Digital Tools Blog due 7.19.13 (Friday)

           

Reading Reflections, Skill builder thoughts, and Reflections/Connections from class last night

Chapter 4- PLD

            This chapter was really good. The problem I am finding is that I want to explore all of the technology options presented.  I keep thinking, “I’ll do that as my next skill builder” with everything I read about!  I especially liked the description that Josh Johnston offered about how he used Atlas ti. for his lit review process.  I am SO not there (as I haven’t even nailed down my topic…professional development for teachers, or student/teacher interactions”, but his description really helped me see what is possible with using coding in Atlas ti.

            The chapter frames the literature review as a way of joining the conversation that is happening in the field.  I think this is an interesting way to frame the lit review.  You really do need to know what has been said before in order to communicate effectively about the topic and share “your take” on the topic.  I also liked how the chapter emphasized that the lit review is your CONSTRUCTION and not just a summary of what has come before.   This quote was great – “The literature review and theoretical frameworks are ideological sites in which you claim, locate, evaluate, and defend your position” (p. 6).

            I am glad I chose Mendeley as my citation manager.  I feel like I am beginning to gather a good number of important articles on topics that are important to me.  There are so many features that I can investigate if I chose to – all the social aspects, and plenty for me to play with right now.  I need to read the Hensley article on Mendeley.   The annotation feature of Mendeley is decent, but I prefer my ipad.  I did upload a flattened PDF into Mendeley today (actually, it was the Boote and Beile article).  It held onto my highlights (that was one of the questions we wondered about last night). *NOTE TO SELF – SCREEN SHOT.  There was some conversation last night about whether or not to use the automatic citing feature.  I think I will try it out as I am writing my skill builder papers.  I need to make sure what I have uploaded has the proper information.

            I have almost settled on my second skill builder (until I read this chapter I thought I had).  I am really working hard to go paperless this semester.  So, with that being an important goal, I think I should stick with Iannotate as my second skill builder.  Every digital tools article since our first class, has been read using Iannotate on my ipad.  I think I am getting better at using the various features and my reading comprehension is better.  This has really been an issue for me, but I find myself not having to work so hard to “hang in there” because I am getting more used to reading from the electronic files.    I thought it was interesting that the book talks about being able to “curl up” with a book.  I think this is part of why I am not fond of annotating in Mendeley…I feel like I am at the computer instead of at my house, at my favorite chair reading a book.  Reading and noting through Iannotate feels more like reading a real book.  I remember begin so irritated taking the GRE on the computer. I was not used to reading on the screen and felt that I had to work really hard to understand.  In a couple of years, kids will take the PARCC exam on the computer.  I wonder if anyone has thought through how the scores will be affected by kids having to test electronically vs. kids testing with pen and paper.

            I had considered that unintentionally plagiarizing might be a disadvantage to annotating electronically.  Something else to be really careful about….

            I liked the additional reference articles listed for conducting a lit review, and also the web link to literature reviews.  I made myself a note to check those out.

Boote and Beile – Scholars Before Researchers: On the Centrality of the Dissertation Literature Review in Research Preparation

            As I was reading this article, I was reminded of my group mate’s experience and comments from class last night.  He presented his proposal to his committee and they “trashed it”.  He commented that he felt like his committee felt like he should KNOW how to write a dissertation proposal even though the one he had written for them was the first one he had EVER written.   He reported feeling completely unprepared for both the task and the feedback he got. Boote and Beile lay a lot of the problem of situations like this at the feet of universities, and more specifically, those guiding doctoral students in the field of education.   Boote and Beile maintain that the literature review is not taken seriously enough and that it often takes a back seat to research methodology. I have to say, that other than this class and my advanced qual class, not much attention has been given to the literature review, other than people saying that one has to be written.  It was interesting to me that Boote and Beile didn’t think that a course on the writing of the literature review would be helpful.  I understand their reasoning – that it doesn’t need to be this discrete entity and that it should be woven into the entire PhD experience, but if it is THAT bad, what could it hurt to have a course dedicated to writing the literature review?  The course that you have recommended is focused on academic writing, and I think that would be very helpful.  The course could use this article and the rubric that Boote and Beile devised. 

            What do you think about the compilation of research articles format for dissertations?  I read one on teacher professional development that came out of the University of Cincinnati last semester.  I thought it was horrific.  The organization was poor, the writing was drab, and the explanation of the methods used for the three “articles” was practically non-existent.  That is the only dissertation I have read that is in this format, but I have friends who have completed PhD’s and have done them this way.  It seems much easier…but not a “better” option to me.

            I thought it was interesting that Boote and Beile do not differentiate between the Ed.D and Ph.D. degrees in their approaches to dissertations.  They believe they should be held to the same high standard since they are both terminal degrees.  I can buy that.

            I really enjoyed this article.  It will definitely be one that gets a STAR in my Mendeley library!

 

Kern – Citation Management Software

            This article was informative, but a bit dry.  I prefer learning about these kinds of things either through presentations (like Mary Alice’s on Tuesday) or through the PLD book we are reading, which is more interactive, has more graphics and uses more “user friendly” language.  I thought the inclusion of the librarian’s perspectives on each of the tools was good.   I also like that the article frame was set up with benefits/drawbacks (similar to affordances and constraints – but not exactly).