A little more action (research) please!

I've been thinking about some of my learning experiences during the course, and I've picked out one of the most critical for getting my qualitative research project on the right tracks.

When I was devising my research questions, the original versions came out like this:

Primary research question:
"What effect does online interaction have on participants' approach to learning?"

Secondary research questions:

1. "How does online socialisation before a face-to-face training event affect interactions within that event?"
2. "How does online interaction before a face-to-face training event affect participants preparation for that event?"
3. "How does the opportunity for online interaction after a training event affect the application of that training in the workplace?"
4. "What would be the effect of allowing participants to contribute anonymous comments to online discourse?"

Fortunately I was reading through the advice given by Creswell (2009, Ch.7) on devising research questions for qualitative research, and I realised that my choice of words was completely inappropriate. Using the word 'affect' (or 'effect') naturally leads towards a more quantitative result because it is inherently directional for responses, as opposed to the exploratory nature of asking people to describe their experiences.

A secondary learning experience that is occurring even as I write this is revision of some of the points I had originally put into my wiki pages. I described my change in questions as being due to advice that Creswell gives specifically about action research, but I've actually misread something again - the advice was simply about qualitative versus quantitative. But I digress...

With a much clearer mind, I can re-define my overall goal for this research project as being to draw out participants' experiences of using online discussion alongside a face-to-face training event, without seeking to establish whether the effects are positive or negative through the questions themselves. So my revised set of research questions comes out as:

Primary research question:
"How would participants describe their experiences of using online interactions to support a face-to-face training event?"

Secondary research questions:
1. "Describe your experience of socialising with other participants who you interacted with online before the training event"
2. "Describe your experience of preparing for a face-to-face event where online interaction was required, relative to an event with no prior interaction"
3. "Describe your experience of participating in online interactions around course related content after the face-to-face event"

I've deliberately left out the question of anonymity - not sure I want to open that can of worms right now!

Reference:
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. (3rd edition) Sage.

Evaluating online communities

Thoughts on Ke & Hoadley (2009)

 

Important point to consider: do we expect online learning communities (OLCs) to appear spontaneously or through design? Study inherently seems to favour studies of those that are well-defined in terms of support & structure, so either well-designed or evolved.

Taxonomy of online learning community evaluations

Recognises that this is a divergent research area, attempts to categorise studies in terms of four key components:

1. Evaluation purpose
Notable distinction between proving and improving purposes – convincing organisations that the community has a value at all, versus looking for ways of systematically enhancing the interactions within it. In my case the interactions don't yet amount to a community, so the emphasis is on making interactions sustainable and of benefit to participants.

2. Evaluation approach
Approaches were sometimes summative, usually for proving, or formative for improving, sometimes with elements of both of these. There are also the participatory and responsive approaches – a choice of whether to include participant evaluation or not. Oliver (2000) and Patton (1997) are cited as primary references here. My approach will be based entirely on participant responses, with a view to formative evaluation of the interactions.

3. Measures for evaluation
Outcome vs process measures. The outcome view looks at the community as a static system, evaluating the raw technical set-up of the environment and the learning outcomes. Process evaluation takes an in-depth look at the factors that facilitate or impede learning within the system. My study will need to focus on the process, with a possibility for pairing this up with outcome evaluations from colleagues.

4. Evaluation techniques
The authors seem to use the term objective in place of quantitative; they also refer to qualitative and mixed-method approaches. An important distinction between the two main forms is made – objective approaches deliberately remove context from the data, focusing on what could be directly comparable between other studies. Qualitative studies allowed for more direct insights for the learning processes within a community. I will be focusing on qualitative approaches, although there is potential for identifying the best factors to use in future studies for building up an objective measure of communities in future.

Conclusions

This gives a very good critical analysis of the factors at play in evaluating OLCs, and can serve as a guide point relating to the higher level discussions of Newby (2010), Cresswell (2009) and Colquhoon (2006). The authors also point out a good number of shortcomings in current research. Partly these are due to the constraints of researchers performing their studies for their own purposes, rather than to sit conveniently into the wider body of research. They also point out that the offline interactions between participants play a large role in the actual learning process, and these are very difficult to find any record of. There are also no studies that show how a community has evolved over time.

Long term goals of the researchers are to establish a framework for understanding OLCs, possibly towards a central theory. They make no reference to the five stage model identified by Salmon (2003); they do refer to phases of community development (Palloff and Pratt, 1999). It will be useful to pursue this systematic approach for research to inform my own understanding, and note if any similarities or contradictions with Salmon’s model emerge, which has previously been central to my understanding of online learning interactions.

Reference:

• Colquhoon, D. (2006). Research Methods in Education Contexts. University of Hull.
• Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. (3rd edition) Sage.
• Ke, F. and Hoadley, C. (2009). Evaluating Online Learning Communities. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(4), pp.487-510.
• Newby, P. (2010). Research Methods for Education. Pearson Education Limited.
• Salmon, G., 2003. E-Moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online. 2nd ed. London: Routledge-Falmer.

Thoughts on Conrad

I've been going into more details on my literature review, and considering how other authors structure their writing, particularly from the perspective of what I find useful, and how it might influence my own writing. The first article is an interpretive study by Conrad (2002).

 

Conrad makes the point that while quantitative studies can give a useful overview of the area, understanding the experiences of users is a priority for development of communities. Although my context is somewhat different, her point about learners creating their own lines of defence sounds quite telling in the light of some initial comments observed in my study. Without understanding what barriers people put up, we can’t expect to engage meaningfully with them! Likewise, her point about our research agendas being shaped by our worldview matches with my research being guided by exploration of how network effects are re-shaping society, and the subsequent effects on education systems, both technological and organisational.

Writing a section about who, what, where, etc. is a useful step for grounding the paper, and setting the boundaries of the study, particularly the limitations of what might be achieved in the first place. She also breaks down the literature review itself to define different terms, building up how she wants the reader to understand her term of online community. She then examines each of the research questions in turn, looking at general patterns in responses, followed by particularly insightful comments by individuals. This approach will probably work very well for me, as I need to spot general patterns as well as bring out individual experiences.

Reference

Conrad, D. (2002). Deep in the Hearts of Learners: Insights into the Nature of Online Community. Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 1-19

Reviewing the proposal

Considering points raised by Newby (2010, Ch. 2 & 14) to refine my research proposal has given me a mixture of outcomes. Some of these confirm that my basic methodology is correct, whilst some aspects might need tweaking.

Why this research?

My primary aim in this research is gaining a qualification – however I do need to relate the research to my work context, which has been a source of tension since in future I will need to contribute to projects that further divisional goals more directly.

Why am I interested in this area?

We are aiming to move towards a blended training model, with online and face-to-face components.  The use of forums to encourage interactions among participants has been running for some time, with uncertain results.

Why do I think that it is important?

The building of learning communities with increase responsibility for their own learning will become important to sustain learning across the organisation. Our current resourcing will not enable us to meet the continuously growing demand.

Will I be able to write enough to cover my task?

I have chosen this learning program because I know that there is the potential for enough research data to be gathered for a number of cohorts, and I can combine research on the participants with benefit for practitioners.

What experience do I have of this area?

I have made use of forums in my own study and introduced the idea to colleagues through an explorative example. This led to the introduction of forums in the context that I am researching, and I have been involved in an advisory and technical capacity since then.

Who else thinks this is worth exploring?

There is a slight difference of opinion amongst my colleagues as to the value of exploring this area further. Some of my colleagues however have expressed an interest in gaining insights into this area, and even those who don’t fully support it at least acknowledge their frustrations that the use of forums is problematic.

Creating the context for the proposal

Will it deliver on our personal goals?

Although it might meet the requirements of a modular assessment, it may not have a high enough ‘impact potential’ for further progression in some respects. The project should therefore be regarded as a stepping stone for future research efforts – my key learning points will be how successful the approach is in educating practitioners and giving further insights into a learning program. Once my methodology has been established I will then look for higher impact applications.

Does the topic have a political dimension?

Online education in general is an area of intense interest, along with the tools and media for achieving success. Political commentators and politicians may well have opinions on the area, but they are likely more interested in conventional learning matters at this time.

How much do we know about the area?

As stated previously, I have been involved with the use of online discussion for learning in a variety of contexts, both academic and work related. My initial literature review has uncovered some very useful information about how online communities can be investigated methodically, hence my approach to this project.

Identifying the research boundaries

Total amount of time available

In this case the time available is dictated by the time constraints of the assessment task, and my personal time for writing up my results.

What help can we expect from others?

The work does need to be primarily my own due to the assessment criteria, and the data collection should be fairly straightforward due to sending out questionnaires by e-mail. I do need to consider how much time it might take participants to answer my questionnaires, given that we will be approaching a time of higher workload.

Do we need specialist help?

No outside help will be necessary in this case since the data collection and interpretation is of my own devising, and I have sufficient access to journal articles at this time.

What if things don’t go according to plan?

I believe I have sufficient safety in terms of preserving data and the actual collection. My concern is with the possible response rate of participants within the time frame. For this reason I had already opted to research a program that has had multiple cohorts, and also the interactions have been digitally recorded due to the nature of the medium.

Assessing ethical issues

This has already been covered in the blog post on principles to some extent. As a summary, I will be carrying out my research within my workplace and sharing those results with colleagues. One potential issue could come from the sharing of participants’ responses to a wider audience, from a forum that was set up as a confidential area. For this reason I will need to ask colleagues about how to use their responses. I will treat responses anonymously by default, possibly with an option for their responses to not be quoted in reports. All postings on forums will remain confidential.

Preparing a case for a research programme

This research programme is for assessment purposes, but setting out my thinking will be of use in future, especially if I want to keep research as a positive influence on our evaluation strategy.

Getting an idea for research

From the sources of stimulus I have identified several different strands to my research idea & motivation:

1.   Literature

My review of the literature has revealed that there are a number of different theories cited by researchers, in some cases not including those that I have used as a theoretical basis for my own learning. Because of this I am wary of using quantitative methodology to tie results to a particular theory

2.   Policy

Ongoing interest in the field of online education interests me, particularly from the point of view of keeping practitioner education a key issue. Research that is carried out purely from a top-down institutional perspective is unlikely to produced sustainable benefits for the education system or society.

3.   Experience

Following on from previous points, my experience of online education is that it is most powerful as a constructivist environment, to support communities of inquiry and learning by doing.

Potential to finish research project

For this assessed research project I am confident that I can deliver the required results, and show that my methodology for design and data collection has been adequate. Questions about the impact of my research will need to be addressed for future efforts, since online learning projects will be focussed on areas of greatest business interest.

Arguing the case for the research

(a) Can the topic convince our judges?
The project should sufficiently convince my academic judges, although from a work perspective I will need to convince colleagues that the project has sufficient merit as a developmental tool for future work, and show that my approach to sharing results and insights can benefit the wider team.

(b) Is it feasible for me to undertake it?
I believe that this research project is well within my capabilities, and can be completed satisfactorily within the given time frame.

(i)  The field of enquiry
Research in this area is nothing particularly new, since there has been significant research into the field by academic researchers. Neither should this be considered as a theoretical study, although the context will always be different from others. The real interest here is how policies of using online education methods are succeeding against our objectives, and how the use of these approaches compares between academic origins and the actual implementation in the workplace.

(ii) The research issue / question
Related to the issues from previous questions, my key questions for research are based around the experiences of people participating in the use of new types of media, and ensuring that practitioner approaches can match the desire for business results.

Making sense of what we have

My interpretation of results may well draw on theory, although this will not be the primary lens. My main focus will be on judging whether activities have met objectives and how they can be modified for improvements, and also to identify what course of action should not be taken. My approach to truth here is realising how others perceive it, and using this to inform practice.

References

• Newby, Peter (2010).  Research Methods for Education Chapter 2 p.31-65

Where, who, what, how and why?

Some questions based on Creswell (2009) and answers...

a) Where is the setting for your research project?

Multiple offices of an educational services provider in the United Kingdom.

b) Who are the people that you will study (or what is the thing that you will study)?

Company employees with responsibility for managing the performance of others, participating in a people management skills programme. Participants come from a range of departments.

I will be studying the experiences that participants have with online interactions which are required before and after the central face-to-face training event.

c) What methods do you plan to use to collect data?

Survey questions of participants...

Central question: How would participants describe their experiences of using online interactions to support a face-to-face training event?

• Describe your experience of socialising with other participants who you interacted with online before the training event
• Describe your experience of preparing for a face-to-face event where online interaction was required, relative to an event with no prior interaction
• Describe your experience of participating in online interactions around course related content after the face-to-face event

d) How will you analyse the data you collect?

Comparison of individual experiences of participants, with a view to emerging patterns

• Across all participants
• Within separate cohorts
• Experiences of socialisation activities
• Experiences of knowledge sharing activities

And my own question...

e) Why am I doing this (besides needing a project for assessment)?

Rapid change in all areas of business brings an increased demand for effective training of employees, with lower budgets and time scales than ever before. Face-to-face training, while still highly valued, is expensive in terms of removing employees from their regular work activities, and the cost for transport and accommodation. There is also a question of how effectively the content of a 'formal' learning intervention of this type can be effectively transferred back to the workplace. Online interactions are of interest as a means for extending and enhancing the learning experience for participants.

References:

• Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. (3rd edition) Sage.

Time to dig deeper?

My initial literature review led me to a very comprehensive article by Ke & Hoadley (2009), which was very much a centre-piece for my (admittedly still thin) literature review. Whilst I'm keen to continue using this and related articles, I'm now realising after the last few weeks of considering research methods that I need to dig a little deeper, and in a different direction. The problem is that the article focuses on evaluation research, whereas I really need some good pointers on action research, as I believe this will be of more benefit in the qualitative research project I actually intend to do.

 

One useful resource that I have come across is an overview of action research (O'Brien, 1998). Although this is a slightly older article, O'Brien covers a lot of the points made in my earlier reading, and with a slightly different perspective on how it might be used. He also gives case studies of early use of computer mediated conferencing, and how action research was utilised to give the practitioners and participants useful insights that improved practice. Most tellingly, O'Brien points out that action research in itself is becoming a vital tool for organisations that are increasingly interdependent in a climate of change, something that fits well with my worldview.

 

"If you want it done right, you may as well do it yourself"

 

Johnson (2001) offers a good overview of online interaction and communities, again slightly ahead of the review by Ke & Hoadley (2009). One point that immediately caught my eye, is the acknowledgement of attrition as being a key problem - within the workplace, simply getting people to participate in learning activities can be problematic, and online interactions even more so. There is also convergence with the works of Wenger, and of Palloff & Pratt, but again no mention of Salmon, nor of Anderson.

 

References:

• Johnson, C.M. (2001). A Survey of Current Practice on Online Communities of Practice.  Internet and Higher Education, Vol.4 pp.45-60. Available at: <http://repository.maestra.net/valutazione/MaterialeSarti/articoli/Johnson-Survey.pdf> [Accessed March 2013]
• Ke, F. and Hoadley, C. (2009). Evaluating Online Learning Communities. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(4), pp.487-510.
• O'Brien, R. (1998). An Overview of the Methodological Approach of Action Research. [online] Available at: <http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/xx%20ar%20final.htm> [Accessed March 2013]

Creating the research questions

So how hard can it be to ask a question? Depends on how important the question is really! Newby (2010, Ch. 14) helpfully breaks down the different types of research and the types of questions that we might associate with them, to ensure that our data stays true to the purpose that we set out with. In particular, the Action Research school of though appeals to me, because it serves to educate the practitioners themselves. The method embraces uncertainty, and has an interesting parallel with the concept of Constructive Alignment (Biggs & Tang, 2007, Ch. 4), in that we can gain insight into whether or not participants are actually learning what we profess to be teaching them. For courses with emphasis on people management skills, and such a broad range of applications, this could be invaluable for determining success and continued development.

Creswell (2009, Ch. 7) helps to narrow down the research question strategy further for qualitative and quantitative approaches. In particular, he gives advice about the choice of language to ensure that our research questions serve their intended purpose, and ensure that answers aren't biased towards (or against) theories through a poor choice of words. If our purpose is to avoid referencing theories directly, this could help to ensure that we gain richer insights that aren't clouded by arguments about theories or hypotheses.

After an initial attempt at devising research questions where I realised I did the complete opposite of what Creswell suggests, I have refined my research questions to the following:

Primary:

• How would participants describe their experiences of using online interactions to support a face-to-face training event?

Secondary:

• Describe your experience of socialising with other participants who you interacted with online before the training event
• Describe your experience of preparing for a face-to-face event where online interaction was required, relative to an event with no prior interaction
• Describe your experience of participating in online interactions around course related content after the face-to-face event

References:

• Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 3rd Ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
• Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. (3rd edition) Sage.
• Newby, P. (2010). Research Methods for Education. Pearson.