A general statement of course purpose follows this index

Goals & Objectives
Caveat (external document, required reading)
Readings
Course Requirements
Evaluation Procedures
Scoring Rubric  for dissertation proposals (external document)
Instructional Methodology
Program Model Linkage (external document)
Bibliography
Schedule

PowerPoint slide archive for classes is here

The link to Blackboard 6 is here.

PURPOSE OF THE COURSE: ELFN 8773 is the in-depth study and application of principles of inquiry for doctoral students in the field of educational leadership. The term "inquiry" as used here refers to the formal, purposive pursuit of knowledge in the social sciences in the three major forms; applied research, development and evaluation of programs and professional practice, and policy or organization analysis. Basic research is rare in the social sciences. THE major focus of the course is on the individualized conceptualization and development of a structured proposal for conducting dissertation research in the student's area of interest. Both quantitative and qualitative, or naturalistic strategies will be examined for their relative utility. Numerous methodological strategies and issues will be studies as students develop their proposals. This will include statistical as well as qualitative data treatment procedures. This is not a formal course involving sophisticated, higher order data treatment techniques, but it is expected that students will have [or acquire] sufficient knowledge to develop an adequate research design and operationalize it with appropriate procedures in their disseration proposals. Note also that this course does not entail extensive treatment of qualitative methods; that is the subject of another course.

A. Course Goals:

1. To guide students through the individualized conceptualization and development of a structured proposal for conducting dissertation inquiry in the student's area of interest.

2. To advance the student's knowledge of basic research concepts, designs and methodological tools to the next higher level

B. Specific Objectives: Students should be able to:

1. understand and apply the methodologies of inquiry in the social sciences;

2. understand and articulate the relative merit of various forms of inquiry;

3. conduct a literature search and critically evaluate extant research for conceptual and methodological strength and applicability to the resolution of particular problems of interest in the field;

4. conceptualize and formulate a research problem of personal interest, relate the problem to the context of professional practice and line of inquiry in which it resides, and develop appropriate procedures for carrying out the inquiry;

5. distinguish between and choose appropriately from among various data gathering, management and analysis techniques for operationalizing a research project and/or program planning and evaluation activity.

Readings:

     Primary Text:  Gall, M., Gall, J. & Borg, W. (2006). Educational research: An introduction (Eigth Edition). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

I urge you to buy the following (this is a recommendation):

    Rudestam, K & Newton, R. (2001; 2007). Surviving your dissertation: A comprehensive guide to content and process (Second Edition). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

     Galvin, Jose (2006). Writing literature reviews (Third Edition). Los Angeles, CA: Pyrczak Publishing Company.

Supplemental (Required): Cline, D. (Various dates and revisions, some modern). A writer's guide to research and development proposals. Reno, NV, Jonesboro, AR: The respective universities. The Writer's Guide should be retrieved from the course web site in its entirety, printed out and kept in a binder. NOTE that most sections have internal links to supporting documents; don't overlook those.

I also strongly urge Dr. Cox's advisees to consult his Guidelines for Dissertation Proposals.   He also has a checklist for dissertations that has excellent suggestions for format, style, etc. that EVERYONE should consult during preparation of the dissertation.

I strongly recommend reading the article by Craig Lundberg on how one great scholar manages to identify researchable problems... Finding Research Agendas: Getting Started Weick-Like

The following materials are recommended resources for this course because they are basic references for researchers. In all cases it is recommended that the student search for the most recent editions.

    Bryman, A. and Cramer, D. (1997).  Quantitative data analysis with SPSS for Windows. NY: Routeledge.

    Dilman, D. A. (1978). Mail and Telephone Surveys : The Total Design Method. John Wiley & Sons.

    Dilman, D. A. (1999). Mail and Internet Surveys : The Tailored Design Method (2nd). John Wiley & sons.

    Kerlinger, Fred (1986). Foundations of behavioral research (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.

    Rossi, P. & Freeman, H. (1993). Evaluation: A systematic approach (5th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Tabachnick, B. & Fidell, L. (2000). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). New York: Harper Collins.

    Tacq,  J. (1997). Multivariate analysis techniques in social science research: From problem to analysis.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.  [written for SPSS for Windows}

Additional Readings: Individually elected from the Bibliography toward the end of this syllabus or from elsewhere, depending on each student's seminar topic

Requirements, Evaluation, Method:

A. Course Requirements: Email is absolutely essential, otherwise...

1. The major written assignment is a completed dissertation proposal  for a project of inquiry into a significant problem of interest to the student. The proposal has seven key components with numerous sections organized into three chapters that eventually become the first three chapters of the completed dissertation.  

Although considerably more detailed than this, and organized differently from this, the key elements of a proposal will include the following:

1. Statement of the Problem (the problem statement has subparts)
2. Theoretical or Logical Structures (the basic design and conceptual features)
3. Limitations, Delimitations
4. Review of Related Research
5. Objectives
6. Hypotheses and/or Questions
7. Procedures (having several subsections)

(Note: this is not the final order and structure of the proposal. Parts get developed in this order but get moved in the final version as spelled out in another document dealing with proposal format).

After each section is reviewed by the instructor, students will have an opportunity to make revisions if warranted.  Following the first section, as each subsequent section, 2-7, is submitted, it should be attached to previous sections revised as appropriate until ultimately an intact proposal is developed. In other words, do not submit a reivew of the literature without the prior sections attached.

Here is an example of a proposal for a professional research project written by the instructor. NOTE AND CAUTION: It will appear not to follow the format for dissertations, and it doesn't. BUT, all the essential elements are there. Here is a proposal written by one of our students who was recently awarded the distinction for best paper of the year by the Southern Association for Community College Research. The paper was based on her dissertation.

2. In addition, you are responsible for acquiring expertise in a specific topical area of research methodology and instructing the cohort in this method in a seminar. See the paragraphs on seminar below. Most of these will be covered in the text to one extent or another, but NOTE: It is the student's responsibility to expand considerably beyond the text with appropriate material from elsewhere. Prepare you colleagues by ditributing advance organizers, agenda, or background handout a week ahead of your scheduled presentation. Check here for an evaluation rubric.

3. You are are expected to be a contributor throughout the semester, but in particular it is important that you are prepared for the individual seminar presentations by colleagues by demonstartting that you have at a minimum read the material covered in the text related to the seminar topic. It is the presenter's respnsibility to take you beyond the text.

4. Reflections are due in four sets on scheduled dates. There is no point in doing separate sets for this class and another for the curriculum seminar. They should be germane to what you are doing and experiencing this semester academically, intelectually, personally or interpersonally. My criteria for reflections are as follows: "reflections demonstrate a consistent effort to dialogue with self about the implications of personal thoughts and actions for progress toward goal accomplishment, the nature of professional working relationships, and the need to modify personal thinking or behavior or plans; reflections also examine the involvement of others for relevant implications and an effort is made to internalize the semester's experiences for new insights."

Written material should follow the standards in the field as established by the Publications Manual of the American Psychological Association, 5th Ed., 2001. In rare instances, for sound reasons, a student's committee may authorize an alternative, such as MLA. They (APA) have a page devoted to manuscript style resources. They now have an "official" pocket style guide. GET A COPY OF THE PUBLICATION MANUAL and hang on to it for future reference..

ELFN 8773 is a seminar course: translation -- "A group of advanced students studying under a professor with each doing original research and all exchanging results through reports and discussion" (Webster's Ninth...). This means that students do most of the teaching (see method below), but not all of the learning. This activity focuses entirely on various aspects of research methodology; that is, tools and procedures for conducting research. Not counting the problem statement, this is the weakest aspect of dissertation proposals, so the seminar sessions are meant to provide information and resources that can be used in developing procedural statements for the proposal.

There are two general choices for designing the seminar sessions: (a) I can assign topics from a list or students can self-assign from that list with departures as appropriate to the needs of the class and the student's own desire to learn more about a particular topic not on the list; (b) the cohort can take responsibility for self-organizing the seminars that makes the most sense for the group and then parcel out individual responsibilities from there. We will make that decision together the first class session and finalize details within the next next one or two sessions.  This means that the class schedule and specifics of content can't be nailed down at first, so let's be flexible.

I am particularly interested in your level of commitment and involvement in the class as indicated by your preparedness, overall effort, evidence of thoughtful deliberation, interaction and contribution to discussion. It is also expected that the presenter's peers are prepared and engage with the student in informed discussion or debate. More detail is forthcoming.

B. Evaluation Procedures:

1. Quality of written expression, mechanics, clarity, organization, usage, development of thoughts and ideas.

2. Demonstration of satisfactory mastery of concepts and material, ability to apply them to the task of thinking critically about the conceptual and procedural domains of inquiry vis a vis published materials and the students own work.  A scoring rubric will be applied to the proposal.

3. Pedagogical proficiency; that is, in serving as teachers for their colleagues, students should demonstrate mastery of concepts and material and ability to facilitate the learning of others.

4. These have been called logs or reflective journal entries. I call them simply reflections to draw attention to their main purpose.  One per week is expected, with a hard copy set turned in to myself and Dr. Holman as scheduled four times over the semester.

Grades: A = 90 %; B = 80-89 %; C = less than 80 %

Proposal 60%
Seminar 20%
Paricipation 10%
Reflections 10%

C. Instructional Methodology:

I conduct lectures and demonstrate (through examples) the particulars of research design and proposal development. There is considerable reliance on group process of thoughts and ideas; that is, students who do not have a sharply defined focus for their research (which is usually everyone) may bring their thoughts before the group for analysis and shaping of crude ideas into researchable problems worth pursuing. In the last year or two, the variety of electronic productivity tools for conducting research has advanced in sophistication to the point that it has become realistic to learn with the help of technology. In particular, searchable bibliographic retrieval systems (online databases) are vital. You can connect with many good tools through the ASU Ellis Library web. These include ERIC, OCLC First Search, Lexis-Nexis, Sociological Abstracts, Medline, and many others. When student registration is complete, a database of student identification numbers will be installed on the library web site to allow you to access their databases from off campus. Simply enter your your student ID number when prompted for a login ID.

Students' writings are openly critiqued in class. The remainder of the course is seminar format with students responsible for instruction in matters of research methodology, such as data gathering techniques and measurement scale development. The instructor serves as resource, guiding students to key references and consulting on technical matters.

D. Attendance Policy: Attendance, when class sessions are scheduled, is highly advisable; participation  facilitates learning, which is difficult without attendance.

Bibliography: Most of these readings appear to be ancient, and they are; they are nonetheless classics, and are entirely fundamental to an understanding of the concepts and methods to which they pertain. The list represents a sample of materials I have available for loan to students preparing a presentation on a particular topic.

    Campbell, D.T. and Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Chen, H. T. (1990). Theory-Driven Evaluations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications

    Cohen, I. (1994). The earth is round (p < .05). American Psychologist. 49, 997-1003.

    David, H. (1988). The method of paired comparisons. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Fowler, F.J. (1990, 7th printing). Survey Research Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Frary, R. (1996). A brief guide to questionnaire development. Blacksburg, VA: Office of Measurement and Research Services, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

    Guba, E. & Lincoln, Y. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Guttman, L. (1949). The basis for scalogram analysis. In S. Stouffer, et al (eds). Measurement and Prediction (chapter 3 of Vol 4 of Studies in Social Psychology in World War ll. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Hinkle, D., Oliver, J. & Hinkle, C. (1985). How large should the sample be? Part II -the one-sample case. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 45, 271-280.

    Hunter, J. & Schmidt, F. (1990). Methods of Meta analysis: correcting error bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Kalton, G. (1985, 3rd printing). Need Analysis: Tools for the Human Services and Education. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Kimmel, J. (1988). Ethics and Values in Applied Social Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, #140. New York.

    Lord, A. (1953). On the statistical treatment of football numbers. American Psychologist. V8, 550=551.

    Osgood, C., Suci, G. & Tannenbaum, P. (1957). The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd). (chapter on Q method) New York: McGraw Hill.

    Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative Methods. 3rd Edition. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Rosenthal. R.(1991). Meta-Analytic procedures for social research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Sarle,W. (1994). Measurement Theory. E-mail communication.

    Schmidt, F. (1995). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers. E-mail communication.

    Seashore, S. & Katz, D. (1982). Obituary: Rensis Likert (1903-1981). American Psychologist. 37, 8S1-853.

    Snider, J. & Osgood, C. (1969). Semantic differential Technique: A sourcehook. Chicago: Aldine.

    Stephenson, W. (1953). The study of behavior q-technique and its methodology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Stevens, S. S. (1946). On the theory of scales of measurement. Science, 103, 677-680.

    Stevens, S.S. (1951). Mathematics, measurement and psychometrics. In S.S. Stevens (ed.), Handbook of experimental psychology. 1-49. New York: Wiley.

    Stevens, S.S. (1959). Measurement. In C.W Churchman, e., Measurement: Definitions and theories. 18-36. New York: Wiley. (See also reprint in G.M. Maranell, ea., (1974). Scaling: A sourcebook for behavioral scientists, 2241. Chicago: Aldine.

    Stevens, S.S. (1968). Measurement, statistics, and the schemapiric view. Science, 161, 849-856.

    Thorndike, L. (1927a). A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review, 34, 273-286.

    Thorndike, L. (1927b). Psychological Analysis. American Journal of Psychology, 21, 368-389.

Return to Syllabi index or front page 

---