Good and Bad Things with my survey
Mood:  crushed out
Now Playing: Drift Away (Uncle Kracker)
Topic: Data Collection
Well ... I finally got approval for my survey from the SRPP ... however it was with the condition that I ensure that the courses I want to survey do not want to survey their own courses later in the year and I'll obstruct that process. Whilst some course teams were delighted with what I'm doing and wanted to know my results others were not - and have not given me permission since they've taken it upon themselves to decide whether the questionnaire is appropriate or not for their students - so, I'm stuck there.

Actually one of the course team (I'm gonna call it one of the good ones) invited me over for a chat - and we discussed a lot of stuff of mathematics and computing and they were telling me of some course surveys they did about the use of computers in their course and they even gave me the results. It was great. One guy was really enthusiastic ... he gave me references and books as well. It was great knowing that people were interesting in my research.

Unfortunately on the the course team (one of the bad ones) - couldn't see the sense of sending the questionnaire to their students ... that got me thoroughly frustrated! That was on Thursday ...

U500 conference
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: The First Time (Freddie Hart)
Topic: Seminars
So, next week is the U500 conference ... and I'm presenting on the Wednesday. Slightly apprehensive of it this time, because this time around, I'm not as certain as I was last year on what I'm doing. Last year I pretty much knew, this year I'm still floundering around. And that keeps me anxious.

My presentation has something about software and linear programming, but it doesn't't even touch what I really originally wanted to do, which is look at steps in software. I'm not sure how I'm going to do that and relate it to this new direction I seem to be heading.

I really want to look at white-box and black-box software, but it seems that as if I'm looking at dedicated, generic and spreadsheet software instead. I think what is keeping me back is that I know that software may transition between black-box and white-box - it all depends on how it is use by the student or used by the teacher to present the work.

However, I have to keep in focus, that I have to do something that is 'doable' - even if it isn't what I do (well - I mean I still like my area and research - but would have liked to go extra and do the black-box and white-box). I'm still trying to see if I can squeeze it in.

I'm still being silently horrified with my methodology, because I don't know where to get courses, or students studying LP to help me out. Zsolt might be teaching LP in June in Michigan university, so probably he could help me out a bit (if I could figure what I'm doing!).

I still have the BM240, MU120 and M373 students to get something done with them, but not entirely sure...

There is the conception of mathematics questionnaire that seems a bit fascinating, I'm thinking that might relate to the preference of software (white-box or black-box). Coupland already did some research with that and software - but only used Mathematica ... with maths students ... probably I can expand that to be a class of software and be linear programming students ... don't know .... a bit stumped.

Meeting with Mick
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: I Don't Want to Wait (Paula Cole)
Topic: Interviews
So, went and meet Mick Bromilow yesterday to discuss linear programming and software. I thought perhaps he knew about linear programming in the UK and the OU, but as it turns out he is not in the linear programming research area - so, not able to network there. But he did share some light on the M373 course since he was part of the team that developed it. According to him, M373 (which had various versions before) was developed because they considered they should have an optimization course as part of the applied mathematics degree. LP used to be taught in a level 2 course but was removed to make more room for other applied maths like mechanics.

Mick indicated that although simplex is taught there are better algorithms now available such as the interior point method which students should be taught but believed that the simplex will continue as it forms part of most linear programming curricula.

He indicated that previously in-house software was created for LP, but because the need for continuous updates a commercial software was chosen - the reason for MathCad. Also, most of the students would be familiar with MathCad since they would have used it since the entry into their OU course (not to mention OU has a licence for it) - and hence made sense to do linear programming in this way. They developed a number of worksheets templates for the students and in these the students are able to solve the problem using the matrix method rather than the tableau method for formulating the problem for solving. The course is not concerned with the students being proficient at solving the linear programming by hand, but rather being able to set up large scale problems to be solved. Hence, the MathCad just requires the student for pressing F9 to solve the problem. There is however a window in which they can see how the calculations are occurring in the background, although students are required to know the terms pivot point, pivot row they don't actually need to know these for carrying out the computer solution. However, TMA questions may require the student to examine the background calculation window to describe what might be occurring.

The templates were developed by them and the LTS team to make sure they could be readable and understandable to the student.

He also indicated that as this is a maths course they weren't too concerned about the graphics side of the LP, as that is only a 2 variable problem - but it is taught to give an understanding of how solutions are found (I'm not quite sure if this is what he actually said - but I think so ).

Teaching and public understanding of science (bit of a rant)
Mood:  lazy
Now Playing: Making Love Out of Nothing At All (Air Supply) - Live Edition - doesn't sound so good
Topic: Seminars
So, went to this seminar on Thursday which was organised by the RSA (The Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures & Commerce) which was held in the Berill Building at 6pm. We had sandwiches when we arrived - which was good. Met and talked to someone from Rothamsted (I think) who was part of the media arm of Rothamsted. So, we talked a bit about agriculture and her experiences in Brazil. Looked up who it might be and I think she was perhaps Susannah Bolton (but not quite certain).

Anyway, there were three presentations, one by Bob Kibble from Edinburgh University on science education in primary/secondary schools. His presentation was very good - I enjoyed it immensely. One of the questions he was contemplating was why should we teach science as most of the students were not likely to go into sciences. His argument is that we should if not to learn science, but to learn the skills of science of using analytical skills and of things being repeatable, and for letting students being explorative. He, however, laments the fact that the exploratory science that students do during the primary school are most effectively 'killed' because of needing to learn the curriculum and getting a grade. I think what is he's trying to say that students perhaps have adopting a surface or strategic approach to science rather than it being deep. He sort of wants science to be more holistic in its approach i.e. integrated rather than separate.

Peter Atkins who did the next presentation on science in Higher Education. I was a impressed with him until he started speaking. After all, I did use his book during undergrad! But, his approach or outlook of teaching is too traditionalistic and he has some archaic ideas. He is still living in the era that students who opt to do sciences must be the cream of the crop. Which in fact may not be true (well I don't think so) - most students these days are strategic thinkers they are doing subjects that are easy for them to get the grade they want to enter university and get their degree no matter what it is in (a bachelors is one entrance to the business place) - as long as it is easy to get. Therefore students who are science inclined and find it easy (that doesn't make them bright!) - will choose the sciences and students who find the languages easy will do that. I tell you being straight up front - that I did sciences because they were easy - but some of those courses in social sciences are hard especially those that require analysing speech and words - nothing harder in the world than that and making sure it is a logical argument too! As for languages - I'm not good at them, so whilst the languages people are admiring the science students - I'm admiring them right back.

Atkins dared to imply that the only 'real' science there might be is 'chemistry'! He considered biology nothing more that a nature walk until biochemistry popped up (DNA discovery). Well, it is from biology is where the naturalistic research methodology developed, but I think this is where real exploration begins rather than with the scientific method. Indeed it is a method to make sure things are logical - I think in some cases it has a place - but the truth is - it really constricts a researcher in exploring. Instead all they do is change one variable at a time (which is scientifically correct) - but to consider it original research, these researchers keep changing the ranges of these variables to check out different things - now that's making it easy. There is no original thoughts - there is nothing enjoyable in that - and I can see why students are moving away from the profession. Where is the excitement?

I remembered that was what disillusioned me the most during the research methodology course in UWI - I couldn't begin to think that is what research had come to i.e. no real exploration of new ideas but copying of other people's ideas and only if someone was radically to contest someone else's work were there any real theories coming out. I think that's then I started to explore Kuhn's work - its too bad I only browsed it a bit rather than going into it. I think James will be horrified - I just read that Popper was a critic of Kuhn :D!

Anyway, I did pose a comment/ question to Atkins, in that I explained to him that I did thermodynamics during undergrad in both chemistry and physics, and how is it can a student integrate this as I've maintained in my mind two separate thermodynamics. I'm not certain if I was articulate as I should be ... but Atkins said it is right for Chemistry and Physics to teach this separately as they are different concepts from the different subjects. But truth in fact they're not - it is the same concept - and that is why a student is having fragmented learning - there is no way of providing far transfer of knowledge in the student.

Atkins (did get me a bit peeved - but he also made me laugh - because I was laughing with incredibility with the extent of his lack of new educational perspectives - he reminded me of grandpa his views of girls - if an equivalent should be made) - anyway, he was considering that the sciences were hard because they had to do maths and the truth is the maths he was considering they were doing were mechanical mathematics - it is just the application of a formula, this is surface learning and a near transfer skill. When Bob explained that in exams he want the majority of marks to be where the student is explaining how something might occur (like why shouldn't you put butter on a burn - i remember that question from a CXC biology exam - I loved those questions - they required me to explore and think) - that is using the students making a logical argument through words instead, Atkins thought that was cheating and perhaps easier?? (well my interpretation of his expression and what he said etc). Although, I think doing a discussion on something is much harder and it requires a lot more skills on the part of the student, this is actually getting the student to show that they may have had some kind of deep surface learning. Applying maths is a cinch, there is nothing hard about that. Once you get the concept that's it ... do the same problem over and over and over and over.

Well ... John Zarnecki's presentation was interesting, he spoke about the media and science. He was talking about how the media tends to dramatized science to make it seem appealing to the public and also twist it to suit their needs. Nothing controversial here.

Zsolt's seminar
Mood:  bright
Now Playing: Old Paint (Chris LeDoux)
Topic: Seminars
So, I went up to Manchester to see Zsolt's presentation. It was entitled "The investigation of the integration of Computer Algebra Systems into University-level Mathematics Teaching" which is really similar to my work.

In his presentation he is describing a piece of qualitative research he did with 22 lecturers in US, UK and Hungary. It is quite surprising he is also looking across countries. Now, he is going to proceed to do a quantitative survey of 3500 lecturers in these three countries through the use of an inventory to look at their conceptions of mathematics, conceptions of mathematics teaching, conceptions of CAS, conceptions of CAS in mathematics and lastly the conceptions of CAS-assisted teaching and learning. The items in his questionnaire is from previous literature and from his qualitative study.

What is interesting is that he is doing his research in the opposite manner to what I did - although granted I wasn't aiming to develop a questionnaire so that could be the reason.

I really enjoyed this seminar - because not only that Zsolt's talk is very near my research so don't feel as if I'm swimming alone in this research area. He, himself, confesses that there is not much literature into the teaching with software in maths at the higher education level. I wonder how much is there in the learning side. I mean Pierce and Stacey did a lot of research into CAS and learning - some is in higher education but recently their research have focused in secondary schools. Probably, they're more likely to go there since its kind of 'compulsory' and hence have a better chance of finding samples.

Anyway, that wasn't my point when I started the last paragraph. What I wanted to say, is that I finally feel as if I'm networking. Because when I went to the BSRLM conference I felt pretty lonely by myself -and the people who I spoke to were the PhD students ... but, strangely enough, I had completely forgot that those students I met at the BSRLM conference were from Manchester University, and I met them again at this seminar! So, I actually had people I could have talked to. And one student (well then she was!), Maria, who had just completed her PhD when she went to the BSRLM conference is now doing research on how students think about mathematics before then enter into universities - I think if they perceive they'll be doing it again.

It must be true, what Doug said, the contacts you build are actually from the PhD students who evolve and become important hopefully.

Got my masters certificate
Mood:  spacey
Now Playing: Some Bhangra sounding song
Topic: Certificates
So, yesterday got my masters certificate in the mail here in the OU ... was expecting it sort of since Gill said she got hers on Monday ... it was nice to get it .. didn't really get a particular feeling on seeing it ... thought I would have felt a bit more celebratory (well Mum and Pa thought I should have been) - but I think it doesn't mean much with the PhD still needing to be completed.

Must say although the certificate is sort of pretty looking its printed on rather flimsy paper - thought at least the paper would have been stiffer ... it feels like A4 paper.

Got accepted for the ICTM conference
Mood:  lazy
Now Playing: Bholi Si Surat (Dil to Pagal Hai)
Topic: Seminars
So, on Friday afternoon the ICTM panel finally wrote me back and said that my abstract has been accepted and that I could present. Good! So, discussed it with Doug and John at our last meeting on Monday and they've both agreed to my going, so just got to go through CALRG and get approval etc. And then my next task must be to learn Turkish :).

I also have to write a paper which cannot be more than 5 pages and submit it by the 1st April. Well, have starting to write the paper so far, but just my introduction and research design is about 2 1/2 pages ... so got to fit discussion, conclusions and references in the next two pages - so, got to see how that goes. Might have to shorten some things I imagine, but the writing of it is not going too bad but feeling brain dead at the moment.

Just thinking about my research
Mood:  chillin'
Now Playing: Aaye Ho Meri Zindagi (Raja Hindustani)
Topic: Research questions
I have no idea what I want to talk about - but I'm bored and so I thought I would post something here. Well, so far I've gotten about 4000 words done for my literature review - but most of it ain't that great - its just me writing very verbosely and saying many things twice. But as James say, its at least 3500 (well at the time its was!) words on paper that won't have been there before ... so that's some kind of encouragement.

I think James might be worried about me a bit ... I met on Friday - up to that point I didn't think I was faring that badly, but he wants to see me enthusiastic about something, but I must admit there is nothing I find that I could have a burning passion for.

There was the socialization concept with Biglan's classification of disciplines that Smart and Elton used to explain the differences between disciplines. I mean that sounds ok - I think there is a gap somewhere around there - not sure if I'm burning for it though :).

There is also Galbraith and Haines use of the three types of problem: mechanical, interpretive and constructive - very nice concepts: but still not sure if passion exists there.

Hmm ... what else there is the cognitive load theory that John sort of warned me off since it is a huge literature quagmire (my words not his!) ... but that sounded kind of interested - but might get into conflict with other people's views, so best not raise that ants' nest.

So, what else peaks my interest? I don't know ... I know in the end I just want to compare black box and white box software and see how this fares in the learning of linear programming, but from what conceptual angle I'm taking it from I don't know. I could perhaps use Galbraith and Haines questionnaire on mathematics-computing attitudes which seems like some kind of fun - will get some quantitative data to play with - but not sure how it will get me to answer the questions of black-box and white-box software.

Actually, more I come to think about it ... I definitely want to see how disciplinary studies molds a student for different uses or perspectives on the use of black-box and white-box software - and this might be the socialization theory. Disciplines do shape students mind, but also their background - so all that is saying that disciplines is a covariate (if found to be significant) in the way that students use software - particularly I think from the discipline they emerge from. In that sense - if we are looking at what discipline they emerge from - we should find stronger socialization at the graduate level - such as in MBA programmes teaching linear programming and masters programme teaching optimization and masters programmes in engineering concerning with teaching production management etc. Obviously will have to look at the socialization of the persons discipline before they enter their masters degree and the current discipline that their masters degree is in. Therefore, one should expect that the socialization concept should be stronger for the master's students and less for undergrad students learning linear programming and probably increases from their Year 1 to Year 3.

As such, one should expect their mathematics-computing attitude to be shaped by the different years they are in (i.e. higher up they go - more socialization with that discipline - will their high school subjects influence this also?) - particularly with respect to black-box and white-box software. Indeed I expect the business people to be again a more soft-applied approach - hmmm ... this looks good - a factor analysis of the mathematics-computing attitudes should help in investigating what dimensions could be found - won't it be great if three dimensions were found with respect to the mathematics-computing attitudes and they relate to the hard-soft, hard-applied and life-nonlife dimensions. I know John thinks the last dimension is a bit loopy but it would be great to see that ... but won't it be nice to also see how approaches of study (not sure how this will actually act - but there has been some literature that this differs from disciplines but not using a Biglan's framework - as far as I could see - although the SOMUL project may have done some of that) may interact with the mathematics-computing side - I know a lot of purely quantitative stuff - but I can try it for a pilot and see how it works ... and probably go more wide scale after if it proves good - but I can still intersperse this with some real life observations or interviews (because I do want to do this - but just not seeing how it will fit into my study).

Cognitive Learning
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: Singin' In The Rain (Gene Kelly)
Topic: Literature Review
So, have been reading some stuff on cognitive learning lately, as that is one of the sections in my literature review. There are a lot of theories surrounding this, you have the theory of working memory that Baddeley and Hitch developed about have a central executive system which does the processing. This have two slave systems, a phonological loop (verbal and audio) and a visuospatial sketchpad (visual - like words and geographical locations with respect to things - I think) ... lately they have added something new, an episodic buffer which says that this can use data from both the phonological loop and the visuospatial sketchpad to assimilate and learn better (my interpretation :D).

Well ... after the working memory thingy we have the concept of cognitive load theory developed by Sweeney and others, in which it looks at the capacity of the working memory and how to best used it. They proposed three types of loads: intrinsic - which deals with materials that are new to the person, the germane load - this is where the information is processed and becomes learning (whether surface or deep - I have no idea, but some kind of learning occurs) and then there is extraneous load - this is material that does not contribute to learning directly but rather things in the periphery.

Mayer and his colleagues using the concept of working memory and the cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. Particularly, looks at how a person could have cognitive overload - i.e. reached the processing capacity of their working memory. They use a different approach to Sweller I think, they look at cognitive demands, i.e. the types of processing, a)essential processing - this is processing to make sense of materials and perhaps (??) allow meaningful (something like deep learning - allow the students transfer their learning to different tasks), b) incidental processing - processing materials that do no do anything towards meaningful learning (I guess this is similar to extraneous load) and c) representational processing -this is where a representation of the materials, such as an image, has to be held in the working memory for a period of time.

Thinking about methodology
Mood:  sad
Now Playing: Singin' in the Rain (Doris Day)
Topic: Methodology
So, I was thinking that since its proving a bit difficult to find people who are teaching linear programming and for me to get access to it ... I was wondering if I could actually ever test my research by next September and how to test the difference in learning linear programming with various kind of software.

So, I thought perhaps I could use the computer lab here in IET, and get people to volunteer to learn linear programming (ok - not such a bright idea - but people might be willing!) and get them to use the software and see what is happening.

Anyway, I'm going to check out the Matlab software, I ordered it from AACS (hopefully I'll get a link soon telling me to load it - hope they have licences!), I just need to get the templates or whatever from the M373 course to see what is done.