WINTER 2012 - National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Amy E. Smith and Ignacio J. Martinez-Moyano and employed a Web-wide participation tool. The electronic Delphi technique has several advantages. First, the facilitator controls the contributions from the participants. This reduces some of the problems associated with group dynamics, such as groupthink and leader dominance (Janis, 1972; McCauley, 1989; Wissema, 1982). Second, the anonymity of the respondents reduces the bandwagon effect (Coleman, 1973), whereby the chances of one individual in the group adopting an idea increases based on who else in the group has already adopted the idea; and the halo effect (Nisbett & Wilson, 1977), whereby the first characteristics we recognize about an individual influences our interpretation of later characteristics of that individual. Anonymity also encourages open criticism, admittance of mistakes, and revision of original stances. Finally, because the discussion tool was Web based, participants could access the tool at any time, and responses did not have to be completed in one sitting. While there is ample variation in how the Delphi technique has been employed, the procedure used in this project was conducted in three rounds as follows: First, an idea elicitation stage in which the subjects were presented with the survey questions described in Appendix A was conducted. In this stage, the respondents generated ideas independently of one another, and the ideas generated by all respondents were aggregated in one list. Second, an idea clustering stage in which the aggregated list was returned to respondents for grouping based on similarity. A list of groups generated by respondents was created based on grouping agreement among respondents. Third, a cluster prioritizing stage in which the list of grouped ideas was independently evaluated by the respondents based on relative importance. The resulting groups and the level of agreement achieved became the primary portion of the analysis. Each stage of the Delphi procedures is discussed in detail next. To begin the idea elicitation stage, we sent participants an e-mail with a link to the Web-wide participation meeting. The purpose of this step was to elicit ideas from participants regarding methods to address the challenges inherent in teaching statistics to students enrolled in practitioner-oriented master’s degree programs. Participants answered each of the four survey questions privately, but they were given the opportunity to view an anonymous list of answers generated by other participants as these became available. This is similar to a brainstorming exercise wherein an unlimited number of ideas can be generated. The elicitation stage lasted 3 weeks. During this time, participants generated ideas in response to each of the four questions. At the end of the session, the authors compiled an aggregated list of all the ideas produced by participants by question. After the idea elicitation stage, we began the idea clustering stage. The purpose of this stage was to get participants to examine the aggregate list of ideas (by question for each of the four questions asked) and cluster these ideas based on similarity. There were no predetermined clusters. Participants were asked to cluster ideas that they thought were similar. Participants privately clustered 118 Journal of Public Affairs Education
Techniques in Teaching Statistics ideas for each of the four questions separately and could create an unlimited number of clusters with no restrictions on how many ideas could be assigned to a cluster. For example, if the participant thought that all the ideas belonged in one cluster, he would assign all of them to the same one. Alternatively, if the participant thought that all the ideas were distinctly different and would not belong to the same cluster, he would create as many clusters as ideas existed in the list, assigning one idea to each cluster created. All of our participants created more than one cluster and less than the total number of ideas presented to them. This stage allowed participants to narrow down the initial list of brainstormed ideas into more general clusters of practices, thus consolidating ideas into more manageable clusters. Participants were allowed 3 weeks to cluster the ideas contained in the aggregated list that they had populated in the prior stage. Each participant generated different clusters of ideas. To identify clusters that most participants agreed on, each participant’s clusters were compared using a 70% agreement threshold and the analytic routines embedded in the Web-wide participation tool. The 70% agreement threshold indicates that the ideas in each cluster were linked to most or all of the other ideas in the cluster by at least 70% of participants. This process resulted in the identification of 19 clusters of ideas for question one, 21 clusters for question two, 21 clusters for question three, and 14 clusters for question four. The identified clusters were used in the next stage of the process: the prioritization stage. In the prioritization stage, participants prioritize the identified clusters of ideas according to their relative importance for addressing the relevant challenge (i.e., as essential for addressing one of the listed challenges inherent in teaching statistics). This prioritization activity was intended to distill what general practices (clusters) were most important for addressing each challenge. To begin, participants were shown a list of the identified clusters. Each cluster was given a score of 100 points. Participants then increased or decreased this score based on how important they believed the cluster was for addressing the challenge described in the question. Higher scores indicated more important clusters; lower scores indicated less important clusters. For example, if a participant thought that cluster 1 was twice as important as cluster 2 in addressing the challenge under study, he would assign twice as many points to cluster 1 than those assigned to cluster 2 (either by assigning 200 points to cluster 1, or by assigning 50 points to cluster 2 without changing the original 100 points assigned to cluster 1). Because participants used self-determined scores for indicating importance, we standardized the scores assigned by each participant following the prioritization stage in order to compare scores for a particular cluster among participants. To standardize the assigned scores, we calculated the sum of all points assigned to all clusters by a participant and then divided the score assigned to an individual cluster by this total. 4 Journal of Public Affairs Education 119
Page 1 and 2:
JPAE VOLUME 18 NUMBER 1 JOURNAL OF
Page 3 and 4:
Journal of Public Affairs Education
Page 5 and 6:
FROM THE EDITOR In the symposium in
Page 7 and 8:
NASPAA Presidential Address Annual
Page 9 and 10:
Leading by Example: Modeling Global
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
FROM THE GUEST EDITOR FROM THE GUES
Page 17 and 18:
FROM THE GUEST EDITOR A SYMPOSIUM I
Page 19 and 20:
on other fronts, certainly it can h
Page 21 and 22:
Picasso, P. (1937). Guernica. Pictu
Page 23 and 24:
A View from the 50th Street Gate on
Page 25 and 26:
Reflections of a Working-Class Acad
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Reflections of a Working Class Acad
Page 33 and 34:
Reflections of a Working Class Acad
Page 35 and 36:
Class Rooms Kenneth Oldfield Univer
Page 37 and 38:
Class Rooms although I did, but not
Page 39 and 40:
Class Rooms GRADUATE SCHOOL I was u
Page 41 and 42:
Class Rooms the odds this appointee
Page 43 and 44:
Class Rooms The Great Leveler, too
Page 45 and 46:
Class Rooms of higher learning and
Page 47 and 48:
ook (Oldfield & Johnson, 2009). The
Page 49 and 50:
Didactic Changes Class Rooms Pedago
Page 51 and 52:
Admittedly, it will be difficult to
Page 53 and 54:
hooks, b. (2000). Where we stand: C
Page 55 and 56:
Shaw, G. B. (1928). The intelligent
Page 57 and 58:
What’s a Girl Like You Doing in a
Page 59 and 60:
What’s a Girl Like You For exampl
Page 61 and 62:
What’s a Girl Like You and operat
Page 63 and 64:
What’s a Girl Like You captured t
Page 65 and 66:
What’s a Girl Like You full-blown
Page 67 and 68:
What’s a Girl Like You inside). I
Page 69 and 70:
What’s a Girl Like You and collea
Page 71 and 72:
What’s a Girl Like You toward ser
Page 73 and 74: Blue-Collar Teaching in a White-Col
Page 75 and 76: Blue-Collar Teaching Half of my fam
Page 77 and 78: Blue-Collar Teaching from physics.
Page 79 and 80: Blue-Collar Teaching lifelong dream
Page 81 and 82: Blue-Collar Teaching Before him, in
Page 83 and 84: Blue-Collar Teaching One may argue
Page 85 and 86: Blue-Collar Teaching graduation in
Page 87 and 88: Blue-Collar Teaching advantages oth
Page 89 and 90: Carrizales, T. (2010). Exploring cu
Page 91 and 92: Oldfield, K. (2010). Socioeconomic
Page 93 and 94: Moving Forward by Looking Back Gary
Page 95 and 96: Moving Forward My father married my
Page 97 and 98: Moving Forward became apparent that
Page 99 and 100: Moving Forward to Duane, because he
Page 101 and 102: Moving Forward by this contaminant.
Page 103 and 104: Moving Forward quite by chance to b
Page 105 and 106: Moving Forward Federalist 51 detail
Page 107 and 108: Moving Forward their profession, in
Page 109 and 110: Moving Forward as the study shows,
Page 111 and 112: REFERENCES Ashwander v. Tennessee V
Page 113 and 114: Techniques in Teaching Statistics:
Page 115 and 116: Many researchers have explored the
Page 117 and 118: LITERATURE REVIEW Techniques in Tea
Page 119 and 120: Techniques in Teaching Statistics b
Page 121 and 122: Techniques in Teaching Statistics T
Page 123: Techniques in Teaching Statistics l
Page 127 and 128: Table 1. Downloads of Papers at Sel
Page 129 and 130: Figure 2. Expanded Model of Researc
Page 131 and 132: Techniques in Teaching Statistics o
Page 133 and 134: Figure 3. Expanded Model of Researc
Page 135 and 136: Techniques in Teaching Statistics L
Page 137 and 138: Techniques in Teaching Statistics o
Page 139 and 140: Felbinger, C. L., Holzer, M., & Whi
Page 141 and 142: Snee, R. D. (1993). What’s missin
Page 143 and 144: Are They Connected? Exploring Acade
Page 145 and 146: Exploring Academic and Social Netwo
Page 151 and 152: Figure 2. Career Advice Network Fig
Page 153 and 154: Table 1. Descriptive Statistics of
Page 155 and 156: network density, and network recipr
Page 157 and 158: Figure 5. Academic, Career Advice,
Page 163 and 164: Open Access Digital Repository: Sha
Page 165 and 166: Sharing Student Research with the W
Page 167 and 168: Table 1. Downloads of Papers at Sel
Page 169 and 170: Table 2. Top 10 Most Downloaded App
Page 175 and 176:
Analysts also determined the number
Page 177 and 178:
Topical categories. As shown in Tab
Page 179 and 180:
negative impact on ARP downloads (
Page 181 and 182:
Sharing Student Research with the W
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Knowledge and Skills for Policy Mak
Page 191 and 192:
Stories from Local Public Managers
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
and writing the proposal for the co
Page 199 and 200:
Another echoes: Stories from Local
Page 201 and 202:
I think communication is one of the
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Creating Quality Online Course Desi
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
it was achieved. The assessment of
Page 235 and 236:
Fulbright Program for Foreign Stude
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Review of Moral Controversies in Am
Page 247 and 248:
application of those foundations to
Page 249 and 250:
Journal of Public Affairs Education
Page 251 and 252:
Information for Contributors The Jo
show all

WINTER 2012 - National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?