Jump to content
Lyn Richards

Conference on Teaching with software

Recommended Posts

Dear all,

 

The wonderful Wisconsin Teachers' Conference is coming up next month - TQM- the place to go for the breaking news of QSR's next product and for working sessions on the tasks of teachers.

 

Tom Richards is giving the first presentation about the new software, which has big news for both N6 and NVivo users and teachers - how it will change research and teaching.

 

Working sessions will tackle the challenges to be dealt with by those who teach methods with software.

 

The conference is open to students as well as teachers - and everyone learns from the working conference approach. This conference grew out of teachers' networking on all the challenges that confront qualitative methods teachers - and their students; for past conference information, go to http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/tqm/events.html. And by the way you can see the journal that published papers from the last conference free online at http://www.latrobe.edu.au/aqr/index.php?op...id=17&Itemid=35.

 

We're looking forward to a hugely interesting conference, a lot of discussion about the coming new software and a Forum-full of ideas!

cheers

Lyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings from Wisconsin

 

I would certainly encourage anyone interested to contact me directly with questions or requests. This will be a working conference on April 8th & 9th. Day one consists of several plenaries and two panels that raise a wide range of issues around teaching qualitative methods. The second day will be spent in working groups on topics of particular interest to the participants. The goal is to get some consensus on important issues (or at least clarity on what we don't agree about) in teaching the doing of qualitative research. The working groups from the 2003 TQM Conference produced a number of articles in the special issue of AQR that Lyn refers to below.

 

Of particular interest this year are questions related to assessment of student work and larger issues of quality in our writing. One of the most accurate criticisms of qualitative work is that we are often not explicit enough about our method - as operationalized in the study being described - and why it (this method) is most appropriate for the research questions being asked. This seems trivial but is actually a rather difficult task. It is also not limited to folks doing qualitative research.

 

We will also be offering several tutorial opportunities on April 7th and 8th. Please come to the web site and check it out.

 

Chris

 

 

 

Dear all,

 

The wonderful Wisconsin Teachers' Conference is coming up next month - TQM- and I thought it would be hugely helpful to get Forum feedback on some of the issues it will be tackling.

 

What are the challenges to be dealt with by those who teach methods with software, what are the success and failure stories? (Keep course descriptions anonymous, please!) Did you have a course that helped you with qualitative software and what did you see as the secrets to success? What doesn't work?

 

Most courses now give some time to assisting students to understand what software can do and reflect on what they need to do to use it well. But the recognition and teaching of software is pretty new, and the exchange of experiences is really helpful to the teachers designing curricula and the students learning.

 

The Wisconsin conference is open to students as well as teachers, by the way - and everyone learns from the working conference approach. This conference grew out of teachers' networking on all the challenges that confront qualitative methods teachers - and their students. I've just posted up to date details under Announcements.  Or just go to http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/tqm/events.html. And by the way you can see the journal that published papers from the last conference free online at http://www.latrobe.edu.au/aqr/index.php?op...id=17&Itemid=35.

 

looking forward to a Forum-full of ideas!

cheers

Lyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New news for the Teachers' Conference!

 

QSR is preparing to send the messages about NVivo 7, our coming new software - and they'll be leaked to the Forum next week. Meanwhile, in case you were wondering about coming to Wisconsin, for this highly interactive and productive working conference, the new news is:

 

• This conference will have the first chance to discuss QSR’s newest software tool, NVivo 7 – and the ways it is tackling methodological boundaries. There will be a special plenary from Tom Richards on the new product and its implications for teachers and teaching.

 

• A free copy of my new book, Handling Qualitative Data, is being donated to every participant.

 

• And of course QSR offers a free trial 90-day site license for participants to explore in their teaching what they learn at the conference.

 

For further information and workshop and conference session timings, go to http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/tqm/events.html. Participants are invited for either or both sessions.

 

Looking forward to it hugely,

cheers,

Lyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Special Offer Intermediate/Advanced Workshops at the Teaching Conference at the University of Wisconsin - Madison

 

Silvana di Gregorio, PhD, of SdG Associates, will be offering 2 special offer one day pre-conference workshops.

 

Using NVIVO for your Literature Review (6 April 2005)

 

and

 

Masterclass in NVIVO and N6 (7 April 2005)

 

Details are at www.wcer.wisc.edu/tqm/events.html

 

Silvana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Special Offer Intermediate/Advanced Workshops at the Teaching Conference at the University of Wisconsin - Madison

 

Silvana di Gregorio, PhD, of SdG Associates, will be offering 2 special offer one day pre-conference workshops.

 

Using NVIVO for your Literature Review (6 April 2005)

 

and

 

Masterclass in NVIVO and N6 (7 April 2005)

 

Details are at www.wcer.wisc.edu/tqm/events.html

 

Silvana

 

 

 

Hi folks,

 

Some comments and a simple question to Silvana. First the question: :blink:

 

If your paper on Literature Review and the role of NVivo is an update on your previous work in this field, can you please make it available on the QSR website? I think that things have come a long way since the Qualitative Reasearch Association Conference in Melbourne where NViov was announced. At that conference, I presented a paper on using N4 with EndNote so that primary and secondary data could be cross tabulated. I remember making the comment, however, that the paper had become, even at the point of presentation, superceded by the advent of the possibilities that derive from NVivo.

 

I guess that the new version of NVivo Seven will lead to fresh possibilities but in the meantime, your paper, Silvana, remains very useful, so please, if it is a revised version, can you put it onto the QSR site?

 

Now the comments. It is timely that the matter of evaluation is being raised as one focus for the conference (as noted by Chris) and that the question of best practices in teaching is always useful (and was nominated as an interest by Lyn Richards).

 

It seems to me that just as policy analysts have, very slowly and very cautiously, accepted that policy development can actually be informed by high standard QL research, so too are evaluation researchers moving away from being mainly reliant upon psycho-metrics. In our neck of the woods, Australians and New Zealanders routinely take the mickey out of each other but they do so in a good natured way. They say in Australasia that you can always tell a person from another Australasian country - it's just that you can't tell them very much!!

 

In a way, the debate between QN and QL folk has been like that but it has not always been good natured. There has been what some have described as a state of academic war and certainly, there have been more than one instance of QL being debunked by QN researchers and vice versa.

 

Nevertheless, a gradual convergence that has occurred, as exemplified by the matter of move to using QL software and approaches in evaluation work. That convergence is to be applauded. What we must beware of though, is not assuming the high moral ground on these matters. So while there is discussion on and about the uses of QL strategies for teacher evaluation, let's make sure that they do not become too precious!

 

Let's also make sure that we are realistic about time factors when we have such discussions. Psychometric techniques in evaluation research have the advantage of being quite quick and typically they can be shown to have reliability. QL approaches may, if done well, be able to illustrate validity but seldom quickly. I get concerned when, in our enthusiasm, I see colleagues 'offer' to use our craft and in doing so they place ourselves into a time demanding and stressful situation. Enough said.

 

 

Second, a comment on the focus on teaching. Yes, the issue of teaching both QL and QN research successfully is always going to be important although far too typically, conference talk-fests become grand 'show and tell' events (share-fairs) as opposed to focussing upon what we expect our graduating students to be able to do, and what, if any research is there to support our assertions about those expected student outcomes/profiles? And then, as a corollary omission, the question is seldom posed about how best that can be achieved. More specifically, the question that needs to be asked is what, if any research has been conducted that can verify or challenge whatever the popularist teaching strategies of the moment may be?

 

At the risk of falling into the very trap of 'show and tell' which I mentioned above, I have to say that a colleague and I presented at a joint NZARE and AARE conference on teaching research methods to pre-service teachers. We taught that course by using a problem-based and experiential/discovery approach and aside from showing and telling about the success of this approach, we argued that there remains a need for international discussion on this whole matter.

 

And I suspect that even though that presentation is now a few years old (2002), the issue lingers – we still need to mount an international study of best ways of proceeding insofar as teaching research methods is concerned.

 

Just as a final and perhaps provocative comment, can I suggest that the reality often seems to be that either teaching research methods is left to the happy volunteer or conversely, the unhappy person is volunteered? In the first case, Academic A enjoys research methods and is quite good at it, and, therefore, becomes willingly assigned to teach it (because others dislike teaching such a course and often can’t do so very well ;) ). In the second case, Academic B, C, D…or whoever it is that time round, becomes drawn (in lotto fashion) to teach that course. What d'you reckon? :rolleyes:

 

Cheers

 

Jens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jens,

 

I first discussed a teaching conference with Lyn at the second strategies conference in London. I had been one of those "volunteered" instructors and felt that I was almost completely unprepared for the event. My research experience prepared me to some extent, but all of my instruction had been seminar & literature based - not tied to doing research.

 

I had been to several US National Science Foundation-sponsored working conferences that were a balance of targeted papers and working groups designed to provoke discussion and produce something. I suggested this working forum and this is our second go at the event. In my dreams, this event becomes unnecessary in the future as communities develop at many universities. I am looking forward to the training days and conference. I learned quite a lot last time and have high hopes for this session.

 

Chris :lol:

 

TQM Events Page

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jens,

 

I first discussed a teaching conference with Lyn at the second strategies conference in London. I had been one of those "volunteered" instructors and felt that I was almost completely unprepared for the event. My research experience prepared me to some extent, but all of my instruction had been seminar & literature based - not tied to doing research.

 

I had been to several US National Science Foundation-sponsored working conferences that were a balance of targeted papers and working groups designed to provoke discussion and produce something. I suggested this working forum and this is our second go at the event. In my dreams, this event becomes unnecessary in the future as communities develop at many universities. I am looking forward to the training days and conference. I learned quite a lot last time and have high hopes for this session.

 

Chris :lol:

 

TQM Events Page

 

Hi Chris,

 

Of course, you are quite right that in an ideal environment, research and scholarship would be coterminous. But I suspect that we are still just a tad away from that ideal.

 

And even if we were to be in an ideal world within which 'strategies for teaching' conferences became, in a sense, unecessary, the chances are that there would be a range of variations concerning whatever the ideal is! Insularity does tend to breed a degree of determinism if not dogmatism....

 

So in all seriousness, I ask you to introduce/push the challenge at your conference that an international study needs to be be mounted re the best ways of teaching research to undergraduates and graduates, be the parameters QL and/or QN with or without software.

 

Cheers

 

Jens ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(snip)

Second, a comment on the focus on teaching.  Yes, the issue of teaching both QL and QN research successfully is always going to be important although far too typically, conference talk-fests become grand 'show and tell' events (share-fairs) as opposed to focussing upon what we expect our graduating students to be able to do, and what, if any research is there to support our assertions about those expected student outcomes/profiles?  And then, as a corollary omission, the question is seldom posed about how best that can be achieved.  More specifically, the question that needs to be asked is what, if any research has been conducted that can verify or challenge whatever the popularist teaching strategies of the moment may be? 

 

Cheers

 

Jens

 

Just a comment on an excerpt of Jens post... we're very much on the same page! In fact, I am facilitating a workshop around that very question at the upcoming Wisconsin conference.

 

It's entitled "What do novice researchers need? A conversation about teaching goals." In proposng it, my thinking was that we need to situate the teaching and learning of QDA in a more general context of teaching and learning qualitative methods - that teaching TOOLS requires a conversation about the GOALS.

 

So, whoever else is interesting in this conversation is more than welcome to join us! We'll work in the morning, then report out to the other work groups in the afternoon.

 

(Btw, I really like the conference structure - there's some nice pre-conference training sessions, then a "regular" conference day with presentations and the like. But the second day of the conference is reserved for in-depth working groups on topics like this, which I think will be really productive!)

 

Cheers,

 

Linda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×