Instructions Consider An Educational Topic For This Course

Instructionsconsider An Educational Topic For This Course Conceptuali

Consider an educational topic for this course. Conceptualize how the theoretical (PhD) or conceptual (EdD) framework serves as the lens through which you view your working problem statement and helps guide the development of your research questions. Create a video (a narrated presentation) using Kaltura or another video tool to present these points of discussion. You will create your video (narrated presentation) using Kaltura or another video tool in the Center for Teaching and Learning. For step-by-step instructions, go to Table of Contents and select Course Resources.

The terms theoretical and conceptual are not interchangeable. Choose one depending on your degree and focus. At a minimum, include and discuss the following in your video: Identify a framework that you believe may serve as the lens for your study. Use a theoretical framework if you are a PhD student or a conceptual framework if you are an EdD or EdS student. State your revised (based on instructor feedback) problem and purpose statements from Week 2.

Explain how your chosen framework is relevant to your topic and problem Present at least one problem and framework-informed research question for both a qualitative and quantitative study. For the qualitative research question, propose two or more sub-questions. For the quantitative research questions, present at least one null and corresponding hypothesis. (Later, you will choose a design and make sure the design is aligned with your RQ). Discuss how your research questions and hypotheses align with your chosen framework and purpose statement in addressing the research problem.

Paper For Above instruction

The purpose of this presentation is to conceptualize and articulate the role of a theoretical or conceptual framework in guiding educational research. For this example, I will focus on an EdD student choosing a conceptual framework to examine an educational issue, illustrating how this lens informs research questions aligned with the purpose and problem statements.

Assuming the research focus is on improving student engagement in online learning environments, a suitable conceptual framework might be the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework developed by Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000). This framework emphasizes social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence as essential components that foster meaningful learning experiences. As an EdD student, selecting a conceptual framework like CoI helps to focus the investigation on the relational and experiential aspects of online learning, guiding the development of research questions to explore how these components influence student engagement.

The problem statement revised from initial feedback emphasizes that despite increased online course offerings, student engagement remains inconsistent. The purpose of this study is to explore how the components of the Community of Inquiry framework impact student engagement in online courses within higher education settings. This framing directs the investigation and identifies the variables of interest—social, cognitive, and teaching presences—and their roles in facilitating engagement.

In discussing the relevance of the CoI framework to this study, it becomes evident that engagement in online learning is complex and multidimensional. The model’s emphasis on social and cognitive dimensions aligns with the observed factors influencing student retention and satisfaction, such as sense of community and perceived relevance of course content. Employing this framework allows for a nuanced understanding of how specific elements within the learning environment interact to promote engagement, thus providing actionable insights for educators and administrators.

Formulating research questions guided by this framework, for a qualitative study, I propose the following main question: “How do students perceive the roles of social, cognitive, and teaching presence in their online learning experiences?” Sub-questions include: “In what ways do social interactions influence student engagement?” and “How does instructor facilitation affect cognitive presence?” These questions aim to capture personal experiences and perceptions, providing rich, descriptive data aligned with the CoI’s focus on interaction and presence.

For a quantitative study, a core research question might be: “What is the relationship between perceived social presence and student engagement in online courses?” The null hypothesis would state: “There is no significant relationship between perceived social presence and student engagement.” A corresponding alternative hypothesis would suggest: “There is a significant positive relationship between perceived social presence and student engagement.” These hypotheses directly test the influence of a key component of the CoI framework, allowing for statistical analysis of the relationships among variables.

Both the qualitative and quantitative research questions and hypotheses are aligned with the chosen framework by emphasizing the importance of social, cognitive, and teaching presences in understanding student engagement. They also align with the revised problem and purpose statements, focusing the investigation on how specific elements of online learning environments contribute to or hinder engagement and learning outcomes. This alignment ensures that the research remains rooted in the theoretical foundation while addressing practical concerns in higher education contexts.

In conclusion, selecting a conceptual framework such as Garrison et al.’s Community of Inquiry is instrumental in shaping research questions and guiding the investigation of online student engagement. Clarifying how this lens informs the study’s direction ensures coherence among problem statements, research questions, hypotheses, and the overall purpose. This comprehensive approach enriches the study’s contribution to educational practice and theory, ultimately supporting more effective online teaching strategies.

References

• Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.
• Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Create, communicate, and collaborate: Learning in a community of inquiry framework. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3–4), 107–118.
• Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction in Web-based courses. Journal of Management Education, 24(1), 7–27.
• Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view. Cengage Learning.
• Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing interaction online and its relationship to learning: A review of the literature. Journal of Distance Education, 22(1), 1–19.
• Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective. Pearson.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
• Salmon, G. (2013). E-tivities: The key to active online learning. Routledge.
• Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1978). The network nation: Life, leadership, and work in our electronic society. Addison-Wesley.
• Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7.