#6

Quantity-not quality- now has new meaning. One that involves a TON of work. So, a study could take a good length of time, and ultimately, defined variables may have absolutely no relationship to one another.

But, the bottom line here for the LA reading—easy to follow. The examples they gave helped define the steps taken in conducting the study. I refer to it often, but my research design class really made life difficult in terms of trying to understand the types of research. The books were very statistical. They were written for those who had already started their research and needed some sort of instructional manual. This actually explains the processes and why numbers were chosen and why you need a large number of subjects and why certain methods were used. (85) One thing they didn’t define further about independent variables is that they can’t change. It may even go beyond age and gender…it could be education, jobs, and discourse. These are also things that have an effect on outcome. See, I took something from the research class. But like I mentioned in my last blog, I feel like this is an instruction manual…and I don’t have the benefit of some in-depth research project to relate the instructions to. It’s just very difficult to especially relate to the mathematical portions of the text…more specifically the standard deviation calculations. (91)

KS reading- Is experimental research the long version of a classroom inquiry? The idea that teachers can use two variables to see if there are correlations tells me this is accurate… (220) How big are the groups supposed to be? How many variables do you need? Is there a limit? It seems like there are so many perspectives the researcher needs to take in terms of their subjects and variables and how the variables are affected by the way a subject thinks or doesn’t think and how it all does or does not relate to the research question. It’s really so in-depth that I almost feel overwhelmed by the study and I’m not even conducting it. (224) I’ve read studies that do not have a limitations section. Do all good studies have one? Are they supposed to? What does it signify if researchers do not include them? Page 238 indicates that they need to be discussed…so why do some studies not have them? To avoid talking about problems the study had? I would imagine they offer important insight. I wish I had a better ending to this blog than to drop it after the last question, but my brain feels way too full after reading this.