Spring 2019 - EDUC 904 G032

Fieldwork III (5)

Class Number: 5861

Delivery Method: In Person

Overview

  • Course Times + Location:

    Location: TBA

Description

COURSE DETAILS:

Meeting Days/Times:
Friday, 4:30 - 9:00 pm
Saturday, 8:30 am - 4:30 pm

Meeting Dates:
January 11, 12, 24*, 26
February 15, 16
March 1, 2, 15, 16**, 29 and 30
**Note the March 16th class is optional

Meeting Location:
SFU Surrey Campus, Room 3270 (*Jan 24th in Room 2750)

Course Description:
To maximize understanding of Imaginative Education (IE) it is essential that in-service teachers actively engage in "researching" IE practices in their individual teaching contexts. As a central part of the course, each student will design and carry out an action research inquiry project in an educational setting of their choosing. Early classes will focus on the philosophical and practical dimensions of research culture, while later ones will assist students in the interpretation and communication of findings and reflective inquiry practices. Between classes discussion will take place in an on-line forum (i.e., Canvas).

COURSE-LEVEL EDUCATIONAL GOALS:

  • Develop a disposition of inquiry and critical reflection to examine educational practices
  • Conduct a literature review and connect readings to field study project
  • Participate in a “critical friend group” to provide/receive thoughtful feedback to/from peers
  • Identify a research question, design a proposal, plan for field study and conduct an action inquiry project  
NOTE: For students joining this course from the on-line Graduate Certificate in Imaginative Education Program you will have a choice of 1) conducting a new action research project, 2) extending the project you began during the on-line course, or 3) conducting a directed readings project that is of a comparable quality and scope as an AR project (i.e., of publishable quality) in which you will explore and deepen some aspect of your practice in relation to the principles of Imaginative Education. With the exception of dates and times set aside to meet with course mentor(s) Graduate Certificate students will be expected to participate in all class activities.

Grading

  • Inquiry Project Consent Letters / Ethics Forms Complete/Incomplete%
  • Participation in Critical Friend Groups/Class Discussion 20%
  • Suggest a Reading (Lit Review) Complete/Incomplete%
  • Initial Research Sketch 20%
  • Fieldwork/Final Action Research Report 60%

NOTES:

  • Inquiry Project Consent Letters/Research Ethics Forms – Complete applications to conduct research in your respective districts. Design and draft the research consent letters and ethics forms you will require for parents and legal guardians, and students/participants. Templates, examples, troubleshooting and advice will be provided.
  • Critical Friend Group // Discussion & Participation -- Participating in a Critical Friend Group (CFG) – providing and receiving constructive feedback on research projects – is an essential component of Action Research (AR) and a requirement for completing EDUC 904. Active, consistent and respectful participation in your CFG as well as thoughtful contributions to weekly activities thus comprise a large percentage of your final grade in order to emphasize its significance. This does NOT mean that you have to comment on EVERY thread “for the sake of commenting,” but note the importance of sharing, questioning and co-creating an environment in which such activities are encouraged.
  • Suggest a Reading (Lit Review) – As we begin to (a.) read through the literature on action research, as well as literature related to our own research projects and (b.) get a sense of the proposed research inquiries from those in our Critical Friend Group – be a swell friend and suggest a reading to someone in your CFG that you think might help them come to a better understanding of AR or IE, or perhaps even something related to their proposed research project.
  • Initial Action Research Sketch -- Prepare a description of the topic(s) you are interested in researching, the reason(s) for your interest, what you know about the topic thus far, what you need to find more about, and some preliminary ideas about how you plan to collect the data. Tell us a bit about the context, potential allies or co-researchers, and any concerns or uncertainties you may have. Along with posting your own proposal, please make comments on the proposals of all of the people in your Critical Friend Group (and feel free to comment, make suggestions, provide resources, etc. on any other proposals).
  • Action Research Project Fieldwork -- Conducting research in the field always comes with surprises and unforeseeable challenges. Your fieldwork mark will not be based on the data you gather per se or whether or not your project was objectively “successful,” but on the validity of your research process, the amount of planning and care you put into gathering data with appropriate methods, and the ethical considerations you make working with participants. Remember, data collection methods can always be reworked, abandoned for more appropriate methods, or supplemented by additional methods. It is not uncommon to try one method, re-evaluate, and try again. Your fieldwork mark will be based on the rigour, validity and care you put into this process. Students will be required to write a short self-evaluation of the research process by the end of the course.
  • Action Research Project Final Report / Communication of Findings -- Your final report will include all key components of an action research project including: a title page, an abstract, a table of contents, an introduction or vignette, situating the research in your own teaching context and/or epistemological approach, a literature review, the story of your data collection and research process, some analysis and interpretation of the data, and any relevant appendices (examples of student work, copies of interview questions, focus group transcriptions, etc.). Technically there is no word/page limit but reports tend to be between 30-80 pages, please space papers 1.5 and submit as a pdf.

REQUIREMENTS:

LEARNING COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS AND ON-LINE ETIQUETTE
It is my hope that this program will support your growth as a thinker, writer and teacher-researcher. To this end, the course is designed to develop what Scardamalia (2002) calls a “knowledge-building community.” Within a community one feels a sense of belonging. One feels safe and is therefore comfortable to take risks, make mistakes, and share feelings, hopes and concerns openly. All students are expected to interact and participate in ways that support this kind of supportive, caring, knowledge-focused, learning community.  

Golden Rule: Respect -- All students are expected to demonstrate respect for:  

  • Learning Time: (e.g. arriving on time to scheduled meetings, being prepared for class, using shared time effectively, completing collaborative work according to established due dates etc.)  
  • Learning From Difference: (e.g. approaching new ideas with an open mind, embracing epistemological diversity, recognizing different ways we make sense of and express understanding)
  • Each Other: Always be aware of the risk in on-line communications that your comment or question may be misunderstood or your “tone” interpreted differently than intended—we all know that text never fully replaces face-to-face communication. Tone and attitude can be easily mistaken. To avoid misunderstandings and to support each other’s growth, please ensure your interactions with your peers tend to include something positive about shared ideas or demonstrate appreciation for discourse. After providing some positive feedback we encourage all students to respectfully ask questions or challenge the thinking. You may offer an alternative view and, when possible, tie that view to some kind of textual support. It is very important that we provide each other support and critique as both are required for growth.   Here is a link to some basic rules of “netiquette”—rules that are good to keep in mind. The Core Rules of Netiquette by Virginia Shea (http://www.albion.com/netiquette/corerules.html)  
Expectations for Student Participation --What does participation look like in this course? How often must you contribute to discussion? What kind of contributions should you make? The beauty of online discussion forums is that they offer everyone time to reflect and contribute to a discussion—this is not something that always happens in a traditional classroom. You will have ample opportunity to work individually, but also frequently with partners, peers and “critical friend groups.” You will have many opportunities to participate and you are each expected to do so consistently throughout the course.  

General guidelines for participation:
  1. Participate in every discussion by a) providing your own perspective, answer, or idea and b) commenting and responding to others—just as you would in a “live” conversation.
  2. Quality trumps quantity. A brief contribution that is insightful and thought-provoking is better than a much longer, rambling contribution that is unfocused or goes off topic.
  3. Your primary or “main” post/contribution to a discussion topic or prompt should be 1-2 paragraphs in length (somewhere between 100-300 words). Maximum: Your main post should not exceed 500 words.
  4. Stay focused on the question or topic in your post. If applicable, incorporate quotations from assigned readings (including reference and page numbers).
  5. Remember that your post continues a conversation—that is what the “discussion thread” is. Link to what has been said before, if applicable.
  6. Your responses to others should not be limited to “I agree” or “Great”—instead, elaborate upon why you agree/disagree. Link to readings or others’ ideas.
  7. Strive to keep your contributions to discussion forums on topic—Link to excerpts from readings/text or link to others’ ideas.
  8. Think about your posts as “written conversation”—an equivalent to the discussion we might have in a face-to-face learning environment. There is no need, therefore, to worry too much about sounding formal or “academic.”  
So, as you participate in this course, you might ask yourself the following kinds of questions:  

Is my contribution timely? Is it readable? Does my contribution indicate a detailed understanding of the assigned text? Does it reveal that I have heard and understand my colleagues’ ideas? Is my contribution insightful and concise? Does it add something to the dialogue? Is it provocative? Does it indicate my willingness to re-evaluate and expand my thinking? Does it show that I am actively working to make sense of the “web of ideas” being explored? Am I productively contributing to the team of learners of which I am part?  

From: Boettcher, J. & Conrad, R. (2010). The online teaching survival guide: Simple and practical pedagogical tips. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.  

On Being Prepared For Each Class -- There is nothing worse than discussions that fall flat or activities that are stagnant because people have not properly prepared to discuss assigned readings. It is NOT enough to skim through a reading before class. Rather, the topics of the articles need to be fresh in your mind. You need to have closely read and have a vivid awareness of readings for the start of each week of class.  

Assessment Rubric for Participation:
(A Range) Student’s oral and written contributions consistently demonstrate openness to learning and transformation. Student’s work frequently indicates their dedication to improving the quality, coherence, and utility of ideas. Student often engages in self-reflection and critique. Student’s contributions consistently include connections to other ideas expressed in assigned readings or expressed by fellow students. It is clear that the student has a deep and nuanced understanding of course themes. Student acknowledges points of epistemological harmony and discordance between their ideas and others’ ideas. Student demonstrates consistently high level of respect and commitment to group activities.  

(B Range) Student’s oral and written contributions mostly demonstrate openness to learning and transformation. Student’s work usually indicates their dedication to improving the quality, coherence, and utility of ideas. Student sometimes engages in self-reflection and critique but not consistently. Student’s contributions sometimes include connections to other ideas expressed in assigned readings or expressed by fellow students but typically they do not. Student demonstrates understanding of course themes but does not indicate depth of knowledge or nuanced understanding of other ideas. Student occasionally acknowledges points of epistemological harmony and discordance between their ideas and others’ ideas but fails to elaborate upon these. Student is usually committed to group activities.  

(C Range) Student’s oral and written contributions only occasionally demonstrate openness to learning and transformation. Student’s work more often reveals rigidity in thinking rather than a disposition to improving the quality, coherence, and utility of ideas. Based on oral and written contributions, there is little evidence that the student engages in self-reflection and critique. Student’s contributions rarely include connections to other ideas expressed in assigned readings or expressed by fellow students. Student work does not reveal depth of understanding of course ideas, peers’ contributions, or a close reading of text. Student rarely acknowledges or recognizes points of epistemological harmony and discordance between their ideas and others’ ideas. Student demonstrates inconsistent and unsatisfactory participation in group activities.  

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR ASSIGNMENTS

A/A+:
Outstanding grasp of concepts and issues; evidence of careful and precise reading of required texts and of other related texts; ability to accurately relate theoretical discussions to practice; critical evaluation of readings and discussions and lectures giving evidence of independent and consistent judgment; fluent and appropriate use of relevant concepts; careful attention to the ideas of others, and courtesy in addressing them; imaginative organization and presentation of written work.
A-:
As above but at a somewhat lower level of acuteness.
B+:
Clear use of relevant literature and background reading; appropriate use of relevant concepts; sound structure and good organization; sound critical evaluation; linkages with wider issues made clearly; courtesy in dealing with others’ ideas and opinions.
B:
Reasonably accurate grasp of key concepts and issues; analyses and discussions relevant and appropriate; adequately clear structure to written work; readings sensibly incorporated into arguments; evaluative discussions made accurately and sensibly; courtesy in dealing with others’ ideas and opinions.
B-:
As above, but at a somewhat lower level of acuteness.
C/C-:
Little evidence of required reading or little evidence that it has been adequately understood; limited grasp of the concepts being discussed; divergence from the main point to only peripherally or superficially related items; largely dealing with anecdotal or concrete instances rather than with the level of principles and theories; largely descriptive writing with little analysis, though showing some grasp of the main issues.
F:
Solely descriptive and only peripheral points engaged; lack of evidence of reading or limited understanding of what read; conceptual confusion, irrelevant and muddled material poorly organized.

Materials

REQUIRED READING:

Parsons, J., Hewson, K., Adrian, L., & Day, N. (2013). Engaging in action research: A practical guide to teacher-conducted research for educators and school leaders. Calgary: Brush Education Inc. www.brusheducation.ca/catalog/arts-education-social-sciences/books/engaging-in-action-research

Egan, K. (1997). The Educated Mind: How Cognitive Tools Shape Our Understanding. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (paperback).
ISBN: 0-226-19039-0

Required Articles - All articles should be available via the SFU Library database and will be posted on Canvas. 

Additional readings related to individual research projects will be required in literature review.

Graduate Studies Notes:

Important dates and deadlines for graduate students are found here: http://www.sfu.ca/dean-gradstudies/current/important_dates/guidelines.html. The deadline to drop a course with a 100% refund is the end of week 2. The deadline to drop with no notation on your transcript is the end of week 3.

Registrar Notes:

SFU’s Academic Integrity web site http://www.sfu.ca/students/academicintegrity.html is filled with information on what is meant by academic dishonesty, where you can find resources to help with your studies and the consequences of cheating.  Check out the site for more information and videos that help explain the issues in plain English.

Each student is responsible for his or her conduct as it affects the University community.  Academic dishonesty, in whatever form, is ultimately destructive of the values of the University. Furthermore, it is unfair and discouraging to the majority of students who pursue their studies honestly. Scholarly integrity is required of all members of the University. http://www.sfu.ca/policies/gazette/student/s10-01.html

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY: YOUR WORK, YOUR SUCCESS