The University of Pittsburgh
Administrative and Policy Studies
ADMPS 3001 Disciplined Inquiry (3 Credits)
Spring 2015
5400 Posvar Hall
1:00-3:40 PM Wednesday
Sean Kelly, PhD
4308 Posvar Hall
Office: (412) 648-7165
spkelly@pitt.edu
Office hours: by appointment
Disciplined Inquiry
Figure from Crosnoe (2011). This
is an example of both a relatively
abstracted independent variable
(“not fitting in”) as well as a simple
measurement scale (“Number of
Feelings”).
1
Course Overview
Description
Welcome to ADMPS 3001 Disciplined Inquiry, a course in research methods! This course
surveys the major research designs and techniques used in social and comparative analysis in
education, and educational research more broadly. We will cover both qualitative and
quantitative approaches, with an emphasis on the fundamental principles and logic underlying
research methodology. While there will be many practical examples of methods in action, this is
not primarily a hands-on course. For example, the statistical mechanics of various quasiexperimental approaches are covered in 3100 (Intro to Quantitative Methods I) and 3103
(Intermediate Quantitative Methods). Instead, in this course we will treat quasi-experimental
designs as a set of methods sharing similar strengths and weaknesses compared with other
approaches, and explore the theoretical rationale for this set of methods. In addition, an
important aspect of the course is that many of the methodological topics are relevant to both
qualitative and quantitative analyses, including: conceptual frameworks, measurement error, data
reduction, sampling, historical/case study methods, and others. A core principle of this course is
that regardless of your research goal—description, causal inference, or something else—a robust
body of research must eventually draw on multiple methods of inquiry.
Goals and Learning Objectives
This course has a number of specific learning objectives, some of which overlap with related
research courses. Note that the basic design and objectives of this course, as well as the
assignments, build on the Disciplined Inquiry course originally developed and taught by
Professors Gunzenhauser and Bickel in ADMPS for many years.
1. Overview of multiple methodological approaches used in education research, including a
rich set of examples. I have tried to select examples that span the range of educational
settings, and that do not duplicate readings/topics in other courses. As an introductory
course, particular methodological approaches (e.g. instrumental variables, focus groups)
are reserved for detailed treatment in other courses.
2. Exposure to epistemological and theoretical diversity in educational research.
3. Understanding of the importance of articulation between a research question, prior
research (we have a session devoted specifically to the review of literature), and choice of
methodological design within a research effort.
4. Important concepts related to the quality (and ethics) of educational research, such as
validity, reliability, generalizability, etc.
2
5. Exposure to the role that research plays in educational practice and policy, although note
that this topic is treated in other courses in greater depth.
Note that two topics are not taught in detail in this course: (1) The Institutional Review Board
approval process, including the underlying topics of informed consent, minimizing risk, etc., are
covered in 3003 (APS Doctoral Core I), not this course. (2) Publication style (e.g. American
Psychological Association publication style guidelines, etc.)
Course Readings and Required Texts
We have two required texts for this course, which we will do multiple readings from, and that
will serve as resources for you on additional methodological topics:
Jaccard, J., & Jacoby, J. (2010). Theory construction and model-building skills: A practical
guide for social scientists. New York: The Guilford Press.
Berg, B. L. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th edition). Boston,
MA: Pearson.
Each week, we will generally have two types of readings, (1) empirical examples of a
methodological approach in action, and (2) theoretical/overview/teaching pieces on that
methodological approach. The empirical examples will be listed first each week (see Calendar
of readings and activities at end of syllabus), followed by the overview readings. For example,
in Week 3, we have two examples (Grossman, Littwin) followed by a chapter from Berg. We
will generally have three articles/chapters to read each week, or the equivalent amount of
reading. Please read the session notes on Courseweb for each session, as I will sometimes post
important contextual information about the readings there, or note which parts of the readings
you may skim in order to lessen the reading load.
As your studies proceed, you will certainly find that you need greater information about a
particular method, and often you will find that within a specific literature (e.g. if you are doing
an event history analysis, there are specific resources for that). Generally speaking, overviews of
methods that are easy to read and contain clear examples are generally found in methods
textbooks and edited volumes, while journal articles contain much more specific, sometimes very
narrow methodological issues. Additional difficulties with methodological journal articles is that
they are (A) not always in education journals, and (B) focus on formal derivations or theory
rather than practical examples. Journals will also occasionally publish methods that are “not
ready for prime time;” that perhaps, have not been incorporated into most software programs, or
in some cases have not yet withstood enough scrutiny to generate confidence for a new user.
That being said, there are a number of journals devoted to research methods that you may find
3
helpful as references, including: the Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, the
Journal of Educational measurement, Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, Journal
of Experimental Education (they mean “experimental” in the broad sense), Sociological
Methodology, and others. Note also though, that certain journals publish methodological articles
in addition to substantive ones (e.g. Educational Researcher, Educational evaluation and Policy
Analysis, Social Science Research, Review of Research in Education, Review of Educational
Research, etc.). The discipline of Psychology also has journals that publish a lot of
methodological articles (e.g. Psychological Bulletin, Journal of Educational Psychology,
Psychometrika, etc.)
One effort by the American Educational Research Association to put together an edited volume
with chapters giving overviews of different methods in education is the Handbook of
Complementary Methods in Education Research (2006), edited by Green, Camilli, and Elmore.
Course Expectations
Readings and Class Discussion
Because this class meets only once a week, the reading load for each class is relatively heavy. It
is also a bit uneven (as real-world work tends to be), so scan the readings for each week to
anticipate challenging weeks. The expectation is that your understanding will develop through
your independent reading, class discussion, and writing. In order to benefit from class then, you
must complete the readings, and bring copies with you to class. Our class discussions will
serve not only to develop a coherent understanding of the literature, but you will also be
practicing a fundamental skill of both practitioners and academics: the capacity for substantive,
analytic conversation.
Writing Assignments and Tests
The writing assignments and tests are an essential element of the learning experience in ADMPS
3001, and this course is an excellent opportunity for you to simultaneously hone your analytic
thinking and writing skills.
You will have two writing assignments in this class. The first assignment is the Research
Journal and Article Review, which is a two-part assignment where you do some
analyses/interpretation of an entire journal, and then a particular article from that journal. The
second assignment is a Proposal for an Empirical Study. In the earlier half of the course, you
should be doing some work on both of these papers concurrently. The proposal assignment is
worth 50% of your grade, so it is on the level of a short term paper. You will be turning in three
preliminary materials for comment from me as a formal part of that assignment, including a
4
rough draft of that proposal paper. You will also have the opportunity to make a short
presentation on the final class day on your proposal for an empirical study. Both of these writing
assignments will allow you to engage with the methodological literature. Writing assignments
are due the Tuesday before class at 7:00 PM.
In working with you to craft excellent course papers I will emphasize several generic elements of
the writing process:
1) Start with a close reading of the text(s).
2) Be explicit in (a) stating your ideas and (b) in how your paper is organized.
3) Analysis, Analysis, Analysis. All good papers contain an analysis of the text;
generalizations, comparisons, causal statements, etc., not mere summaries or
descriptions.
4) Writing is an iterative process. With each revision a paper improves. Your classmates
and instructor are here to help you improve your papers.
The tests are non-cumulative assessments of your understanding of material for the first and
second half of the course. Tests are not very common in the PhD program in our department,
One reason tests are not common, is that in your professional work you will be asked to write,
teach, discourse with your colleagues, etc., you mostly won’t be asked to take tests! Yet, the
material in this course lends itself well to tests. It is possible for me to create tests that are
representative of the course content in each half of the course, and the tests allow students an
additional opportunity to demonstrate mastery. However, given the length of the writing
assignments, these tests will be short and not count as much toward your final grade as the
writing assignments.
Research Journal and Article Review
The Research Journal and Article Review is a two part-assignment. But both parts are due
on the same date (Tuesday 3/17 at 7:00 PM).
Journal review (825-1000 words, 3-4 pages): First, you will identify a research journal
relevant to your program, specialization, and/or research interest and review that journal for
the year 2012. A typical journal with 4-5 articles per number (issue), published 4 times per
year, will have 18-20 articles. Your goal for the first part of the paper is to analyze the
methodological approach taken by works in this journal. Approach that task by posing and
answering methodological questions about the journal you selected in 2012. For example:
What kind of theoretical perspectives are evident in this journal? What methodologies and
methods are published here? Assuming “high quality methods” are important to this journal,
what dimensions of quality seem to be evident here? Are there any other issues that reading
the journal raises for you? Pose and answer the particular questions that are most relevant to
your own analysis.
A. If you select a journal published substantially more often, or with substantially more
articles per issue, you may elect to trim the criteria to get down to a manageable
5
number of articles (e.g. in AERJ, focusing only on the “social and institutional
analysis” section).
B. Try to select a commonly used/highly valued journal in your field
(program/specialization). Do not select a review article journal (e.g. Review of
Educational Research), or a methodological journal.
C. Do not try to read each article start to finish, focus on the parts/aspects relevant to the
questions you pose.
D. It might be useful to begin by finding information about the quality of this journal, its
mission, its sponsorship, its readership, its frequency of publication, and (if possible) its
acceptance rate.
E. Please include at least one quantitative analysis in this part of the paper. This could be
as simple as counting the number/proportion of occurrences of a given method.
F. Use course readings and specific examples to frame and support your
analysis/assertions.
Article review (1000-1275 words, 4-5 pages): Next, analyze one article from the journal by
identifying and analyzing the positive value of that article. In your view, what is the
meaning and value of this study? How does the methodological approach taken by the
author(s)’ contribute to the value of this study? Consider the theoretical framework, the
methodological approach, attributes of the data, and the possible audience/implications of
this work. Strive for a well-organized and coherent progression of ideas in this paper with a
thesis statement, supporting points, and a conclusion. Cite the literature and course readings
to support your thesis. Use APA format for all citations and references. Cite reading and use
your notes from class discussions in clarifying how to identify and evaluate these elements:
Proposal for an Empirical Study
This paper is a 3,300-4,125 word (or 12-15 page) proposal for an empirical study to address a
research question within a line of inquiry that interests you. You have broad latitude to select an
area of inquiry/question that interests you. You are not expected to collect and analyze data for
this paper, but rather, to propose a research design, and describe the methodological attributes
that will help you to answer your research question. Your paper should begin with a literature
review of existing studies on this topic. Published literature reviews are typically 10 pages in
length; yours should be more concise than that, perhaps 4-6 pages drawing on approximately 10
references. The balance of the proposal should describe a proposed study, and the logic behind
the design and methods you have proposed. In laying out your methodological plan, provide a
rationale for its various elements, citing course texts and other methodological readings for
support. You have three intermediary assignments that are an opportunity for me to give you
feedback. First, on Tuesday 2/03 at 7:00 PM a one paragraph summary of your research
question is due. On Tuesday 3/24 at 7:00 PM, a preliminary list of the references you will be
using is due. Then, a rough draft is due for this paper on Tuesday 4/14 at 7:00 PM, which is a
6
very important opportunity for me to give you feedback. In the final class session, you will
present your proposed study to the class.
Additional Guidelines:
A. Well-written lit reviews can look very different depending on the author’s approach, but
two common problems that reduce the impact of a literature review are (1) focusing to
“sequentially on authors/studies,” rather than on questions/themes/arguments, etc., (2)
providing too little elaboration on study results themselves (i.e. what was found, but also
how).
B. It will be difficult to propose and defend a study design if your research question is too
broad/big.
C. You may position your proposed study as “realistic” (what you might be able to
accomplish as an individual or small team of researchers, with limited funds), or as “ideal
scenario” (if you had a large federal grant and a big team), but be explicit about how you
see the requirements/feasibility of this research design as one of its elements.
D. In addition to discussion of the rationale for the methodological plan, you might also
include (but are not required to), discussion of: research subjectivity (your own
standpoint, history, or preconceptions), projected results, ethical considerations, or
deconstructive interpretation (e.g. is your study predicated on a particular cultural norm
that you could imagine vanishing?).
E. Please plan a 12-15 minute (the typical length of an AERA presentation) power-point
presentation to accompany your paper and be delivered the final day of class. A good
rule of thumb is to try to average 1 minute per slide.
Use of CourseWeb Technology
We will utilize CourseWeb technology to support our progress in several ways. First, we will
utilize CourseWeb to share information, including the course readings and additional handouts
that might be needed (e.g. statistical primers, recent educational data reports, writing tips, etc.).
Second, CourseWeb will be the depository for class assignments. Details will be provided in
class on using dropboxes on CourseWeb.
Formatting Written Work
By formatting your papers carefully and using accepted copy-editing standards, you can assure
the reader is able to focus on the substance of your work. In this class we will use the American
Psychological Association (APA) guidelines, which is what the American Educational Research
Journal (among others) requires! You should know though, that this is not the only style used
in education research, so you may at some point in your career be required to use a different
style, such as the American Sociological Association (ASA) style, which is derived from the
Chicago Manual of Style. ASA style has the interesting feature of spelling out authors’ first
7
names in the reference list! In addition to APA, please note some guidelines to make it easier for
me and other folks who read your work to take notes and leave comments for you:
○
○
○
○
○
○
Times New Roman, 12 point font
One inch margins on all sides
Page numbers
Left alignment with default spacing between words and letters
Double spaced lines with only one hard return between indented paragraphs
Give your paper a substantive title (describing the novel content in your paper not the
name of the assignment)
Grading
Graded Assignments
Research Journal & Article Review:
Test 1:
Test 2:
Proposal for an Empirical Study:
30%
10%
10%
50%
Additional Policies
Departmental Grievance Procedures
The purpose of grievance procedures is to ensure the rights and responsibilities of faculty and
students in their relationships with each other. When a student in ADMPS believes that a
faculty member has not met his or her obligations (as an instructor or in another capacity) as
described in the Academic Integrity Guidelines, the student should follow the procedure
described in the Guidelines by (1) first trying to resolve the matter with the faculty member
directly; (2) then, if needed, attempting to resolve the matter through conversations with the
chair/associate chair of the department; (3) if needed, next talking to the associate dean of the
school; and (4) if needed, filing a written statement of charges with the school-level
academic integrity officer. [Dean Jere Gallagher is the Associate Dean and Integrity Officer.]
Academic Integrity
Students in this course will be expected to comply with the University of Pittsburgh's Policy
on Academic Integrity. Any student suspected of violating this obligation for any reason
during the semester will be required to participate in the procedural process, initiated at the
instructor level, as outlined in the University Guidelines on Academic Integrity. This may
include, but is not limited to, the confiscation of the examination of any individual suspected
of violating University Policy. Furthermore, no student may bring any unauthorized materials
to an exam, including dictionaries and programmable calculators.
Disability Accommodation
8
If you have a disability that requires special testing accommodations or other classroom
modifications, you need to notify both the instructor and Disability Resources and Services
no later than the second week of the term. You may be asked to provide documentation of
your disability to determine the appropriateness of accommodations. To notify Disability
Resources and Services, call (412) 648-7890 (Voice or TTD) to schedule an appointment.
The Disability Resources and Services office is located in 140 William Pitt Union on the
Oakland campus.
Statement on Classroom Recording
To ensure the free and open discussion of ideas, students may not record classroom lectures,
discussion and/or activities without the advance written permission of the instructor, and any
such recording properly approved in advance can be used solely for the student’s own private
use.
Course Outline
Week 01: Epistemology, Theory, and Conceptual Frameworks
Week 02: Ethnographic Methods
Week 03: Interviewing
Week 04: Content Analysis
Week 05: Literature Reviews: Examples and Methods
Week 06: Randomized Experiments
Week 07: Quasi-Experiments
Week 08: Longitudinal Designs
Week 09: Measurement Error
Week 10: Data Reduction
Week 11: Sampling
Week 12: Survey Research/Questionnaire Design
Week 13: Mixed Methods
Week 14: Historical and Case Study Analysis
Week 15: Presentations
9
CALENDAR: ADMPS 3001, Spring 2015
Session Date/Day Readings
Activities & Assignments
Introduction: The Big Picture
1
01/07/15
Epistemology, Theory, and Conceptual Frameworks
Wednesday
Jaccard, J., & Jacoby, J. (2010). Chapters 2, 3, & 10 from Theory
construction and model-building skills: A practical guide for social
scientists. New York: The Guilford Press.
Complete professional profile
2. Read syllabus
3. Complete readings and prepare
for class discussion [EVERY
WEEK!]
Qualitative Methods
2
01/14/15
Ethnographic Methods
Wednesday
Kinney, D. A. (1993). From nerds to normals: The recovery of identity
among adolescents from middle school to high school. Sociology of
Education, 66, 21-40.
Best, R. (1983). Chapter 6: What was being learned, the boys. In We’ve
all got scars: What boys and girls learn in elementary school (pp. 71-87).
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Berg, B. L. (2007). Chapter 6: Ethnographic field strategies. In
Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th edition) (pp.
10
171-221). Boston, MA: Pearson.
3
01/21/15
Interviewing
Wednesday
Grossman, P. L. (1990). Chapter 3: Learning from professional
education. In The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher
education (pp. 53-85). New York: Teachers College Press.
Littwin, S. (1986). Chapter 7: Santa Cruz as a state of mind. In The
postponed generation: Why American youth are growing up later (pp.
82-98). New York: Quill.
Berg, B. L. (2007). Chapter 4: A dramaturgical look at interviewing. In
Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th edition) (pp. 89143). Boston, MA: Pearson.
4
01/28/15
Content Analysis
Wednesday
Porter, A., McMaken, J., Hwang, J., & Yang, R. (2011). Common core
standards: The new U.S. intended curriculum. Educational Researcher,
40, 103-116).
Bullman, R. C. (2005). Chapter 4: Expressing oneself in a culture of
conformity. In Hollywood goes to high school: Cinema, schools, and
American culture (pp. 80-118). New York: Worth.
Berg, B. L. (2007). Chapter 11: An introduction to content analysis. In
Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th edition) (pp.
303-339). Boston, MA: Pearson.
11
Reviewing the Literature
5
02/04/15
Literature Reviews: Examples and methods
Wednesday
Stephan, J. L., & Rosenbaum, J. E. (2009). Permeability and
transparency in the high school-college transition. In G. Sykes, B.
Schneider, & D. N. Plank (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research
(pp. 928-941). New York: American Educational Research Association
and Routledge.
**1-paragraph research question
statement due in support of
Proposal for an Empirical Study
paper on Tuesday 2/03 at 7:00
PM**
Kelly, S., & Price, H. (2009). Vocational education: A clean slate for
disengaged students? Social Science Research, 38, 810-825.
[*concentrate on front-end*]
Jaccard, J., & Jacoby, J. (2010). Chapters 4: Creativity and the generation
of ideas. In Theory construction and model-building skills: A practical
guide for social scientists (pp. 39-74). New York: The Guilford Press.
Becker, H. S. (2007). Terrorized by the literature. In Writing for social
scientists (2nd edition) (pp. 135-149). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Quantitative Methods
6
02/11/15
Randomized Experiments
Wednesday
12
Jussim, L., & Harber, K. D. (2005). Teacher expectations and selffulfilling prophecies: Knowns and unknowns, resolved and unresolved
controversies. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 131-155.
Yuan, K., Le, V., McCaffrey, D.F., Marsh, J.A., Hamilton, L., Stecher,
B., & Springer, M.G. (2013). Incentive pay programs do not affect
teacher motivation or reported practices: Results from three randomized
studies. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35, 3-22.
Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (Eds.), (2002). Chapter 5: Designs for the
conduct of scientific research in education. In Scientific Research in
Education. A National Research Council report. Washington, DC:
National Academy Press.
Cook, T. D. (2001). Sciencephobia: Why education researchers reject
randomized experiments. Education Next, 1, 63-68.
7
02/18/15
Quasi-Experiments
Wednesday
Rosenbaum, J. E., Deil-Amen, R., & Person, A. E. (2006). Educational
outcomes of labor-market linking. In After admission: From college
access to college success (pp. 182-200). New York: Russell Sage
Foundation.
**Test One**
Marsh, H. W., & Kleitman, S. 2005. Consequences of employment
during high school: Character building, subversion of academic goals, or
a threshold? American Educational Research Journal, 42, 331-370.
Shadish, W. R., & Luellen, J. K. (2006). Quasi-experimental design. In J.
L. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of
complementary methods in education research (pp. 539-550). New York:
13
American Educational Research Association and Routledge.
Campbell, D. T., & Ross, H. L. (1968). The Connecticut crackdown on
speeding: Time-series data in quasi-experimental analysis. Law & Society
Review, 3, 33-54.
Additional recommended readings:
Jaccard, J., & Jacoby, J. (2010). Chapters 7: Causal models. In Theory
construction and model-building skills: A practical guide for social
scientists (pp. 137-176). New York: The Guilford Press.
Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (2009). Introduction to multivariate
relationships. In Statistical methods for the social sciences (4th edition)
(pp. 301-320). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
8
02/25/15
Longitudinal Designs
Wednesday
Arum, R., Roksa, J., Potter, D., & Velez, M. (2011). Origins and
trajectories. In Academically adrift: Limited learning on college
campuses (pp. 33-57). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Carbonaro, W., & Covay, E. (2010). School sector and student
achievement in the era of standards based reforms. Sociology of
Education, 83, 160-182.
Kelly, S. & Ye, F. Under Review. Accounting for the relationship
between initial status and growth in regression models.
14
Harris, D. N. (2011). Measuring student growth. In Value-added
measures in education: What every educator needs to know (pp. 49-68).
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
9
03/04/15
Measurement Error
Wednesday
Foss, R., Diekman, S., Goodwin, A., & Bartley, C. (2003). Enhancing a
norms program to reduce high-risk drinking among first year students.
Chapel Hill, NC: Highway Safety Research Center.
Meyer, R. H. (1999). The effects of math and math-related courses in
high school. In S. E. Mayer & P. E. Peterson (Eds.), Earning and
learning: How schools matter (pp. 169-204). Washington, DC: Brookings
Institution Press.
Jencks, C. (1972). Measurement error. In Inequality: A reassessment of
the effect of family and schooling America (pp. 330-336). New York:
Harper Colophon Books.
10
03/18/15
Data Reduction
Wednesday
**Spring Break; no
class on the 10th
Kelly, S. (2010). The prevalence of developmental instruction in public
and catholic schools. Teachers College Record, 112, 2405–2440.
DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Guidelines in scale development. In Scale
development: Theory and applications (2nd edition) (pp. 60-101).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
**Research Journal and Article
Review paper due Tuesday 3/17 at
7:00 PM**
Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P M. (2003). A critical
review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification
15
in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30,
199-218.
Integrated Topics
11
03/25/15
Sampling
Wednesday
Fowler, F. J. (2002). Sampling. In Survey research methods (3rd Edition)
(pp. 10-38).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Babbie, E. (1990). Examples of sample designs. In Survey research
methods (2nd Edition) (pp. 102-117). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
**List of references due in support
of Proposal for an Empirical
Study paper due on Tuesday 3/24 at
7:00 PM**
Daniel, J. (2012). Choosing between non-probability sampling and
probability sampling. In Sampling essentials: Practical guidelines for
making sampling choices (pp. 66-80). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Stuart, A. (1984 [1962]). Sections 20, 21, & 32. In The ideas of
sampling (pp. 34-37, 62-64). New York: MacMillan.
12
04/01/15
Survey Research/Questionnaire Design
Wednesday
16
Shernoff, D. J. (2013). Measuring student engagement in high school
classrooms and what we have learned. In Optimal learning environments
to promote student engagement (pp. 77-96). New York: Springer.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Schneider, B. (2000). Appendix B. In Becoming
adult: How teenagers prepare for the world of work (pp. 241-242). New
York: Basic Books.
Aubusson, P., Burke, P., Schuck, S., Kearney, M., & Frischknecht, B.
(2014). Teachers choosing rich tasks: The moderating impact of
technology on student learning, enjoyment, and preparation. Educational
Researcher, 43, 219-229.
Fowler, F. J. (1995). Questions to measure subjective states. In
Improving survey questions: Design and evaluation (pp. 46-77).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13
04/08/15
Mixed Methods
Wednesday
Juzwik, M., Nystrand, M., Kelly, S., & Sherry, M. (2008). Oral narrative
genres as dialogic resources for classroom literature study: A
contextualized case study of conversational narrative discussion.
American Educational Research Journal, 45, 1111-1154.
Calfee, R., & Sperling, M. (2010). Why mixed methods? In Mixed
methods: Approaches to language and literacy research (pp. 1-18). New
York: Teachers College Press.
14
04/15/15
Historical and Case Study Analysis
Wednesday
17
Clotfelter, C. T. (1996). The sources of rising expenditures. In Buying the **rough draft of Proposal for an
best: Cost escalation in elite higher education (pp. 139-161). Princeton, Empirical Study paper due on
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Tuesday 4/14 at 7:00 PM**
Grant, G. (1988). Deconstruction of the old world, 1966-1971. In The
world we created at Hamilton High (pp. 24-44). Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Berg, B. L. (2007). Chapter 10: Case studies. In Qualitative research
methods for the social sciences (6th edition) (pp. 283-302). Boston, MA:
Pearson.
15
04/22/15
Presentations
Wednesday
**Test Two**
Final drafts of Proposal for an Empirical Study paper due on CourseWeb
Monday April 27th at 12:00 PM
18