Another consideration in rebranding assessment would be to emphasize that assessment “draws from multiple sources” of information. This in turn would encourage faculty to think about assessment not as means of judgment, but rather as a process of evidence gathering. In fact, it helps underscore the idea that to really demonstrate effective learning and instruction, we must collect multiple pieces of evidence. As a result, faculty will be more likely to plan and implement multiple and varied assessment methodologies, which in turn will lead to the collection of more evidence and stronger validity of inferences about the extent of student learning.
The finding is good news for colleges and universities focused on digital transformation — whether that means implementing new classroom technologies, transitioning services to the cloud or building out the back-end infrastructure needed to support students’ increasing bandwidth demands.
Document analysis is a systematic procedure for reviewing or evaluating documents—both printed and electronic (computer-based and Internet-transmitted) material. Like other analytical methods in qualitative research, document analysis requires that data be examined and interpreted in order to elicit meaning, gain understanding, and develop empirical knowledge(Corbin&Strauss,2008;seealsoRapley,2007).
Document analysis is often used in combination with other qualitative research methods as a means of triangulation—‘the combination of methodologies in the study of the same phenomenon’ (Denzin, 1970, p. 291)
The qualitative researcher is expected to draw upon multiple (at least two) sources of evidence; that is, to seek convergence and corroboration through the use of different data sources and methods. Apart from documents, such sources include interviews, participant or non-participant observation, and physical artifacts (Yin,1994).By triangulating data, the researcher attempts to provide ‘a confluence of evidence that breeds credibility’ (Eisner, 1991, p. 110). By examining information collected through different methods, the researcher can corroborate findings across data sets and thus reduce the impact of potential biases that can exist in a single study. According to Patton (1990), triangulation helps the researcher guard against the accusation that a study’s findings are simply an artifact of a single method, a single source, or a single investigator’s bias. Mixed-method studies (which combine quantitative and qualitative research techniques)sometimes include document analysis. Here is an example: In their large-scale, three-year evaluation of regional educational service agencies (RESAs), Rossman and Wilson (1985) combined quantitative and qualitative methods—surveys (to collect quantitative data) and open ended, semi structured interviews with reviews of documents (as the primary sources of qualitative data). The document reviews were designed to identify the agencies that played a role in supporting school improvement programs.
Document Analysis
Document analysis is a form of qualitative research in which documents are interpreted by the researcher to give voice and meaning around an assessment topic. Analyzing documents incorporates coding content into themes similar to how focus group or interview transcripts are analyzed. A rubric can also be used to grade or score a document. There are three primary types of documents:
• Public Records: The official, ongoing records of an organization’s activities. Examples include student transcripts, mission statements, annual reports, policy manuals, student handbooks, strategic plans, and syllabi.
• Personal Documents: First-person accounts of an individual’s actions, experiences, and beliefs. Examples include calendars, e-mails, scrapbooks, blogs, Facebook posts, duty logs, incident reports, reflections/journals, and newspapers.
• Physical Evidence: Physical objects found within the study setting (often called artifacts). Examples include flyers, posters, agendas, handbooks, and training materials.
As with all research, how you collect and analyse the data should depend on what you want to find out. Since you haven’t told us that, it is difficult to give you any precise advice. However, one really important matter in using documents as sources, whatever the overall aim of your research, is that data from documents are very different from data from speech events such as interviews, or overheard conversations.So the first analytic question you need to ask with regard to documents is ‘how are these data shaped by documentary production ?’ Something which differentiates nearly all data from documents from speech data is that those who compose documents know what comes at the end while still able to alter the beginning; which gives far more opportunity for consideration of how the recepient of the utterances will view the provider; ie for more artful self-presentation. Apart from this however, analysing the way documentary practice shapes your data will depend on what these documents are: for example your question might turn out to be ‘How are news stories produced ?’ – if you are using news reports, or ‘What does this bureaucracy consider relevant information (and what not relevant and what unmentionable) ? if you are using completed proformas or internal reports from some organisation.
An analysis technique is just like a hardware tool. It depends where and with what you are working to choose the right one. For a nail you should use a hammer, and there are lots of types of hammers to choose, depending on the type of nail.
So, in order to tell you the bettet technique, it is important to know the objectives you intend to reach and the theoretical framework you are using. Perhaps, after that, We could tell you if you should use content analysis, discourse or grounded theory (which type of it as, like the hammer, there are several types of GTs).
how the digital medium will foster engagement and enhance learning outcomes.
aware of the implications of having students post content on third-party services (those not provided or hosted by your institution).
Social media usage in the classroom intersects with both FERPA and Copyright Compliance, so keep this checklist handy as you develop your class activity.
Include details about the activity in your syllabus & course description.
Use contracts.
Link to institutional policies.
Use aliases for social media accounts.
Teach your students to use digital media responsibly.
Know where to provide assignment feedback.
Don’t use personal accounts for university business.
Understand the Terms of Service.
there is too little understanding of what academic freedom means. It is not absolute and it is not the simple equivalent of “freedom of speech.” All citizens have, or should have, the latter, but only individuals who have specified educational and professional qualifications are entitled to academic freedom within universities. In the words of the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT), they are granted the “freedom to teach and discuss; freedom to carry out research and disseminate and publish the results thereof; freedom to produce and perform creative works; freedom to engage in service to the institution and the community; freedom to express one’s opinion about the institution, its administration, and the system in which one works.”
Engaging with students – both inside and outside the classroom – who are continually linked in to social media and online devices presents a range of opportunities, challenges and pitfalls.
By DAVID SMITH | April 5, 2017
More and more of our public, private and professional lives are migrating online. There is little doubt that social media will infiltrate every aspect of our day-to-day existence. If used effectively, online tools are revolutionary for communicating and stimulating important conversations.
When we learn something outside the comfort zone, we attempt to acquire knowledge or skills in an area where we’re lacking. Part of the discomfort derives from learning something we anticipate will be difficult. We have no idea how to do it, or we think it requires abilities we don’t have or have in meager amounts. Moreover, poor performance or outright failure lurk as likely possibilities.
I wonder if learning outside the comfort zone isn’t especially difficult for faculty. Theoretically, it shouldn’t be. We’ve devoted years to learning, but most of what we know resides in one area. We’re experts at learning more about what we already know and love. And we’re used to having our learning expertise recognized—by students, colleagues, and sometimes even at home. However, plop us down in a discipline unlike our own, task us with learning a skill we don’t have, and suddenly, we look and act exactly like our students. And that’s the very reason this kind of learning has all sorts of positive implications for teaching. It’s good every now and then to be reacquainted with feeling stupid.
My note. Eventually, I had to tell a [already departured] library director: it is better to throw stones in the swamp of mediocrity then to sink slowly into it. To the objection of my colleague that throwing stones does NOT improve the situation, I could only say: making ripples until someone more diplomatic will draw the attention means more then just slowing sinking into the swamp of mediocrity. That swamp is determined by the inability / unwillingness of faculty the leave their comfort zone.
In regard to the teacher, who has students memorize and recite a poem – I will never forget Herr Klenske, who made us memorize in 10th grade of high school “Erlkoening” (http://ingeb.org/Lieder/werreite.html). It made us hate him as much, as now I, at least, appreciate his unique approach to fostering to high school students persistence and will.
The Charles G. Koch Foundation offered to give the university $1.5 million to hire two assistant professors and fund fellowships and undergraduate curriculum on free-enterprise topics.
“In exchange for his ‘gift,’ the donor got to assign specific readings, select speakers brought to campus and instruct them with regard to the focus of their lectures, shape the curriculum with new courses and specify the number of students in the courses, name the program’s director, and initiate a student club.”
How the Koch Brothers Are Influencing U.S. Colleges
The most notable difference: While some of Soros’ higher education grants go to programs aligning with his domestic policy priorities, the majority are focused overseas, tax records show.
Spreading the Free-Market Gospel
What’s new and interesting about the Koch brothers’ approach to funding academics
It is well-known that the Kochs’ network has invested hundreds of millions of hard-to-track dollars in conservative political nonprofits that influence elections. The brothers, who earned theirbillions leading private oil, chemical, and manufacturing conglomerate Koch Industries Inc., were dominant forces in recent election cycles
The Kochs educational giving, while rarefied, isn’t the most abundant in the United States. Gordon Moore, the co-founder of Intel, with his wife Betty, this year pledged $100 million to the California Institute of Technology—and offered to let the school to spend it as it sees fit.
At the College of Charleston in South Carolina, for example, documents show the foundation wanted more than just academic excellence for its money. It wanted information about students it could potentially use for its own benefit
Among the proposed conditions: Teachings must align with the libertarian economic philosophy of Charles Koch, the Charles Koch Foundation would maintain partial control over faculty hiring and the chairman of the school’s economics department—a prominent economic theorist—must stay in place for another three years despite his plans to step down.
Florida State University ultimately didn’t agree to the initial requests when, in 2008, it reached a funding agreement with the foundation. It’s also tightened and clarified policies that affect private donors’ contributions to the university.
To Charles Koch, Universities Are Propaganda Machines
