & EXPLAINING (acetate); representation of EXPERIENCE (acetate) (this point has not been covered)
    5. research on graph interpretation by scientists (sample graph) (this point has not been covered)

[top]

 

 

Tuesday, JUL 30

Assignment: Each student write one research question that he or she might be interested in researching.

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. Minilecture on topics not covered on Monday, JUL 29.
    1. Ethnomethodology ('following instructions'), strucuturalism, symbolic interactionism, discursive psychology (students' talk about the nature of science [ROTH & LUCAS, 1997]), poststructuralism (DERRIDA, text, author/audience), social representations (e.g., language)
    2. dialectic of UNDERSTANDING & EXPLAINING (acetate); representation of EXPERIENCE (acetate)
    3. research on graph interpretation by scientists (sample graph)
  3. Questions, discussion "PART 2: Research Design" (Chapters 4-7);
    1. Tales from the field - Entering the field: Encounter, interview as an existential experience, anxieties, etc
    2. Recruitment and ethics
  4. Discussion and analysis of some of the research questions;

[top]

 

 

Wednesday, JUL 31

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. Questions, discussion Chapters 8-10
  3. PRAXIS: Interpreting interviews (Objective: learning to analyze interview data)
    1. Writing categories (sample)
    2. Writing assertion (sample)
    3. Students analyze this ("interview")
  4. Analyzing research questions: One or two potential research questions posed by students will be analyzed in detail (Objective: learning to write research questions, clarifying design) (this point has not been covered)

[top]

 

 

Thursday, AUG 01

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. Analyzing research questions: One or two potential research questions posed by students will be analyzed in detail (Objective: learning to write research questions, clarifying design)
  3. Three examples of the transition from "raw transcripts/observations" to initial framing of themes.
    1. Notes, based on the reading of interviews conducted by MR with grade 8 students toward the end of an "open inquiry" curriculum in ecology, where students framed their own research question, designed research method, reported results back to class and teacher. (Click here for example at a first cut at analysis)
    2. Emergence of themes while (a) looking at a video where students classify the different "ecozones" of their campus and (b) while looking at the maps that they have produced as a result of this activity. (Click here for example at a first cut at analysis)
    3. Annotated and commented transcript, including stills from the videotape from a study of scientists at work in their laboratory. (Click here for example)
  4. Praxis: Analyses of different types of verbal data;
    1. We analyze a "narrative text", written by a high school student on the topic of the nature of knowledge, and as part of a series of essays and discussions about the nature of knowledge in the context of a physics course that I taught. (Click here for text) (Objective: gaining practical experience in the analysis of real data.)
  5. Summary discussion:Verbal data, theory and praxis (Chapter 11)

[top]

 

 

Friday, AUG 02

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. What similarities/ differences did students experience between the analyses of "conversation," which was a bit like focus group (WED, JUL 31) and "narrative text" (TH, AUG 01)?
  3. Visual data (Objectives: (1) better understanding of discourse about visual data analysis and (2) practical experience in (a) analyzing video and (b) analyzing transcripts together with video)
    1. Praxis: Analysis of visual data.

      A video clip from a fourth-grade science class is analyzed, first based on observation and replay only (Explanation of the technique of "Interaction Analysis") then
    2. based on the transcript, a copy of which you can find here
    3. This same transcript and video has been analyzed by 9 science educators, each bringing his/her particular perspective. You can find the resulting article here (I give away the link after class) (Click here)
    4. On transcription and transcribing: 3 ways of transcribing the same dialogue: example 1, example 2, example 3 (From: Wolff-Michael Roth, Authentic School Science: Knowing and Learning in Open-Inquiry Science Laboratories (Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer, 1995), 197, 199, 201.
    5. (The forgotten transcript, including many details and images can be obtained here)
    6. Questions, discussion Chapter 12);
    7. Summary discussion:Verbal data, theory and praxis (Chapter 13)
  4. Analyzing research questions: One potential research questions posed by students will be analyzed in detail (Objective: learning to write research questions, clarifying design)

[top]

 

 

Monday, AUG 05

B.C. Day--No classes

[top]

 

 

Tuesday, AUG 06

Assignment: Students read the following two articles that make use of qualitative methodology. Both articles are available at the UVic library and, electronically, through its electronic journals service.

  1. Good, J. M., Halpin, G., & Halpin, G. (2001). Capturing problem-solving skills: The integration of electronic journals with case study instruction. Journal of General Education, 50 (2), 140-155.
  2. Barab, S. A., Hay, K. E., Barnett, M, & Squire, K. (2001). Constructing virtual worlds: Tracing the historical development of learner practices. Cognition and Instruction, 19, 47-94.

A guideline for reviewing articles, which are used by the reviewers for the Journal of Research in Science Teaching can be found here.

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. Discussion, analysis, and critique of the two articles in terms of their qualitative research designs, data, results, etc. (Objective: Learning to critically analyze articles according to the qualitative research methods that they use.
  3. Theory & praxis: Reflexivity, ethnomethodology (Objective: Critically dealing with ideology, presuppositions when doing qualitative research.)
    1. We analyze the video of students who analyzed data. Question: What are the presuppositions, the unstated knowledge and assumptions that these individuals/ the group bring to the analysis?
    2. Minilecture: Ethnomethodology ("queuing," "following instructions," "doing science labs")
      (Click image to enlarge)
  4. Small group discussions of one student's research question (Objective: (a) Learning to design qualitative research studies and (b) assisting students in designing their specific studies.)

[top]

 

 

Wednesday, AUG 07

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. Small group discussions of students' research question (Objective: (a) Learning to design qualitative research studies and (b) assisting students in designing their specific studies.)
  3. Questions and discussion Chapters 14-15 (Objective: (a) Understanding the different forms of coding, (b) Understanding the transition from raw materials to grounded theory, and (c) Gaining practical experience in building grounded theory.)
    1. Mini-lecture: Open, axial, selective coding
    2. An example that shows how I went from raw responses (interview, structured written questions) through open coding to axial coding and selective coding to arrive at a grounded theory can be found here.
  4. Praxis: coding and categorizing
  5. Summary discussion: coding and categorizing

[top]

 

 

Thursday, AUG 08

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. Quality of qualitative research. (Objective: Students will develop a basic understanding of quality criteria for qualitative research.)
    1. Minilecture
    2. Here a discussion of the Guba/Lincoln criteria as we had used them in one research project (ROTH & ALEXANDER 1997).
    3. Here a text that introduces you to the criteria for quality of qualitative research.
  3. Sequential analysis (Objective: Students develop a/n (better) understanding of sequential analysis and gain some practical experience at doing sequential analysis.)
    1. Questions and discussion: Chapter 16;
    2. Praxis: sequential analysis 1 (small group): We will analyze the same two episodes of teacher-student interaction from two/three perspectives: Open coding, using an a priori theoretical framework ("metaphors we live by"), and sequential analysis. (The transcripts/hand outs can be found here. (My analysis)
    3. Sequential analysis 2 (whole class): Another transcript that we will discuss in terms of sequential analysis can be found here.
  4. Narrative analysis (Objective: Students develop a/n (better) understanding of narrative analysis and gain some practical experience at doing narrative analysis.)
    1. Praxis: We analyze a narrative text provided by one high school student (Todd Alexander) as part of a project subsequently published as ROTH & ALEXANDER (1997).
    2. The transcript can be found here
    3. Discussion narrative analysis

[top]

 

 

Friday, AUG 09

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. Text analysis (Objective: Students will be able to distinguish conceptual and/or literary inquiry from inquiry involving human beings and lived experience)
    1. We have a discussion surrounding Ian's project, where he presents the project, and the remainder of the class (students, instructor) ask questions, comment, etc.
    2. Discussion: conceptual analysis & literary criticism as forms of curricular inquiry:
      1. What are some of the possibilities for these forms of inquiry?
      2. What are some of the dangers?
      3. What do teachers get out of literary criticism/conceptual analysis versus what they get from doing an investigation involving their students, colleagues, parents of students, etc.?
      4. How do such forms of inquiry inform curriculum or the day-to-day school and classroom life?
    3. Summary discussion: text interpretation (Chapter 17)
  3. Grounding qualitative research (Objective: Students will gain a better understanding of how the quality of qualitative research can be assured) (This point has not been covered and will be moved to the next lesson.)
    1. Questions and discussion Chapter 18
    2. Mini lecture & discussion: Criteria by GUBA & LINCOLN 1989
      1. Credibility (replacing the conventional concept of internal reliability)
      2. Transferability (replacing the conventional concept of generalizability)
      3. Dependability (replacing the conventional concept of reliability)
      4. Confirmability (replacing the conventional concept of objectivity)
      5. An example of a study in which "transferability" and "Dependability" played a major role can be found as MCGINN, ROTH, BOUTONNE & WOSZCZYNA 1995.
  4. Writing qualitative research (Objective: Students will gain insights in different forms of writing qualitative research, how forms of writing stand in a relation with the claims being made in the text)
    1. Mini lecture: Examples of alternative ways of writing (e.g., w/ri(gh)ting) research
    2. Activity/discussion of alternative ways of writing. [Example 1: Reflexivity and historical psychology] [Example 2: Autobiographical sociology] [Example 3: The rhetoric of discourse analysis]
    3. Examples of alternative writing: (ROTH & MCROBBIE 1999) (ROTH, MCROBBIE & LUCAS 1998) (ROTH, TOBIN, ZIMMERMANN, BRYANT & DAVIS 2002)
    4. Questions and discussion Chapter 19

[top]

 

 

Monday, AUG 12

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
    1. Questions about the final project: Layout, sections, points to be addressed, conclusion, etc.
    2. Because this is a course on research (inquiry), your assigment should fundamentally take the structure of an article as these are published in journals. In case of doubt, use one or more of these as a template according to which you want to structure your writing.
    3. Over and above what you find in a research paper, I am interested in your reflection on the process of doing this research, which you can add as a sub-section in the discussion, or as a final (CODA) section, or something like that.
    4. You can also use section headings that are descriptive of the content, rather than sticking to the more conventional "findings," "introduction," "discussion," etc.
  2. Whole-group discussions of one student's research question (Objective: (a) Learning to design qualitative research studies and (b) assisting students in designing their specific studies.)
  3. Praxis: data analysis and reflexivity: Phenomenological, hermeneutic, and reflexive dimensions (Objective: Students will gain a better understanding of the interpretive process)
    1. Students read and interpret this excerpt from Jacques Derrida, Monolingualism of the Other or The Prosthesis of Origin
    2. (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998). (7-8 min)
    3. Students reflect on their interpretive process: What are key features of your interpretive experience? (5 min)
    4. Whole-class discussion of texts students previously produced. What are the implications of this for interpretive research?
  4. Grounding qualitative research (Objective: Students will gain a better understanding of how the quality of qualitative research can be assured)
    1. Questions and discussion Chapter 18
    2. Mini lecture & discussion: Criteria by GUBA & LINCOLN 1989
      1. Credibility (replacing the conventional concept of internal reliability)
      2. Transferability (replacing the conventional concept of generalizability)
      3. Dependability (replacing the conventional concept of reliability)
      4. Confirmability (replacing the conventional concept of objectivity)
      5. An example of a study in which "transferability" and "Dependability" played a major role can be found as MCGINN, ROTH, BOUTONNE & WOSZCZYNA 1995.

[top]

 

 

Tuesday, AUG 13

Assignment: Read any one article of your choice that makes use of qualitative research methods. Critically analyze the article. Use the guidelines for reviewers from the previous assignment.

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. First half of students present their reading and analysis; count on about 10 minutes per presentation; you should focus in your presentation on the key points that are outlined in the reviewer guidelines. For maximum benefit of your audience, you could structure your presentation like the following two points.
  3. Presentation of the research paper.
    1. What is the problem addressed? Purpose of research? Why is it important?
    2. How was the study designed? What data were collected? How were the data analyzed?
    3. What was found out? How did the author/s present his/her/their data?
    4. What were the conclusions
  4. Critique: Pick out those points that you feel are relevant to this course, Interpretive Inquiry, and tell us why they are problematic.

[top]

 

 

Wednesday, AUG 14

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. Second half of students present their reading and analysis; count on about 10 minutes per presentation; you should focus in your presentation on the key points that are outlined in the reviewer guidelines. For maximum benefit of your audience, you could structure your presentation like the following two points.
  3. Presentation of the research paper
    1. What is the problem addressed? Purpose of research? Why is it important?
    2. How was the study designed? What data were collected? How were the data analyzed?
    3. What was found out? How did the author/s present his/her/their data?
    4. What were the conclusions
  4. Critique: Pick out those points that you feel are relevant to this course, Interpretive Inquiry, and tell us why they are problematic.

[top]

 

 

Thursday, AUG 15

Lesson topics

  1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made.
  2. Qualitative and quantitative research (Chapter 21)
  3. Qualitative in qualitative research (Chapter 22)
  4. Discussion: On interpretation: explaining and understanding
    1. We read this Ricoeur text and discuss its implications for interpretive inquiry as science
  5. Summary discussion: From text to theory

[top]

 

 

Friday, AUG 16

Lesson topics

    Assignment: Each student picks and reads a differt article from the following list. Students will present for 5 minutes key elements of computers in qualitative research presented in the article. The list of the articles is here. The articles are all available from the FQS special issue on computers in qualitative research. Follow this link.

    Lesson topics

    1. Questions about process, special needs, possible changes to be made: Based on your experience in this course, how would you set up the assignment/course structure in another iteration of the course? (It will be taught over 13 weeks, one 3-hour session per week.)
    2. Whhole-group discussions of students' research question (Objective: (a) Learning to design qualitative research studies and (b) assisting students in designing their specific studies.)
    3. Whole-class discussion: Computers in qualitative research: Summary discussion (Chapter 20 and individual readings) (Objective: Students will get a deeper and broader understanding of computers as tools in qualitative research.)
      1. What are some of the positive aspects of computers in qualitative research?
      2. What are some of the negative aspects of computers in qualitative research?
      3. How are paradigms (theories) and computer use related?
      4. What kind of theories go/do not go with computer use? Why?
      5. Why do I consider/not consider using computers in qualitative research?

    [top]