From deliberating over Becky's response to my list of possible research projects, she has gently been steering me toward a more "field methods" type of project that focuses on solving a problem, answering a question, or gathering information to address a situation/context/design. She suggests that I might study the "design" of using Writer's Reviews within ICON. This study would seek to answer the question of how writer's reviews are perceived by students, document instructors, and even the curriculum designers. How are these WRs done? It would study the place and role these writer's reviews have within this curriculum design and writing program. What would the writing program director (Susan Lang) need to know about how writer's reviews are actually being used by students and document instructors in order to better take advantage of their potential for the writing program? (Are they worth doing?)
This study would probably involve surveys of the different users and even follow up focus groups or interviews. It could possibly involve some data-mining, but I think that might begin to get out of hand (it depends how easy it is to do the data-mining).
This study looks very do-able and I would hope relevant to Texas Tech and ICON.
I'm still thinking...
It doesn't dig as deep as I had intended.
1 comment:
The field methods study can help you think about your dissertatin, yes? Have you emailed Dr. Lang to see what she's doing different now than last year? The value of the writing review has changed significantly; the curriculum has changed significantly.
Post a Comment