ETT741

 
Ying  Xie,  PhD  
Agenda  
•  Logis/cs  
•  Ar/cle  evalua/on  report  3  &  4    
•  Debrief:  case  study  
•  Synthesis  lecture  and  group  ac/vity  
•  Group  presenta/on  4  
•  (if  /me  permits)  LeFovers  from  the  last  lecture  
Logistics  
•  Next  2  weeks:  individual  mee/ng  with  the  instructor:  Sign-­‐up  
for  the  required  individual  mee/ng  if  you  haven’t  
•  4/14  
•  Annotated  bibliography  
•  Literature  review  draF  (op/onal,  only  1  draF  is  accepted)  
•  Recorded  presenta/on  (5-­‐8  mins)  
•  4/21:  feedback  to  your  classmates’  presenta/ons  
•  4/28:  final  paper  due  
Annotated  Bibliography    
•  Introduc)on  
•  Topic  
•  Theories  
•  List  of  ar)cles  
•  Ar/cle  1  (apa)  
•  Summary  (how  it  relates  to  other  studies)  
•  Your  evalua/on  
•  …  
•  Ar/cle  7  (apa)  
•  Summary  (how  it  relates  to  other  studies)  
•  Your  evalua/on  
•  Conclusion  
•  Theory  review  
•  Synthesis    
•  Research  gaps  
Literature  Review:  Final  Paper  
•  At  least  5  research  ar/cles  
•  Between  7-­‐10  pages  (double-­‐spaced,  excluding  the  /tle  and  
reference  pages)  
•  Must  follow  APA  (6th  edi/on)  
•  Recommended:    
•  Work  with  the  wri/ng  tutor  before  turning  in  your  final  paper  
•  Find  help  checking  plagiarism  of  your  paper!  
Literature  Review  Paper  
•  Introduc/on  
•  Analysis  and  Discussion  
•  Theme  1:  Theories  used  in  the  studies  related  to  your  chosen  
topic  
•  Theme  2:    
•  (op/onal)  Theme  3  
•  (op/onal)  Theme  4…  
•  Conclusions  (and  Recommenda/ons)  
Introduction  
•  Define  or  iden/fy  the  general  topic,  issue,  or  area  of  concern,  
thus  providing  an  appropriate  context  for  reviewing  the  
literature.  
•  Point  out  overall  trends  in  what  has  been  published  about  the  
topic;  or  conflicts  in  theory,  methodology,  evidence,  and  
conclusions;  or  gaps  in  research  and  scholarship;  or  a  single  
problem  or  new  perspec/ve  of  immediate  interest.  
•  Establish  the  writer's  reason  (point  of  view)  for  reviewing  the  
literature;  explain  the  criteria  to  be  used  in  analyzing  and  
comparing  literature  and  the  organiza)on  of  the  review  
(sequence);  and,  when  necessary,  state  why  certain  literature  
is  or  is  not  included  (scope).  
Body  
•  Group  research  studies  and  other  types  of  literature  (reviews,  
theore/cal  ar/cles,  case  studies,  etc.)  according  to  common  
denominators  such  as  qualita/ve  versus  quan/ta/ve  
approaches,  conclusions  of  authors,  specific  purpose  or  
objec/ve,  chronology,  etc.  
•  Summarize  individual  studies  or  ar)cles  with  as  much  or  as  
lihle  detail  as  each  merits  according  to  its  compara/ve  
importance  in  the  literature,  remembering  that  space  (length)  
denotes  significance.  
•  Transi)ons  and  organiza)on.  Provide  the  reader  with  strong  
"umbrella"  sentences  at  beginnings  of  paragraphs,  "signposts"  
throughout,  and  brief  "so  what"  summary  sentences  at  
intermediate  points  in  the  review  to  aid  in  understanding  
comparisons  
Conclusion  
•  Summarize  major  contribu)ons  of  significant  studies  and  
ar/cles  to  the  body  of  knowledge  under  review,  maintaining  
the  focus  established  in  the  introduc/on.  
•  Evaluate  the  current  "state  of  the  art"  for  the  body  of  
knowledge  reviewed,  poin/ng  out  major  methodological  
flaws  or  gaps  in  research,  inconsistencies  in  theory  and  
findings,  and  areas  or  issues  per/nent  to  future  study.  
•  Conclude  by  providing  some  insight  into  the  rela/onship  
between  the  central  topic  of  the  literature  review  and  a  larger  
area  of  study  such  as  a  discipline,  a  scien/fic  endeavor,  or  a  
profession.    
Presentation  and  Feedback  
•  5-­‐8  minutes,  use  a  PPT  
•  Topic  
•  Number  of  ar/cles  included  
•  Major  themes  
•  Conclusions  
•  Post  at  least  6  comments/sugges/ons  on  the  discussion  forum  
(anonymous  pos/ng  allowed)  
Article  Evaluation  Report  3  &  4  
Case  Study:    
Inter-­‐rater  Reliability  I  
Case  Study:    
Inter-­‐rater  Reliability  I  
SUMMARIZE  VS.  SYNTHESIZE  
When  Summarizing  
Look  for  the  following  elements  in  a  research  study:    
•  Problem  
•  Hypotheses/research  ques/ons  
•  Research  method  
•  Findings/Conclusions  
 
Synthesize  Articles?  
•  It  means  that  in  your  literature  review,  you  examine  a  number  
of  studies  on  a  shared  topic  and  note  aspects  that  are  of  
interest  for  your  own  work  
•  It  also  may  mean  that  you  draw  and  state  a  conclusion  about  
the  similari)es  and  differences  in  the  studies  you  review  
Listing  Summaries  ≠  
Synthesizing  
•  It  is  not  unusual  to  see  a  student  paper  that  reviews  one  
ar/cle  aFer  another  
•  It  describes  each  ar/cle  in  one  or  two  or  more  paragraphs  
•  Usually  giving  sample  size,  method,  findings,  etc.  
•  OFen  in  some  detail  
This  is  not  a  synthesis  
How  to  synthesize  articles  
•  Give  enough  informa/on  about  the  study  for  the  reader  to  
imagine  it  
•  Highlights  what  is  important  about  the  study  for  your  paper  
•  Note  what  is  similar  and  important  across  several  studies  
•  Note  any  important  differences  that  are  relevant  to  your  
study  
•  Describe  each  ar/cle  briefly  in  ways  relevant  to  your  study  

•  Examples  next!  
Synthesize  Exercise    
   
•  Group  work  
•  Read  the  “Mobile  in  STEM  study  summaries”  (handouts  online)  
•  The  complete  papers  are  in  “Ar/cles”  folder  on  BB  
•  When  trying  to  iden/fy  themes,  discuss  within  your  groups:  what  
are  the  major  things  you  care  about  when  reading  research  
ar/cles  about  mobile  devices  in  STEM?    
•  Download  the  “synthesizing  table”  and  fill  out  the  table  with  your  
group  member  
What  do  you  care?  
•  Theory?  Pedagogy?  
•  How  mobile  devices  are  used?  
•  Design  of  study?  
•  Type  of  outcome  in  the  studies:  focus  of  the  study  (learning,  
aqtudes,  mo/va/on,  percep/on  etc.)?  
•  Discipline?    
Synthesize  Example    
•  Because  of  the  unique  affordances  including  permanence,  
accessibility,  immediacy  and  portability  (Scanlon,  Jones,  &  
Waycoh,  2005),  mobile  devices  are  increasingly  used  in  
various  seqngs,  esp.  in  STEM  classrooms.  Yet,  empirical  
studies  about  mobile  technologies  are  s/ll  in  its  infancy.  The  
literature  shows  that  mobile  devices  in  these  studies  have  
been  used  in  a  variety  of  approaches,  from  simplis/c  tex/ng-­‐
messaging  (Seppälä,  &  Alamäki,  2003)  to  rather  complex  geo-­‐
sensing  reality  augmenta/on  (e.g.  Huang,  Lin,  &  Cheng  2013).  
Regardless,  portability  and  mobility  of  such  devices  is  the  key  
feature  that  ahracted  researchers  and  educators  to  leverage  
the  technology  for  learning  and  instruc/on.  
 Synthesize  Example  Continued  
However,  these  ahempts  produced  varying  degrees  of  success  in  these  
experiments.  The  majority  of  the  findings  were  aqtudinal.  For  example,  
Seppälä,  &  Alamäki  (2003)  found  that  teachers  viewed  the  technology  
offered  a  sense  of  convenience,  expediency,  and  immediacy.  Heightened  
mo/va/on  and  engagement  with  the  class  and  the  material  was  reported  in  
many  of  these  studies  (e.g.  Cortez  et  al.,  2004;  Franklin,  &  Peng,  2008;  
Klopfer,  Yoon.  &  Perry,  2005;  O'Malley,  et  al.,  2013).  A  few  studies  found  
mobile  technologies  and  modified  pedagogy  helped  students  master  some  
of  the  important  skills,  such  as  self-­‐directed  learning  (e.g.  Klopfer,  Yoon.  &  
Perry,  2005),  collabora/ve  learning  (Norris,  et  al.,  2013)  and  “construc/ng  
answers  on  the  fly  and  engaging  in  thoughuul  conversa/on.  ((Norris,  et  al.,  
2013,  p38).  Findings  associa/ng  the  use  of  mobile  technologies  with  
academic  achievement  were  rare:  O'Malley,  et  al.  (2013)  reported  that  using  
Math  Racer  (a  game  on  mobile  devices)  promoted  students’  basic  math  
fluency.  Huang,  Lin,  and  Cheng  (2010)  found  using  geo-­‐sensing  PDAs  allowed  
students  to  look  up  plants  in  real  /me  and  therefore  promoted  their  
learning  achievement  in  the  course.  Yet,  not  all  studies  produced  posi/ve  
effects.  For  example,  Thibodeaux,  J.  (2013)  found  that  students  using  the  
iPad  scored  the  same  or  lower  on  all  measures  academically.  The  studies  
also  showed  a  scarce  and  embryonic  applica/on  of  using  mobile  devices  in  
math  teaching  and  learning.  
Notes  
•  Focus  on  the  aspect  you  were  interested  in  
•  Do  not  give  many  details  about  each  study  
•  Synthesizing  takes  prac/ce  
•  You  need  to  know  what  you  are  focused  on  in  your  own  study  
in  order  to  synthesize  ar/cles  for  it  
•  You  need  to  know  what  parts  of  an  ar/cle  are  of  use  to  your  
own  study,  and  what  parts  are  not  
•  You  need  to  draw  a  conclusion  for  the  reader,  so  the  reader  
will  know  what  is  important  about  the  studies  you  have  
summarized  
Group  Presentation  
Next  
Will  be  cut  off  around  30  mins