hopper, 1993 [abstract, toc, switchboard, references]

Courseware projects in advanced educational computing environments
Mary E. Hopper, Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN

Methods [Overview]

The naturalistic inquiry paradigm was chosen as a framework for this research, and this choice also guided the selection of an emphasis on qualitative methods.
 
The study also provides a concrete illustration of how various computational technologies can contribute to improvements in each of the phases of the qualitative research process. The cummulative effect of these improvements were intended to be an overall improvement in the validity and value of the study.
 
The following table provides a set of explanations of the ways in which specific computational capabilities support or expand capabilities in each phase of the qualitative research process.

 

Qualitative Methodology

Computation Support

Type and Function

Improvement of Research in

Terms of Validity and Value

Problem Definition

On-line literature search and database for later retrieval.

Unusually broad, exhaustive and efficient review and integration of relevant literature.

Initial

Research

Design

Database for efficient storage, retrieval and analysis of data collected during the problem definition.

Made multiple data sources reasonable,  increasing number of participants, situations and organizations.  This increased the validity through more breadth of perspective and extensive triangulation opportunities.

Data Collection

Electronic notes by tape recorder and on-the-spot word processing.

Allowed for both more accurate and manageable direct data capture during interviews and observation record after.

Data Analysis

and

Emergent Design

Extensive database with an easily editable and re-definable coding scheme in hypertext.

Because the data was immediately accessible in a flexibly coded scheme, gradual evolving interpretations and knowledge structures could be rapidly accommodated and used for reevaluation and modification of the research design. Working definitions of key concepts were coded, applied and redefined on the fly.  Flexible linking allowed early formulations to be easily tested, reformulated and tested again with little cost to the researcher.  Comparison groups were selected for further specification and explanatory network re-developed more rapidly.

Theory

Construction

Database allowing explicated hypertext links and multiple simultaneous linking schemes.

The use of hypertext in the analysis allowed the ability to document and trace complex relationships.  In addition, multiple schemes could simultaneously be implemented to allow comparisons between competing interpretations.  Complex propositions were developed and validated with numerous relatively rapid passes/searches of data.

Reporting

Findings

Hypermedia representations were constructed and presented.

Allowed a non-linear presentation of the results that more accurately represented the findings during presentations.

Contributions to Knowledge and Further Research

A continually expandable  database was established.

Captured and preserved extensive new longitudinal documentation of historically significant projects in a database that can be contributed to by both the original researcher and others.  This can be distributed cheaply as a community resource for research and instruction.  Depth  of data easily communicated to other researchers for analysis.  Constructed mapping of relationships to be further tested in both quantitative and qualitative works.

Table: Computational Support in the Qualitative Research Process

 

[See 2.2 Research Plan.]

The investigator started with a tentative design and developed the design further as the inquiry progressed (Borg & Gall, 1989). Preliminary research questions were formulated to guide the researchers activities, rather than a traditional set of research hypotheses like those used in quantitative research. The questions were focused on the three major contexts inherent in the nature of "educational computing projects". The following questions were the foundation of this study:
 
General Question
 
What were the relationships between the educational, technical, and organizational contexts of courseware?
 
Educational Questions
 
What were the educational goals of the courseware?
Did the goals focus more upon discipline oriented outcomes, or upon broader outcomes for the learners?
 
Technical Questions
 
What educational considerations influenced technical decisions about courseware?
What were pragmatic technical issues that emerged during courseware projects?
What were key technical characteristics that determined the viability of courseware?
 
Organizational Questions
 
What were the relationships between the roles, tasks, and the timing of tasks?
What were implicit or explicit educational, technical, financial, and personnel support policies within the organization(s) which had an impact on courseware projects?
 
[See 2.1 Research Questions.]
 
Projects and Participants
 
Participants in this study were key developers and managers in educational computing initiatives or courseware development projects that used networked workstations from more than one vendor. Participants from four different organizations were selected to allow distinctions to be made between phenomena common across institutions and phenomena that occurred due to circumstances in particular organizations.
 
The following projects, organizations and participants were the focus of this study:
 
Project: ESCAPE (HyperCard and HyperNews)
Organizations: Educational Research and Information Systems (ERIS, Purdue)
Participants: Hopper, Lawler, LeBold, Putnam, Rehwinkel, Tillotson, Ward
 
Project: TODOR (BLOX) & Mechanics 2.01 (cT, Athena)
Organizations: Athena and Academic Computing (AC, MIT)
Participants: Bucciarelli, Daly, Jackson, Lavin, Schmidt
 
Project: Physical Geology Tutor (AthenaMuse)
Organizations: Center for Educational Computing Initiatives (CECI, MIT)
Participants: Davis, Kinnicutt, Lerman, Schlusselberg
 
Project: Context32 (Intermedia, StorySpace)
Organizations: Institute for Research and Information Scholarship (IRIS, Brown)
Participants: Kahn, Landow, Yankelovich
 
[See the Switchboard for further information.]
 

 
[See 2.3 Settings and 2.4 Participants.]
 
Data Collection
 
Data was gathered through interviews with key developers and managers of organizations and projects. Their recollections and hindsights in publications and interviews were used to construct descriptions of the educational, technical, and organizational contexts of courseware projects. While interviews varied somewhat in structure, they all followed the format of "Ethnographic Interviews" (Spradley, 1979). Every interview was recorded with audio or video tape and then transcribed. Each transcription was reviewed at least once late in the study to insure accuracy and allow the researcher to reexperience the interview from a more developed perspective. After all interviews were reviewed, copies of the interview logs were divided into segments based on topic and edited to remove extraneous, repetitive and unclear sections. The resulting "vignettes" served as primary data. Published and unpublished documents were also obtained before, during and after interviews. These served as supplementary data because they were easy to access for immediate follow-up data clarification. This compensated for the limited access to data sources afforded by interviews with experts (Borg & Gall, 1989). Published documents also allowed triangulation between a larger number of accounts than were available from interviews alone.
 
The cumulative data distribution in the Table below reflects both the number of passages from interviews that were transcribed, and the number that were approved for inclusion in the database and public documents (see Table). This table appears to show that publications were the primary source of data for this study. This misleading impression is the result of a strategy used to avoid imposing on participants for a time consuming review process required before passages from interviews could be made available for publication. When key points were emphasized by participants during interviews that were also available in published form, documentation was drawn from the previously published sources. Data collection thus included searching for published passages to illustrate specific points highlighted during interviews. While the passages finally used in the report came from previously published reports, the relative emphasis on them was determined through experiences and insights gained from personal interviews.
 
10 K GIF File

Table: Cummlative Distribution of Data Collection

[See 2.5 Data Collection.]
 
Data Analysis
 
Databases of vignettes from interviews and publications were developed to store and analyze data. The researcher added working notes that helped guide the ongoing data collection and analysis process. These notes became more systematic as increasing numbers of vignettes were collected and analyzed. After all interviews were complete, the working notes were refined into a catalog of key themes cross-referenced to the database of vignettes. The researcher used this system to analyze the relationships between recurring issues discussed by different participants in different settings. The final product of this process was a model describing the relationships between educational goals, technical characteristics, and organizational structures of advanced educational courseware projects. The explanations provided by participants from their "expert" perspectives provided the basis for "grounded theory" about key factors in the successful and unsuccessful operation of these projects in advanced environments (Marshall and Rossman, 1989).

[See 2.6 Data Analysis.]
 
15 K gif file
Database Structure and Access Used for Interpretation

[See Chapter 2 Methodology.]

© Mary E. Hopper | MEHopper@TheWorld.com [posted 12/04/93 | revised 04/12/13]