Opening Syllabus for EDUC 858-010:

Advanced Qualitative Research Methods

/Spring 2016, UD/

 Wednesdays 10:00am-1:00 pm; Room WHL#135

Instructor: Eugene Matusov, Ph. D., Professor of Education

Office: Room 206D Willard Hall; Phone: 302-831-1266 (office); e-mail: ematusov@udel.edu

Office Hours: flexible and by appointment (just email!)

Course description

I want to share my excitement with issues of Advanced Qualitative Methods (AQM) in education with you. The course should spur you to begin to consider your own stances, objectives, and voice as a researcher and develop your ability to sell and defend your own way of doing research. This goal will be achieved through two main ways: 1) pursue your own interests, needs, and inquiries in AQM and 2) your exposure to alternative approaches to AQM that you might not familiar with. In my view, it is essential that you become familiar with and critical of the various ontological, epistemological, and methodological assumptions that guide research in the social sciences.

In this advanced methodology course, the focus will be on epistemological approaches, research design, and especially on diverse data synthesis and analysis approaches, research findings’ presentation, ethics, reflexivity, and critiques of qualitative research. It aims to familiarize you with, socialize in, and develop a critical stance to the different ways of knowing and doing qualitative research on a more advanced level, culminating in the written, visual, and oral presentation of a qualitative research proposal, including preliminary results from fieldwork conducted during the course. We will consider a range of methodological approaches considered to be qualitative, but special emphasis will be placed on observational, interview-based, and participatory research. The course provides students an overview & practical experience in qualitative research methods in education. The focus of this course may include (but not limited to): (auto)ethnography, content (theme) analysis, deconstruction, ethnostatistics analysis, microstoria, grand narrative, discourse analysis, narrative analysis, dialogic analysis, fictional account, narrative networks (NVIVO), plot analysis, grounded theory, action research, ethnomethodology, video and photo analysis, arts-based qualitative methods, phenomenological study, case study, participant and nonparticipant observation, phenomenological interviews, heteroglossia, heterodiscoursia, ethnostatistics, & an introduction to focus groups and so on.

Since the last part of the 20th century, a variety of critical discourses--postmodernism, poststructuralism, poststructuralism, feminism, queer theory, and race based theories, to name a few--have troubled the adherence of positivist notions of research to objectivity, Truth, and value-free science, where data is assumed to be neutrally and naturally collected, interpreted, and

textualized by disinterested researchers. Rather than attempting to provide an objective, "tidy" text about what is inherently an untidy, fractured world, these critical discourses suggest that research ought to be considered a problematized and contested terrain depicting a double crisis of representation and legitimation. Issues of validity, generalizability, positivism, addressivity, positionality, ethnocentrism, objectivity, finalizing, hermeneutics, dialogism, and epistemology of qualitative methods (among many others) will be discussed. Over the course of the semester, we will hopefully engage the classic and ongoing debates concerning the merits and problematics of quantitative and/vs. qualitative and/vs other methodological approaches, the agent-structure problem, objectivization and/vs. subjectivization, objectivity vs. dialogism, emic and/vs etic, the philosophical underpinnings of design and application, and so on. In addition, we will not avoid the difficult but critical ontological and epistemological issues underlying social science research.

This course will explore the origins, nature, and implications of this double crisis of representation and legitimation and what it might mean and entail for doing critical qualitative research in the 21st-century. Combining a theoretical and practical approach to the study of qualitative methodology as always already political--that is, as always positioned somewhere and as always advocating something--this course will help students learn to attend to the ethics and politics of what we do and do not do as researchers and the various epistemologies, assumptions, and values underlying our practices as well as their consequences for our own research, for our participants, and for the world we attempt to depict conceptually and/or empirically. At the core of this class, and as we explore issues of power, ethics, positionality, voice, authorship, and praxis as well as "play" with alternative forms of discursivity that are more representatives of our current polyvocal world, is the attempt to help students reconcile the relationship among issues of epistemology, ontology, politics, social justice, and methodology--ensuring the first two correspond with one's "methods" to produce a meaningful research mastery -- both in your own current doctoral work and beyond. Through reading, discussion, and exercises linked to individual research projects, students encounter firsthand experience with a range of issues, including data collection, data analysis, and narrative and visual research reporting.

A major part of the course will revolve around readings and focused exercises that foster the development of each individual’s personal research plans, personal competencies in, and critique of qualitative research. Over the duration of the course and with support from their peers and the instructor, you will execute in-class and out-of-class qualitative mini-research projects (especially data analysis).

The issues of qualitative methods are open for debate. My goal is to engage you in these debates and learn together with you. There is rarely one “correct” answer, but rather varying answers that are informed by particular epistemological, ontological, and even political perspectives, data, methods of analysis, and/or theory.

As your instructor, I assume that each of you will bring your own questions to this course and will pursue answers to those questions. I invite you to take in all that you can in this course and make use of it in ways that help you to get answers to, or further develop, your own questions. To facilitate your choices, I have develop “Curricular Map” of this vast academic territory that I invite you to amend based on your pre-existing and emerging interests. I treat the class as a

2

journey for all of us. The amount of time that we will spend together over the course of the semester only allows us to begin our inquiry and learning journey together into the interdisciplinary field of qualitative methods in education. As you gain further academic and professional experience, my hope is that you will continue to reflect upon the significance of this framework, and the rich ways that it can inform research, policy and practice.

Note1: If you plan to use the data you collect during this course in your dissertation or a formal

research publication, you must complete the IRB process prior to data collection. See http://www.udel.edu/research/preparing/humansub.html for additional information.

Note2: Throughout this semester, you may be working on your dissertation research methodology or mastery. Please consider working closely with your academic advisor and dissertation committee through the process of developing a methodological approach for your dissertation work as well as in constructing a research question. One danger in teaching a methods course is that I become your shadow dissertation advisor, taking over the responsibility for guiding you through developing a research question and research plan for your dissertation. This is not my intention. Involving your own chair in your work in our class is essential, therefore, if you are going to build the relationship with him or her necessary to efficiently and effectively completing the doctoral dissertation.

Philosophy of the class

               As we are going to tests our own and established ideas, the philosophy of the class is to maximize a safe learning environment for you – to make sure as much as institutionally possible that your mistakes do not count against you. There will be no exams. Nothing will be graded in class except the Main Learning Project. The course is designed to encourage all participants (i.e., each student and the instructor) to engage in critical thinking and open discussions concerning issues of critical and interpretative methods of educational research. We will consider different curriculum areas such as literacy, math, and science.

               The format of the class is a research hands- and minds-on seminar. You will do three independent mini-research projects on the topic of your interest using non-quantitative, non-qualitative, critical and interpretative methods during the semester. We will discuss both the research questions and diverse methodology. 

               I want to admit that as any alive being, I am conceptually biased – biased specifically toward a sociocultural and dialogic approach to education, learning, and becoming. It does not mean that I expect you to embrace this approach but it does mean that while discussing a variety of theoretical approaches (see my Curricular Survey that I sent to you), you will hear about these approaches a lot.

               I expect each of us (i.e., you all and me) to participate as a responsible member of the class who is willing to contribute to one's own as well as others' learning. The course involves active participation across multiple in-class and web-based experiences. These learning experiences will include: class and web discussions and small group activities based on the readings, instructor’s and students’ class presentations, and several films. Individuals and/or groups will work on and present projects during the semester.

3

               I want to work hard to develop a professional community of learners in our class. I expect that we all make mistakes (including myself) so we all can learn from them. I will try to avoid punishing for your learning from doing mistakes. I am committed to making the class meaningful and to promoting a safe and supporting environment for the learning of all class members (including myself as your instructor). Many things are negotiable in the class except everyone's commitment to learning and meaningfulness (see below for my evaluation philosophy and policy). 

My democratic dialogic teacher’s credo

I see your learner role in our class as pursuing your own education. I believe that learners are the highest authority for their own education. Thus, it means that you, -- and not anybody else, -- should decide what to study, how to study, why to study, with whom to study, and whether to study at all. Some of these decisions may need help and I’m happy to provide this help (but feel free to ask others for help as well). I expect that there will be diverse relationships between you and our class collective diverse topics and issues. Some of the issues may be or become very dear to your heart and mind, some peripheral, but some not at all – and I, as your instructor, will try to respect all these diverse relationships.

            I believe that genuine teaching starts with a learner asking the teacher for genuine help. I see my teacher role in supporting your own learning and creating educational opportunities for you via:

1.       Supporting your existing learning interests, inquiries, needs, and questions;

2.       Promoting emergence new learning interests, inquiries, needs, and questions through dialogic provocation, providing a rich learning environment, and learning activities of my design;

3.       Promoting your opinions about important issues of the field and your own interest;

4.       Engaging you in testing your own ideas and desires through exposure to alternative and even opposing ideas, approaches, values, attitudes, evidence, and desires;

5.       Helping you find alternative ideas, approaches, values, attitudes, evidence, and desires that help you to test your ideas and desires;

6.       Engaging in analysis and evaluation of diverse ideas and desires: their PROs, CONs, claims, credibility, validity, evidence, implications/consequences, and values;

7.       Considering professional and political actions for realization of your ideas;

8.       Helping you critically reflect on your own learning journeys and a type of education that you desire for yourself;

9.       Providing honest and supportive feedback on your work when you ask for it;

10.    Helping you manage your own education.

4

I try to eliminate or minimize any educational police or oppressive role as much as possible to prevent robbing you from the ownership of your own education and life. I believe that a teacher has his/her highest loyalty to his/her student above all other professional and citizenry loyalties of the teacher.

Open curriculum

               In order to make our class as meaningful and useful for as possible, I want to apply the concept of “Open curriculum”: we will design what we want to learn as the class goes. You may ask me and yourselves, “How can students (i.e., we, EDUC852 students) participate in designing a good class curriculum, if students are not familiar with the academic matter of the class? Is it not a primary, if not solely, role of the teacher who is considered to be very knowledgeable in this academic field and knows better what the students (i.e., we, I) should learn in this class?” This is a tough question, which, in my view, reflects one of the main paradoxes of learning namely: On the one hand, a student does not know what learn because the student is not familiar with subject of his/her own learning. But on the other hand, learning is transformation of the student’s subjectivity: his/her opinions, thoughts, feelings, worldviews, interests, puzzlement, and concerns. Without a student actively raising a question, his/her teacher’s answer usually remains meaningless for the student. Thus, meaningful guidance by the teacher starts with the student’s question. To address this learning paradox, I propose us constantly negotiate what we will learn to reflect your emerging questions, puzzlements, concerns, and interests. It is like going to unfamiliar foreign country: the guide’s suggestions and the tourists’ emerging interests generate meaningful, safe, and exciting tourist experiences and learning. The more tourists become familiar with the foreign country, the more informed becomes their interests. Similarly, I hope that the more you become with vast terrain of the field, the more informed you will become your interests and choices of the study.

               I already asked you to reply on my Curricular Survey about your familiarity and interest in curricular topics of the class. The results of the Curricular Survey shows, you already have certain interests and attractions and also you have certain indifferences and curricular repellences. Some of these indifferences and repellences may be caused by your lack of familiarity, or poor learning experiences with these subjects, but some can be a result of your informed choice. There is also a potential effect of serendipity of getting attracted (or repelled) to something that you did not care before or were not even aware of. As your views and interests may change during the course, we can travel in different territory of the curricular terrain. At the end of each class meeting we will make decision of what to study next. I’ll try to plan one week ahead.

               I see my primary special role as your teacher in facilitating this process through: finding information of your interests relevant to our class, preparing presentations for you to address your inquires, guiding your where to find sources for your inquires, bringing alternatives to your ideas, helping us develop learning experiences, providing learning provocations, facilitating our discussions, providing a safe learning environment for all of you, making sure that your learning experiences are meaningful for you and there is no waste of time and energy for you, helping you to manage demands from our class with your other life demands, providing my formative assessment feedback of your independent mini-research projects (did I miss something?).

Mid-term class "town hall meeting”

5

            One type of diversity is a pedagogical diversity of how to run a class. There have been 3 major types of running a class: a) Closed Syllabus, when all pedagogical decisions are made unilaterally by the teacher (e.g., a traditional classroom), b) Open Syllabus, when all pedagogical decisions are made by the teacher and students together, and c) Opening Syllabus, when some pedagogical are made unilaterally by the teacher but some (e.g., curriculum -- what to study) are done in collaboration with the students (e.g., this is how this class is run so far). Since our class is experiential, on this mid-term class "town meeting”, we may consider if we want to try Open Syllabus or return back to Closed Syllabus, or transform our Opening Syllabus class to make our education more meaningful for all of us (but what if different students in our class may need different type of class?).

               During our mid-term class town hall meeting, we will discuss how our class feels, what works in our class and what does not, and how can we improve our for the second part of the semester. We will analyze PROs and CONs consequences of the proposed improvements and then vote on them to let a majority decide which of the proposed improvements to implement and which not. We may also want to set checkup date to see if the implemented improvements work or not.

Free but compensated class attendance

With my 20-year of teaching experience, I have become more and more ambivalent about students’ mandatory class attendance. On the one hand, our class is discussion-based, experience-based, activity-based, and participation-based. Active participation in class and web discussions and small group activities is crucial for learning in this course. Class participation also includes playing active roles in creating a supportive atmosphere, in which every participant's learning will be fostered.  This involves both building on each other ideas and disagreeing with arguments made by others. We will learn from each other and will guide each other. Also, class attendance can provide serendipity for your learning: something that initially you might not like or feel indifferent suddenly becomes interesting for you through exposure of this material through the class learning activities and/or discussions. Finally, required attendance may give discipline for the studies you value: it protects your time and assures your efforts from other important or required activities to take them over for you. Hopefully, we will have many exciting, meaningful, fun, and useful learning activities and critical discussions that can actively promote your education.

However, I have recognized that different people may learn differently, have different interests. Some students are more autodidact (i.e., active self-learners) than others. Some like more solely learning then others. Some need more help from me and other students than others. Some are more committed to their own and nobody else’s interests than others. You may also have different life circumstances that sometimes can prevent them from attendance of the class. Also, mandatory attendance may create a sense of imprisonment in some of you and at some time and rob us from self-correction when you vote by your feet in response to my insensitive, meaningless, boring, useless guidance for you.

To address these PROs and CONs of required class attendance, I have come with the following pedagogical solution that I called “Free but compensated attendance.” You are free to miss a class – fully or partially – but you are required to compensate your missed learning through the Exchange of Favors Class Policy (see below). When you absent from the class, it means that you need to learn a class topic on your own with my guiding support. Also, each class meeting will be audio-recorded and the audio file will be placed on "Audio recordings of the class meetings" for students who may miss the class. My past 

6

students defined “partially missed class” when student misses more than 10 min of the class, which should trigger compensation. If you need or want to leave the class, please, try to do it as unobtrusively as possible (it can an appreciated courtesy, if you inform the instructor about that in advance).

Calling on out by the instructor: 5 th Amendment

As a teacher I always face the following dilemma in my classes. Should I call only on students who raise their hands OR should I also call (randomly?) on students who do not raise the hand? I see PROs and CONs in each option. I like calling on students who raise their hands because it goes according to their will, they indicate that they have something to say, they will not be embarrassed to talk. 

               On the other hand, in my observation, this approach will often promote only a few students to talk while making the rest silent. The class will not know the other, silent, students' opinions and ideas. These students will not learn to speak out publically in class. The vocal students may develop negative arrogant attitudes against the silent students as if the vocal students are smarter than the silent students. 

               As to leaving the students who do not raise their hands, it will respect their silence and desire not to talk, it will not embarrass the silent and shy students. It promotes their comfort. But, on the other hand, it may lock the silent students in their being shy and silent. It does not promote their voice and learning activism. It may make them feel stupid. 

               I found a good solution in the book “When students have power: Negotiating authority in a critical pedagogy” by Ira Shor. In his Democratic Class, his students came with the “5th Amendment” approach: the instructor has a right to call randomly a student, who has not raised his/her hand but the student has a right to say “pass” without any explanation (the teacher does not have a right to pursue or ask for any explanation). This is similar to the US Constitution’s 5th Amendment, in which an accused has a right not to testify against him/herself. In my many past classes, this policy helped many of my shy students to become comfortable to raise their hands at the end of the semester.

Mind Attendance

I expect you actively participate in class meetings. To facilitate your active engagement in learning during the class meetings, we will take a "mind attendance” roll each class meeting by asking you to address the following questions on the class web: a) two most important, thought provoking, and interesting things that you have learned in this class meeting, b) questions about the class discussion and presentation, and c) your feedback on the class. The index card is not graded. I might quote you and address your Mind Attendance via the WebTalk, in class, or in an email, depending on the issue you bring up on it. Of course, I understand that the Mind Attendance does not fully explain what you have learned, in part because learning is a never ending process that occurs not only at the end of the class. But it helps me see where your immediate focus was in the class. As our experience shows, it is a good learning tool for you and a good guidance tool for our teaching. 

Homework

There will be no required homework besides a Webtalk posting once a week that you can also do in class if you want (your own learning activism is welcomed). A student from a previous class did her Main 

7

Learning Project on effectiveness of homework. She found that research does not report any learning benefits from assigned homework and I decided to experiment to move away from homework. So, I will provide opportunities for you to do all required learning activities in class. However, if you could not do it in class, you can finish it after the class on the same day.

Autodidact

I want to create many diverse possibilities for your voluntary self-studies and learning activism. One of these possibilities is for you to study topics of your interest on your own. For that you can go to Curriculum Map (on the Home page) and select topic of your interest. I provided instructional materials there for your self-studies. Also, you can find interesting relevant materials and post them on the WebTalk and/or Self-Studies. Let me know, please, if you have more ideas for how I can support your learning activism.

Participation in our class Web discussions (WebTalk)

Web discussions are a new form of instruction that involves participation in the threaded discussions on the class Web site. The WebTalk will not only allow us to participate in class outside of the class meetings but promote more ownership for our own learning since all of us can control the content of our postings. We expect you to read all the messages and contribute a minimum of one message, which can involve messages of various lengths on a subject initiated by you OR as a reply to somebody else's messages. The Web discussion will be based on class discussions, your questions, your past experiences, your comments, Self-Studies, readings, relevant YouTube videos, relevant Internet articles, relevant readings from your other classes, and the instructors' guiding questions. Try to make your posting as short as possible to save your and other people time while articulating your ideas, opinions, and feelings but do not be apologetic for long messages (WebTalk is democratic medium and people can skip if they don't want to read). More than one posting is very welcome and will provide extra credit. (But it does not automatically count against previous week's missed postings -- see the Exchange Favor Class Policy below).

How to write web messages: Focus please on interesting, personally relevant, and provocative ideas, challenging teaching dilemmas, questions, and information so your message is worth reading for the other class members (including me, the instructor).  Try to illustrate your message with examples.  Your personal experience is always a good source for examples and interesting thoughts. Find good relevant sources on the Internet -- articles, videos, polls, and so on -- to provoke a discussion or inform your peers. Make the subject of your message as informative and attractive as possible (provocative subjects often attract readers' attention).

Support other students by replying to their messages and responding to their replies on your own messages.  In your reply, refer to the original author by name (otherwise, if a big discussion emerges, people may forget to whom you are referring) and quote or paraphrase the referred points from the original message (so people know with what part of a message or idea you agree or disagree).  If you agree with an idea/message, try to say why.  If you are disagree with the original author try to be respectful by appreciating the author's position and by providing justification for your disagreement - remember that disagreements highly contributes to your new

8

thinking, feelings, attitudes, and learning. Be thankful to people (and readings) with whom you disagree, please.

Your message is especially successful when it generates a discussion.

I expect that some of you may feel uncomfortable with exposing your thinking to the entire class - but previous students have found that the Web is fun and rewarding after a couple of weeks.  Don't worry about spelling or grammar - think only about communicating your ideas.  Nobody judges or grades your web contributions.

Self-Studies

There are Self-Studies during the class.  A major purpose of the Self-Studies is to provide you with an opportunity to explore an issue of your interest and think critically and reflectively about teaching practices and to communicate your thinking through your writing a(as you may do in your future professional activity) and prepare for our further class discussions.  There is no single right answer for any of the assignments.  Therefore, your focus in your response to the Self-Study should NOT be on whether your essay is correct or not.  The focus should be placed on what you think about the topics and how you develop and communicate your Self-Studies and provide evidence supporting and illustrating your ideas. The length of the assignment varies depending on how much you need to communicate to express your ideas and feelings and to justify them and to reply to the assigned readings (the shorter the better but please do not apologize if you need to write more).

Self-Studies often connect the upcoming class session's discussions and readings. Thus, they give your opportunities to rethink new material and prepare for the next class. Reading your Self-Studies, helps me understand and guide your learning and prepare my guidance for the next class meeting so I answer your questions and issues rather than my imaginary students' ones. Feel free to raise questions to me and to the class on the topic of the Self-Study. An important purpose for doing the writing assignment is for you to receive feedback on and responses to your thinking from other class members so that you can further reflect on and discuss the topics with others.

I expect that these assignments will help all of us introduce our ideas to each other and to engage in web and class discussions on important teaching dilemmas, problems with traditional schooling, and issues of socioeconomic class, race, culture, age, and gender in regard to school instruction and learning in general.

I see Self-Studies as a learning teaser for you: if you become interested in it, you can explore it later at home. I intentionally want to limit to 20-25 min, so many of you may not finish it in class. If you decide to finish it at home -- great. If not, it is OK.

Main Learning Project (MLP)

"Hot” issues and difficult cases of advanced qualitative methods in education (the drafts are DUE: 

9

Formative assessment: last day of our class, 5/17/2016 11:55PM Tue., MLP with self-evaluation via email to the instructor and to grading non-participating peers (if chosen)

Summative Only Assessment: Wednesday of the Exam week, 5/25/2016 11:55 PM Wed   . MLP with self-   grading via  the class web  and to grading non-participating peers (if chosen)

The Main Learning Project (MLP) is an opportunity for you to try out what you have learned in the class about issues of advanced qualitative methods in education by exploring a new or old topic of your interest in depth. Thus, we will start working on the Main Learning Project from the beginning of the semester, see the web for details. We will develop grading criteria for the Main Learning Project collaboratively during one of our class meetings so you will have better idea what quality of the work means for the professional educational community, you, and me, and what my expectations for good grades are. 

The Main Learning Project (MLP) is an opportunity for you to explore an issue of your choice broadly related to advanced qualitative methods. The MLP also helps you to develop research skills, analytic skills, critical thinking, and problem solving skills, all of which will make you, hopefully, more able to realize when you need more information and when you need to find ways to interact with others in order to grapple with problems about teaching.  We will start working on the Main Learning Project within the class--see the class web for much more detail about the content of the final project.

MLP must involve the following components: controversy of advanced qualitative methods in education personally important for you and other educational researchers and educators (why did you select it and not others); bringing diverse voices, opinions, views, approaches to this controversy; your analysis of PROs and CONs of the alternative ideas; evidence of backing up or challenging these PROs and CONs; conclusion of what you have learned from the MLP and how it may affect your future professional practice.

MLP can have diverse formats and media: essayistic research paper, presentation in class, grant proposal, conference presentation, and so on. Feel free to become creative and consult with the class and the instructor when you have doubts. 

To promote quality in your work and to receive a good grade for it, previous students along with I designed the following policy. You are required to submit your preliminary draft of MLP (along with your questions if you have ones) with your self-evaluation (via narrative or rubrics - you can read about benefits of self-assessment here: https://chroniclevitae.com/news/1214-how-and-why-you-should-have-students-assess-themselves) for the instructor's and/or peer's feedback (i.e., formative assessment) before the final deadline via email to the instructor. In addition you have to grade your own draft (as if it is final) on the provided rubrics (you can tailor it toward your particular project). In a couple of days, you will get feedback for improvements (if improvements are necessary in the instructor's and/or your peer graders' judgment). Then you can either accept the grade or revise and resubmit your final project based on the feedback. If you disagree with the suggestions provided in the feedback, please, feel free to articulate your disagreement and reasons of why you are talking an alternative route.

Previous students have liked this policy a lot as it was less stressful and it promotes more learning as it gives more control to you over your work and grade. A dramatic improvement of their work and grades were also noticed. However, it requires your efforts and initiatives - doing the required minimum might 

10

not be enough for excellence in the final project (and, thus, your final grade score). You may submit as many drafts for our feedback as you wish before the second deadline (if your feedbackers agree but try not to wait until the last day because your graders may have many other obligations). The final draft with your self-grading (via narrative or rubrics) have to be submitted via our class web (see it in the navigation bar on the Home page) and to your peer graders (optional). In the final draft, I or your peer graders will provide my grading and brief justification of the final grade (no feedback). I will work hard that your MLP score will NOT be affected by your disagreement with me, with your peers, or with the mainstream views by the professional community. However, you should demonstrated knowledge and address existing diverse approaches to the issues of cultural diversity in education you are considering. 

It is possible to do a group Main Learning Project of no more than 3 people. My past teaching experience shows that bigger groups often create coordination problems and diminish the quality of the work. The scope of the project should be appropriated and justified for the group. There will be one score grade for all: no complains about your partners will be accepted. If you decide to work in a group, you are responsible for managing the group work relations. 

Formative assessment of your MLP (feedback): To promote the quality of your work, you are requested to submit your preliminary draft (along with your questions if you have them) and self-evaluation narrative or rubrics for my/peer's feedback (i.e., formative assessment) about a week before the final deadline via email to us, the instructors. In a couple of days, you will get my feedback for improvements (if improvements are necessary, in our judgment). On your feedbackers' agreement, you can submit as many drafts for our feedback as you wish before the final deadline (although try not to wait until the last day because we have many students). Formative assessment is safe for you - you won't be punished for making mistakes. Let your evaluators know if you want mock summative assessment (grade score) for your working drafts (some past students love it and some hate it). Mock grade scores are not consequential and won’t influence final score in any way. Formative assessment is safe for you - you won't be punished for making mistakes.

(Optional) If you decide to ask your non-participating peer to grade your MLP (see below), I highly recommend you asking her/him/them for formative assessment (feedback) as well. 

Summative assessment of your MLP (grading): The final draft and self-graded narrative or rubrics have to be submitted via our class web and via email to your peer graders (optional). Based on the institutional demands, MLP is the only learning activity that will be summatively assessed (i.e., graded) and thus it is NOT safe for you to make mistakes in its final draft (i.e., you will be punished for making mistakes). You (or your group in case of a group MLP) will have a choice for summative assessment (grading): 

1)           peer grading by non-participating peers and/or; 

2)           the instructors' grading 

Also, you are required to submit self-grading on the rubrics. In a case of peer grading, you need to find a peer who did not participate in your MLP and ask him or her to grade your work. If you choose peer grading (checked by me). In a case of discrepancy, between your self-grading and peers/instructor grading, you have a right to select your MLP grade on the range, defined by the discrepancy.

11

We will discuss grading criteria in the class. You have to inform me (and your grading peer) about your desired type of grading before 2 weeks of the end of the classes via email. Grading peers must submit your grades of your peers along with the justifications of your judgments to us no later than Friday of the exam week via email (feel free to raise questions for us via email about peer grading). In the final draft, we'll provide our grading and brief justification of the final grade (no feedback). The final grade for MLP is your choice on the range between your own self-grading and my/peer grading.

There will be no exams in this course. 

Deadlines: 

        Weekly Webtalk:  Sundays, 11:55pm;

        Weekly Self-Study: in class or at the end of the day on Tuesday, 11:55pm;

        First draft of the Main Learning Project:  Last day of class Tuesday, May 17, 11:55pm (via email)

        Final draft of the Main Learning Project:  Wednesday of the Exam Week, May 25, 11:55pm (via web)

Exchange of Favors Policy: Attendance, WebTalk, Self-Studies

There are can be many reasons why you may not meet the class requirements listed in the syllabus: religious holidays, problems with your home computer, sickness and health problems, family emergencies, overwhelming assignments from other classes, the need to help your friends, demands from romance, your learning style based on self-guidance, just being forgetful or disorganized, and so on. I expect you to consider seriously your commitment to the class and do your best to meet the class requirements. However, I believe that meeting class requirements may not always be possible. I, your instructor, respect your judgment and decision making, even if I, your instructor, may disagree with it. 

One the other hand, imagine flying to California and experiencing rather difficult weather conditions. Imagine that your pilot tells you via intercom, "Sorry, I do not know what do in this weather condition because I missed the class on that day due to a very good excuse - I was sick.” Would you, her passenger, accept this excuse? I doubt it. Probably, you would yell to the pilot, "I don't care if you have good excuses but you must have learned all what you supposed to learn in your pilot school!” We think that this is even truer for us teachers! We all, as professional teachers, have a responsibility to our future students, their parents, and the general public to learn what we are supposed to learn to become good teachers despite all of our good excuses. No? Also, hopefully you may have intrinsic interest in learning about education, about becoming a good teacher, and about issues of diversity. 

When you violate the class requirements, you often put some stress on our class community and compromise your own learning since our class learning is very experiential and discussion-based. So, I expect you to do some community work and compensation learning in exchange for us accepting your violation of the class requirements, as a way of dealing with the stress this violation causes ("exchange of favors”). Finally, the university also expects you to compensate your absence even when it is excused, "students are fully responsible for all material presented during their absence, and faculty are encouraged to provide opportunities, when feasible, for students to make up examinations and other work missed because of an excused absence" http://facultyhandbook.udel.edu/handbook/3113-

12

student-class-attendance-and-excused-absences. The purpose of the compensation is to help you and your classmate learning something important and meaningful for you. It is NOT a busywork or punishment by learning.

Below is what I, your instructor, expect for you to do if and when you violate the class requirements. By fulfilling these expectations, you will be able to reinstate your good standing in the class (i.e., meet the requirements for an "A" in this class). 

To keep you engaged with the class and keep them relevant to the class discussion, all compensations have to be done within TWO weeks of the missed/late requirement (the web system will not allow you to do them later). 

Attendance. I welcome and encourage you to come for each class meeting. If you missed a class meeting because of special circumstances or your desire, you should: 

1)      Please inform me via email about that in advance if possible as I plan learning activities and discussion with you in mind; 

2)      Within 2 weeks of your absence, submit a learning compensation to the Webtalk by following the link on your Participation Report (you will see blinking icon there and then see the “Compensation” link in the right top corner). Please add an informative title of the subject of your compensation posting. An additional goal of this compensation posting is to spark a fruitful discussion among your peers.   

Guidelines for the attendance learning compensation posting: 

a)      Please select:

                           I.          the topic that you missed and listen to our class discussion via "Audio recordings of class meetings" (on the Home page) OR 

                         II.          any NEW topic that you did not study yet from the Class Curriculum Map (on the Home page) OR

                        III.          develop your own new topic that is not on the Class Curriculum Map

b)      Define what is controversial and problematic in this topic and why (you may also bring description of concrete cases exemplifying these issues); 

c)      Search on the Internet videos, articles, polls, advocacies, -- you can also interview diverse people -- to find out diverse approaches to addressing these controversies and problems; 

d)      Find our PROs and CONs of these approaches; 

e)      Search on the Internet for facts that proves or undermines these approaches; 

f)       Develop your own provisional position and opinion on these controversies and problems and explain what attracts you to this position and not to its alternatives; 

13

g)      (Optional) Raise more questions about this topic that you may want to explore in the future. 

Postings on the WebTalk. If for some reason you did less than one posting for a class meeting, you will have to make it up by doing the missed posting plus an extra one posting for each one you missed within 2 weeks. Try not to procrastinate with making up and compensating web postings, because you will create more stress on yourself and make your participation in the class less meaningful and effective. Do not steal education from yourself, please! Also, your classmates and I are waiting for your important input. Be a sport - post on time  ! Please try to make informative and attractive subject of your posting. 

Self-Studies. In addition to your late Self-Study (you should post your required Self-Study), you should summarize (wrap up) the posted papers of the other students (common threads, controversial points, disagreements, interesting examples in their writing) for the late Self-Study on the webtalk within 2 weeks after your late Self-Study in addition to your required minimum web postings.  Submit a Self-Study learning compensation to the Webtalk by following the link on your Participation Report (you will see blinking icon there). 

Finally, there are four notes: 

If the violation of requirements occurs because of technical problems with the web, I'll make adjustments in the requirements. However, please, make efforts to inform me about any problem and send me your assignment on time via another channel (e.g., email, paper). 

It may be beneficial to inform me about your special circumstances and expected/occurred violations of class requirements as early as possible via email or a phone call. 

Your special circumstances may be of such scope that the class requirements may not work for you and may not be beneficial for your learning. If you feel that it may be the case, please, contact me for an adjustment of requirements as soon as possible via email or phone call. However, occasionally if so many requirements are missed, that the course cannot be sufficiently counted towards the student's professional portfolio, it must be retaken. 

The policy may be amended with emerging new concerns and problems in our class community. Please, check this page when you have a question or a concern and then contact us if you can't find the answer. 

Grievances, concerns, feedback, and suggestions for class improvement

            There are several venues to raise issues and concerns and share your grievances and suggestions about the class with the instructor privately or with the entire class:

a)      Write your feedback on the class Anonymous Feedback forum;

b)      Write on the Mind Attendance forum during the class meeting;

c)      Emailing to the instructor;

d)      Posting on the class Webtalk;

e)      Adding the item to the class agenda on the particular day;

14

f)       Raise the issue on the Mid-term Class Town Meeting;

g)      Raise your hand during the class and share the issue;

h)      Discuss an issue in your small group during the class;

i)       Discuss an issue with your classmates after the class;

j)       Provide your feedback on the class on the official class online evaluation at the end of the class;

k)      Provide your feedback on the class on the exit survey after the class is over;

l)       Contact Elizabeth Farley-Ripple, SOE Associate Director for undergraduate education: enfr@udel.edu 

When you experience a problem with the class, it is VERY helpful if you try to generate your solution with its justification. I welcome and appreciate your help, feedback, concerns, and suggestions.

Exit survey

For improvement my own teaching I will ask you to fill out a short ANONYMOUS survey on your learning and experiences in the class based on your own judgment. The survey is NOT mandatory for you but I'd appreciate you do it. It does not affect your grade in any way. 

Authorship-respected summative assessment (final grade)

Problem: I believe that grading interferes with students' learning because it makes making mistakes unsafe. It disrupts trust between the teacher and the student. It forces the student to conform to and please the teacher. It unavoidably transforms the teacher’s feedback into blackmail, “either you do what I told you to do or you get a poor grade: my way or highway!” It robs the students from their authorship and authority for their projects and learning. It robs students form self-evaluation and making judgment about quality of their and other people’s work. It imposes the teacher’s feedback on the student, whether the student wants and needs this feedback or not. It makes the teacher dictatorial. It finalizes knowledge and guidance which are never completely known. It kills learning and undermines guidance. How can student’s unique and emerging voices and ideas be graded and sorted on a scale?!

At the same time, summative assessment forces a student to engage in arguably important learning experiences and exposes the student to feedback of others (e.g., the instructor). So, how can these important positive aspects of summative assessment be preserved while negative eliminated or, at least, minimized?

My current philosophy of summative assessment: I see my main goal is to help your own self-promoted learning, your emerging professional voice, making your own judgment about quality of projects, and your authorship. Unless you are a full-blown self-guided learner (and not just a student who wants to please the teacher to get credentials, or living in survival mode, or a slacker, or a by-passer, and so), at times I have to force you to engage in important learning

15

activities: I cannot help you, if you do not engage in learning. At the same time, I believe that it is not my business, as your teacher, to sort you in any way (e.g., good vs. bad student, promising vs. non-promising educator) -- summative assessment. I think that summative assessment (grading) makes learning unsafe and, thus, interfere with your learning and my guidance. My goal is to mediate the negative effects of grading (summative assessment) and respect your ownership and authorship for your own projects and education as much as possible. I need your help for that.

My current solution: First of all, by walking into the door of our classroom on the first day of the class, you already have an "A” (i.e., grading type based on "presumption of the student goodness”).  I expect all students who conform to or negotiate the preset and emerging class regime will maintain this "A.”  This involves the timely fulfilling of all the requirements (i.e., class participation, active working in small groups, Self-Studies, participation on the class web, active and responsible involvement in the group projects, and the main learning project) and having ownership for your own learning.  I am here to help you to meet your learning needs so negotiation and modification of the class regime are welcome. The grades below an "A” will be decided on an individual basis.  If you are ever concerned about your grade or progress, please speak with us.  Every day you will receive a Participation Report with a provisional grade reflecting your stand in the class with the regard to its requirements.  In this report, I will let you know if your work falls below an "A” and how you can improve the final grade.  I want to put you in control of your final grade as much as possible but without your efforts and initiatives it can be a lost cause. There are no limits on the number of As and other grades. You are NOT in competition for grades with each other. Significantly exceeding minimal requirements gives extra credit. 

The second part of your final grade, in addition to the Participation Report, will be based on evaluation of the quality of your Main Learning Project (MLP). There will be two or three evaluations of your MLP: your own internal self-evaluation and external evaluation. The external evaluation can be done either: 1) by the instructor only, 2) by peers only, or 3) by peers and instructor – whoever you trust more and find more useful for you. In a case of a discrepancy, between your self-grading and peers/instructor’s grading, you have a right to select your MLP grade on the range, defined by the grading score discrepancy (i.e., anywhere on the range between max and min grade scores). This will protect you from a need to conform to your evaluators’ feedback and grading judgments, while giving you an opportunity to receive their honest feedback. Also, your potential disagreements with me or with your peer evaluators about your ideas or a direction of your project won’t hurt your grade. This approach to summative assessment respects your authorship and recognizes you as the final agency for your own learning.

The final grade will be based on fulfillment of all required assignments (i.e., the required number of web postings, reading essays, preparations of the teaching activities, mini-projects, class attendance) AND the quality of your main learning project. Substantial exceeding of my requirements and expectations (e.g., more than 5 web posting per course, up to 3 additional points maximum) will provide extra credit. There is no final exam. 

Class Requirements Credit points Extra credit points and demerits

16

Weekly web postings (2 min per week, 13 weeks)

26pt 1 pt per extra 5 postings; 3pt max

Weekly mini-projects (13) 26pt n/aAttendance, coming in class on time, active participation in class, and group work, readings, submitting work on time

18pt 5 points demerits

Final project 30pt Max 3pt on discretion of the instructor

Total: 100pt  

 

Grade-point distribution

A             >98                       B             83-87                    C             68-72                    D            55-57

A-           93-97                    B-           78-82                    C-           63-67                    D-           50-54

B+          88-92                    C+          73-77                    D+          58-62                    F             <50

 

17

Curriculum Map: Propose Topic of Your Interest to Study for our NEXT Class

Propose a topic to study

View ALL Proposed Topics for the Next Class Unselect your proposed topic

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

1. Orientation to the class curriculum and pedagogical regime

Introduction to the course. Why are you taking this class? What do you want to learn? What is “qualitative” research? What research is not “qualitative”? Does “non-qualitative” research exist? Diverse answers to these questions. Challenges of “methods” class: “how” before “why”: your macro (long-term research commitment), mini (a few week self-assigned research for this class), and/or micro (a project during a class meeting) research during this semester. Sociological view of our class: who you are and who am I? Am I a “student,” or a “learner,” or both, or neither? How do you want to be treated in the class: as a “student” or as a “learner” or both? What does it mean in practical terms? Our roles in the class mediated by syllabus. Diverse type of syllabus: Closed Syllabi, Opening Syllabi, Open Syllabi. What should type of syllabus be in our class? Curriculum as content (stuff to study) vs. vista (diverse perspectives on the societal practices and institutions of education). Giving table of context of textbooks and conventional syllabus curricula. Virtual people in the practice. What type of learning activities do we want in our class? Class web (do we need it). What is our next topic?

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

2. What are qualitative methods?

Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity -- one's own. Educational Researcher, 17(7), 17-21.

Weber, M. (1997). Objectivity in the social sciences and social policy (pp. 24-37). In Dallmayr, Fred Reinhard, and Thomas A. McCarthy (eds.) Understanding and social inquiry. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

Geertz, C. (2006). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture (Ch.1, pp. 3-30). In The interpretation of cultures, selected essays. New York: Basic books.

Clark, T. (2010). On ‘being researched’: Why do people engage with qualitative research? Qualitative Research 10(4), 399-419. doi: 10.1177/1468794110366796

Anfara, V. A., & Mertz, N. T. (2006). Introduction. (pp. xiii-xxxii). Theoretical frameworks in qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA:

18

SAGE Publications.

Dey, I. (1993). What is qualitative data? What is qualitative analysis (chs. 2-3, pp. 10-48). In Qualitative data analysis: A user-friendly guide for social scientists. London: New York Routledge. 

Propose this topic

3. Deconstruction analysis

Boje, D. M. (2001). Deconstruction analysis (pp. 18-34). In Narrative methods for organizational and communication research. London: SAGE.

Propose this topic

4. Grand narrative analysis

Boje, D. M. (2001). Grand narrative analysis (pp. 35-44). In Narrative methods for organizational and communication research. London: SAGE.

Propose this topic

5. Microstoria analysis

Boje, D. M. (2001). Microstoria analysis (pp. 45-61). In Narrative methods for organizational and communication research. London: SAGE.

Propose this topic

6. Story network analysis

Boje, D. M. (2001). Story network analysis (pp. 62-73). In Narrative methods for organizational and communication research. London: SAGE.

This topic was

proposed

7. Discourse analysis

Gee, J. P. (2005). Discourse model. Discourse analysis. Sample. (Chs. 6,7,9; pp. 71-117, 137-152). In An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. London: Routledge.

Unselect this topic

Propose this topic

8. Heterodiscoursia analysis

Matusov, E. (2011). Irreconcilable differences in Vygotsky’s and Bakhtin’s approaches to the social and the individual: An educational perspective. Culture & Psychology, 17(1), 99-119.

Boje, D. M. (2001). Intertextuality analysis (pp. 74-92). In Narrative methods for organizational and communication research. London: SAGE.

Propose this topic

9. Dialogic analysis

Sullivan, P. (2011). Dialogic analysis (Ch. 1-3, pp. 1-63). In Qualitative data analysis using a dialogical approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Matusov, E. (2009). Dialogicity and monologicity of Socratic pedagogical dialogues (ch. 2, pp. 13-46). In Journey into dialogic pedagogy.

19

Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.

Propose this topic

10. Causality analysis

Boje, D. M. (2001). Causality analysis (pp. 93-107). In Narrative methods for organizational and communication research. London: SAGE.

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

11. Theme analysis

Boje, D. M. (2001). Theme analysis (pp. 108-137). In Narrative methods for organizational and communication research. London: SAGE.

Propose this topic

12. Narrative analysis

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Narrative analysis (pp. 53-57, 86-88, 159-159, 183-187, 225-226, 251-264). In Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

13. Phenomenological analysis

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Phenomenological analysis (pp. 57-62, 88-90, 159-160, 187-189, 226-227, 265-284). In Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

14. Grounded theory analysis

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Grounded theory analysis (pp. 62-68, 90-91, 160-161, 189-192, 227-228, 285-308). In Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. (select a chapter for your reading).

Clarke, A. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. (select a chapter for your reading).

Propose this topic

15. Ethnographic analysis

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Ethnographic analysis (pp. 68-73, 91-92, 161-163, 192-195, 228-230, 309-336). In Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Burawoy, M. (1991). Teaching participant observation (pp. 291-300). In Ethnography unbound: Power and resistance in the modern

20

metropolis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. (djvu format)

Propose this topic

16. Duoethnography

Sawyer, R. D., & Norris, J. (2013). Duoethnography. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sawyer, R. D., & Norris, J. (2015). Duoethnography: A retrospective 10 years after. International Review of Qualitative Research, 8(1), 1-4.

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

17. Case study analysis

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Case study analysis (pp. 73-76, 92-93, 163-164, 195-197, 225-225, 337-355). In Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Ragin, C. C., (1992). Introduction: Cases of “What is case?” (pp. 1-17). In Ragin, C. C., & Becker, H. S. (eds). What is a case?: Exploring the foundations of social inquiry. New York: Cambridge University Press (djvu format)

Gerring, J. (2007). What is case study?: The problem of definition (pp. 17-36). In Case study research: Principles and practices. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Burawoy, M. (1991). The extended case method (pp. 271-290). In Ethnography unbound: Power and resistance in the modern metropolis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press (djvu format).

Propose this topic

18. Ethnostatistics and ontological storytelling

Boje, D. M. (2012). Ethnostatistics and ontological storytelling. http://peaceaware.com/ethnostatistics/index.htm

Gephart, R. P. (1988). Ethnostatistics: Qualitative foundations for quantitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Savall, H., & Zardet, V. (2011). The qualimetrics approach: Observing the complex object. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub.

Propose this topic

19. Pragmatic storytelling research methods

Boje, D. M. (2014). Critical, ontological, post-positivist, epistemic, S5-research, paradigmatic storytelling methodology (chps. 15-18, pp. 262-343). In Storytelling organizational practices: Managing in the quantum age. London: Routledge.

21

Propose this topic

20. Autoethnography method

Boje, D. M. (2014, in press). Autoethnography method: Dinner with Zygmunt Bauman (chp. 19-20, pp. 344-354). In Storytelling organizational practices: Managing in the quantum age. London: Routledge.

Holman Jones, S. (2005). Autoethnography: Making the personal political (pp. 763-792). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Davis, C. S., and Ellis, C. (2008). Autoethnographic introspection in ethnographic fiction: A method of inquiry (pp. 99-117). In Liamputtong, P., & Rumbold, J. (eds). Knowing differently: Arts-based and collaborative research methods. New York: Nova Publishers.

Tidwell, D. L., Heston, M. L., & Fitzgerald, L. M. (2009). Research methods for the self-study of practice. Dordrecht: Springer. (read any 2 chapters of your choice).

Propose this topic

21. Foulcault's methodologies: Archaeology and genealogy

Scheurich, J. J., and Bell McKenzie, K. (2005). Foulcault's  methodologies: Archaeology and genealogy (pp. 841-868). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Fendler, L. (1998). What is it impossible to think? A genealogy of the educated subject. In T. S. Popkewitz & M. Brennan (Eds.), Foucault's challenge: Discourse, knowledge, and power in education (pp. 39-63). New York: Teachers College Press.

Matusov, E., & Smith, M. P. (2012). The middle-class nature of identity and its implications for education: A genealogical analysis. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 46(3), 274–295.

Propose this topic

22. Arts-based research inquiry

Finley, S. (2005). Art-based inquiry: Performing revolutionary pedagogy (pp. 681-694). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Liamputtong, P., & Rumbold, J. (2008). Knowing differently: Arts-based and collaborative research methods. New York: Nova Publishers. (read a few chapters of your interest)

22

Propose this topic

23. Fictional qualitative methods

Wolf, M. (1992). Chs. 1-3, (pp. 1-84). A thrice-told tale: Feminism, postmodernism, and ethnographic responsibility. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Kilbourn, B. (1999). Fictional theses. Educational Researcher, 28(9), 27-32.

Oatley, K. (1999). Why fiction may be twice as true as fact: Fiction as cognitive and emotional simulation. Review of General Psychology, 3(2), 101-117.

Propose this topic

24. Observational ethnography

Angrosino, M. (2005). Recontextualizing observation: Ethnography, pedagogy, and the prospects for a progressive political agenda (pp. 729-746). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Harper, D. (2005). What's new visually? (pp. 747-762). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

25. Participatory action research

McIntyre, A. (2008). Participatory action research. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (2006). Education research in the public interest: Social justice, action, and policy. New York: Teachers College Press. (read any 2 chapters).

This topic was

proposed

26. Child-centered research methods

Clark, C. D. (2011). Valuing young voices. Child-centered inquiry. Observation and participant observation. (chs. 1, 2, 3; pp 3-67). In In a younger voice: Doing child-centered qualitative research. New York: Oxford University Press.

Unselect this topic

Propose this topic

27. Visual photo methodology

Becker, H. (1998). Categories and comparisons: How we find meaning in photographs. Visual Anthropology Review, 14 (2), 3-10.

Bourdieu, P., and Bourdieu, M-C. (2004). The peasant and photography. Ethnography, 5(4): 601-616.

Knoblauch, H., Baer, A., Laurier, E., Petschke, S., & Schnettler, B. (2008). Visual analysis. New developments in the interpretative analysis of

23

video and photography. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(3). Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1170/2587

Propose this topic

28. Video recorded data analysis

Jacobs, J. K., Kawanaka, T., & Stigler, J. W. (1999). Integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches to the analysis of video data on classroom teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(8), 717-724.

Ratcliff, D. (2003). Video methods in qualitative research (pp. 113-129). In P. M. Camic, J. E. Rhodes & L. Yardley (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives in methodology and design. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Knoblauch, H., Baer, A., Laurier, E., Petschke, S., & Schnettler, B. (2008). Visual analysis. New developments in the interpretative analysis of video and photography. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(3), 1-14.

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

29. Qualitative research of electronic data

Eun-Ok, I., and Wonshik, C. (2006). An online forum as a qualitative research method: Practical issues. Nursing Research; 55(4): 267–273; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2491331/

Greenhow, C. (2011). Research methods unique to digital contexts: An introduction to virtual ethnography. In M. Mallette & N. Duke (Eds.), Literacy Research Methodologies (2nd Ed.), (pp. 50-86).  New York, Guilford Press.

Karchmer, R. A. (2001). The journey ahead: Thirteen teachers report how the Internet influence literacy and literacy instruction in their K-12 classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly,36, 442-466.

Kinzer, C. K., Turkay, S., Hoffman, D. L., Gunbas, N., Chantes, P., Chaiwinij, A., & Dvorkin, T. (2012). Examining the effects of text and images on story comprehension: An eye-tracking study of reading in a video game and comic book.  Literacy Research Association Yearbook, 61, 259-275.

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

30. NVIVO: Computer use in qualitative data analysis

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Computer use in qualitative data analysis (pp. 164-177). In  Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five

24

approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Download NVIVO11 (PRO or Plus) free 14-day trail version: http://www.qsrinternational.com/products_nvivo_free-trial-software.aspx

NVivo11-Getting-Started-Guide

NVivo10 Reference Guide

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

31. Unit of analysis

Matusov, E. (2007). In search of the “appropriate” unit of analysis. Culture & Psychology, 13(3), 307-333.

This topic was

proposed

32. Coding qualitative data

Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. (read ch 1, pp 1-30, and one more chapter of your choice).

Unselect this topic

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

33. Validity issues of qualitative methods

Seale, C. (1999). Quality in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 5(4), 465-478.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Standards of validation and evaluation (pp. 201-222). In Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Bloor, M. (1997). Techniques of validation in qualitative research: A critical commentary (pp. 37-50). In G. Miller & R. Dingwall (Eds.), Context and method in qualitative research. London: Sage.

Whittemore, R., Chase, S. K., & Mandle, C. L. (2001). Validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 11(4), 522-537. doi: 10.1177/104973201129119299

Freeman, M., Marrais, K. d., Preissle, J., Roulston, K., & Pierre, E. A. S. (2007). Standards of evidence in qualitative research: An incitement to discourse. Educational Researcher, 36(1), 25-32.

Koro-Ljungberg, M., Yendol-Hoppey, D., Smith, J. J., & Hayes, S. B. (2009). (E)pistemological awareness, instantiation of methods, and uninformed methodological ambiguity in qualitative research reports. Educational Researcher, 38(9), 687-699.

25

This topic was

proposed

34. Writing research report

Denzin, N. K., (2005). Emancipatory discourses and the ethics of political interpretation (pp. 933-958). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Richardson, L. & Adams St. Pierre, E. (2005). Writing: A method of inquiry (pp. 959-978). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Brady, I. (2005). Poetics for a planet: Discourse on the same problem of being-in-place (pp. 979-1026). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Stewart, K. (2005). Cultural poesis: The generativity of emergent things (pp. 1027-1042). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Unselect this topic

This topic was

proposed

35. Writing qualitative dissertation

Bloomberg, L. D., & Volpe, M. (2012). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A road map from beginning to end (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. (select one chapter)

Knopp Biklen, S., & Casella, R. (2007). A practical guide to the qualitative dissertation. New York: Teachers College Press. (select one chapter)

Meloy, J. M. (2002). Writing the qualitative dissertation: Understanding by doing (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (select one chapter)

Unselect this topic

Propose this topic

36. Diverse types of presentation of qualitative research

Parker, I. (2001, May 28). Absolute PowerPoint: Can a software package edit our thoughts? The New Yorker, 1-7.

Anderson, C. (2010). Presenting and evaluating qualitative research. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 74(8), 1-7.

Giaever, B. (2013, March). Scared is scared: Storymaking by 6-year old boy. http://vimeo.com/58659769

Propose this

37. Philosophical, paradigm, and interpretive frameworks of qualitative research

26

topic

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Philosophical, paradigm, and interpretive frameworks (pp. 15-34). In Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Guba, E. G., and Lincoln, Y. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluence, (pp. 183-216). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Gallagher, K. (2008). The methodological dilemma: Creative, critical, and collaborative approaches to qualitative research. London: Routledge. (pick up a chapter to read).

Propose this topic

38. Qualitative-quantitative wars and debates

Hammersley, M. (2002). The relationship between qualitative and quantitative research: Paradigm loyalty versus methodological eclecticism (pp. 159–174). In: Richardson, John T. E. (ed.) Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for Psychology and the Social Sciences. Oxford: BPS Blackwell.

Sale, J. E. M., Lohfeld, L. H., & Brazil, K. (2002). Revisiting the quantitative-qualitative debate: Implications for mixed-methods research. Quality and Quantity, 36(1), 43-53.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2005). Taking the “Q” out of research: Teaching research methodology courses without the divide between quantitative and qualitative paradigms. Quality and Quantity, 39(3), 267-295.

Propose this topic

39. Qualitative research and politics

Smith, J. K. and Hodkinson, P. (2005). Relativism, criteria, and politics (pp. 915-932). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Harnett, S. J. and Engels, J. (2005). “Aria in time of war”: Investigative poetry and the politics of witnessing (pp. 1043-1068). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

House, E. (2005). Qualitative evaluation and changing social policy (pp. 1069-1082). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.40. Ethics and politics in qualitative research: Neocolonialism

27

Propose this topic

Bishop, R. (2005). Freeing ourselves from neocolonial domination in research: A Kaupapa-Mauri approach to creating knowledge (pp. 109-138). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Christians, C. (2005). Ethics and politics in qualitative research (pp. 139-164). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Propose this topic

41. Institutional conservatism and qualitative research

Lincoln, Y. (2005). Institutional Review Boards and methodological conservatism: The challenge to and from phenomenological paradigms (pp. 165-182). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Schrag, Z. M. (2010). Ethical imperialism: Institutional review boards and the social sciences, 1965-2009. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

This topic was

proposed

42. Critical qualitative research

Ladson-Billings, G., and Donnor, J. (2005). The moral activist role of critical race theory scholarship (pp. 279-302). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Kincheloe, J. L., and McLaren, P. (2005). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research (pp. 303-342). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Plummer, K. (2005). Critical humanism and queer theory: Living with the tensions (pp. 357-374). In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Unselect this topic

Propose this topic

43. Argument for antimethodology in the humanitarian sciences: Authorial research mastery

Jagodzinski, J., & Wallin, J. J. (2013). Distributing the sensible. And so it goes on (Ch, 5, pp. 159-195). In Arts-based research a critique and a proposal. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Toward a methodology for the humanitarian sciences

28

(pp. 159-172). In Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Matusov, E. (2013). Anti-methodological considerations: Research mastery (pp. 119-134). In E. Matusov & J. Brobst (Eds.), Radical experiment in dialogic pedagogy in higher education and its centaur failure: Chronotopic analysis. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.

Propose this topic

44. Planning your mini- and/or macro-research qualitative projects

What kind of mini- and/or macro-research qualitative research project are you going to do? How and why do you choice the qualitative research topic and why? Why bother to do it? Who cares about your research questions and research findings and why? Why do you care? What exactly do you plan to do for this research and when? What difficulties do you expect and how do you plan to address them? What findings do you expect and why? How can we help you with your mini- and/or macro-research qualitative project?

Propose this topic

45. Our EDUC858 qualitative research conference

Presentation of your mini- and/or macro- qualitative research projects: work in progress, sharing your research challenges and asking for help, sharing your research achievements, practicing conference and/or job presentations. What are your most interesting findings so far? Why are these findings interesting for you? What are educational and conceptual consequences of the findings? What difficulties have you faced in this mini-research and how did you try to address them? What new research projects can emerge from our project? What did you learn from this qualitative mini-research? What questions do you have for us?.

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

46. Mid-term town meeting

One type of diversity is pedagogical diversity of how to run a class. There have been 3 major types of running a class: a) Closed Syllabus, when all pedagogical decisions are made unilaterally by the teacher (e.g., a traditional classroom), b) Open Syllabus, when all pedagogical decisions are made by the teacher and students together, and c) Opening Syllabus, when some pedagogical are made unilaterally by the teacher but some (e.g., curriculum -- what to study) are done in collaboration with the students (e.g., this is how this class is run so far). Since our class is experiential, on this mid-term class "town meeting”, we may consider if we want to try Open Syllabus or return back to Closed Syllabus, or transform our Opening Syllabus class to make our education more meaningful for all of us (but what if different students in our class may need different type of class?).

This topic was studied but it can be

47. Main Learning Project workshop

Working on your Main Learning Project in class

29

re-proposed

Propose this topic

Spring break

No class :-( Enjoy the spring sun... :-D

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

48. Designing and conducting interviews

Mears, C. L. (2009). Interviewing for education and social science research (ch.6,7). NY: Palgrave/Macmillan.

Weiss, R. (1994), Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies. (epub format) Free Press.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.) (chs. 6-7). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.    

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

49. Different research designs to make rigorous empirical analysis

How does the research question shape the research format and design? What are various types research design? How do I decide the right research design for my project? 

 * I know it seems pretty clear when we conduct interviews or do field work. But what if we are writing a paper using secondary source analysis? I want to have a sense of a format to follow in order to have a structured research. 

This topic was studied but it can be re-proposed

51. Presentation of my qualitative research in-progress: Asking for help, feedback, and advice

I, your peer, want to present my own qualitative research in-progress in order to ask for your help, feedback and advice. Also, I want actively involve you in qualitative method decision making using my research. We can read qualitative research literature relevant to my research method's problems, challenges, and dilemmas.

Propose this topic

52. Research Workshop

The classroom will transform into a buzzing beehive of scholarly exchange and productivity during Research Workshop! This is a time for students to work individually or in small groups to get input about their research. Students can come prepared to work on their own research, seeking perspectives from other students and the professor; or students can use this

30

time to offer their expertise to a fellow classmate who may want feedback on

a project.

Propose this topic

53. Eugene picks!

Eugene should select his choice for our next topic and provide his reasons why.

31