Session+1


 * LINK TO EDF689 SESSION 1 **
 * Activity 1 **

Research Scavenger Hunt


 * Activity 2 **

Fifty one (51) teachers at our school were surveyed to determine their favorite pastimes. The survey also enquired their job function as well as their mood and personality trait at the time of taking the survey.


 * __Teacher Pastime Survey with Results__**
 * ** Role ** || ** % surveyed ** || ** Mood ** || ** % surveyed ** || ** Personality ** || ** % surveyed ** ||
 * Snr. Management || 20 || Wicked || 5 || Aggressive || 6 ||
 * Middle Mgt. || 16 || Hungry || 20 || Ambitious || 29 ||
 * Librarian || 14 || Zestful || 40 || Competitive || 40 ||
 * Aspiring Mgt. EDF689 || 21 || Calm || 25 || Harmonious || 5 ||
 * Teacher || 29 ||  || 10 || Meek || 20 ||



Teachers were unanimous in selecting “OTHER” as their favorite pastime activity (63%). We concluded therefore that teachers at our school are often engaged in “OTHER” activities.
 * __Summary__**

Curious to capture the nature of these OTHER activities, a further investigation was initiated. Interviews were conducted from within a small targeted group of staff from the 32 “OTHER” respondents carefully selected to maintain an equal balance between primary and senior school. It became apparent that “OTHER” was highly diverse in nature and included activities that ranged from Darts, Scrabble and Hottest Chili cook-outs to Soccer, Volleyball and Cricket. No single activity stood out as a clear favorite. During acute and careful observation (Listening mainly), stress levels in interviewee appeared to rise whenever the other section of the school was mentioned. Primary interviewees used terms (through gritted teeth) like ‘cheats’ to describe senior school staff while senior school staff used terms like ‘feeble wimps’ to describe their primary colleagues. (See appendix for full list of colorful terms). A pattern emerged that pointed to the competitive nature of our staff (40%). Evidently the answer lay right under our noses all the time. The most popular activity at our school is the end of week Thursday afternoon competition between Primary and Secondary staff. In its third year the competition has become a tradition, a bitterly fought battle that lasts the duration of one academic year. The competitive nature of the activity we unearthed as a favorite pastime is consistent with and accounts for some of the apparently spurious data that we observed such as the 6% who liked eating grubs.
 * __Mean Data Sample__**


 * __Outliers – Data that did not meet expectations.__**
 * Initially we were tempted to remove and ignore the data relating to seal culling since it did not fit into our view of the world but agreed that this was not good or ethical scientific practice. On closer examination it became evident that an interesting tight correlation may exist. The ramifications of this revelation we decided was huge and would warrant urgent investigation if indeed the meek (20%), Senior Management (20%), Hungry (20%) and Seal culling (20%) do indeed correlate strongly. When the meek (Ref: Mathew 5.5) do eventually inherit the earth, what hope is there for the fur seal population? The data is not sufficient here to draw any concrete conclusions but further research is strongly recommended.
 * Scuba Diving the Mariana trench was identified as a favorite activity by 4% of respondents. This may well account in part to the small turnover in staff at our school.

Flamenco dancing on stilts drew no respondents from which we can conclude that our colleagues are not stupid.
 * __Zero respondent data.__**

Postage stamps did not exist before 1680 leading to the conclusion that some (4%) of teacher feedback is inaccurate, false or down-right lies. From this we estimate Data Uncertainty = +/- 4% in our measurements.
 * __Estimating Uncertainties: “False Response Data.”__**


 * Activity 3 **



Students enter in grade level classes. They queue up in an orderly fashion and select their lunches based on a hot and cold selection. They then move to the seating area. Distinct tables of students form. 1) The same gender sit together- boys with boys, girls with girls 2) Nationalities sit together- the local national students sit together 3) All other Arab students sit together- Palestinians, Egyptians, Jordanians 4) All expatriate students sit together whatever their nationality may be- Indian, British, American There is cross chat between the tables but only between the same gender groups and between the local national students. Most of the cross-chat was to do with football. The other groups of students just communicate between themselves at the tables. Once the whistle blows to line up to go and play the students mix together to line up in their classes.


 * Activity 4 **
 * __Background__**
 * Twenty three graduate and undergraduate students studying Physics online with the Open University (UK) were surveyed. The focus of the survey was to determine the extent of anxiety they experienced or perceived they would experience when conducting their research in terms of (i) Use of Statistics (ii) Data Manipulation and Interpretation (iii) Computer Literacy and (iv) Time. Gender was not considered in this survey.**
 * __Graduate Anxiety Survey Questions with Results__**


 * [[image:Session_1_-_Task_4_stats_pie.jpg]] ||
 * Q1: Statistics:** To what extent does the use of statistics make you anxious in your research?
 * 1) Not at all: I am highly numerate or have studied math and stats to an adequate level.** (4 respondents) 17% **
 * 2) Somewhat: I am confident that I can learn to use statistics. ** (9 respondents) 39% **
 * 3) Quite a-lot: Using statistics is a surmountable source of confusion and anxiety** (8 respondents) 35% **
 * 4) Huge: Using statistics is an enormous source of anxiety for me in my research that poses a potential failure point. ** (2 respondents) 9% **

2. Somewhat: I am keeping an open mind but I am confident that I will identify findings that I can clearly articulate one way or another.** (12 respondents) 52% ** 3. Quite a-lot: My focus has breadth and I am anxious that I may miss some critical information.** (5 respondents) 22% ** 4. Huge: My focus is open-ended and vague. I feel like I am looking for something sharp on a farm that I hope to recognise when I see it.** (3 respondents) 13% **
 * Q2: Data manipulation and interpretation:** To what extent does misinterpreting your findings make you anxious?
 * 1) Not at all: I am confident and focused - I know what I'm looking for, and where when and how to go about getting it.** (3respondents) 13% **


 * Q3: Computer Literacy:** To what extent does the use of technology make you anxious

1. Not at all: I am very comfortable with all aspects of technology including the resolution of problems and learning new skills, independently, online or in a class setting while conducting research. 2. Somewhat: I am confident in most of technology and able to work and communicate with technology while researching online and in a class setting. 3. Quite a-lot: I depend heavily on technology for my research and become anxious when I lose access to the network or data during my research. Huge: I seem to spend more time seeking help with technology that I do researching.
 * (7respondents) 30% **
 * (11 respondents) 48% **
 * (2 respondents) 9% **
 * (3 respondents) 13% **

Not at all ** (5 respondents) 22% ** Somewhat ** (9 respondents) 39% ** Quite a-lot ** (5 respondents) 22% ** Huge ** (4 respondents) 17% **
 * Q4: Time:** To what extent are the demands on your time a source of anxiety during research?

As expected the Physics students were not hugely fazed by statistics (17% not at all) and a large proportion (74%) felt confident that they would learn to use statistics or overcome the hurdles statistics posed when they arose. Only 9% considered statistics to be a potential point of failure and is consistent with dropout rates for this discipline.
 * __Summary__**

[] (Higher Education Statistics Agency – UK) 35% of all students believe their focus is broad. Of those 13% think their focus is so broad that they are anxious to the extent that nailing down a significant conclusion will be difficult. 65% of students who indicated a more defined focus indicated less anxiety. A high proportion (78%) of respondents suggested that computer literacy posed little anxiety. This correlates strongly with the on-line virtual environment in which Open University study is delivered and conducted. Many of the students (unknown precisely) have a high degree of on-line and distance learning experience having completed a selection of courses at various levels online. Surprisingly, only 39% of students indicated time as a limiting factor in levels of anxiety during graduate study. This reading warrants further investigation and is potentially spurious. As an Open University student myself, I am aware of the high proportion of students that balance their study with full time employment.

Anxiety is indirectly proportional to levels of numeracy (N). Anxiety diminishes with higher ability levels of mathematical and statistical ability. A clear and central focus reduces anxiety in graduate research. Anxiety is directly proportional to the breadth of focus.(F) Computer Literacy and familiarity with learning management systems such as Moodle are indirectly proportional to anxiety levels in graduate research students. Anxiety diminishes with greater degrees of computer literacy. (C) Time does not impact on levels of anxiety as expected. Further study is required to confirm this aspect of the research since our knowledge that the majority of Open University students are mature, have families and hold permanent positions of employment.
 * __Conclusions__**

Anxiety index = F/NC

Several raisins were dropped into a glass of seven-up carbonated soft drink. The raisins initially dropped to the bottom of the glass then promptly rose to the surface whereupon they rolled over and began to sink once again to the bottom. A closer observation indicated that the raisins sometimes began a new ascent before hitting the bottom. As time elapsed the fizz became less active. This seemed to affect the liveliness of the jumping raisins. After several hours the raisins finally settled on the bottom of the glass. Our Hypothesis for the observations is that the rising bubbles in the seven-up attach themselves to the raisins to the extent that the up-thrust force from the bubbles exceeds that of the raisins weight in the liquid thus causing it to rise. On reaching the surface the surface the gas from the bubbles exposed escapes into the atmosphere. The turning force from the gas bubbles on the underside of the sultanas in turn cause a turning effect on the raisin such that the remaining gas escapes also. The weight of the raisin now exceeds that of the up-thrust and so the raisin sinks once again. The cycle is repeated. In our experiment to test our hypothesis we sunk a thin layer of tissue paper below the liquid line to prevent the raisins from reaching the surface and expelling the gas bubbles. What we observed was the raisins rising, gently colliding with the tissue paper and remaining there thus indicating that indeed the up-thrust was sufficient to keep the raisins afloat provided it did not ditach and escape into the atmosphere.
 * Activity 5 **

SUMMARY OF SESSION 1

**Congratulations on completing your first assignment!**

We know that the posting part was a bit confusing but a special kudos to those of you who did manage to find your section and also to those who did figure out how to post in the discussion board. For instance, Maria, Leticia, Mariana, and Lorenza from the Tampico group did post photos and graphs right in their discussion. Others of you made wonderful use of the white board for your visuals. This will get easier as the course goes on. Take a look at the white boards of the different groups and see the rich variety of visual representations of data. Bravo!!

I hope you had a good time dabbling with research ala the scavenger hunt. All groups and those few of you who worked alone were thorough in your postings and provided fine data. We will make made individual comments to those who posted within their section over the course of the next 2 days. So keep checking your posts. Below are comments about each of the items. Read them carefully as this we dig for deeper understandings that we hope you gain from the experience.

ITEM DISCUSSION

All groups really engaged in the photo research and, as good historians, made sure to triangulate data points. You came up with great answers. We like how all of you identified specific variables in the photos and sought confirmation of these ideas, I have never seen anyone look so carefully at fashion from bonnets to bustles. Good work.

The picture can be found at [].

You may have located this but all of you did a wonderful job of researching the various clues or variables available. By the way, it is the South Portico of the White House so the bikers are **facing** south. Bravo.

The second picture is actually the Easter Parade on Fifth Avenue, New York City around 1900. St. Patrick’s Cathedral is in the background. If you have never been to New York City, this would be a very difficult leap of faith to get you to the telling sources. Many of you mentioned how prior knowledge can help or deter you from your detective work.

I found many of you to be budding sociologists as you tackled the cafeteria problem. A variety of cafeteria patterns emerged. You probably approached the cafeteria using observation and then looking for patterns. By collecting your observations you are able to make some generalizations such as boys don't sit with girls. Children outside were more active than those inside. You looked at bits and pieces and then drew conclusions from the patterns you saw. This is using induction. Some of you may have noted a variety of variables by which children and adults grouped. This is an example of an ethnographic qualitative study where the researcher actually goes into the site and observes over time. The research takes place “front row center to when and where the phenomenon is happening.” The researcher looks for patterns and tries to make sense of the phenomenon. Inductive reasoning is really in play here. In fact these observations lead to uncovering patterns, which lead to developing theory. One group, for example, provided lots details and a fine analysis and critique of their observations. "We spent 30 minutes observing student behaviour at lunchtime and chatting to the students about their habits at break. Based on our observation and discussion, we can report the following findings:
 * Year 9 girls inhabit the covered area; the covered area and tennis courts are the “turf” of the year 9.
 * Year 7, 8 boys play football on the playing field
 * Year 10 girls congregate in the covered area or the fine arts building. they use the blue benches.
 * Some year 7 girls and boys hang out by the tuckshop, the girls in middle, the boys near the science lab.
 * Some IB 1 students hang out in the tuckshop corridor.
 * IB 2 students tend to occupy the common room.
 * Year 10/11 boys play sport at break, either in the covered area or on the field

Most students group together according to which year group they are in. There is a gender divide amongst the students. Most hang out with students of their own gender, though the year 9s do mix more than most. The boys are more active than the girls at break."
 * Analysis of results:  Conclusions include the following: **


 * Thoughts about the process: **  This is a kind of ethnographic study, observing participants in their natural surroundings. In order to report true findings we would have to conduct the study over a longer period of time in order to ensure that what we have observed is not just a “once-off”. We would also need to account for environmental factors and how that might affect student behaviour. ... After just 30 minutes spent at the tuckshop and its surrounds, it is clear that one would need much more time and more consistent means of data collection if one wanted to conduct good research into teenage break-time habits! The ways of knowing for this activity were personal experience. It also required (rather too much) induction.

Observations allow us to notice patterns. Many of you found similar kinds of patterns. Patterns lead you to formulate questions. Could we then suggest a theory? Qualitative research often build theory where empirical or quantitative research tests it.

Surveys are yet another type of research. In both examples you asked folks (a sample) their opinions and posted them through visual representations.

One group surveyed 20 random teachers and asked them, "What is your favorite leisure time activity? How often do you participate in this activity? How long have you been doing this activity?" They posted pie charts to show percentages. They then provided a summary paragraph describing the results. "Based on the finding the typical teacher at our school participates in outdoor activities (70%), with the majority of teachers participating in horse riding (25%). Overall, the division of teachers between the activities was quite widespread. The majority of teachers participate in their preferred leisure activity at least once a week (50%), and the majority of teachers have been participating in their activity for more than three years (70%)." In terms of anxiety about research, some of you looked at the different parts of research to determine overall anxiety levels. The most interesting fact for me is that different ones of you found males more anxious than females and others of you found females more anxious. We suspect that we should combine all your results and conduct a meta analysis of findings across studies to establish reliability and validity of findings.

Finally it is indeed interesting how the raisin and 7-up questions were interpreted. Most of you formed hypotheses to explain why the raisins bounced. You were able to design an experiment to look at the phenomenon. That was our intent. We have never realized that surface and "oilyness" of the raisins would capture your attention. Observations lead to research questions and more hypothesis testing. “Hypothesis testing” involves deductive reasoning. After forming a hypothesis the trick is to design a careful experiment to rule out alternative hypotheses. One group posted the following: How do the raisin’s react? As air bubbles formed on the surface area of the raisin the raisins were lifted up and floated. The pressure of the air created enough buoyancy to lift the raisins up. Hypothesis: This effect is caused by the carbonation in the fizzy drink that forms on the raisins which is limited by size of the raisin, so that there would be a limit to the mass of the raisin that could be lifted versus its surface area (for more bubbles to form on).

1) Carbonation causes raisins to rise and fall: Materials 2 glasses, 1 filled with tap water, 1 filled with sprite. Observe raisin ‘behaviour’ (rise/fall & height)    2) Rise/Fall action is determined by raisin size (the smaller the size the higher the rise) Materials 2 glasses filled with sprites 6 small raisins, 6 large raisins Add small raisins to one glass, large raisins to the other.
 * Experiments to test the hypothesis:  **

Results: Experiment 1 Only raisins in the carbonated drink rose and fell. Experiment 2 The large raisins did not rise, the small raisins rose about 3-4 cm on average Accidental side experiment ‘Old’ soda water was initially used in the initial experiment and the raisins did not rise, although bubbles did form on the surface. When the experiment was repeated with sprite the raisins rose and fell vigorously. There were more carbonated bubbles in the sprite and they were larger.

Conclusion: The carbon dioxide forms pockets of air that decrease the density of the raisins to less than the sprite, which causes the raisins to float. Once the bubbles of CO2 are released from the raisin the density returns to normal and since it is greater than the density of the sprite it sinks.

The more thorough and systematic we can be to rule out alternate hypotheses, the more valid our results will be. For example two students in an earlier class did with this question. They really used the scientific method as they systematically formed hypothesis and then ruled them out one by one. I included it here for your examination. Hypothesis: 1. That the raisins would sink in non-carbonated Sprite and float in carbonated Sprite. 2. That different raisins (black or blonde) may react differently due to the sugar content of the raisin, sugar content of the Sprite, or the temperature of the Sprite. To test hypothesis:


 * Beverage || Raisin type || Temperature || Carbonation || Observations during 30 mins. ||
 * Sprite || Black raisins || Cold temp. || Carbonated || Raisins bounced ||
 * Sprite || Black raisins || Cold temp. || Non-carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite || Black raisins || Room temp. || Carbonated || Raisins bounced ||
 * Sprite || Black raisins || Room Temp || Non-carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite light || Black raisins || Cold temp. || Carbonated || Raisins bounced ||
 * Sprite light || Black raisins || Cold temp. || Non-carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite light || Black raisins || Room temp. || Carbonated || Raisins bounced ||
 * Sprite light || Black raisins || Room Temp || Non-carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite || Blonde raisins || Cold temp. || Carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite || Blonde raisins || Cold temp. || Non-carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite || Blonde raisins || Room temp. || Carbonated || Raisins bounced ||
 * Sprite || Blonde raisins || Room Temp || Non-carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite light || Blonde raisins || Cold temp. || Carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite light || Blonde raisins || Cold temp. || Non-carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite light || Blonde raisins || Room temp. || Carbonated || Raisins bounced ||
 * Sprite light || Blonde raisins || Room Temp || Non-carbonated || Raisins sank ||

To set up the experiment, they tried to think of all of the variables including temperature, sugar content & type of raisins involved. They quickly concluded that there needed to be carbonation in order to have a bouncing affect with the raisins. We could also conclude that it had nothing to do with the sugar content in the Sprite due to the fact that the raisins bounced in both normal Sprite and Sprite Light. An interesting observation was that blonde raisins that were in cold Sprite & Sprite light did not have the same bouncing patterns as the dark raisins. That led us to another experiment to prove or discard our second hypothesis: that temperature has an effect with the blonde raisins.


 * Beverage || Raisin type || Temperature || Carbonation || Observations during 30 mins. ||
 * Sprite || Small Black raisins || Cold temp. || Carbonated || Raisins bounced ||
 * Sprite Light || Small Black raisins || Cold temp. || Carbonated || Raisins bounced ||
 * Sprite || Large Black raisins || Cold temp. || Carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite Light || Large Black raisins || Cold Temp || Carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite light || Small Blonde raisins || Cold temp. || Carbonated || Raisins bounced ||
 * Sprite light || Small Blonde raisins || Cold temp. || Carbonated || Raisins bounced ||
 * Sprite light || Large Black raisins || Cold temp. || Carbonated || Raisins sank ||
 * Sprite light || Large Black raisins || Cold Temp || Carbonated || Raisins sank ||

Conclusion after experiment 2: Temperature had nothing to do with bouncing effect. However, size did have an effect. Final Conclusions: In carbonated Sprite, whether cold or room temperature, light or normal, small raisins had a bouncing effect and large raisins did not during a thirty-minute time period.

FLAWS IN THE ASSIGNMENT

Many of you began to see the issues that threaten validity or the truthfulness of any research study. These flaws include a sample size that is too small, subjectivity, and non representative samples limited observations and using less than the scientific method. Another flaw was you trying to find information when you have ambiguous information.

=** What does it mean when I asked for the “typical” teacher? Did your sample contain the typical teacher? In the second survey about anxiety, did you consider the term anxious. Sometimes it has a more positive connotation. I am anxious to see you, which could mean that I am looking forward to seeing you.**=

** DEBRIEFING THE HUNT ** How did the scavenger hunt relate to research? I believe all of you saw the connections and were able to discover the difficulty of confirming truth but the fun we can have in the search. Most of you posted outstanding summaries. For instance, one of you not only was quite thorough but gave us another resource to think about:

The “ways of knowing” I used for the photo were: Personal experience – I have seen many photos of people wearing clothes from this era. I thought I recognized the building from the photo. When I found the “original” photo online, I could see that the building in the background was the White House. Logic – Logic told me that the building must indeed be the White House, an easily recognized landmark, or the professor would not have asked the location. Research or scientific inquiry – I used research the most, but only after I had used personal experience and logic to establish parameters. The use of research was the only way to verify my findings.

Obvious flaws come from the small sample size (especially mine!) and the lack of a controlled environment for the experiments. For the photos, Wikipedia should certainly never be considered as a “reliable” source! One observation of thirty minutes on one day in the cafeteria should certainly not be used as reliable “data.”

The “types of research” seems a very vague statement but I suppose my “guess” would be that both quantitative and qualitative research were introduced.

As a side note. . .  The observations I made in the second raisin experiment sparked a memory of a scientific (of sorts) book I have read several times, The Log from the Sea of Cortez. Two marine biologists, John Steinbeck and Ed Ricketts, and their crew outfitted a boat that normally fished sardines out of Monterey Bay, San Francisco and collected marine animals from the littoral zone in the Sea of Cortez. Rather than concentrating on one specific species, they collected widely and often, meticulously recording their collected species. They also kept a log of their trip. The trip yielded knowledge of new species of marine animals and a significant body of information on littoral animals. However, the book is better known as one of the great philosophical works of our age. The ideas from that book are born of observation by people trained to observe and record. By being in the habit of careful observation, meticulous recording and then discussion of the results, these men gave to the world something great, but something they had not really intended to give us. I believe we human beings need to be more like scientists in that way. We need to become better observers. On the other hand, while the scientific method requires that we eliminate the variables from our experiments, we should not eliminate the variables from our minds but should observe widely, often and thoughtfully.

In short all of you showed that you are beginning to grasp the idea of what research can be. Many of you talked about quantitative vs. qualitative approaches. In truth you were asked to dabble in both methodologies. Session 2 will help you explore in much greater depth the types of research providing more specific examples of both qualitative and quantitative approaches.