In an ideal world, with the proper format and instructor, I believe Interpreting Educational Research would have been very useful and quite foundational to the rest of my graduate studies experience. Unfortunately the version of the course I received was not ideal. Assessments and feedback were severely lacking even minimal standards, assignments were vague and poorly designed, and the overall goals or “outcomes” of the course were certainly not emphasized or focused upon in a clear manner.
Interpreting Educational Research did allow me to become familiar with the specific terminology used in the field of educational research. Terms such as constructivism, positivism, and the difference between qualitative and quantitative research, were new to me and proved quite useful throughout the rest of my Master’s Degree.
The artefact I chose for this course was a literature review that examined one of the major themes that I explored throughout my graduate studies: male literacy. In my undergraduate degree I became well-versed in analyzing primary and secondary sources, as well as determining their ultimate value as relevant research for my writing. Applying these analytical tools to several sources that I worked without throughout the course allowed me to get a real feel for the literature in the field and various ways viewpoints were expressed in mainstream settings, as well as in academic journals.
It was very fortunate for me that several other courses, and many professors throughout the Brandon University Faculty of Education, covered the essential material from this course. I learned a great deal about research methods in all of my other courses. I was quite familiar with various types of literature-based research from my undergraduate degree, but field research was a new concept for me and I know feel reasonably confident that I know how to collect and analyze data using relevant and ethical methods.