A500.9.3.RB - Course Reflections

Leadership Foundations in Research was arguably the most useful course I’ve taken at any level, at any school, and in any subject. Unlike most courses that have a narrow focus, the information and knowledge I gained from this course can be used in virtually any other course and in essentially any aspect of one’s life. The major components of the class were necessarily slanted towards leadership and included critical thinking, action research, and digital presentation technologies.

Critical Thinking. For example, the critical thinking component of the course can be used in reasoning through any issue at work, home, or school. The first three weeks the coursework was focused on critical thinking with a slant towards leadership and was dedicated to the Paulian model of critical thinking using a popular textbook, Learning toThink Things Through: A Guide to Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum (4th ed.) (Nosich, 2012). I appreciated the textbook’s readability and extensive writing prompts. Along with Nosich’s textbook, Paul & Elder’s The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools (7th ed.) was used. Because it took some effort to link the material between the two reading sources, I found it necessary to actively seek out and acquire another text to make sense of the first two. I settled on Paul & Elder’s Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Professional and Personal Life (2nd ed.) in no small part because the miniature guide and Nosich’s textbook are based largely on this book as well as other works by Paul & Elder.

More Critical Thinking and Conspiracies. Similarly, an alternate model of critical thinking—the CARS Method—was used for nearly a full week as we explored conspiracy theories. This Credibility, Accuracy, Reasonableness, Support checklist is a surprisingly simple but powerful method. It’s somewhat of a variation on the who-what-when-where-why-and-how model many of us learned in elementary school. If I have any criticism of this model and source, it’s simply that there is, ironically, no seemingly credible source other than a publisher of higher education textbooks (The CARS Checklist (Credibility, Accuracy, Reasonableness, Support), 2003) and not so much as an allusion as to its origination. The source material itself is in a bit of disarray with no clear indications as to who or when the material was developed. Only an internet search revealed a likely source. Likewise, the presumed author’s website (http://www.virtualsalt.com/evalu8it.htm) is written in an out-of-date style from the early 1990’s. It contains multiple hyperlinks and no margins making it very difficult to read on a monitor using recent technology of the late 2010’s and confusing as to a beginning location. The site was last updated in December 2016—about 16 months prior to the present writing. The material contained within the website is immensely useful, albeit disorganized. The CARS Method would be an ideal graduate—or even undergraduate—project worth updating. Lastly, Santa Barbara City College has a useful checklist based on the same source material (C.A.R.S. Checklist for Evaluating Sources,. n.d.) and a hyperlink points to the original author’s site rather than the textbook publisher’s site.

Action Research. Once we gained insight into models and methods of critical thinking, we moved on to Action Research. I found the subject matter to be very useful not only in a professional environment but also a personal one. It offers a much-needed alternative to the classic research methods, notably the quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods approaches widely used in research foundations courses. This module relied heavily on McNiff’s 2002 version of Action Research for Professional Development: Concise Advice for New Action Researchers (3rd ed.). However, despite repeated re-readings of this material, I found it lacking in being able to explain to me—a beginning action researcher—what action research is all about and how I should proceed. This is one area where the course material could be more explicit. While the source material was useful, it was clear that many class participants struggled with understanding action research. I found it necessary to reach outside the course materials, yet I still struggled to find appropriate material because I didn’t know what I should be looking for. I settled on Greenwood & Levin’s 2007 widely cited text Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change (2nd ed.). However, despite it being an introductory text, this book was overkill as it was not written for new researchers and unnecessarily slowed me down in the course. Regardless, once I understood the basic principles behind action research, I found it to be quite useful now and for the future. Surprisingly, I reverted to several of McNiff’s published books and found the following to be useful: You and Your Action Research Project (4th ed.) published by Routledge in 2016 and Action Research: All You Need to Know published in 2017 by SAGE Publications. Both books are well written, but it is unclear to me why two books exist from two different publishers. The contents of each one overlap to a significant extent so either one would do for this course. I have my personal preference for the Routledge book.

Surveys. As part of the Action Research component, surveys were utilized. There was nothing spectacular in this component, but I found it to be very useful in keeping abreast with available online technologies. It’s these online technologies that have simplified certain technical aspects of our lives while allowing us to focus on practical matters. For example, instead of focusing on statistical analysis of survey questions, we can put more effort into formulating meaningful questions. This may be highly useful in everyday action research. However, more emphasis should be placed on two areas: the first is question formulation and the second is security issues especially given the global skepticism of late. It has been widely publicized that much of the interference in the U.S. electoral processes were brought about by unsuspecting survey and quiz respondents. Question formulation appears to be a sticking point for many class participants for it was during the survey response segment that it became apparent many students did not know how to effectively frame questions, myself included.

Digital Presentation Tools. The exposure to various online digital presentation tools was also particularly useful. However, given the compressed time format for the course, a cursory overview was about all that could be managed. A substantial time commitment would be necessary to utilize these tools to realize just a fraction of their potential. For example, Prezi is touted as an alternative to Microsoft PowerPoint slide presentations. But, the amount of effort needed to prepare a meaningful presentation is outside the scope of a 9-week course. Still, it’s very much appreciated that students are made aware of various technologies available at little or no cost.

Summary. Leadership Foundations in Research was an outstanding course whose utility can be difficult to overstate. Of particular usefulness for me was the critical thinking component which can be applied to virtually any coursework and in any aspect of one’s life. The action research component provided a much-needed alternative to traditional research methods and can be immediately implemented in either personal or professional settings. More explicit direction for study materials would be useful for those students who may be unfamiliar with action research. Online survey tools move the researcher’s focus from technical issues such as statistical analysis to more practical concerns such as question formulation. Emphasis should be placed on security issues given recent skepticism brought upon unsuspecting survey and quiz respondents. Lastly, being exposed to available digital presentation technologies helps students keep abreast of low cost alternatives to traditional mainstream technologies.

References

C.A.R.S. Checklist for Evaluating Sources. (n.d.). Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved from https://www.sbcc.edu/clrc/writing_center/wc_files/handout_masters/CARS%20Checklist%20for%20Evaluating%20Sources.pdf

The CARS Checklist (Credibility, Accuracy, Reasonableness, Support). (2003). Retrieved from http://novella.mhhe.com/sites/0079876543/student_view0/research_center-999/research_papers30/conducting_web-based_research.html

Greenwood, D. J., & Levin, M. (2007). Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

McNiff, J. (2002). Action Research for Professional Development: Concise Advice for New Action Researchers (3rd ed.) Retrieved from http://www.jeanmcniff.com/ar-booklet.asp

McNiff, J. (2016). You and Your Action Research Project (4th ed.). London: Routledge.

McNiff, J. (2017). Action Research: All You Need to Know. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Nosich, G. M. (2012). Learning to Think Things Through: A Guide to Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2014a). Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Professional and Personal Life (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2014b). The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools (7th ed.). Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking Press.