Still no sign of the software
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: Can't Help Falling in Love (Michael Buble)
Topic: Methodology

Well ... so far no sign of the software ... but should in the meantime put together stuff for it ... double checking the software ... moving around the spreadsheets etc.

Hopefully, everything will work once I get the software. I want to finish this before Christmas because hoping it would inform my main study!

Software for pilot study
Mood:  chillin'
Now Playing: White Christmas (Bing Crosby)
Topic: Methodology

I am getting a bit anxious about my vemotion software that IET supposedly ordered but can't seem to get a hold of the licence as yet since it is with paypal ... its been 3 weeks since they ordered it but although been asking Fil about it, there hasn't been anything positive feedback as yet.

On the plus side, Jonathan has showed me a software called Netviewer which seems quite promising for remote observation. Jonathan is actually going to be using Netviewer for remote observation in the same way I am going to do it, and he suggested we can write something up later on the differences we've found. It says it has high security so wondering if it will be easier to use behind the OU's firewall than the Windows messenger. It also has a VoIP but not sure if I can record this VoIP with vemotion ... will have to check it out with Jonathan, once I get the software.

Chapter 1 and Pilot Study
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: (I Just) Died in Your Arms Tonight (Cutting Crew)
Topic: Thesis writing

Well, my writing came to a full stop when I decided to go to the TELMA workshop and haven't done anything since on it ... I've only managed a measly 1850 words ... well, it is still more that I had originally, I was thinking of reviewing it and then rewriting the chapter, but not sure how productive that would be ... I still have to rewrite my pilot study which I have put aside for quite awhile.

 To be fair, I did do the canonical correlation between the two questionnaires that John suggested, but can't make head or tail of how I should proceed to analyse it, and if there is anything of significance between the two questionnaires.

Grand Unified Theories (GUT)
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: When It Comes Down To It (Tasmin Archer)
Topic: Methodology

Well, I'm reading Diana Laurillard's Conversational Framework for learning, I don't think I'm likely to be using it (well who knows!) ... because I do like my cognitive load theory, however, I couldn't help noticing that in the Conversational Framework there is a period in which the student has to internalised or rather reflect on what is being said to them, now in cognitive load theory won't that be the point in the reflection where the germane load is occurring? Laurillard also speaks about the experiential environment wouldn't that in some way be considered a sort of extraneous load if there is no effect in the learning and the teacher providing the information being some part of the intraneous load.

Well, that is just some of my equivalency of learning theories - but that got me thinking ... won't it be cool if we were able to unify all these learning theories and have only one the "Grand Unified Learning Theories" (GULT -has a nice ring to it) - that's my physics background coming into play.

As, can be seen I sort of unified the conversational framework with the cognitive load theory all I got to do is add on the situative learning and the first GULT would be made. I think that might become the ambition of my life ... creating GULTs :)

TELMA workshop
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: Invisible Touch (Genesis)
Topic: Seminars
So, I oft to the TELMA workshop on Sunday and back on Wednesday ... hope it all goes well. Hopefully, get to meet some interesting people and I think Luc Trouche is going to be there - so hopefully can meet him as well.

Remote Observation Study ... continues :P
Mood:  chillin'
Now Playing: Hey, Mr DJ (Backstreet Boys)
Topic: Methodology

Well, I think I might finally have a format for an experimental methodology when studying students learning software with mathematics. I was reading papers by Atkinson and Renkl, and their methodology seems to be always a 5 part method, which I think might be useful to adapt. This is how it goes:

1. Demographic questionnaire of students
2. Pre-test questionnaire (which will later be used as a covariate during the analysis of the post-test)
3. Instructional materials (particularly on the mathematics topics and concepts)
4. Study or do the worked-out examples and solve the problems provided by the programme (during which the learning time is recorded)
5. Complete a post test (in which they compare the factors they were looking at)

I think mine would follow the ave steps, except since I'm doing solving problems on a computer the post-test will be on the computer, and there will be a practice session on the computer rather for step 4. I think that seems reasonable.

I'm restructuring my remote observation study with lotteries to follow this same kind of pattern to see how useful it might and how long it might take. Renkl and Atkinson usually took about 90 mins, but I'm not sure how long someone will sit through for 90 mins. They used psychology students who were offered extra credit. I have nothing to offer to students. But what I think is interesting about their research is that they use a wide variety of students with a differing mathematics ability. They also allow students who didn't anything about the topic to learn it right there and then and then use the examples or problems to help understand their learning. I think this is something useful. Not sure how applicable it might be to linear programming, which might be more complex than simple probability that Atkinson and Renkl tend to employ.

(On a sidenote and an up note: the outlook servers are back on with all our email!)

Writing a paragraph :)
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: Na Tum Jano Na Hum (Kaho Naa Pyar Hai)
Topic: Thesis writing

So, this is turning out to be a lot harder than I anticipated. I think it is because I have no clear structure in my head, so have no idea what to write. But got to keep writing, never know how useful the writing purpose might be. I did write one half-crack paragraph about 100 words as my daily paragraph (its really stupid) - but more words on paper than before.

I'm trying to figure what to write for my new paragraph, so did a whole new section of "Research objectives and aims" and then I drew a blank :) ... couldn't figure where to go from there. I think that heading was too daunting. Not sure how much this plan is actually going to be fruitful, because don't know if I have enough will-power to continue it, but I think once I have those annoying pop-up reminders it should help.

Anyway, the reason why I'm here posting to this blog, I'm hoping I can do a draft write and then copy it over, since I seem to think better when I'm here (well not think better - but rather don't have any preconceptions about the writing procedure and write better).

Right, so let's get to it ... (I think I'm still stuck :D ... just had a fire drill - so juices not running as it should.) Think I'll just write in the document instead (can sprinkle it with a lot of references and quickly reach 100 words :)!)

Research ideas coming in ...
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: Champions Trophy: WI vs India (WI 48/1; India 223/9)
Topic: Methodology

So, I've been reading a number of papers by Atkinson and Renkl and by Sweller on cognitive learning and fading steps etc. I'm still wondering if these fading steps is not exactly what I wanted to do, and that my research has already been done. What I noted that was interested about this research is that they sort of assumed people didn't know their problems and then taught it to them (but then again they had their students as guinea pigs!) - and used a pretest as a covariate when they were doing their analysis - which I think that might be a good idea.

Something else is that, they're not using traditional mathematics software, but rather constructing their problems (although they did use CASCADE for the fading problems) - so, it is not learning with software but learning in general. So, maybe I can extend this to learning with software. What's interesting also, that the steps are not random but rather sequential - wondering if that'll make a difference.

Thesis (... I know a bit early!)
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: Champions Trophy: WI vs India (WI 43/1, India 223/9)
Topic: Thesis writing

So, after getting duly scared from Jonathan telling me I should start writing early ... that is what I'm doing. I've decided to write a few lines everyday for my Chapter 1 - I'm hoping this way my dislike for writing won't culminate.

Did the first paragraph today, and it is looking good (not the writing) - but the writing process itself ... it is helping me to think what I might want to get done, which I think is a good idea since I really unsure of what I'm doing ... I guess this is what will be called an impasse (I've been reading Jones and Fleischman :D).

....Back to cognitive learning :)
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: Slow Hand (Conway Twitty)
Topic: Literature Review
After being warned of cognitive load theory from John, I didn't want to touch it with a 10 ft barge pool, however, we (James, Doug and myself) are stuck on how to actually collect usable data for my study. However, James and Doug suggested that I return to literature on how data were collected for studies that were similar to mine and the only ones I remember were the cognitive load theory ones by Renkl and Atkinson (fading steps in problem solving ) and the papers by Sweller (prior knowledge in maths) are helping me to consider the methodology. One of the things I was considering that I could teach students linear programming in the OU and see how that works with linear programming - but not sure if there is anyone motivated to learn it!