Meeting - 19th September 2017
Those Invited: Prof. Liz Bacon, Prof. Lachlan MacKinnon, Dr. Cos Ierotheou, Andy Wicks
Those Present: Prof. Liz Bacon, Prof. Lachlan MacKinnon, Dr. Cos Ierotheou, Andy Wicks
The RDA2 report should not be in its current format, but rather:-
- This is what I have done: Background and key findings
- Identify the gap in the research which this aims to fill
- Identify a research question
- Describe the methodology
- Which data will need to be collected
- Describe the PhD experiment
- How will the data be analysed?
The current progress report (version 2) is a good basis for the final literature review.
Obtaining the ethical approval is proving difficult because approval is needed from both ILS (the computer services department) and PAS (the guardians of the data for the university). PAS are not being difficult, but are rightly concerned about the data security aspects. They have a list of conditions, including working in an environment and on a machine provided by them. This is not a problem, so I should contact Christine Cooper again to arrange the fine details, especially regarding taking the results away.
The problem with ILS was getting them to provide me with the form needed for approval. The form is geared towards getting approval for a new university system rather than approving an ISP for use by a PhD student. The site has to be off-site because the security systems here do not allow external access to databases. I should therefore continue with the RDA2 whilst waiting for this approval to come through. If necessary, Liz and Lachlan will talk to the head of ILS.
The paper on learning dissonance could be a short paper presented to a confernce. Then once the statistics are created the paper could be expanded to a journal paper despite the ideas having been published before. Also, create a survey paper of the educational theories for journal publication. The fact that nothing in my literature review contradicts what I am trying to achieve with the learning dissonance statistic is a form of proof that it could work.
The RDA2 is the priority, but then get the survey paper to the journal Computers and Education (Elsivier). Then target the IEEE Transactions in Education journal for the full paper on learning dissonance. It should start with the terms of reference for the area to be covered. "Whist investigating the issues of distance based and supported learning in computing the following key areas have been investigated ... The survey paper should conclude with an introduction to learning dissonance. The paper should be 20-25 pages.
Papers are used to stake a claim on a subject area. Alt-C and APT would be good places to try to publish the initial learning dissonance. A short APT paper would be 2-3 pages, whilst a full one would be 6-8 pages. Start with the full paper and then work down from there.
Publishing papers means that the work has been peer-reviewed and therefore does not need to be examined in as much depth at the viva. Whilst there is such a thing as self-plagiarism, properly cited material can be re-used in the disseratation.
The 500 word summary in the RDA2 should an explanation of what I have done up to the methodology. The methodology then describes what my intentions are, but no detail of the experiments or the data.
Send an email to the chair of the ethical approval committee once I have sent the emails to ILS and PAS, saying this is where I am at. The email should explain that PAS are OK and I'm merely waiting for ILS approval.