1

University of Calgary Faculty of Education

Office of Graduate Programs in Education

EDER 603.23 Writing Educational Research

Spring 2012

Instructor: Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D. Office: online Phone: (403) 244-9015 Email: seaton@ucalgary.ca Skype: Sarah Elaine Eaton Office Hours: by appointment Term Dates: May 9 – June 22, 2012 Elluminate Sessions: TBD Course Description: This course will focus on examining and developing the skills associated with crafting an academic paper. Topics will include genres and purposes of academic writing, and venues for presentation and publication. An academic paper is more than a compilation of a literature review, some relevant information, and a conclusion. An acceptable paper- whether intended for an academic or a professional audience, and whether a research report or a theoretical-philosophical argument – takes a clearly defined topic or idea, situates it in the current literature, and supports it with a well-structured discussion. The principal intensions of this course are to introduce students to the various structures of academic and professional papers and to provide support in their efforts to craft and publish their written work. A traditional approach to writing educational research involves first learning about writing, then learning to write. Learners first study sample texts, analyzing them and then dissecting them, examining their structure, argument and style. The next step often involves producing an original piece of writing that mimics the style, tone and structure of the sample text. The final step is to integrate elements of the student’s own voice and style with elements of the texts they have previously studied. The rationale behind this approach is that students must first learn what counts as excellent writing by learning about writing. Only then are they prepared to write themselves. This course takes a non-traditional approach to learning to write for scholarly or professional purposes. Students will focus on writing, revising, and incorporating feedback. That is to say, students will spend the majority of their time in this course focused on learning to write for research purposes, rather than learning about writing.

2

Assumptions We take this non-traditional approach in part, because we assume that students have already learned about writing through their own professional journey and previous studies. Given that students have already taken previous research courses, we assume that they have learned how to read and dissect a research article. We expect that students enrolled in this course already have a solid grasp on concepts such as:

• General vs. specialized writing • Reporting vs. interpreting • Fact-based writing vs. speculation • Professional journals vs. academic journals • Empirical vs. interpretive research • Peer-reviewed (open, blind, and double-blind) vs. Non-refereed

Given this previous experience, we will focus on taking students to the next level. In other words, we will focus on supporting students as they produce their own original research writing and build writing skills as a researcher and as a professional. Likewise, Belcher (2009) contends revision and improving drafts is an essential component of scholarly writing with a focus on the macro aspects of writing, such as developing a succinct and logical argument with a clearly organized structure. The emphasis in the course will be on the micro aspects of academic and professional writing, peer revision and ultimately preparation for publishing or sharing your work to a broader academic or professional audience.

Learner Outcomes:

1. Participate and contribute to online scholarly community of inquiry during synchronous sessions and asynchronous discussions

2. Select and examine academic papers in the field and compare and contrast structures 3. Produce authentic, original academic or professional writing through assigned learning tasks 4. Provide constructive feedback to peers 5. Revise and re-submit writing based on feedback

Course Design and Delivery This is an online course. Students are expected to participate in the asynchronous learning tasks using the Blackboard learning environment and synchronous whole-class Elluminate sessions. We recognize the importance of working in collaboration with others and learning with others in a scholarly community of inquiry and have designed learning tasks accordingly. As part of learning task #1, ongoing contribution to the discussion forum is required regularly throughout each week of the course. Peers will depend on your participation and shared commitment to foster a collaborative knowledge-building environment. Learning task #2 will provide students with an opportunity to co-author with a peer. Finally, learning task #3 will support individuals in developing an in-depth manuscript with peer-review. The instructor’s role is to facilitate the course work and to support students as they engage in the learning tasks; to provide students with ongoing, timely and constructive feedback to further their learning and growth in writing educational research.

3

Required Readings: Belcher, W. L. (2009). Writing your journal article in 12 weeks: A guide to academic publishing success. SAGE

Publications, Inc. URL: http://www.sagepub.com/books/Book231055#tabview=title Workbook Forms - http://www.wendybelcher.com/pages/WorkbookForms.htm Additional Readings: [TBD] Learning Tasks Overview: LEARNING TASK NUMBER

DESCRIPTION OF LEARNING TASK PERCENT OF FINAL GRADE

GROUPING FOR TASK

Learning Task #1 Participation in and Contribution to Online Scholarly Community

30% Individual

Learning Task #2 Foundational Writing Assignment: Abstract/conference poster/Presentation

30% Individual or Group

Learning Task #3 Major Writing Assignment: Journal Article/ Academic Conference Paper

40% Individual

Weekly Course Schedule: A detailed, suggested daily schedule of Course Topics. This schedule may change to meet the emerging needs and dynamics of the participants in the course.

Date

Topic

Readings and Tasks

Important Dates

May 9-11

Course Introduction & starting your writing

Elluminate Session – course overview, assign dialogue groups and numbers for each member of the group (i.e. A1, A2, A3, A4,A5). Discussion Forum – Provide self-introduction in the Blackboard Discussion forum. In your introduction, you may wish to share information about what you do professionally, your scholarly interests, your challenges and positive experiences with writing (see Belcher p.2-4 for ideas). You may also add a photo or yourself. Discussion Forum – Dialogue groups to discuss assigned readings and consolidate key ideas, questions, etc. Assigned Readings: Belcher, Weeks 1 & 2

TBD End of Week End of Week

4

May 14-18

Advancing your argument Elluminate Session – Guest speaker – scholarly writing, abstracts, conference posters. Discussion Forum – Dialogue groups review readings, individuals select journal article and provide an outline of one model article with one to two paragraphs discussing how the author advances the argument. Group members provide feedback for outlines. Member #1 in each group will moderate the discussion and post a short synthesis at the end of the week. Assigned Readings: Belcher, Week 3

TBD End of Week 1

May 22-25

Examining journals & abstract presentations

Learning Task #2 – Individually or with a partner develop (1) an abstract 2) poster for a problem of practice and (3) a presentation to be delivered to the class during an Elluminate session.

Your topic may be related to a previously completed literature review, your own classroom problem, an innovation you would like to design or try out, an action-research project or capstone project idea, etc.

Discussion Forum – Share your abstract and poster with your dialogue group. Provide constructive and helpful feedback to each member of your group.

Member #2 in each group will moderate the discussion and post a short synthesis at the end of the week.

Assigned Readings: Journal Articles

End of Week 2

5

May 28 -

June 1

Reviewing related literature & ethical considerations

Elluminate Session – individuals or partner groups present a Two-minute presentation for Learning Task #2. Learning Task#2 DUE in Bb forum for instructor evaluation on May 29, 2012. Discussion Forum – Draft an argument (see Belcher, p.93) and provide feedback to others in your dialogue group. Discussion Forum – Dialogue groups to discuss assigned readings and consolidate key ideas, questions, etc. Member #3 in each group will moderate the discussion and post a short synthesis at the end of the week. Assigned Reading – Belcher, Weeks 4 & 5 Ethics Links: University of Calgary Research Services: Ethics Support, Online: http://www.ucalgary.ca/research/ethics University of Calgary Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board (CFREB), Online: http://www.ucalgary.ca/research/compliance/cfreb TCPS 2 - CORE Tutorial http://www.ucalgary.ca/research/ethics/CORE_Tutorial

TBD End of Week 3

June 4-8

Strengthening structure, opening, concluding

Discussion Forum - Dialogue groups to discuss assigned readings and consolidate key ideas and questions, etc. Discussion Forum - Dialogue groups share ideas for conference proposals and initial draft sections (i.e. opening) for feedback to help strengthen writing. Member #4 in each group will moderate the discussion and post a short synthesis at the end of the week. Assigned Reading – Belcher, Weeks 6 & 8; journal articles

End of Week 4

6

June

11-15 Giving, getting and using other’s feedback

Elluminate Session – discuss Learning Task #3, ethical considerations and any additional questions, concerns; develop a shared document with relevant upcoming conferences Member #5 in each group will moderate the discussion and post a short synthesis at the end of the week. Learning Task #3 – An authentic conference paper draft prepared for peer review/feedback for cross sharing among dialogue groups (A&B; C&D) Assigned Reading – Belcher, Week 9 Suggested Reading – Belcher, Weeks10 & 11

TBD End of Week 5 Draft due in Bb by June 13 or earlier & provide peer feedback by end of week to partner (i.e. A1 shares with B1, etc.)

June 18-22

Conclusion, next steps… Elluminate Session – course wrap up, questions, next steps, etc. Learning Task #3 –Final copy due in Bb for instructor evaluation

TBD Submit Learning Task #3 by June 22 4:30 p.m. MST or earlier.

Changes to Schedule: Please note that changes to the schedule may occur in response to student questions and conversations.

7

Learning Tasks and Assessment There are three (3) required Learning Tasks for this course.

1. LEARNING TASK 1: Participation in and Contribution to Online Scholarly Community (30%)

DUE: ongoing, May 9-June 22, 2012

Individuals are required to participate (post & provide feedback to peers) in their assigned dialogue group each week. Reflect on the assigned readings, discuss with your dialogue group and consolidate ideas, questions, etc. Each week one member of the group is assigned as moderator and will post a short (~two to three paragraph) synthesis at the end of the week on behalf of the group in the Group Synthesis forum in Blackboard. Note: scholarly writing is expected and all writing in the discussion forum should be in APA Style. Overall tasks required by individuals in their dialogue groups: • Reflections on assigned readings each week • Self-introduction due May 11 • Outline of model article due May 18 • DRAFT abstract and poster Learning Task #2 due May 25 • DRAFT argument due June 1 • DRAFT sections for Learning Task #3 due June 9 Post any questions to the instructor using the Q&A forum or via email. Also, the instructor will provide feedback regarding individual participation and group synthesis posts by May 22nd and June 12th.

8

Criteria For Assessment of Learning Task 1

Criteria “Surface” Discourse: Does not meet requirements (B- to B)

Meets Requirements for Scholarly Discourse (B+ to A-)

Deeper Scholarly Discourse: Meets All and Exceeds Some Requirements (A to A+)

Con

stru

ctiv

e U

ses o

f A

utho

rita

tive

Sour

ces

Readings are summarized with little or no critical analysis or thoughtful interpretation.

Information sources are critically evaluated and writing demonstrates recognition that even the best ideas are improvable.

You draw upon content from the readings and experiences, along with additional information sources, as data for one’s own knowledge building and ideas-improving processes.

Dem

ocra

tizin

g K

now

ledg

e

You add your contribution with little recognition of others in the group.

You recognize and praise everyone’s work and help others find needed information.

You treat all participants as legitimate contributors to the shared goals of the community; all have a sense of ownership of knowledge advances achieved by the group.

Epi

stem

ic

Age

ncy

You demonstrate a personal sense of direction, power, motivation, and responsibility.

You mobilize personal strengths to set forth your ideas and to negotiate a fit between personal ideas and ideas of others.

You mobilize personal strengths to set forth your ideas and to negotiate a fit between personal ideas and ideas of others, using contrasts to spark and sustain knowledge advancement rather than depending on others to chart that course for you.

Idea

Div

ersi

ty

You participate in brainstorming different ideas.

You play an active role in putting forward different ideas to create a dynamic environment.

You play an active role in putting forward different ideas to create a dynamic environment in which contrasts, competition, and complementarity of ideas is evident, creating a rich environment for ideas to evolve into new and more refined forms.

Impr

ovab

le

Idea

s

You accept or reject ideas as truth on the basis of logical argument and evidence.

You treat all ideas as factual, informed by argument and evidence, and improvable.

You treat all ideas as improvable by aiming to mirror the work of great thinkers in gathering and weighing evidence, and ensuring that explanations cohere with all available evidence.

Kno

wle

dge

Bui

ldin

g D

isco

urse

Your contribution to discourse allows participants to express and gain feedback on their ideas, defend different points of view, arrive at conclusions.

Your contribution to discourse serves to identify shared problems and gaps in understanding.

Your contribution to discourse serves to identify shared problems and gaps in understanding and to advance understanding beyond the level of the most knowledgeable individual.

9

Scho

larl

y W

ritin

g

Non-scholarly writing is presented

Scholarly writing – mostly using APA Style (i.e. citations for information sources) with some editing considerations to achieve clarity

Clear scholarly writing in APA style

10

2. LEARNING TASK 2: Foundational Writing Assignment - Develop an abstract and conference poster and

class presentation (30%) DUE: Wednesday May 30, 2012

This assignment is comprised of three discrete, yet inter-related components. Part I: Develop an abstract or executive summary for a problem of practice including a brief list of searchable keywords. You may work with a partner to collaborate on this assignment if you wish, but it is not mandatory. Part II: Develop an electronic poster with visuals/text to represent the abstract. Your visual representation must include citations and a reference list on the poster. Part III: Present to the class about the abstract/poster. Note: your presentation will be timed. You will be cut off after two minutes. One of the objectives of this assignment is to deliver a clear, concise “pitch” that engages and persuades the audience. • DRAFT Due May 25th or earlier in Blackboard Discussion Forum for peer review • Peer Review provided by dialogue group in Blackboard Discussion Forum by May 28th or earlier • Group presentation Due May 30th - Elluminate Session (Individuals or groups may wish to use their

poster or another visual aid during the presentation. Send any visuals to instructor via email by noon on May 29th.

• Scholarly writing that adheres to APA style. Your submission should be one to two pages exclusive of the title page and references. It should be presented as double-spaced work, with 1-inch margins, in 12 pt. serif font such as Times New Roman or Courier, as per APA guidelines.

• Post FINAL copy with revisions on May 30th in discussion forum for instructor to evaluate using the rubric

Post any questions to the instructor using the Q&A forum or via email. Instructor will provide by June 5th, a final grade using the rubric for Learning Task#2.

11

Criteria For Assessment of Learning Task 2

Criteria Does not meet requirements (B- to B)

Meets Requirements (B+ to A-)

Meets all and exceeds some requirements (A to A+)

Context The context is missing or unclear.

Describes the context for the problem of practice.

Clearly expresses the context for the problem of practice (e.g. may be related to previously completed literature review, your own classroom problem, an innovation you would like to design or try out, an action-research project, capstone project idea, etc.) Explicitly defines the central problem and perceived issues.

Original, Research-informed Topic

It is unclear how the topic is original or informed by research.

Describes an original research-informed topic drawing upon relevant literature.

Clearly describes an original research-informed topic drawing upon relevant literature. Describes the topic’s novelty, appeal, timely interest, and what is new about the work.

Argument No clear argument is evident; or the argument is weak or illogical.

Expresses a clear argument. Expresses a coherent, clear and logical argument intended to influence and persuade. Argument is directed to a broad academic audience.

Significance Presents no clear rationale for significance of work.

Describes the rationale for the significance of the work.

Clearly describes the rationale for the work. Articulates the difference this work is intended to make for other professionals or scholars and demonstrates why readers should care about it.

Keywords There are no key works provided, or the key words are unrelated to the topic.

Includes a brief list of keywords relevant to the abstract and poster.

Strategically embeds relevant and searchable keywords that heighten reader interest. Includes a brief list of keywords relevant to the abstract and poster.

Poster The title is vague or non-descriptive. Visual representation is not organized or is unclear.

The work is clearly titled. Provides an organized visual representation of topic

The title is direct, clear powerful invitation describing topic, suggesting argument or implications. Includes searchable keywords in the title. Provides an organized and creative visual representation of topic with ideas clearly expressed in the poster.

12

Peer Review You missed

deadline. There was a lack of peer review or the peer review was not constructive.

Your work was published online by 4:30 pm, MST, May 25th. You offered clear, helpful peer review to your colleagues. Peer review takes place in between May 25 – 28th.

Your work was published online by 4:30 pm, MST, May 25th. You offered in-depth peer review with helpful and constructive feedback. You offered specific, concrete suggestions for improvement in a manner that made it easy for your colleagues to integrate your feedback effectively. Peer review takes place in between May 25th – May 28th.

Presentation No presentation. Ineffective presentation of key ideas.

Individual or partners give a two-minute presentation to the class that highlights the key ideas from their abstract and poster.

Individuals or partners present to their peers a concise and engaging two-minute synopsis of key ideas from the abstract and poster. Presenters fully embrace the challenge of offering a compelling and persuasive presentation in a very short time period.

Writing Non-scholarly writing is presented Little attention to APA standards for references and citations

Scholarly writing that follows APA style is presented. Your written work is one to two pages, exclusive of title page and references, double-spaced, 1-inch margins, 12 pt. serif font, such as Times New Roman or Courier. Presents scholarly writing. Errors are minor and APA style is followed. The work contains cited references with few APA errors.

Scholarly writing that follows APA style is presented. Your written work is one to two pages, exclusive of title page and references, double-spaced, 1-inch margins, 12 pt. serif font, such as Times New Roman or Courier. Presents exemplary scholarly writing that requires little to no editing and demonstrates adherence to APA standards. Your work includes complete list of references and citations using APA format.

13

3. LEARNING TASK 3: Major Writing Assignment – Article/Academic Conference Paper (40%) – DUE:

Friday, June 22, 2012 by 4:00 p.m.

Develop an original article manuscript that is suitable for submission to an academic journal for consideration for publication. The topic must clearly address a problem of practice or a research question. You may choose to extend your topic or argument presented in Learning Task #2. • Scholarly writing, written APA Style (~ 15 pages) exclusive of title page, references, appendices,

double-spaced, 1-inch margins, 12 pt. serif font such as Times New Roman or Courier, as per APA standards.

• DRAFT Due June 13th or earlier in Blackboard Discussion Forum for peer review (sharing among peers).

• Peer Review provided by peers in Blackboard Discussion Forum by June 17th or earlier. • Scholarly writing that adheres to APA style (approximately 15 pages) post FINAL copy with revisions

on June 22nd in discussion forum for instructor evaluation using this rubric. • You are encouraged to dialogue with your instructor throughout the writing process.

Post any questions to the instructor using the Q&A forum or via email. Instructor will provide a grade using rubric for LT#3 by end of June.

14

Criteria For Assessment of Learning Task 3

Criteria Does not meet

requirements (B- to B)

Meets Requirements (B+ to A-)

Meets all and exceeds some requirements (A to A+)

Authentic, professional Writing

Assignment does not include a clear rationale for selecting a particular journal. No active journal URL has been provided. No appendix indicating the journal’s writing guidelines has been included.

Provides a clear rationale for selecting a current and authentic conference/journal. Provides an active URL for the selected conference or journal. Includes expectations and considerations for submissions, which are (included as an appendix to your original work.)

Provides a clear rationale for selecting a current and authentic conference/journal. Provides an active URL for the selected conference or journal. Includes expectations and considerations for submissions, which are (included as an appendix to your original work.) Your work clearly adheres to all writing guidelines and demonstrates excellence in professional writing.

Organization & Structure

The title is vague or non-descriptive. Your writing is not clearly organized. No clear structure is discernible. Main ideas are difficult to identify.

A clear title to the work is provided. Your article is clearly organized. Ideas are clearly expressed.

Title is direct, clear powerful invitation describing article, suggesting argument or implications; includes searchable keywords in title. Your work provides a compelling opening (anecdotal, subject, critical, significance, historical or argumentative) and conclusion that summarizes in a powerful way pointing beyond the article. Your article is clearly organized with explicit headings and subheadings for structure.

Introduction No discernible introduction, or the introduction is poorly written.

The paper starts with a clear introduction that clearly identifies the point of your paper.

Your paper starts with a gripping first sentence. The introduction clearly establishes the value of your paper. The introduction serves as a “road map” to the reader; articulates originality, the topic’s novelty, appeal, timely interest, what’s new about the work and draws upon relevant literature.

15

Context No clear context

for the research is provided.

Your research is clearly situated within the current and historical research or professional context, relating it to previous work conducted in the field.

Clearly describes the context for the problem of practice (i.e. may be related to previously completed literature review, your own classroom problem, an innovation you would like to design or try out, an action-research project, capstone project idea, etc.). Your research is clearly situated within the current and historical research or professional context, relating it to previous work conducted in the field. Your work adds an original and fresh perspective to the ongoing conversation and debate on your chosen topic.

Argument No clear argument is evident, or the argument is weak. Argument is illogical.

Your work develops and delivers a coherent, clear and logical argument, supported by pertinent examples and data.

Your work develops and delivers a coherent, clear and logical argument, supported by pertinent examples and data. Expresses a coherent point of view intended to influence and persuade; directed to a broad academic audience. Your work demonstrates a sophisticated development of your argument following scholarly writing techniques.

Significance Presents no clear rationale.

Clearly describes the rationale for the work, linking it to the particular journal or conference chosen.

Clearly describes the rationale for the work, linking it to the particular journal or conference chosen. Articulates the difference this work is intended to make for other professionals or scholars and demonstrates why readers should care about it.

Conclusion A conclusion is not provided or the conclusion is poorly constructed.

The conclusion clearly and succinctly summarizes the argument.

Summarizes argument and restates the article’s relevance to literature. The conclusion points beyond the article to the larger context, highlighting its significance and provides direction for future research.

16

References Contains few or

incomplete references. Pays little attention to APA standards.

Contains cited references with few APA errors.

Contains a complete list of references, accurately cited using APA format.

Peer Review Missed the deadline. You gave only minor peer review. Your peer review was not constructive.

Your work was published online by 4:30 pm, MST, June 13. You offered clear, helpful peer review to your colleagues. Peer review takes place between June 13 and June 17.

Your work was published online by 4:30 pm, MST, June 13. You offered in-depth peer review with helpful, constructive feedback. You offered specific, concrete suggestions for improvement in a manner that made it easy for your colleagues to integrate your feedback effectively.

Final copy Due June 22, 2012

Non-scholarly writing is presented, or final work is not submitted by the deadline.

Presents scholarly writing. Errors are minor and APA style is followed. Final submission is approximately 15 pages, exclusive of title page, references, appendices, and is double-spaced, with 1-inch margins, in a serif font such as Times Roman or Times New Roman, 12 pt. font, as per APA guidelines.

Presents exemplary scholarly writing that requires little to no editing and demonstrates adherence to APA standards. Final submission is approximately 15 pages, exclusive of title page, references, appendices, and is double-spaced, with 1-inch margins, in a serif font such as Times Roman or Courier, 12 pt. font.

---------------------------- Students are advised to become familiar with the Faculty of Graduate Studies policies and the University of Calgary support services in these areas: intellectual property, academic integrity, plagiarism, research ethics, effective writing, and English language proficiency. Information about these topics is available through the following web addresses:

• http://www.grad.ucalgary.ca/Policies%20and%20Procedures.aspx • http://www.ucalgary.ca/honesty/ • http://www.ucalgary.ca/research/compliance/ethics/

17

Grading Scale *Based upon Faculty of Graduate Studies 2009/2010 Calendar, “Distribution of Grades” All material used in the course is for the sole use of the individual and should not be recopied in either print or digital format. For copyright guidelines, including those relating to photocopying and electronic copies, please refer to the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC) fair dealing guidelines: https://library.ucalgary.ca/sites/library.ucalgary.ca/files/Fair_dealing_policy_final_revised_March_2011-2.pdf Academic Accommodation: Students with a disability, who require academic accommodation, need to register with the Disability Resource Centre http://www.ucalgary.ca/UofC/Others/DRC MC 295, telephone 220-8237. Academic accommodation letters need to be provided to course instructors no later than fourteen (14) days after the first day of class. It is a student's responsibility to register with the Disability Resource Centre and to request academic accommodation, if required. Campus Security provides a range of services intended to promote and facilitate a safe and secure learning and living environment, e.g. the SafeWalk program for students attending classes on campus. For more information please visit http://www.ucalgary.ca/security/ or telephone (403) 220-5333. The Freedom of Information Protection of Privacy Act prevents instructors from placing assignments or examinations in a public place for pickup and prevents students from access to exams or assignments other than their own. Therefore, students and instructors may use one of the following options: return/collect assignments during class time or during instructors' office hours, students provide instructors with a self-addressed stamped envelope, or submit assignments, or submit/return assignments as electronic files attached to private e-mail message.

Distribution of Grades Grade GP Value Graduate Description A+ 4.0 Outstanding

A 4.0 Excellent - superior performance showing comprehensive understanding of the subject matter

A- 3.7 Very good performance B+ 3.3 Good performance B 3.0 Satisfactory performance

Note: The grade point value (3.0) associated with this grade is the minimum acceptable average that a graduate student must maintain throughout the program as computed at the end of each year of the program.

B- 2.7 Minimum pass for students in the Faculty of Graduate Studies

C+ 2.3

All grades below B- are indicative of failure at the graduate level and cannot be counted toward Faculty of Graduate Studies course requirements.

C 2.0 C- 1.7 D+ 1.3 D 1.0 F 0.0