Sunday, June 21, 2015

Week 3 - IDT 8092

This was a difficult week for me. Writing was more difficult than finding articles. Dr. Weaver said it would be more fun. I'm not sure I agree.

I finalized my first draft today after many hours on Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. I kept hoping I would get in a groove. I'm not sure I did. It does feel good to have a draft done, and I'm actually looking forward to going back and revising things this week. I did a little bit of revising as I was writing just and to see if things were making sense. The process of revisiting what I had written seemed to help me think about the overall flow.

This is what I struggled with:

1. Too many terms and definitions. My topic is on computer-assisted instruction, intelligent tutoring systems, computer-based education, adaptive learning, cognitive tutors, personalized instructional systems, etc. These are terms that basically describe the same thing. I struggled to come up with a common definition to fit my situation. I also struggled on when to use my terminology and when to use the terminology used by the author of the article. I don't want to take things out of context and misrepresent info, but at the same time I want to be clear and consistent in my writing. I went with "computer-based adaptive learning (CBAL)" which, to me, represents what I'm focusing on. I hope I'm going down the right path.

2. Feeling confident that I have "everything." There are so many articles on my topic that I feel like I could spend several weeks finding more information. I do feel like I've identified most of the key studies which is probably the important thing. It was/is hard for me to accept that I've reviewed the literature thoroughly when I know there is more out there.

3. Mixed research results. Some studies indicate CBAL has a positive impact. Other studies show little or no impact. I know that my job with the literature review is to present the body of research on the topic -- good and bad. I struggled with the disparity in results though, especially when there is evidence that adaptive/personalized learning is a growing trend. I think a lot of the disparity has to do with the different systems/programs being researched and when the studies were conducted. The struggle for me was to present the findings that are measuring the same thing. This relates to #1 above.


This is what I thought went well:

1. Identifying holes. With 60 articles you would think I have more than enough info. Within the first section of my paper I realized I had holes in the information I was presenting. I thought the process of seeing those holes was very clear. I think going back and looking for specific studies that relate to exactly what I'm looking for will help my literature review become more complete.

2. Organizing my info. I used a Google Form to take notes on my articles last week. This week I sorted my spreadsheet based on my 4 stems and then began to look for themes. The process was fairly smooth. I'm going to revisit my spreadsheet again this week as I make revisions.

I'm glad this week is behind me. I'm looking forward to making my rough draft not so rough.



No comments:

Post a Comment