εκπαιδευτική έρευνα

:

: ( )

(induction)-(deduction)

, .

, .

,

(ontological and epistemological assumptions)

, . ()

,

, (-)

, ,

-

: ,

/

,

,

/

(positivism)

:

(determinism)

(empiricism) (parsimony)

(concepts) (operational

definitions)

(hypotheses)

,

, ,

(normative paradigms)

() , , ,

, ,

, ,

; - ,

. ,

,

- (anti-positivist approaches)

,

,

(interpretative paradigms)

, ,

,

(critical approaches)

, , ,

:

-, , -

.

(basic) , ,

(applied) , ,

,

:

: , , ,

- -

-

,

,

/

/ ,

,

: (survey)

,

- ,

,

.

/

, ,

- , / /

:

- :

:

: , ,

(action research):

:

:

:

:

3

(5 - 6 26/10-8/11/2009)

1

(internal validity)

/

3

9 (history)

9 (maturation)

9 (testing)

9 (instrumentation)

9 (statistical regression)

4

I

9 (differential selection)

9 (experimental mortality)

9 (treatment diffusion)

9 (control group rivalry) (John Henry effect)

5

(external validity)

6

9 (representative sample)

9 (description ofvariables)

9 (Hawthorn effect)

9 (multiple treatment interference)

7

: : (scores)

8

(validity)9 (face) ( )

9 (content) ( )

9 (criterion)... . .

10

(validity)9... (/ concurrent) ( predictive)9 (construct) . (convergent) (divergent) .

11

(reliability)9 - (test-retest)

9 (split-half) ( )

9 (alternate form)

12

(reliability)9 (interobserver)

9 (internal consistency) . Cronbachs alpha ().

13

-

(authenticity/trustworthiness/verification)9 9 - 9 9 - 9 (peer review/ debriefing)9 (external audits)9 (member checks)

14

-

9 (prolonged engagement in the field)9

(negative case analysis)9T (triangulation). / (.. ) . . 15

9

9

9

9 ( !)

9

16

(informed-consent)

9 ( )9 9 9 9

( )9 17

4

(7 9 - 9/11-29/11/2009)

1

9 - 9 9 - 9 ( )99

3

9 (

)

9 ( , , )

9 4

9 : (.. )

5

9 (review articles)

9 9 99 ()9 http://journalseek.net/educ.htm

9 9

( /review articles)9 9 9 9

: (.. , , )

9 9 : .. .. ..

: 1) () 2) . :1.

;

2. ;

3. ;

11

1ENOTHTA 5

( )

2 . , A.1 (Basic) A.2 (Applied)

(Action research)

, B.1 (Quantitative)

(experimental) (descriptive) (correlational)

B.2 (Qualitative) () (case study)

3 A1.

2.

,

4 B1.

(

)

,

5 1.

(

)

,

(

)

:

7

,

,

11

:

:

12

1.

2.

3.

13

4.

-

-

-

5.

14

6.

-

7.

-

8.

-

9.

15

1.

2.

3.

4.

: C: o ER:

CR:

Tx: Tc: O1: O2:

-

-

1.. x.2

-

-

ER 1. x..... 2

CR 1.. c.... 2

-

ER ...x.....2

CR .... c....2

--

-

E 1. x ..... 2

C 1. c .. 2

21

(3) () . -

--

---

22

Hawthorne ,

John Henry ( )

23

Pygmalion , ( Jacobson & Rosenthal, 1968)

(Haloeffect)

26

..

,

29

: ( )

30

( )

, (Stringer, 1996)

, (Kemmis & McTaggert, 1988)

, (Hopkins, 2002).

(Elliott, 1991).

- , , (Kemmis, 1983).

; .

. .

.

(formative evaluation)

(summative evaluation)

- - . :

.

46

:

,

:

,

:

.

.

1 6

,

51

| | |

| | | | |

| (Adelman .., 1980), (.. , , , )

| (, ) ( , )

|

| z

| z

| z

(Yin, 1989)

| ( )

| ( )

| :z z z

(1)

| ;| ;z ;z ; / / ;

z ; ;z ; ;

(2)

| ; z (Individual Case Study)z (Set of individual case studies)z (Community Studies)z (Social Group Studies)z , (Studies of events,

relationships)| ;| ;

| ;

(3)

| ;

| ;

| ;

(1)

| (.. ), , :z ; (settings)

, , ,

z ; (actors)

(, , , , )z ; (Events)

z ; (Processes)

, ,

| :

(2)

(3)

| :z ( , , , , )

z z ( , , )

| z z

| z /z ,

| z z

| , , | ;z , ,

(1)

|

| , ,

| ,

| ,

(2)

|

|

(3)

(1)

|

| , , ,

|

(2)

|

| |

| ( )

| ( , )

18

| ( )

| ( )

19

(Ethnografphy)

20

-

- , ,- ( )

-

z

z

z

z

21

22

| ,

|

.

: ( )

( ) ( )

1) ;) /) /) /) /2) : ...............

3) 1-5, 1= 5=

4) ;1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Likert: .1. 2. 3. , 4. 5.

: : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1.

2.

3.

4.

5. .

6.

7. .

8. .

9. .

10. .

11. .

12. .

13. .

1 ()

2 ( )

3 ( )

4 ( )

5 ( - )

Cohen, Manion & Morisson (2000) :

(.. , .)

, , .

, , .

: .

1. .

2. .

3. , .

4. .

5. .

6. , , .

7. . , .

8. .

:

1) .2)

.3) ,

.4)

.5)

.6)

..

:

;

;

:

.

,

.

.

..

(Nominal Scale)

(Ordinal Scale) .

(Interval Scale) . .. .

(Ratio Scale) .

.. , , .

:1. , 2.

3.

4.

5. .

(norm-referenced tests)

(criterion-referencedtest)

, ( )

(.. ).

.

.

.

, ( )

: . . .

.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

.. Reading Comprehension Inventory, Mathematics Competency Test

.. Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ), Minessota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), Motivation Assessment Scale, athematics anxiety scale

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC), WISC in Greek

: , : http://www.unl.edu/buros/bimm/html/00testscomplete.html

.

: . . .

(face validity)

(content validity)

(criterion validity)

(construct validity)

, / ( ).

?

(test-retest)

(alternate form)

(split-half)

Retrieved from: http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/relandval.php

51 8

(, , )

, , , :

z -

z

z z z , ,

z z z z

(Observation)

()

z ( )

z - ( )

()

z ( )

z ( )

()

z :-/ / .- .- .

()

z :/ / , .

z

z

z

z

()

z ()

z z ( )

z

()

:z (. Flanders)

z

z

(Interview)

()z : / /

, .

z : / / , . - . -.

()

z .

()

z : ,

z : , , , ,

()

z : ,

z z -:

z : - , ,

z --

()

z ( )

z

z ,

z ,

z z

z z ,

z

z z

(Diary)

()

z

z

z

z

()

z

z

z

z

z z ( )

z ( , )

z reactivity

z /

z ,

z , (case study)

A. -

B.

(Frequencies)

. 2 Chi square (correlation) t-test t-test (One Way Anova)

.

.

4 :

(Nominal)

o .

:

;

. .

1 2 1 1 2 2

3 3 5

(Ordinal) .

;/

;

;

.

( ).

. . ; 1 1 2 5 3 16 4 34

2 : / . ( ).

(Interval scale)

.

:, , .

.

.

: , 10 10

( )

(Ratio scale)

, .

.

: , , , .

.

: , 1.75

1 75 .

3 :1) 2)

SPSS3)

SPSS.

1 1: 2:

2 3 0:

1: 4

. . :

1 ; _________( )

2 ; 0-14 115-19 220-24 325-34 435-44 545-59 660 7

.

: . . 2 1 .

.

:

-99

2 1 . -88

. -77

/ -66

: ;

1 :

2 : -

: 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 .9 . 9 .9 .

:

. :

(mode) (median) (mean) (standard deviation)

.

Analyze Descriptive Statistics Frequencies

.. , , , .

.

: , .

-

.

( ).

.

/ : : . : , . : : , . : , / : : , , , :

: , .

.

- 2 : ()

.

.

, .

.

(

(random sample) (independence of observations) - (interval level of measurement) (homogeneity of variance) (normally distributed data)

-

*Pearson r *T-test (Independent samples t-test) -2 *T-test (Paired samples t-test) -2 * (One-way ANOVA) -3

*2 Chi-square*Spearman

*Mann-Whitney U test

*Wilcoxon Signed Rank test

*Kruskal Wallis

- (significance testing) .

( ).

p-value. 0,05 ( ) 5% .

2 (chi-square)

: (= ).

: , SPSS: Crosstabs

: : , .

0,05

.

: (2 = 16,573, df = 6, p < 0.05). (2 = 16,573, df = 6, p < 0.05).

: ( p-value

(correlation)

(linear) .

:Pearson Correlation (r): ,

:Spearman Correlation (): (), ,

-1 +1. ( ) .

(+, -) (, ).

1 ( +1 -1) (perfect correlation) .

(0) ( . )

0.483

(p-value): < 0,05,

: 435

1: ( value)

2: ( )

3: (, , ).

4: (p-value)

0

0-0,2

0,2-0,4

0,4-0,6

0,6-0,8

0,8-1

1

: , ( rho rs = 0,483, p < 0.05).

: . . .

: Independent-samples t-test: : () : ,

: Mann-Whitney Test: : () : ,,

Independent-samples t-testann-Whitney Test: ().

:o ;o ;

: Paired t-test: : () : ,

: Wilcoxon Signed Rank test: : () : ,,

Paired t-testWilcoxon Signed Rank test: :

() , .

( -matched) ().

:

;

;

(treatment group) (control group) ;: .

: One-Way ANOVA: : , (3 ) : ,

: Kruskal-Wallis: : , (3 ) : ,,

One-Way ANOVAKruskal-Wallis

: ().

: (, , ) ; , , ;

: (assumptions) *

* , .

T-test T-test (ANOVA)

Mann-Whitney U test

Wilcoxon Signed Rank testKruskal Wallis

Pearson rChi-squareSpearman

.

. . .

.

, , , .

, .

.

.

( )

.

A.

B.

.

.

.

.

: ( ) think-alouds

/ ( )

(.. , )

(.. ,, ,)

,

, , , , ..

: (:

)

, , .

: [ (4) (.) () 1

,

( )

()

(())

:

.

, .

(1)

-

-

-

-

.

(2)

:

- .

.

. /

. .

.

- 1

. . , , ...; ;

- 2 .

, ; - .

(

) .

(1)

()

-(Credibility)

(Transferability)

(Dependability)

(Confirmability)

(2) - (Credibility)

: :

,

(Transferability)

:

:

(Dependability)

: ( ) ( )

(3)

(Confirmability) :

:

(4)

:

-

-

-

,

.

, .

(. 28 33)

: Miles, MB. & Huberman, AM. (1994). QualitativeData Analysis (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications.

//

. : ,

, (.. , , ..)

Group Interview Extract:CM1- Community Group 16 participants (M=Male, F=Female)

85. M4: I used to be wasting-goin to the club (2), drinking, goin to the86. Chippie. Then goin home and bringing it all upThen it clicked I was87. just wasting and spending ten or twenty quid a night.88. [M2: my friend who had a business was (ruined) by drinking89. F2: When me husband goes out, me and me friend drinks every night.90. But Christmas has got to be the worst timePeople saying go on, ave91. another. If you say no, they think youre being funny.92. [M2: Yeah, they say get that down ya, it ll do ya good93. F4: I find it expensive, especially going to a club in town, with the taxi94. fare.95. F6: I go to the local club, the beers (.) cheaper96. M2: The only reason I dont drink more is that I cant afford it.97. [F6: I dont think If I had money I would drink more. Maybe I would get98. a taxi home instead of the night bus.99. M1: Theres no chance of me getting much money, I just pace me self100. more these days-make it last longer.. Miles and Huberman (1984)

Qualitative Data Analysis

Coded Extract CM1 ()85. M4: I used to be wasting-goin to the club (2), drinking, goin

to the86. Chippie. Then goin home and bringing it all upThen it

clicked I was87. just wasting and spending ten or twenty .

Health Concerns(wasting):money/expense

88. [M2: my friend who had a business was (ruined) by drinking Drinking toomuch/consequences; affecting work

89. F2: When me husband goes out, me and me friend. drinksevery night.

Drinking at home(females); socialconstraints

90. But Christmas has got to be the worst time People sayinggo on,

91. ave another. If you say no, they think youre being funny.

Drinking situation(event); peerpresure

92. [M2: Yeah, they say get that down ya, it ll do ya good Pleasure Havinggood time; Health

93. F4: I find it expensive, especially going to a club in town,with the taxi

94. fare.

Expensive-Drinking place(town)

95. F6: I go to the local club, the beers (.) cheaper Expense-Drinkinglocally (strategy)

96. M2: The only reason I dont drink more is that I cant affordit.

Lack ofmoney/constraint

97. [F6: I dont think If I had money I would drink more. Maybe Iwould

98. get a taxi home instead of the night bus.

Drinking less(female)/constraint

99. M1: Theres no chance of me getting much money, I justpace me self

100.more these days-make it last longer.

Pacing ; drinikingslower-less/strategy

Coded Extract CM1 ()

Expensive UN2: 134-44 CM1: 85-87; 93-94 WK: 34-40

Being Unemployed UN1: 34-38; 120-137; 146-50 UN2: 24-25; 80-89

Drinking less/slower (strategy) WK: 129-34 CM1: 99-100

Drinking Place CM1: 93-95

1. Pattern Code/category: Constraint2. Sub-Pattern Code/Category: Lack of Money3. Lack of Money sub-Pattern Codes/Categories:

/ -(Drinking Constraints Lack of Money)

Drinking Context

Types of Drinking DrinkingConstraints Drinking Situation

Driving Lack of Money

Unemployment

Parental

Strategies

Budgeting

Drinking/Going out less

Expense

1.Enotita_1-09 1: - (ontological and epistemological assumptions) , , (positivism) (normative paradigms) - (anti-positivist approaches) (interpretative paradigms) (critical approaches)

2.Enotita_2-09 2: - /

3.EN_3____ 3 (5 - 6 26/10-8/11/2009) (internal validity) I (external validity) - (validity) (validity) (reliability) (reliability)- - (informed-consent)

4. 4h_enotita0910 4 (7 9 - 9/11-29/11/2009)

5._5__ENOTHTA 5 A B Slide Number 9 - - - - - -- - Slide Number 36Slide Number 37Slide Number 38Slide Number 39A -Slide Number 46 () -

6._6___ 6 , (1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (Ethnografphy)

7.enotita7_108.enot8_-10 51 8 , , , : () () () () () () () () () () () () ()

Enotita_9 9 (Nominal) (Ordinal) (Interval scale) (Ratio scale) : - - - (significance testing) 2 (chi-square) (correlation) Independent-samples t-testann-Whitney Test Paired t-testWilcoxon Signed Rank test One-Way ANOVAKruskal-Wallis

enotita_10

εκπαιδευτική έρευνα

Documents

Transcript of εκπαιδευτική έρευνα