Notice: register_sidebar_widget is deprecated since version 2.8! Use wp_register_sidebar_widget() instead. in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-includes/functions.php on line 3247

Notice: register_widget_control is deprecated since version 2.8! Use wp_register_widget_control() instead. in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-includes/functions.php on line 3247

Notice: register_sidebar_widget is deprecated since version 2.8! Use wp_register_sidebar_widget() instead. in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-includes/functions.php on line 3247

Notice: register_widget_control is deprecated since version 2.8! Use wp_register_widget_control() instead. in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-includes/functions.php on line 3247

Notice: register_sidebar_widget is deprecated since version 2.8! Use wp_register_sidebar_widget() instead. in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-includes/functions.php on line 3247

Notice: register_sidebar_widget is deprecated since version 2.8! Use wp_register_sidebar_widget() instead. in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-includes/functions.php on line 3247

Warning: session_start(): Cannot send session cookie - headers already sent by (output started at /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-includes/functions.php:3247) in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/si-contact-form/si-contact-form.php on line 927

Warning: session_start(): Cannot send session cache limiter - headers already sent (output started at /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-includes/functions.php:3247) in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/si-contact-form/si-contact-form.php on line 927

Notice: Undefined index: ru_index in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/relocate-upload/relocate-upload.php on line 146
drinkme | PhD

Prepping the first batch of survey invites

2012.12.08
Cincopa video hosting solution for your website. Another great product from Cincopa Send Files.

The time has arrived to send out the first batch of survey invites. There is some work to be done in preparation for this happy event.

 

  • Do a couple more trials to self
  • Delete and rebuild database so it is fresh at the beginning
  • Note: i should start doing regular db backups once this gets going
  • List work:
  • Assemble the complete list as presently exists,
  • Create a worksheet copy of the original and clean it up;
  • Create a new worksheet with just last name, first name, email addy, token field, and randomise field.
  • Randomise
  • Get the first 100 and add tokens
  • Import the first 50 into the db
  • Generate the email invites with ‘salutations’
  • Import the second 50 into the db
  • Generate emails invites with ‘first name’
  • Not sure what to do with the plea to meet certain date.  I don’t like it because it is gamesmanship and the invites are going to be rolling out over time. I might just remove it.

Ok. Time, i think for a run, then i get to it. Well, i will work on list for a bit first. Still couple hours till dark.


Notice: Undefined variable: metastring in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/themes/tomorrow/functions.php on line 129
Categories : PhD

UTS Autumn 2011 Progress

2011.05.29
Cincopa video hosting solution for your website. Another great product from Cincopa Send Files.

a. the goals which you set for the semester

 

My goal is to continue making reasonable progress towards completion of my PhD in rough accordance with the plan set forth in my Doctoral Assessment Report of 7 Dec 2010.

b. your progress in relation to your goals, work plans, and other achievements

 

I am definitely making progress.  Just had a paper accepted for the 1st GOLC Workshop at the 2011 Frontiers in Education (FiE) Conference. The two reviewers gave the paper scores of 94/100 and 98/100 which is best result I have obtained to date.

 

 

c. problems or issues which affected your progress and the strategies identified to overcome them (e.g., infrastructure/equipment, outside work commitments, project funding);

 

Without belaboring the tale, I was caught out unexpectedly on a number of fronts at the start of the year.  Most notably, I had to move house and find work.  These unavoidable and high-priority distractions came right on the heels of taking a short breather after successfully passing the Doctoral Assessment in December 2010.  These two matters occupied a great deal of my time and attention for the first few months of 2011.  I have relocated to Katoomba and have taken on some software engineering work and, for the time at least, things have settled down sufficiently that I am again making suitable forward progress towards my degree.

 

 

d. the involvement of external or industry supervisors (where applicable);

 

Not applicable.

 

 

e. the goals and an agreed work plan for the forthcoming semester, taking into account your progress this semester and the number of semesters left for your candidature.

 

 

I intend to continue following the plan set forth in my Doctoral Assessment Report of 7 December 2011.  Over the next few months I will be doing the precursor work needed by the survey instrument to be employed by my research.  I am in the process of developing a working set of remote engineering instructional laboratory characteristics.  The working set derives from exegesis of extant literature.  The working set will be winnowed down to a testable set of REIL characteristics through interviews with teacher-academics within several engineering disciplines.  The testable set will be utilized to create a survey instrument.  Survey instrument guidance, as well as guidance on sample identification and selection, will hopefully come from persons within UTS CenSoC.  By the end of next semester, I should like to have a survey instrument ready to deploy.  Along the way, I will also be developing a taxonomy of remote engineering instructional laboratory characteristics.

 


Notice: Undefined variable: metastring in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/themes/tomorrow/functions.php on line 129
Categories : PhD

Freight Train Breakdown at Penrith

2011.05.18
Cincopa video hosting solution for your website. Another great product from Cincopa Send Files.

So made my train today to get down for PhD visit.  Unfortunately, there was a freight train breakdown at Penrith that led to repeated stop-and-waits for our train.  Clearly to miss meetings, I out at Glenwood and wait for return up the hill.  Lovely station carved out of the hills.  Lonely station, too.  I was there alone for better than 30 minutes and then only two ladies were on the platform when the train did arrive.  One lady was heading to Springwood to return a library book.  During my wait time I practiced flute for a while.  Working on two octave runs, from  C to C.  Low C is a bugger.


Notice: Undefined variable: metastring in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/themes/tomorrow/functions.php on line 129
Categories : Life  Music  PhD

Technology Adoption

2011.02.04
Cincopa video hosting solution for your website. Another great product from Cincopa Send Files.

Technology adoption is a long studied topic in the world of information and computer science.  I knew there would also be much literature on technology adoption in education.  Just had a first peek and there is  LOT of educational technology adoption stuff. Yikes.

Some of what ha gone before is going to be relevant to remote laboratory adoption.  what will distinguish RL adoption from any other sort of technological innovation intended to support teaching and learning? Does is matter that it is engineering education?  Does it matter that it is laboratory based?  Hmmm.


Notice: Undefined variable: metastring in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/themes/tomorrow/functions.php on line 129
Categories : PhD

2010.11.09 Precap

2010.11.10
Cincopa video hosting solution for your website. Another great product from Cincopa Send Files.


    FIVE weeks until my 14 December doctoral assessment.  Much work to be done.

    ———————————————————

    LOGISTICS

    ———————————————————.

  1. Library Books
  2. PDQ statistics

    Author Norman, Geoffrey R
    Publisher Hamilton, Ont. : B.C. Decker, 2003 .
    Format

    Print

    City Campus 001.422 NOMA (ED.3) Available

    The Sage dictionary of social research methods

    Author Víctor Jupp
    Additional Title Dictionary of social research methods
    Publisher London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif. : SAGE Publications, c2006.
    Format

    Print

    City Campus 300.72 JUPP Available
  3. DA Committee
    • David to approach at appropriate time.
  4. UTS facilities
    • Student id for swt -> waiting for skin to heal
    • Desk for swt  ->  spot for me on Level 23 -> though Bridgett missing some paperwork from Phyllis?
    • Computer for swt -> TBD
  5. CRIN
  6. Paid Work
    • Full-time ; approached by headhunter; supposed to phone chat  upcoming week to see if worth pursing.
    • Teaching for me at UTS?  Labshare re-funded?  Other?
  7. CenSoC and Other People(to help clarify research question bits about decision making  and decision support)
    • Supposed to contact Maria next week.
    • Others as well.
  8. ———————————————————

    SUBSTANTIVE

    ———————————————————

  9. Assessment Criteria (Doctoral Assessment)
    • The candidate must satisfy the Assessment Panel on each of a range of criteria. Some of these criteria will have been used in assessing applicants for candidature. Nonetheless, they should be re-applied at the point of Assessment:
      1. an ability to select, analyse, synthesise and evaluate relevant material pertaining to the field of study;
      2. understanding of key concepts, problems, issues in relevant literature;
      3. critical acumen and capability for critical appraisal of relevant research;
      4. substantiation of the choice of research topic/questions and its significance as an original contribution to the advancement of knowledge in the field of study;
      5. justification of proposed research methods;
      6. understanding of resource implications;
      7. understanding of ethical implications;
      8. adoption of a suitable theoretical or conceptual framework for the proposed study;
      9. a capacity and feasible plan to complete the proposed research project within the prescribed time for the degree.
  10. Qualitative v. Quantitative
    • Qualitative
      • richer data obtained by qualitative investigation
      • generally  takes more time;
      • generally harder to generalize results
      • research ‘questions’
    • Quantitative
      • more amenable to statistical analysis;
      • generally faster to get data.
      • generally easier to generalize results
      • research ‘hypothesis’
    • Mixed metaphor?
      • we have phrased a research ‘question’ but intend on using a quantitative  method.
      • should we restate/reformulate as a research ‘hypothesis’ ?
  11. Triangulation?
    • research conclusions considered stronger if same results achieved by multiple methodologies.
    • Is one methodology (and results) sufficient for PhD or  are more needed?
  12. Research Question
    • For some time the question  had this formulation:
    • To make the object of research more amenable to discreet answer, the core research question has been reformulated as follows:
  13. Which characteristics of remote laboratories can be utilised to provide decision support for teacher academics considering whether to adopt remote laboratories for teaching purposes?

    What are the perceptions

    of teacher academics

    regarding the relative importance

    of various information related to remote laboratories

    with regard to the readiness to make decisions

    concerning [use of] those remote laboratories [for teaching purposes]?

  14. Deconstruction of the Research Question
    • What are the perceptions
      • Q: How do we measure perceptions?
      • A: Likert scale
    • of teacher academics
      • Q: How do we select those to participate?
      • A: ???
        • Teacher-academics (university level instructors)
        • Engineering education
        • Not sure how many needed  to be statistically significant
        • Not sure how to promise that selected cohort is a representative population’
        • Not sure if a control group is required.
    • regarding the relative importance
      • Q: What questions do we need to ask to determine relative importance?
      • A:
        • This is part of the actual design, yes?
      • Q: How many different questions do we need to ask?
        • In total?
        • Regarding each characteristic to be tested?
      • A:
        • This is part of the actual design, yes?
    • of various information related to remote laboratories
      • Q: How do we identify the information to be tested?
      • A:
        • Interviews w/ coding (talk to ‘experts’)
        • Content analysis (from the literature)
      • Q: What ‘number’ of items do we assess?
      • A:  some defensible quantity
        • Constrained by survey length; i.e. survey must not take four hours to complete
        • suggested by information clusters that emerge during or derive from characteristic gathering/coding
        • Goldilocks would know
    • with regard to the readiness to make decisions concerning [use of] those remote laboratories [for teaching purposes]?
      • Q: What is a decision?
      • A:  a final and definite choice after consideration of some proposition
        • We are considering ‘stated choice’ and not ‘revealed choice'; where ‘stated’ choice is hypothetical situation/decision and ‘revealed’ choice is real situation/decision.
      • Q : What do we mean by ‘readiness’
      • A:
      • Q : Teaching purposes?
      • A:  as opposed to remote labs for research or commercial purpose.
  15. This is not properly deconstruction as per Derrida; nonetheless . . .

  16. Methodology
    • Make some intelligent choices about which remote laboratory characteristics should be considered for use in the survey instrument.
      • There are an infinity of characteristics and some selection and exclusion must occur at the outset.
      • Characteristics from literature, of course.
      • I am thinking that some techniques from grounded theory might be utilized to develop a working set of characteristics.
        • By grounded theory techniques, I am thinking about some structured and semi-structured interviews with experts where the questions aim to elicit some alleged performance, effort, and social characteristics of remote laboratories vis a vis the teachers who employ them.
        • Coding would be performed on the data to establish properties and dimensions. (Maybe requirements engineering techniques? Maybe phenomenological techniques? Maybe case study techniques?) The point here is to develop a working set of remote laboratory characteristics which can be employed to develop an appropriate survey instrument.
    • Develop a survey instrument (in conjunction with or under review of who?)
      • Construct might contain subscales?
        • Perceptions of relative importance: to teaching itself, to technical quality; to job advancement, etc.
      • Evaluate instrument quality (though I not sure how to do this yet)
        • Reliability  (can we repeat it)
        • Validity (did we measure what we intended to measure)
    • Deploy the survey instrument.
      • Who is the cohort?
      • What is the sample size?
      • Does there need to be a control in place?
      • Online survey with postal mail invitation and email prompts.
        • Thank you note to participant.  Be polite.
    • Collect, analyse, and report on survey data.
      • Correlation analysis?
      • Factor analysis?
      • Analysis of Variation
        • e.g. Kruskal–Wallis one-way analysis of variance
    • Do I have phd yet? OR
    • The end of this part gives us (or so we intend) an empirically obtained and weighted collection of remote laboratory characteristics that are perceived by teacher-academics as being relevant to performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and social influence associated with remote laboratory adoption.
    • Then we have to find out if these things can be used to provide decision support. So we have to structure this information somehow (quality framework time).
    • Then we have to find out if it actually can be used to provide decision support. Which means we have to do some sort of experiment in which a cohort (or two or three?) makes r emote lab adoption decisions with benefit of framework and some other cohort does not have the same benefit. Then, and i think this is hard, we have to know if having the decision framework makes the decision making easier? Better? Can we just ask to self report?
    • Assuming we get a ‘yes’, the framework can provide decisions support, then we can suggest interventions to designers/providers of remote laboratories. If we get a ‘no’ then back to the drawing board? Say decision support not possible? Or just that this particular research does not suggest that decision support for adoption of remote labs can be provided by UTAUT? Do we care about UTAUT for structuring any longer?
  17. My DA reports
    • Next week let us take a look at where my report currently stands and discuss what needs to be done and where it needs to go.
    • Known issues:
      • Methodology + research design
      • Project plan + schedule
    • Table of Contents
      • Introduction
      • Purpose and aims
        • Contribution
        • Significance
      • Literature review
        • Remote Laboratories
        • Remote Laboratory Adoption
        • Decision-making
        • UTAUT?
      • Research design (or methodological approach)
        • Knowledge and the Scientific Enterprise         (i.e. epistemology)
        • Deconstruction and Analysis of the Primary Research Question
        • Limits, Restrictions, and Boundaries of This Research
        • Assumptions of This Research
        • Methodological Approach
        • Research Design
      • Thesis structure
      • Significance/expected outcomes
      • Appendices
        • Ethical Considerations
        • Research Timeline
        • Resource Requirements
      • References
  18. ———————————————————

    Progress continues . . .


Notice: Undefined variable: metastring in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/themes/tomorrow/functions.php on line 129
Categories : PhD

2010.10.10
Cincopa video hosting solution for your website. Another great product from Cincopa Send Files.

You had asked for interest points and expected outcomes.  No particular expectations other than chance to run some of my fuzzy thinking past someone who also thinks about this kind of stuff.  I know more about decision support systems than I do about decision-making; so I suppose I would like some insight into that world.  Perhaps decision-support is not even the most appropriate vocabulary for my purposes?  Interest points shall be revealed in the text that follows.

Take five minutes and read the opening page at http://www.labshare.edu.au/.

Laboratory work is a fundamental ingredient of an engineering education curriculum.  A laboratory may be classified as proximate, simulated, or remote.   A proximate laboratory is the traditional lab where the student and physical apparatus are co-present.  In a simulated laboratory there is no physical apparatus, the student interacts with a model based computer simulation.  Remote laboratories employ physical apparatus but the student operates the apparatus remotely via some telecontrol interface.   My research concern regards remote labs.

Take as given

  • that remote labs are being developed and deployed in numerous institutions that deliver engineering education;
  • that that institutions which deploy remote labs would like to see the labs be utilized;
  • that remote labs do not as yet get much use;
  • that among the ways to increase use of remote labs is for teachers to require remote lab activities of their students.

SO – if a teacher incorporates remote lab work into a subject, remote labs will get use.

SO – what do teacher’s need to know about remote labs to decide if they should use one?

Here is the present state of my main research question:

Which characteristics of remote laboratories can be used in providing decision support to teacher-academics considering whether to adopt remote laboratories for teaching purposes?

I am puzzling over just what I mean by “decision-support” and this is the matter I should like to discuss with you.

Though I can speak casually on the matter, I find that I am faced with both conceptual and methodological difficulties when I attempt to address the matter with rigor.

Let me attempt to illustrate my consternation by describing the circumstance of interest.  A university teacher is charged with delivering a some subject (e.g. physics).  The subject is defined within some curriculum (e.g. civil engineering).  While the curriculum delineates the subject content (e.g.  Physics will include Newton’s law of universal gravitation); it is the teacher who crafts the pedagogy that will actually deliver Newton’s laws to students in her physics subject.  This is what teachers do, right?

Suppose a teacher wishes to include a laboratory lesson in which in which students conduct an experiment determine the value of g (i.e. 9.8m/s*2).  Proximate laboratory? Simulation laboratory? Remote laboratory?  What ‘things’ would a teacher want (need?) to know about a remote laboratory to be able to make a decision as to whether or not to use — or not to use — the remote laboratory?

Ok – at last we have arrived at the beginning of my troubles.  Here is some of my thinking.

  • I am wanting to look at the decision-making-process; i.e. that which leads up to a decision.
  • The decision itself is immaterial; it is the capacity to make a decision that is of interest.
  • PROBLEM:  ‘Capacity to make a decision’ is conceptually inadequate.
    • An arbitrary yes/no decision is always on the table.
    • An arbitrary decision makes any notion of *support* superfluous.
    • Partial Fix: so it must be a ‘capacity to make a non-arbitrary decision’
      • Note that non-arbitrary implies value; i.e. non-arbitrary is somehow ‘better’ than  arbitrary.
  • PROBLEM:  ‘Capacity to make a non-arbitrary decision’ is methodologically inadequate.
    • At what point along some continuum does an arbitrary decision  become non-arbitrary?
      • I cautiously suggest that non-arbitrary could mean ‘reasoned’ or ‘informed’.
    • By what measure can I evaluate a teacher’s ‘capacity to make a non-arbitrary decision’
      • Prof Lowe has wondered if we might measure the ‘confidence’ or ‘readiness’ that a teacher self-reports.
        • Are you ‘confident’ about making a decision?  Are you ‘ready’ to make a decision?
        • LIkert scaling . . . ?
  • I assume the above two problems are tractable.
    • By tractable, I mean that that a conceptually sound and methodologically defensible definition of ‘decision’ can be had.
    • Which leads to the nest . ..
  • PROBLEM: What should (could?) be meant here by ‘decision-support?
    • What kinds of support are possible?
    • What sort of support is needed?
    • How best to provide the support?

Notice: Undefined variable: metastring in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/themes/tomorrow/functions.php on line 129
Categories : PhD

Feeling Overwhelmed

2010.10.02
Cincopa video hosting solution for your website. Another great product from Cincopa Send Files.

Probably need to step away from computer for a while.  Go fly a kite.  Quite a bit on my mind.  Seriously need to step up the organization as so many things going on in so many directions.


Notice: Undefined variable: metastring in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/themes/tomorrow/functions.php on line 129
Categories : PhD  Self

Papers i might write

2010.08.10
Cincopa video hosting solution for your website. Another great product from Cincopa Send Files.

[TASK: Get admitted and enrolled.]

  • A general survey paper regarding remote laboratory adoption
  • A paper which looks at claims (anecdotal , empirical, theoretical) regarding the remote labs desiderata vis a vis teacher-academics
  • A paper which presents the research question(s) and methodology (maybe just for me, not publication till thesis)

[TASK: Interview some expert locals. Performance expectancy: what counts as performance (perceptively)? Effort expectancy: what requires effort (perceptively)? Social influence: from which quarters do they hail (again, in perception of teacher-academics)?]

  • A paper which reports what expert locals had to say and the survey instrument that is built based on what the expert locals had to say.

[TASK: Execute survey, code data, and analyze data.]

  • A paper which reports survey data and presents preliminary data analysis.

[TASK: Construct a proposed framework based on further coding and analysis of data.]

  • A summary to-date paper which outlines work to date, presents the proposed framework, and outlines methodology to use framework to evaluate claims that decision support is possible.

[TASK: Employ framework in some sort of experiment to evaluate whether decisions support feasible with this approach.]

  • Paper which reports on experiment data and provide data analysis.

[TASK: pull it all together]

  • Submit Dissertation

Notice: Undefined variable: metastring in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/themes/tomorrow/functions.php on line 129
Categories : PhD

Sunday

2010.07.25
Cincopa video hosting solution for your website. Another great product from Cincopa Send Files.

Sunday night, once again. Went for a run earlier which was good. The more I run the more I can run. Funny that. New term arrived at TAFE and nearly upon us at UTS. Worked today on research proposal for UTS. The writing I had done for the REV paper turns out to fit quite nicely into the needs of the research proposal. Make sense, really, as the REV paper was saying ‘hey, here is a possibly interesting approach to addressing an interesting problem’ and left off with promise that empirical research would follow. Well, the phd is all about empirical research and so it fits. Will need to get input from my supervisor of course (geez, he is really good at this stuff). Next up for tonite – more coding for labshare proto catalog. Piano, too, before I am done.


Notice: Undefined variable: metastring in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/themes/tomorrow/functions.php on line 129
Categories : PhD  Self

Out and about

2010.07.16
Cincopa video hosting solution for your website. Another great product from Cincopa Send Files.

Out and about today. Bike dropped for repair estimate. Some time at vic park. Enjoyed the out of doors to be sure. Crisp and chill today. The sky blue. Bright and friendly.

Just done at piano and bass. Now to get at some writing. Some unclarity regarding distinction between ‘purpose’ and ‘aims’ but discussion with professor Lowe yesterday quite helpful in improving my understanding.

Purpose is the big picture objective that the research is to serve. The aims are the specific attainables of the research that contribute to achieving the purpose.


Notice: Undefined variable: metastring in /home/daedalco/public_html/drinkme.com/blog/wp-content/themes/tomorrow/functions.php on line 129
Categories : PhD