Critique Writing on Quantitative Research - Essay Example

? Quantitative Research Critique grade: This article details a critique analysis of apublished research paper on; The effects of teacher training on new instructional behaviour in reading comprehension authored by Reezigt, de Jager, and Creemers (2002). In this research, the writers have embarked on a study with an aim of examining how practical teacher behaviours are affected by teacher in-servicing. In this critical analysis, the main focus is on particular dimensions of the article in relation to the research validity and process together with the methods employed and obtained results. This analysis has developed a unified and cohesive explanation that has not only been targeted at expounding the specifics of the research, but also provides a clear formulation of a thorough research interpretation. According to my suggestion from the study observations, it is apparent that the sample size and the methodology that is employed in the experimental group subjects selection invalidates the research thereby resulting in a great reduction of the ultimate ability to generalize the immediate and eventual population. Key Words: teacher in-servicing, research, methodology, sample size, and research validity Critical analysis In this research paper on The effects of teacher training on new instructional behaviour in reading comprehension, de Jager, and colleagues (2002) have given an outline of a quasi-design of an experiment that is centred on three groups of sample population (these groups consists of two investigational and one control group). These sample groups were selected from the population that consisted of 83 teachers from the primary school level in Northern Netherlands. While introducing the research paper, the authors insists on the need for the teachers incorporating the appropriate instructional approaches through which they will be implanted with the guidelines for the new instructions coupled with the need for accessing the inservice coaching through which they will successfully be able to implement these models in their day to days teaching. This can be explained as the statement that details the reason behind the research. However, this must not be misunderstood as a research question according to my belief. It is just a belief statement that is employed in framing the focus and purpose of the research. In addition, the authors recognize the fact that in education, the focus has to revolve around the student based and constructive learning. This idea is supported by Dorgan (2004) who insists that pupils have to be guided and facilitated by the teachers to the best understanding level. In addition, the authors also recognizes the fact that while the educational theory can be perceived to have progressed to an extent of meeting the current paradigm higher standards, the progress of education has not been progressive to a level that is up to date. Therefore, the paper aims to explore the possibility of having the educational and theoretical practices reconciled practically. Research problem In this research paper, de Jager, and colleagues (2002) have their focus drawn to particular research question that has clearly been detailed in page 832. Rather that detailing the question as interrogative, it is framed as a statement that asks; can the primary school teachers be trained in the Direct Instruction (DI) or Cognitive Apprentiship (CA) model? Particularly important to the author is the way the metacognitive skills are integrated into the models employed in teaching. The authors insist that through the previous studies; for instance those conducted in 2001 by Muijs and Reynolds among others, the Direct Instruction is proven to be effective when it comes to enhancing the basic skills development. In addition, the authors have insisted that from the proof provided by the lab experiments, the Cognitive Apprenticeship has been proven to be effective. As a result of these facts, we can justify conducting and analysing similar experiments in the actual situations of classrooms. Certainly, the replicating method act is the small scale qualitative research heart. This perception is also supported by Cohen and colleagues (2003) who insist that the quantitative approach is based on the replication possibility. Therefore as Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2006) adds, the implementation and training possibility can be researched based on the fact that it is based on the pre-existing research. As earlier highlighted, this research is based on a pre-existing theory base and hence the aim of the authors is to generate significant results in the approach of practically applying those conceptual theories. In essence, the basis of the research is changing the educators’ instructional methodology in order to ensure compatibility with the existing outcomes. This simply means that they are simply focused and centred on the students with the target being development of the metacognitive thinking proficiency. Therefore, the article emphasizes on the dynamism need for the educators coupled with the ability of adapting their teaching styles and methods towards the direction whereby it is possible to accommodate the curricula shifts and pedagogy intrinsic in the existing archetype. Hence as Joe (2008) posits, there is significance in researching into the possibility of adapting latest instructional approaches. According to the explanation detailed by the authors, the research study that was conducted for this case was quasi experiment, with post-test, pre-test, and control group design. Probably, the study population targeted for this study could be all the global educators. In the immediate population, a total of 82 teachers at the primary school level are selected specifically from the Netherlands northern region. In addition to identification of the sample population on the basis of occupation and locale, there is also the study specification that is based on the fact that every individual in the group has previously been familiar with coupled with incorporation of the reading knowledge. According to Coladarci (2007) this knowledge is tied to a particular curriculum. This is an important aspect that is likely to reintroduce a probable problem when it comes to external validity. Strong importance is linked to the classification of the dependent and independent variables in this study based on the fact that every experiment is founded on the basis of this approach. In essence, this research evaluates the likelihood of transforming the methods of education through incorporation of training. Hence, the education of the two groups is this study’s independent variables have been clearly designed with the aim of developing the metacognitive comprehension abilities. With this being the case, the study has not been able to clearly detail these variables. In addition, the dependent and independent language does not explicitly occur anywhere. In addition, past these variables, there are other existing extraneous variables that are likely to be evaluated as independent variables. These variables include; the existing comprehension of the specific model of the curriculum, the participant’s age, the experience and training level, and the research sample among others. Hypothesis This research paper has also comprehensively detailed the research hypothesis. Unlike the weaknesses that have earlier been highlighted in the independent and dependent variables, de Jager and colleagues (2002) have concisely, clearly, and openly highlighted the hypothesis that guides to the research outcomes. It has also been importantly noted that the hypothesis is clearly linked to the literature with one section in the article exploring the Cognitive Aprentiship (CA) and Direct Instruction (DI) models. Also incorporated in the hypothesis is the suggestion that there exists a true causal interconnection between the dependent and independent variables. What this implies is that as a result of Direct Instruction and Cognitive Apretiship, the teachers will be able to implement these models. Although this is perceived to be a simplistic submission at the initial stance, there is a likelihood of this study implication resulting in new instructional methods and curricula inservicing. Essentially, the study validate the perception that has been widely held that not only do the teachers need the inservicing but in addition they are likely to yield benefit from the approach. Therefore it is possible to identify the lesson characteristics in addition to measuring the focus. Sampling method and subjects’ selection In the section 4.2 of the research paper, the authors have clearly detailed the immediate population that was targeted for this particular research. Out of the 83 individuals that have been selected for the study, 20 volunteers were employed in generating the three sample categories. Among the three selected study groups, the authors experimented with the two while retaining the third as the sample group. In the two initial groups, the CA inserviced teachers were eight. In the second group, there were five DI inserviced teachers with the remaining seven teachers being categorized in the control group. The subjects were perceived to have some equivalence in terms of the teaching experience years. The same case was depicted in their experience when it comes to particular reading program. Another question need to be addressed in regards to the sample groups. Although there seems to be some equivalence in the sample groups, some important validity questions seems to emerge. To begin with, it should importantly be noted that the 95% of the subjects have a teaching experience exceeding 10 years. This is noteworthy because the research study is designed in such a way that it targets measuring the ability of teachers to change their instructional approaches. In the section where these authors have discussed teacher training, they insist that it may be easier for novice teachers to change in comparison to the more experienced teachers. Should this indeed be the case, then there is a likelihood of encountering difficulty when the sample groups are altering their methods, hence this could result in distortion of the research findings. Therefore from this observation, there is need to make an attempt of ensuring that the teachers with diverse experience are included in the effort to ensure that the findings are more generalizable. Howley (2009) insists that this approach has a likelihood of increasing the external validity. Moreover, the sampling method that these authors have employed in this study appears to have less validity. This means that these authors have not made any attempt in controlling the subjects parsing into three groups divided for the sample. Worse still, these authors gave permission for the subjects to individually make their choice between the three groups. Basically, Holwey (2009) warns that there is a difference between volunteers’ acceptance and allowing the volunteers make a choice of the sample groups of their experiments. Apparently, there is a high likelihood that the teachers that specifically volunteered to the CA training were inclined to that instruction method; the same case for the DI group. In addition, choosing 20 volunteers cannot be qualified as reliable for the sample size that targeted 83 individuals. As Cohen and colleagues insists, a population that exceeds the size of 80 subjects is supposed to limit its sample size to 65 subjects (2003). Therefore, this size can be observed as disproportional from the origin population and is hence likely to yield biased, unreflective and inconclusive results. Design As earlier illustrated, this study design is indicated as experimentally quasi with post-test, pre-test, and group design. In addition, this study has clearly manipulated the study variables. In addition, conducting of every treatment was independent of the other with the metacognitive skills being employed. For the control groups, no teaching aids or training was received. This being the case, various extraneous variables can hardly be accounted for here. First, the significance of the subjects experience in the sample can hardly be denied. In addition, the research findings validity is strongly affected by the fact that completely alternate materials were provided to the two groups in the experiment. Supposedly, this study was based on the likelihood of implementing the instructional methods. Therefore, more validity would have been enhanced had all the groups utilized the curriculum materials. This is based on the fact that it is hard to be sure that the conflicting observations in the groups’ are linked to training or employment of various materials that are perhaps even more superior. Analysis and results The analysis and results in this article appears to approve the hypothesis of the research. However, although the author has repeatedly insisted on the existence of a significant difference between the post test and pre-test in the experimental groups, there is rather a limitation in the scope of these differences. For instance, looking at the CA groups, the significant difference was portrayed in only four out of the thirteen indicators. A similar case was witnessed in the DI group with only significant difference being witnessed on only four high inferences. In addition, the authors also reported that in both markers, the experimental groups’ teachers portrayed behaviours that were more approving in comparison to the control groups. Generally, the study results are hardly indicative and valid. Well, some differences are undeniable highlighted. However, it is hard to be certain if these differences can be linked to the inservice training in either models of CA or DI. Therefore beyond this point, the population sampled subjects were insufficient and could not statistically validate the results. Although the research employed apposite statistical tests such as the Mann-Whitney U test, the tests significance is delimited by the fact that there was insufficient number of sample groups. Personal analytic avowal This article appears to lack the merit in terms of external eminence validity. This implies that although it is interesting to note how the regular classroom teaching methods can be affected by the alternate instructional methods of teaching, it is apparent that the results offered can hardly be generalized. The approach of selecting the sample groups was poor coupled with being unreflective of the immediate population. Therefore, the research findings are specific to the studied individuals and this should not be the case according to Kitching (2008). Obviously as the habitual teachers were demonstrated to be equivalent (though I can disapprove this perception from my own opinion), the samples can be perceived to be reflective of the population and therefore the author calls to research replication. Past this, the observations appear to be inconclusive based on the fact that a general significant variation can hardly be outlined between the control groups and sample. The issue that was specifically interesting to me was the fact that that from one side, the author seems to insists that the experienced educators in this profession will hardly be able to welcome and integrate the changes in their methods of teaching while on the other side, the same authors go ahead and indicate a 95% statistical significant group with ten or more years of experience. With such a method, it can be concluded that the authors of this research paper failed to specify their objectives. References Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education (5th ed.). New York: Routledge/Falmer. Coladarci, T. (2007). Improving the yield of education research: An editor’s swan song. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 22(3). de Jager, B., Reezigt, G.J., & Creemers, B. (2002). The effects of teacher training on new instructional behaviour in reading comprehension. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 7, 831-842. Dorgan, K. (2004). A Year in the Life of an Elementary School: One School’s Experiences in Meeting New Mathematics Standards. Teachers College Record, 106, 6 1203-1228. Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2006). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Howley, C. (2009) Critique and fiction: Doing science right in rural education research. Journal of Research in Rural Education 24(15). Gorder, L. (2008). A Study of Teacher Perceptions of Instructional Technology Integration in the Classroom. The Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, L (2), 63-76. Joe, L. (2008) "Knowledge and Critical Pedagogy." Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. Kitching, G. (2008). The Trouble with Theory: The Educational Costs of Postmodernism. Penn State University Press. Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2001). Effective teaching: Evidence and practice. Gateshead: Athenaeum Press. Read More