Action Plan

Action plan

Week 19 - Hunch

Developing a Hunch

You or your team may have a ‘hunch’ about why things are the way they are in relation to
your chosen topic and issues within it, or what could be the reason for the problems, or
which pedagogy could be used to improve the situation, getting them out on the table to
discuss or investigate would help you or the team move forward together (Kaser and Halbert, 2017).

Developing a hunch means getting deeply held beliefs out on the table about your own practices
and checking your assumptions for accuracy before moving ahead. In this phase, you or your
team (If you go for group submission) should look for the evidence of the reason or process that
leads to the current situation and how you could contribute to improving it as a professional.
Blaming other factors such as the learners, parents, or the system would only stifle the Inquiry
(Kaser and Halbert, 2017).

These class notes will guide you to explain how you can evaluate the literature to check for the
accuracy of any assumptions you make when developing your hunch. The literature you evaluate
should be relevant to the Teacher Inquiry area(s) of focus that you have identified based on the
week 18 literature search.

How to Critically Evaluate Your Resources

In your research essay, you should analyse and evaluate the resources that are relevant to your
topic area. It might have been a while since you’ve written in this way, so this required reading,
an academic paper by Jennifer Duncan-Howell will hopefully help to refresh your thinking. There
are extra annotations added to provide indications on how to analyze and evaluate a research
publication, and how to extract the key information from the viewpoint of the literature review.
For instance, getting an overview from the Abstract, critically analyzing numerical data, linking
the article content with potential themes, recording key references cited in the article, taking notes
of your evaluation and possible further analysis on specific content when writing the essay
(the class notes of week 20 will explain more about the writing process).

It is important that when you read research literature, you critically evaluate it. Questions you
might find useful to ask yourself when reading an research article might include:

• Are there clearly stated research questions?
• Does the article explain why the topic is important?
• Is the research design and methodology described? Does it seem appropriate for the area
• of study?
• What is the data analysis like? Are the results clearly explained?
• What are the conclusions? Are they a reasonable reflection of the data analysis?

There are several supplementary videos that provide valuable information about interpreting
academic papers. The short video from the Hong Kong Polytechnic University discusses reading
academic articles in a time-efficient way. The video "How to read a scholarly Journal Article" from
Kishwaukee College Library works through a specific example. Another video,
"How to read scientific articles" from the University of Mississippi, covers similar ground but
also includes convenient subtitles.

You can look at further examples (required) of evaluation of research publications from previous
students’ works to understand more.

Organising and Synthesising Your Sources With a Matrix

Synthesizing the sources is relevant to criterion 2 (“Critically engage with a range of literature
about the identified research topic by summarising the key ideas and then comparing/contrasting
how literature addresses the topic”) in the rubric. The themes can then be discussed in the main
sections of the research essay as shown in the template.

We strongly believe that a synthesis matrix can help you to organise sources within those different
themes for your Research Essay. The supplementary document titled “Writing A Literature
Review and Using a Synthesis Matrix” (Ingram, Hussey, Tigani & Hemmelgarn, 2006) demonstrates
how you can use a synthesis matrix to sort and categorise the different viewpoints presented on
a topic in the literature. There should be two to four themes, which are discussed across the
literature, to be elaborated in your essay.

Your main task this week is to fill in your synthesis matrix (you can either create a new document
or use the template from last week). You might quickly realise that you need to locate and read
more to find new viewpoints to compare and contrast under each subtheme.

Remember to add all the new sources to your annotated bibliography, and remember to do that
in APA format so that writing the Essay itself and then creating the final Reference list is easier.

Comparing or Contrasting the Literature

In your Research essay, you need to analyse the commonalities as well as the differences
between the literature, for example, what are the common findings between the different sources
you are reading? Are there any disagreements or tensions among them? This is where creating
that Matrix will help you.

Next week you’ll all write and finalise your Research essay, so remember this week to focus on
comparing or contrasting the literature, since it is relevant to criterion 2 of RESEARCH 1 “Critically

engage with a range of literature about the identified research topic by summarising the key
ideas and then comparing/contrasting how literature addresses the topic”.

Some of you might already start to summarise these viewpoints into your Research Essays too,
under the theme headings. You are free to do that, but we strongly recommend using the
synthesis matrix or something similar to locate the viewpoints that challenge your assumptions.

When you are critically evaluating research publications, you should note the common
information/ideas discussed across the literature which could be a theme in your essay.

You can look at examples (required) of synthesizing the sources and comparing/contrasting
the literature from previous students' works to understand more.

Checking Your Assumptions

Now that you have summarised, synthesized, and compared or contrasted the literature that’s
relevant to your Inquiry’s area(s) of focus, you would now be more research-informed to check
your previous assumption(s) or ‘hunches’ about the topic of interest. This all relates to criterion
3 in the RESEARCH 1(‘Argue how your insights gained from the literature address the current
needs of your community’).

If you need an entertaining break, view 2010 video (supplementary) from Steve Johnson about
‘WHERE GOOD IDEAS COME FROM’ that explains the idea that combining hunches have for
innovation.

You need to discuss the insights from the analysed literature in your research essay as shown
in the template. Answering these questions in section 4 could help you to meet criterion 3 of
the rubric:

• What are the similarities and differences between your prior knowledge (assumptions)
• and the literature?
• To what extent do these similarities/differences inform your Inquiry?
• How do the insights gained from checking your assumption(s) address the current needs
• of your community? For example, can the approaches discussed in the literature be
• applied to meeting your community’s current needs?

Write brief responses to the ‘Insights from the analysed literature’ section of your essay document,
it will make finalising your Research essay so much easier next week.

Applying Kaupapa Māori Approaches to ‘Developing a Hunch’

This week’s principles of Kaupapa Māori that you should reflect upon in your Action Plan
document are:

• Tino Rangatiratanga - the self-determination principle: To what extent is your hunch different
• from (or similar to) the literature in how the area of focus helps the students/whānau
• to get meaningful control over the student’s learning and cultural well-being?
• Ako - a teaching and learning relationship: How is your hunch different from (or similar to)
• the literature regarding the perspectives of people other than the teachers on the area of
• focus?

And once again you can develop your own guiding questions too.

The topic for next week is ‘Write up Your Topic (Learn)’, in the class notes, we will show you
how to complete the writing of your Research Essay.

Checking You’ve Done All That Was Required for This Week

The Tasks-list on the next tab helps you to check you have done all the required activities.

REFERENCES

Brock Library. (2013). What's an annotated bibliography? Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0Hsnx0l1q4&feature=youtu.be

Duncan-Howell, J. (2010). Teachers making connections: Online communities as a source of
professional learning. British Journal of Education Technology, 41(2),
324-340, doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00953.x

Johnson, S. (2010). WHERE GOOD IDEAS COME FROM [Video].

RiverheadBooks. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NugRZGDbPFU

Kaser, L., and Halbert, J. (2017). The Spiral Playbook: Leading with an inquiring mindset in
school systems and schools. C21 Canada – Canadians for 21st Century Learning and Innovation.
Retrieved from http://c21canada.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Spiral-Playbook.pdf

Katoa Ltd. (n.d.) Kaupapa Māori Research. Retrieved from http://www.katoa.net.nz/kaupapa-maori

Kishwaukee College Library. (2012). How To Read a Scholarly Journal Article. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEVftUdfKtQ

Ingram, L., Hussey, J., Tigani, M., and Hemmelgarn, M. (2006). Writing A Literature Review
and Using a Synthesis Matrix. NC State University Writing and Speaking Tutorial Service.

PolyU ELC. (2014). Reading academic articles. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJaJL8drcT0

Timperley, H., Kaser, L., and Halbert, J. (2014, April). A framework for transforming learning
in schools: Innovation and the spiral of inquiry. Centre for Strategic Education, Seminar Series
Paper No. 234.
https://educationcouncil.org.nz/sites/default/files/49.%20Spiral%20of%20Inquiry%20Paper%20-
%20Timperley%20Kaser%20Halbert.pdf

The University of Mississippi Libraries. (2014). How to Read Scientific Articles. Retrieved
from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BuE138KK18

Assignment Research 2

Research and Community Informed Practice - CISC8001

July 2018 Intake

Assessment 2 (RESEARCH 2) - 50%  

Title:  Further develop your reflective portfolio: Identify and engage with relevant community or communities in the formation of specific research questions. Address the potential impact of findings.

Description:

Part A (90%): Either individually, or in groups of two or three, develop an Action Plan for your Inquiry (which you may add to your eportfolio) in which you:

1. Identify the community or communities you will engage with and explain their context.
2. Describe the actions and timeframe, and explain how they address your research question(s).
3. Explain how you will collect data for your project from relevant members of your community or communities and consider ethical principles/guidelines for this process. Provide evidence of your data collection tools (e.g. survey questions, observation template, interview questions, etc.).  
4. Explain how Kaupapa Māori principles are integrated into your Inquiry.
5. Address the potential impact of your findings.  
6. Cite a range of relevant sources.
7. Use an appropriate standard of presentation.

Ideally your Inquiry will build on your previous assignment (Research Essay). The Action Plan should be relevant to Digital and/or Collaborative Learning. The following assignments will require you to implement your plan and collect data.

The Action Plan can be in a format of your choice. It may be a blog, written document, video of a slide presentation (please note that a slide set only is not accepted, you need to make it into a video presentation).You can choose one single delivery format or combine different formats that suit your and your chosen community(ies) needs.

Please keep in mind that you will have to upload a digital artefact to the portal for assessment purposes if your chosen format is a blog or eportfolio. You can, for example, screen record (by using Screencast-O-Matic or Chrome’s Screencastify) or capture it and upload that to the portal as a set of pictures or a video.

The maximum length for your work is as following (failure to adhere to length requirements will result in grade penalties in the presentation category).  A 10% leeway on the word count is allowed to cater for differences in the way that word counting algorithms work in different systems.

• Individual
• 1,200 - 1,500 word written submission (the word count includes the reference list), or video presentation of 6-8 minutes in duration.
• Group (optional)
• 1,500 - 1,800 word written submission ( the word count includes the reference list), or video presentation of 8-10 minutes in duration.

Part B) Online participation (10%)

For this assessment, you need to provide two (2) pieces of evidence of your online participation. This is an individual assessment.

1. Online Participation: Your response to an existing online conversation, e.g. a comment on fellow students’ posts, or your reply to a comment from fellow students on your first post in the thread of conversation. The first post on G+ to initiate a conversation does not count as evidence of online participation.
2. Format of Evidence: Screenshot or video capture of your contribution.
3. Content: Your discussion should be topic-driven and add value to the interaction and specifically relate to your teacher inquiry topic or the class notes/materials from this course (Weeks 17 - 24). Materials used for the previous assessments should not be reused for this assessment.
4. Platforms: Your discussions should take place on any reputable online forum (for example Google+, comments on blog posts, or Facebook etc.). Because we are looking for engagement in professional social networking, we do not accept email correspondence or online meetings (sessions using Zoom, Google Hangout, etc.) as evidence.
5. Dates: Your four recorded online conversations must take place between the start of Research and Community Informed Practice (RESEARCH) course and the final deadline for submission of the assignment (from 12th November 2018 to 12th February 2019). Each of the video/screen recordings should clearly state the date of the participation and your name.
6. Names: If your screen name is different from your registered name, please make a note in the submission.
7. Submission: When submitting your evidence of online participation to the portal, please identify the URL (web address) clearly in the name or the description section. If possible, include the link to the discussion, even if the online forum is a closed group.

Initial Due date: Tuesday 29 January 2019, 11:59 pm

Final due date: Tuesday, 12th February 2019, 11:59 pm

Part A	Weigh- ting %	Below Expectations (Prestructural)	Meets Minimum Expectations (Unistructural)	Meets or Exceeds Expectations (Multistructural)	Meets or Exceeds Expectations (Relational)	Exceeds Expectations (Extended Abstract)
1/ Identify the community / communities	10	Main relevant community / communities not identified.	The main relevant community / communities identified.	The relevant community / communities and their context  are identified.	The relation relevant community / communities and their context are related.	The relevant community / communities and  their context are related to wider debate.
		0-4	5	6	7-8	9-10
2/ Describe the actions and timeframe and explain how they address your research question(s)	20	The action plan is not adequately described or does not sufficiently address the research question(s).	The actions  and timeframe and how they address the research question(s) are described.	The actions and timeframe are described, and how they address the research question is explained.	The  actions and timeframe are explained. How they  address the research question is justified.	The  actions and timeframe and how they  address the research question are justified with reference to wider debate.
		0-9	10-11	12-14	15-17	18-20
3/ Explain how you will collect data considering ethical principles/guidelines and provide evidence of your data collection tools	20	Inadequate explanation of data collection or ethical factors	Method of data collection and ethical factors identified.	Method of data collection and ethical factors explained.	Method of data collection and ethical factors are related together.	Method of data collection and ethical factors critically evaluated with reference to wider contexts.
		0-4	5	6	7-8	9-10
		Insufficient or inadequate evidence of data collection tools.	Evidence of data collection tools provided.	Evidence of data collection tools to address the inquiry explained.	Evidence of data collection tools that address the inquiry justified.	Evidence of data collection tools that address the inquiry is justified with reference to wider frameworks.
		0-4	5	6	7-8	9-10
4/ Explain how Kaupapa Māori principles are integrated into your Inquiry.	10	Inadequate explanation or integration of Kaupapa Māori principles.	One aspect of how Kaupapa Māori principles are integrated is discussed.	Multiple aspects of how Kaupapa Māori principles are integrated and explained.	Multiple aspects of how Kaupapa Māori principles are integrated are discussed and related together.	Multiple aspects of how Kaupapa Māori principles are integrated are discussed and related together with reference to wider contexts.
		0-4	5	6	7-8	9-10
5/ Address the potential impact of your findings.	10	Potential impact of findings is not addressed.	One potential impact of findings is described.	Multiple potential impacts of findings are described	Multiple potential impacts of findings are related to one another.	Multiple potential impacts of findings are related to one another and analysed within a wider context.
		0-4	5	6	7-8	9-10
6/ A relevant range of sources are cited	10	Inadequate referencing, insufficient sources and citation.	Adequate referencing, sources identified and cited.	Good list of references, cited and discussed.	Well integrated and constructed  references, cited and debated.	Comprehensive referencing, integrated in a reflective manner.
		0-4	5	6	7-8	9-10
7/ Appropriate standard of presentation	10	Poorly structured presentation of disconnected information, or length did not meet the required criteria.	Adequate presentation quality (telling / reciting)	Presentation that describes and combines themes, with a narrative structure.	A well argued presentation with a narrative structure that relates themes together.	An original and creative presentation displaying a reflective narrative structure.
		0-4	5	6	7-8	9-10

Provide evidence of online participation

Refer to a separate rubric (Part b RUBRIC)

10%

Part B	Checklist 1	Checklist 2	Weighting %
Online evidence  1	Contribution is topic driven and adds value to the interaction	Contribution is made during the period of the course	5 %
	Yes/No	Yes/No
Online evidence  2	Contribution is topic driven and adds value to the interaction	Contribution is made during the period of the course	5 %
	Yes/No	Yes/No