My topic literature focussed on the work of Koszalka (2002)(1) and Boling (2005)(2). Both investigated the use internet tools and communities to enhance educators experience of technology. Boling in particular used blogs and an action research methodology and so her study was very relevant to mine. In action research though the search for literature is on-going and does not end with the literature review. I continued to seek out new sources as my research took emergent directions. For example as I undertook the Postcards cycle (Appendix 1 - P1) I looked back at the work of Holt (3) because underpinning this cycle was my interpretation of his pedagogy.
There is a need to ensure that studies and theory mentioned are not only relevant but that that relevance is made quite explicit. A challenge was made that my use of literature amounted to 'name dropping' and that relevance was not explained and that my referencing was also poor. This was partly due, once more, to the use of an early draft of work for review. I added more detail to the final account of the research and attempted to make the relevance of references more explicit.
Also large amounts of my emergent topic literature was never mentioned in my account of the research. It is referenced in posts in my research blog Acting to Improve.For example:


Issues of brevity and word count meant I have not referred to much of the emergent literature in my accounts of the research. There simply was not room to weave in the new literature I found as the research progressed. It influenced and underpinned my actions, despite my inability to make its influence explicit.

This challenge also shows one of the tensions created by balancing the requirements of the degree with the needs of the audience. ARU requires the production of a Harvard Resource List at the end of each module, with references in the body of the report in the format: Name (date). Advice in the previous modules has been only to directly quote when not possible to paraphrase and to simply say "This accords with Name (date)" where possible. This practice was described as 'useless' in this challenge.
I agree. My own preference is for references to be placed in each section but this is not in accordance with the requirements of the university. In this penultimate module I have chosen to do both. All references are included in footnotes. However I will also provide a Harvard Resource list at the end of the report to comply with the requirements of the university.
Back to methodology1
back to index
Forward to data1


(1)Koszalka, T. (2001). Effect of computer-mediated communications on teachers’ attitudes toward using web resources in the classroom. Journal of Instructional Psychology. (28)2, 95-103.
(2)Boling, EC.Preparing Teachers to Integrate Technology for Literacy Instruction National Educational Computing Conference June 29, 2005 Philadelphia,Pennsylvania
(3)Holt, J C (1986). How Children Learn (Revised). 3rd ed. London: Pelican Books.

Created on Monday 05/08/2006 07:20:47 PM from /Users/lindahartley/Desktop/ValandD.vdoc