M.Ed Session 1

 Finalize your committee ◦ Meet with your chair to discuss your project idea. Get some direction for your Problem Statement ◦ Interactions with your Chair  Bob  Wesley

Is this topic researchable?  Is the topic researchable given time, resources, and availability of data?  Is there a personal interest in the topic in order to sustain attention?  Will the results from the study be of interest to others (e.g., in the district, state, region, nation, etc.)?  Does the study (a) fill a void, (b) replicate, (c) extend, or (d) develop new ideas in the scholarly literature?  Will the project contribute to career goals?

 The focus for a study is the central concept being examined in a scholarly study.... Focus the topic by describing it succinctly, drafting a working title, and considering whether it is researchable. In a sentence try to describe the focus concisely. Complete the following sentence: My study is about...

 Be brief and avoid wasting words.  Eliminate unnecessary words such as An Approach to... and A Study of...  Use a single title or a double title. An example of a double title: An Ethnography: Understanding a Child’s Perception of Play.  Eliminate most articles and prepositions, and make sure it includes the focus or topic of the study.

NATURE OF THE PROBLEM Problem Statement: Premise I, Premise II, Interaction problem (III),, Possible solutions Literature Review: supporting details Premise I - details, analyze, synthesize Premise II – details, analyze, synthesize Problem (III) that arises due to I & II Possible Solutions including previous work to address III – Weaknesses or “holes” in literature Summary: bring it all together and lead reader to the need for the study PURPOSE Restate problem The purpose of this research is... The specific objectives are METHOD How will you accomplish the objectives stated in the purpose through your study? Participants Instrumentation Procedure Data Analysis THE MASTER’S PROJECT PROPOSAL

 NATURE OF THE PROBLEM ◦ Problem Statement (don’t use a heading)  What is it?  Why is it first?  Logical Argument – Sicilian ◦ Literature Review  What is it? ◦ Summary  PURPOSE ◦ Why are you doing this? ◦ Should flow smoothly and logically from the Nature of the Problem

 METHOD ◦ Research design  How does will the design of the study fit the purpose? ◦ Participants  Who are you going to study? ◦ Procedure  What are you going to do and how are you going to do it?  Include your procedure for data collection ◦ Data Analysis Plan  How will you analyze the data?

 How many MAIN sections are in the Proposal?  Put the main sections and subsections in the correct order: Summary METHOD Participants Instruments NATURE OF THE PROBLEM Literature Review PURPOSE Procedure Problem Statement Data Analysis Plan  Which of the sections above will NOT have a heading in the Proposal?

Alignment Nature of the Problem Leads to Purpose Which dictates Research Design Which determines Data Analysis Which answers

 APA Review Activity  Discuss journal quality

NATURE OF THE PROBLEM Outline Problem Statement – Premise I – Premise II – Problem (III) – Possible Solutions Literature Review – Premise I - supporting studies, details, connect the studies together by analyzing and synthesizing. End with a paragraph summarizing and synthesizing the knowledge about Premise I leading to Premise II. – Premise II - supporting studies, details, connect the studies together by analyzing and synthesizing. End with a paragraph summarizing and synthesizing the knowledge about Premise II leading to the Probem. – Problem (III) - supporting studies, details, connect the studies together by analyzing and synthesizing. End with a paragraph summarizing and synthesizing the knowledge about the Problem. – Possible Solutions - supporting studies, details, connect the studies together by analyzing and synthesizing. End with a paragraph summarizing and synthesizing the knowledge about the Problem. Summary – Based on the literature, what problem exists that needs to be resolved through additional research? Review Problem Statements

Writing the Literature Review Problem Statement Literature Review Premise 1 Premise 2 Problem Possible Solution Second main heading: Review and discuss all the relevant literature (studies) about Premise 2. Connect the different studies together by analyzing them – identifying differences and similarities. Also synthesis what is known when all the studies are taken together. Third main heading: Review and discuss all the relevant literature (studies) about the Problem created because of the premises described. Connect the different studies together by analyzing them – identifying differences and similarities. Also synthesis what is known when all the studies are taken together. Final main heading: Review and discuss all the relevant literature (studies) about possible solutions to the identified Problem. Connect the different studies together by analyzing them – identifying differences and similarities. First main heading: Review and discuss all the relevant literature (studies) about Premise 1. Connect the different studies together by analyzing them – identifying differences and similarities. Also synthesis what is known when all the studies are taken together.

Writing the Literature Review Literature Review Second main heading: Review and discuss all the relevant literature (studies) about Premise 2. Connect the different studies together by analyzing them – identifying differences and similarities. Also synthesis what is known when all the studies are taken together. Third main heading: Review and discuss all the relevant literature (studies) about the Problem created because of the premises described. Connect the different studies together by analyzing them – identifying differences and similarities. Also synthesis what is known when all the studies are taken together. Final main heading: Review and discuss all the relevant literature (studies) about possible solutions to the identified Problem. Connect the different studies together by analyzing them – identifying differences and similarities. First main heading: Review and discuss all the relevant literature (studies) about Premise 1. Connect the different studies together by analyzing them – identifying differences and similarities. Also synthesis what is known when all the studies are taken together. Summary Summarize, summarize, summarize, summarize, so now it is evident that my project is the next needed step.

Disclaimer The previous slide does not mean that ALL proposals should have four subsections in the literature review. You may have three or five or six depending upon your project.

 The major topics should have been addressed in the Problem Statement.  You are establishing yourself as an expert in this area. Make sure you thoroughly review what already has been done in the area.  Identify the historical foundations for the current state of knowledge.  Identify ◦ What connections have been made? ◦ Who are important players in the topic? ◦ Where are the holes in the research?  What is the next step?

 Review your Problem Statement  OUTLINE the areas you need to cover ◦ List what you already know in each area ◦ Backup with references ◦ Be detailed, thorough, go in-depth  Make connections, summarize, synthesize ◦ Lead the reader through your argument – (Monty)  Lead the reader to the need for your project

Writer:  Come to the workshop with your best possible draft.  Alert your reader to any concerns you have before they begin to read.  Ask questions and take notes as you’re discussing your writing.  Try not to get defensive. Be grateful for your reader’s time and attention.  At the same time, don’t feel obligated to take all of your reader’s advice. Remember that readers’ opinions may differ and that you’re ultimately responsible for your paper.

Reader:  Ask the writer what you can be looking for as you read their essay.  Read the writer’s essay carefully.  Respond as a reader, pointing out where things don’t make sense, read smoothly, etc.  Be positive. Point out strengths as well as weaknesses, and be sensitive in how you phrase your criticism (“Could you clarify this section?” rather than “Your organization is a mess.”)  Be honest. Don’t say something works when it doesn’t. You’re not helping the writer if you avoid mentioning a problem.  Be specific. Rather than simply saying a paragraph is “confusing,” for example, try to point to a specific phrase that confuses you and, if possible, explain why that phrase is problematic.