First Semester

Ok first exam for the last semester is out of the way one more to go.  I'm hoping that the course work marks won't take to long to appear either.  This has to be the worst part waiting for it all to get marked and verified.

The new semester begins on the 2nd February 2011 and 5 new modules will be introduced.  i have had a look at the new timetable and it is not very friendly.  Early morning single lectures with a huge gap to a late afternoon lecture.  I really hoped they would get better organised and block the lectures so that those of us who need to work to could do extra shifts.  I need to fit in 15 days with City Boys School too for the Student Associates Scheme so that should prove interesting.

Research Critique

The paper being reviewed is titled "How is the Training of IT Managed in Schools?" Initially this seemed like a good title for the report which suggests the report will discover how IT training is managed within an educational environment.

On page 62 of the report the author states "The main focus of this study will be the management of training employees to use the Information Technology in schools." On this basis it would have been appropriate to discuss the different schools being observed and investigated for the case study; however the very next paragraph on page 62, under the sub heading of "Project aims and objectives" then states "The aim of this study is to investigate the management and training of Information Technology within Park Community School." This seems to be a change of direction for the report. It is understood that often a small sample is required to test a theory and then attempt to generalize about the results and predict what may be the case in similar situations, but moving from the plural of schools to the singular school has altered the dynamic of the report.

The author then goes on to state that "As the author has been working at the school for 2 years now and another family member for 10 years it will be relatively easy to obtain the research." Obviously this information is required to understand the opinion and point of view of the person writing the report; however this seems to influence the approach to the case study in an adverse way. The research which was conducted was centred on the one school, which was not the aim of the report based on the reports title. A better method would have been to approach a number of schools and the local authority to investigate the methods used for training and a sample of answers of several questionnaires from a variety of schools used to present the findings. I appreciate that this would have taken some extra time, but this should have been discussed in the report. On another note the researcher claims to have strict time limits to the research and then proceeds to talk about the difficulties of gathering the data, which is in contrast to the previous statement about it being relatively easy to obtain the research.

Primary research conducted for the report was in the form of questionnaires, interviews and observations. There are no structured examples of the questionnaires as evidence in the report, which makes it difficult to determine how good the process was and whether or not the researcher has managed to discuss the findings accurately within the report. The interview questions were included in the appendix but they seem very brief. The section of the report which does discuss the findings of the questionnaire highlights only the first three questions. Were these the only questions asked?

The secondary research which supports the report is comprehensive, and discusses the different books used to support the case study. A small number of quotes were used and have been cited correctly. The bibliography contains a full list of the material used to support the project and this was useful for checking the accuracy of the information contained in the report. The majority of the books and journals listed were reasonably up to date.

A section sub-titled Interviews within Chapter 4 Titled Results, the writer alludes to a discussion about the interviews and yet presents very little information. The section describes a software system used within the school but does not say which questions were asked how they were answered or give any analysis of the findings. Additionally an interview about "How IT training is managed in schools?" should have included a description of the equipment available and the views of the interviewee. To my knowledge none were recorded for review within the report. This would have helped present the findings and given the research more credibility.

Within the report there is a good discussion of observation techniques and the impression gained by the author during the observation and the experiences of actually using the equipment within the school for teaching. A comment about the lack of training is given yet later in the report the author acknowledges that training had been given by ICT employees. This section also goes on to describe in great detail all the equipment available for use within the school and it was found to be useful supporting material in the reading of the report.

A Methodology was discussed in the report but it caused confusion as the writer of the report clearly states "The methodology I am going to use will be DSDM." This is not a common form of conducting research in this particular field as it is more suited to Software Development. DSDM stands for Dynamic Software Development Method, which is based on Agile development Methodology. A better approach would have been to state that a qualitative design to the research was going to be used. The use of the term DSDM just confuses the reader of the report. In addition on page 83 the further confusion exists as the researcher claims that quantitative research uses questionnaires, whereas this method of research is qualitative. Quantitative data could have been formed from the qualitative research by coding the responses to the questionnaire but no evidence of this exists within the section.

Arguments used within the report for change management are sound however they do not directly concern how the training of IT is managed in schools. It is understood that new developments in IT hardware and software have meant changes have affected the schools administration and the use of IT within the learning environment, but a lengthy discussion of change management was not appropriate in this instance. Had a recent change taken place the concepts may have been of more use but in this instance the IT that was in use within the school had been in place for some time. The only new (2 years or more) change had been the Management Information System use for administration by teachers and the office staff.

Background information such as the discussion about ITiS (Information Technology in Schools) an initiative developed by the Department for Education and Science was used well to support the need recognized within in the report in terms of further education and training of teachers and staff in the use of IT within the school. It points out the fact that grants are available for training and other support is available for schools. Good points were made and the supporting literature was used effectively.

A sub heading "Comparing research data to secondary data" is used in chapter 5 page 95, but there does not appear to be any discussion of the comparison in this section. However what is included is a further discussion about ITiS and the use of a Management Information System for administration purposes within the school. Therefore the sub-heading for this section is either incorrect or the author lost their direction.

The Risk log for the case study was incomplete in the copy that was received. Obviously it is difficult to comment but the parts that were present discussed the ethical approach that was required for working within the school and also recorded incidents where the researcher came in to contact with children whilst conducting the research. The discussion by the author of important facts pertaining to Child Safety and the Data Protection Act were relevant and useful as a means of explaining some of the strict controls required when carrying out this type of study.

A reflective section was included within the report and this section actually proved to be some of the better work done by the author. They recognized that improvements could be made to the research that was carried out and possible advances in technology could bring about new changes and the need for further research, once these changes had been made.

The conclusion given in the report was negative," saying not much training had been given", and goes on to criticize the lack of training provided, surely that is the responsibility of the school manager, who was not interviewed in this case study. Also the researcher states that they did not have any access to the training records for the staff and teachers in the school, so how can a judgement be made without all the facts. Speculation about whether training had been provided is irrelevant, the mechanisms are in place to provide training and the fact that the author had not received this training should not have influenced the findings within the report. It is important to identify who has received and elected to take advantage of training schemes run during the school term in the form of INSET days and other training initiatives used for the continued development of educators and their support teams. Another point that is raised is the lack of training for the equipment in the section titled "Using the equipment" on page 91 the writer seems confused," there has been no training of the equipment but it has been used when teaching. The basics were taught by ICT employees showing how to use the equipment before teaching" This statement makes very little sense, either no training had been provided or limited training had been provided. It is difficult to determine what the author meant.

In conclusion the report contains some interesting facts and does provoke a desire to read further into the subject area. However more could have been done to give a balanced view of how IT training is managed in schools. The report presents a biased view of one school based in Hampshire and does not attempt to compare the findings with other schools in the same county or Local Education Authority. If this was the intention of the author then the title for the report is flawed and should have read "How IT training is managed in Park Community School". More effort could have been made to ensure that the sub headings in the report were accurate and the sections actually contain the material that the heading alludes to.

As stated earlier the secondary data described within the report was accurate and enlightening, however this did not improve the quality of the report which contains a lot of repetition between sections of a similar headings in different chapters.

The main message in the report is the lack of training for the use of IT in schools and the fact the researcher feels that they could have received better training in the use of the equipment in the school. However realistically, no matter how much training is provided, this does not ensure competence, but the increased use and adoption of these technologies to assist in the education of pupils can increase the abilities of the teacher and support staff.

Research Methods as a Core Module

As a second year undergraduate I have benefitted from this module. It has given me a toolbox to assist me with my final year research and other skills to take forward into my career as an educator. I have also discovered that group work can be beneficial to the learning experience; however I think this method would benefit from a more formal structure.

By this I mean that some sort of contract be drawn up and agreed between members of a group, so that no group member is under any illusion of the responsibility to his or her colleagues and the level of commitment required to complete a group task. This could also be carried forward to a more strict agreement, where aside from the deadlines posed by tutors for hand in dates, a group would agree a draft date where all work must be posted to a group blog or similar so that it can be assessed by the peer group and edited accordingly. This type of project management would be similar to a formal working environment, so that the effort of all members of the group was equal. Rather than one member leaving things to the last minute and the other members feeling obliged to perform extra work, just in case the lazy one (for want of a better description) fails to deliver any content. Despite various emails and group meetings where the project and content is discussed a review by the tutor of the content at a fixed point with some type of feedback would offer some support to working group to apply pressure to the failing colleague. As all this is happening inside a learning environment for the purpose of education I feel the tutor should take a firmer approach to members of a group who fail to meet the requirements of the contract drawn up between the group members at the outset. It is not reasonable for members of a group to lose marks due to the lack of effort by one party.

The use of a blog for creative thinking and learning has been useful. It has given me the opportunity to express my feelings and record my reflections at various times. I am glad there has been no format imposed at this stage and having the freedom to write as I like has been cathartic. It has allowed me to challenge my own perceptions of situations and share with an audience, who by their own choice read my material.

Having the opportunity to read others work via the learning journal in the Victory E-Learning environment has been useful too, but I would have liked more comments from the lecturers or suitably qualified members of the faculty, as this would have perhaps prompted more effort and improve the level of understanding and the quality of the work written. I am not saying I want a scoring system in place but I feel every post to the learning journal should have a type of read receipt from the lecturer or person reviewing the work, so that the student would at least know when their work had been read. A small comment either positive or negative would also incite reflection from the student, thereby improving future postings. Also I think that postings in the learning journal could be limited for viewing until you have posted your version for the particular week. The reason for this is, I feel that other students can benefit from looking at completed work, which means that they are not necessarily using their own skills to produce work and merely re-wording content from other students. This may be difficult to achieve with the current system that is in use at Portsmouth University. I have no problem having a chat box or drop box for peer advice and questions but the actual posting of completed work should be private until every student is working on the same level or weeks activities.

RSMET week 8 Activities

CDs containing the confidential personal details of 25 million child benefit recipients have been lost by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) 2007.

To decide the sample size if you wanted to be 99% confident that that sampling error % (confidence interval) was below 1%, you could use the calculator below.  I have included the link for you to try it yourself.

http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm

Taken from the article.

“The data contained on the discs contained the child benefit information of 25 million claims.  The data was made up from names, addresses, dates of birth, and National Insurance numbers.  It also contained the bank account details of more than 7 million parents, guardians and carers claiming child benefit.”

http://www.silicon.com/special-features/digital-defences/2007/11/20/missing-25-million-child-benefit-records-39169217/

Using the data contained on the discs a number of methods could be used to sample the data for statistical analysis.  The Sampling Frame is the contents of the 2 cds. In the first instance I suggest assigning a Number to individual files once the data has been sorted in alphabetical order based on the surname of the claimants, so that each record could be given a unique id.

Sampling the data

To find a Systematic sample of the population 2500000/16630 = 1503 (population/sample size = interval number) this means we could compare the data from every 1503rd record.  This spreads the sample over the population of 2.5 million (2500000) and makes it easier to conduct than a random sample. 

It would also be possible to stratify the data based on age or number of children per claim/household this would give us unique groups to test and produce statistics which would describe the differences based on the age of the children or numbers of children per family.

Using this method could achieve greater precision, the members within each set would be similar in attributes making it possible to analyse each set individually and then compare the data achieved across the population sample.

It would also be possible to divide the population within the frame into regional groups and draw conclusions based on a regional representation and then compare the findings.  This could be a good method for determining regional variations within the population sample.

Using this method on the entire population within the frame and then selecting a random number from each of the regions would also provide some interesting statistical data.  For example families in the north of the country tend to be larger and therefore claim more in benefits.  (This example is only used to highlight a point and has no basis of fact.)

Quota sampling would be possible but not as effective as stratified sampling as the sample would be non-random so therefore not as representative of the population.

Therefore in this situation I would prefer to use a stratified sample.

RSMET week 7 Activities

7.1

The difference between Mixed Methods Research and Multi-method Research is, Multi method incorporates both qualitative and quantitative data at any point in the research whereas Multi-method has both qualitative and quantitative projects that can stand on their own, but are used in a project to support each other, using triangulation to ensure the credibility and validity of the research.

In my opinion the use of a mixed methods approach to research can improve the credibility of the work being undertaken.  A purely quantitative piece however interesting the statistics, would be a difficult report to write.  Although the information would be important I feel the addition of qualitative data would assist with the triangulation of the research.  This method would also give a greater opportunity to discuss the issues raised by the comparison of the data.

7.2

The method of research used within the study project I am critiquing uses both questionnaires and interviews to collect the data within the case study.  The report attempts to compare the data from both methods and does achieve some correlation of opinions.  The overall conclusion drawn in the report enforces the opinion of the author.  It is interesting to note that the researcher in this case used a previous position of employment to gain access to the data recorded in the report and I question whether this affected the outcome.  

I don’t think the credibility of the data can be questioned but the methods used to obtain the data in a short time frame may have affected the results.  The way the report is written appears to be quite last minute and poorly thought out.  The data gathered from the questionnaire is not discussed at depth and this has caused the report to suffer in what otherwise could have been an interesting topic.  The use of the interview material in the report has not been discussed in great detail.  I felt more could have been said to give the reader of the report more understanding of the topic.  The use of modern journals to support the theory of the author was good and could have improved the report had the results within these reports been compared to the data gathered during this case study.

INSAD update

At last there seems to be some light at the end of the tunnel. The body of work completed for this module is currently being refined and collated. The ETHICS templates are almost complete so now I just need to include some reflection. The study diary needs updating and some extra content
adding but overall I am pleased with the amount of work I have put in. At times some of the tasks have not seemed relevant, but as a final piece of work it does all link together.

The fact remains that the delivery of the subject material could have been better. For example the use of Power Point Presentations in the lectures to support the content delivered by the lecturer would have been useful. It would have allowed students to use the keywords on the screen to ask
questions and form Mind Maps from the lecture to assist in the writing of the study diary. I'm not suggesting that the lecturer provide all the answers just some pointers to enable discussion.

A group of us second year students have also been working on a mini project which has offered some further insight into Systems Thinking.  Peter Bednar invited 6 of us to attend a lecture by Prof Frank Stowell; the theme of the lecture was CLIC's (client led information system creation). The
Professors approach to teaching and helping the third year group whose lecture we piggy backed was as I have described above. In addition a collection of notes and a printed copy of the Power Points were distributed. To this a case study was also added and is being used to develop understanding in Systems Thinking. The Seminar which followed was used to break into small groups and work as a project team to discover the problem within the case study and create definitions which we used to create a presentation for the rest of the class. Working in this way has given me a greater understanding of the requirements within the role of an analyst and facilitator.

I believe if this approach had been adopted within Intermediate Systems Analysis and Design more students would have gained a better understanding of what was required for the Newsagent case study and how to perform the tasks within the ETHICS templates.

Apathy of students performing group work

Ok like it or not I am getting back on my soap box!!

Isn't it about time more students tasked with performing a given project within a group setting became more proactive?  Why does it take so long to get involved?

The theme of the work has been issued.  The forum and tools have been suggested, the only thing left to do is actually add a post of you own and contribute.  It's not a choice you can make.  It is your responsibility to contribute.  The rest of us who have made an effort to get involved and use the our Personal Learning Network to share information, such as bookmarks to interesting topics using Delicious, are waiting to see the thoughts of others.

The marking criteria for the Rsmet module requires that you publish a blog and comment on others.  What can I comment on if you’re not contributing?  How can we begin a discussion if you won't comment on my work?

I just hope that you won't expect me to rush and comment on your work when you have left it to the last-minute?

I realize group work is not for everybody and to be honest I dislike it when I have to rely on others for course marks and grades.  I would prefer to have my own efforts marked regardless of how the group performed.  Obviously in a real work setting this would be different, but I don't feel that all the laws of business can be applied to students in a learning environment.  My fellow students are not contractually obliged to perform in any particular manner in regard to commitment to group work yet my grades will suffer without their contribution.