Week+5+Innovation+Diffusion+Process+V+Mitchell+Stevens

=Research Supporting 5 Step Innovation Process=

====﻿The research provided here will be an annotated bibliography of 5 research articles. However I will continue my research to find articles that provides data information concerning the diffusion process and post it by Day 7====

====Clark, K. (2005). Serving underserved communities with instructional technologies: Giving them what they need, not what you want. //Urban Education.// 40, 430-445. doi:10.1177/0042085905276388 ==== ====Clark (2005) provided a qualitative research framework for determining how, what, when and why members of a diverse community would use technology in living and learning in their environment. This case study took place in an affordable housing residency which involved 3,910 households who were culturally and linguistically diverse. The author used an onsite technology center to observe and record residents using computers over a period of 3 months twice a week. Clark also had 7 investigators recorded their observations in the form of field notes using 11 questions as the framework for taking notes. An example of a question is how is the technology being used currently? The data analysis involved manually examines trends and common events. There were similarities in observations among the investigators which were recognized as proving that the data was accurate. The results was reflected in 44 documented field notes and sorted based on the questions. Clark discovered that the technology can be used to meet the needs of the use when online tools are used to assist them in obtaining knowledge. Education was viewed as the means to improve employment options. ==== ====This case study was very extensive in the observation of this underserved community. Clark discovered that access to instructional technology was the most important benefit that the media center could provide. He discovered that self directed learning is based on the components of information access, interpersonal communication skills and the sharing of information in a collaborative setting. This study was relevant to my interests in that it demonstrated how technology is selected and used to facilitate the learning process and the application of instructional design principles. ==== ====Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D. & Door, V. (2007). The evolution of an effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard in mathematics and modern languages: an empirical analysis from the secondary sector. //Learning, Media and Technology.// 32(1), 5-20. doi:10.1080/17439880601141146 ==== ====Glover et al. (2007) tried to understand how the use of Interactive White Boards (IWB) could impact learning in math and language classes based on the pedagogy style of using IWB for visual support only (limited use), using the IWB to demonstrate content (regular use) and the use of IWB for complete interaction(enhanced interaction) such as to prompt, explain, develop and test concepts throughout the lesson. Thirty-six teachers worked with student’s ages 11-14 years old on 50 lessons. The lesson sessions were videotaped and structured interviews were provided to all the teachers who participated. The researchers discovered that the lesson plans and teaching styles had to be modified in order to facilitate enhance interactive use of the IWB. ==== ====There were several issues with this research. First the authors did not identify how many students were working with the 36 teachers. They did not ensure that all the teachers were technically able to use the IWB with confidence and the teachers adjusted their teaching style in the middle of the study. There was evidence that a 10% error in subjectivity and bias occurred in this study because the teachers were nominated volunteers. The subjects were math and language arts but the groups were imbalanced with 2/3 of the groups focused on math and 1/3 on language arts. ==== ====The concept, not the actual study is relevant for my project since it did demonstrate that pedagogy style and the use of certain technology has to blend with what is being presented in the lesson plan. The use of a particular technology requires a certain level of confidence and practice for both the teacher and the student. ==== ====Liu, X., Magjuka, R. J. & Lee, S. (2008). The effects of cognitive thinking styles, trust, conflict management on online students’ learning and virtual team performance. //British Journal of// //Educational Technology.// 39(5), 829-846. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00775.x ==== ====The role of cognitive thinking styles was studied by Lieu et al. (2008) to determine what is really to take advantage of online learning. This mixed method study used two hundred and eight students to collect data that was collected from content analysis of transcripts and student interview sessions. There results indicated that cognitive style is not a good variable in which to understand online learning performance. The authors also studied the relationship of teamwork and individual difference in online education. The hypotheses stated that students with external styles will engage more often in collaborative activities on the average than students with internal or flexible styles. Also students with external styles will be more satisfied with teamwork activities. The researchers used Sternberg (1997) inventory survey to classify the students in terms of external or internal cognitive styles. The results of a one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on 11 dependent variables separately and scope or level as the independent variable indicated that 127 external style students did collaborate more on teamwork projects on both the scope and level variables. However neither the scope or levels variables contribute to satisfaction with teamwork. ==== ====This was a good mix model study that was comprehensive in both available research and the level of analysis. The study did suggest that when designing an online course it would be beneficial to factor in the course design based on cognitive style as one factor especially for team collaboration activities. ==== ====This study was useful for my future project since it was a very good example of research involving a mix model, both quantitative and qualitative analysis (Creswell, 2009). The study also provided me with an understanding of other variables pertaining to instruction design that I should be aware of and factor into my research. ==== ====Blasi, L. & Alfonso, B. (2006). Increasing the transfer of simulation technology from R&D into school settings: An approach to evaluation from overarching vision to individual artifact in education. //Simulation & Gaming//. 37(2), 245-267. Doi:10.1177/1046878105284449. ==== ====Blasi & Alfonso (2006) explored the possibility of performing a study to determine if it was appropriate to have a simulation of a science project in a regular classroom environment. They identified how the design of the technology would assist students in learning science. They had evaluators assess the simulation on the basis of four levels over time. These evaluators determine that the variables were artifact, content, context and the value to education would be the variables to analyze. Blasi & Alfonso observed the virtual science laboratory in 9 high school biology classes and usability data was collected from 40 students. The students received a test and were interviewed by the evaluators. The results suggest that there is transfer and the product could be optimized to meet the challenges of the classroom. The quantitative and qualitative data that was analyzed indicated that the simulation model was very effective. The discussion by the authors led to the conclusion that you cannot measure the impact of technology on education without considering the education context and the student traits. ==== ====This study was useful in identifying the human factors that should be considered when determining the type of technology suitable for a particular education subject and within the education setting or context. ==== ====Lin, S. Y, & Overbaugh, R. (2009). Computer-mediated discussion, self-efficacy and gender. //British Journal of Educational Technology//. 40(6), 999-1013. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00889.x ==== ====This mix method study considered the impact of gender and computer mediated communication and the effect it would have on the learners’ self-efficacy or self esteem. The learning environment was a blended in which online and classroom instruction were combined. ==== ====<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">The authors researched the significance that gender could have on computer-based instruction because previous studies demonstrated that females had ==== ====<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">significant Information Technology (IT) skills as compared to males. The authors felt that gender as an independent variable would impact such factors as ==== ====<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">learning style, delivery format, satisfaction and learning motivation (dependent variables). The study involved the participants to provide information on four ==== ====<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">research questions that the authors identified. The participants consisted of 180 students in which 151 students were females and 29 were male students. The ==== ====<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">course was hybrid consisting of thirteen sections, nine were project based modules and four were discussion threads. They used a questionnaire that ==== ====<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">contained open ended and closed ended questions. The results indicated no significant difference between males and females with respect to choice of ==== ====<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">discussion modes. The results of a Multivariate Analysis (MANOV) showed significant differences in high efficacious as compared to the asynchronous mode ====

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.25in;">Female students demonstrated higher efficacy than the male students.
====<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">This research was very comprehensive and there were other results identified. There is the possibility that this type of research provides insight as to how online class discussions should be structured. The term asynchronous modes discussions refer to posting, read, reflect and comment on the discussion. The term synchronous mode means the student requires real time postings in which the discussion is well prepared. The major significance of this research for educators is to factor in how online instruction should be designed, the type of learning to promote and how to enhance the learning activities for students to receive the maximum learning experience. ====

Val,

These appear to be some very good resources for your project. Nicely done.

Jason