| second mtg | third mtg | fourth mtg | fifth mtg | sixth mtg | seventh mtg | eighth mtg | ninth mtg | tenth mtg | eleventh | twelfth | thirteenth | fourteenth |fifteenth |
| back to top | next |
| previous | back to top | next |
| previous | back to top | next |
| previous | back to top | next |
| previous | back to top | next |
| previous | back to top | next |
| previous | back to top | next |
| previous | back to top | next |
Friday, 04/01/22 - 10am - OM 385
Met with and Gabby (Gabby Maramag), and Ryann Thomson both new
Spring 2022 - not here yet - Nicky (Nicayris
Ulerio-Fernandez)
Problems to deal with for a followup experiment to StatsSE:
How to run enough subjects
How to make it more in depth material
How to get cooperation of faculty in different classes
Would try to get it as a registered report (get the pre-registration
accepted for conditional acceptance)
One idea would be to try to get faculty from other PASSHE schools to
participate
It could be a checkerboard design in order to do it in the classroom and
with important material. That design has the advantage that one module
could replicate our materials from last time. But is we can't get the
participation of lots of faculty, then we end up running subjects for a
long time in order to get a large enough sample. Also, the retention test
has to be given in the Experimental course to those students who
participated in the first part, and are taking Experimental the semester
after Stats.
The COS, back in 2016 tried to interest Applied Cognitive Psychology, Teaching of Psychology, and Instructional Science in registered reports. I don't think TOP does them yet. The other journals need to be checked on the COS website.
Gabby will email Ryann the KLI paper and the StatsSE
Gabby suggested Matched Pairs and using a video to present the
instructions to the subject.
Gabby and Ryann will work on creating several possible designs and we
will meet again next Friday, 4/8/22, same time, same place
| previous | back to top | next |
Fri. 04/08/22 - 10:30 - OM 385
Met with Gabby and Ryann
Will start a project on the OSF and make the reseach assistants contributors.
Ryann suggests manipulating Practicing Retrieval along with manipulating
Testing
Gabby suggests if we use matched pairs, then we can use a control group in
which the condition is "use your own methods". But that would risk carry
over effects. But we still get the benefit of controlling for things
like aptitude and motivation. AND we could use two different classes each
of which is in a different university. So we have to have a structured
activity as control - it should be "like" what students usually do.
We also discussed the possibility of doing retention in Experimental. But it doesn't have to be in Experimental class, it just has to be the next semester. And we could argue for a higher amount than $15.
Next time we will nail down the exact to-be-learned material.
Teaching Stats Fall 2022 Stoffey (2) Sunsay (2) Ryan (1)
So next we nail down the to-be-learned material and more about the method (D2L?)
| previous | back to top | next |
Fri. 04/15/22 - 10:30am - OM 385
Experimental |
Control |
|
Pretest - Normal
Dist and z scores |
Pretest - Normal Dist and z scores | |
Read Lesson |
Read Lesson |
|
Study by
Retrieving |
Study by
re-reading |
|
Study by Retrieving | Study by re-reading | |
Study by Retrieving | Study by re-reading | |
Posttest - Normal
Dist and z scores |
Posttest - Normal Dist and z scores |
So, the Research Assts. will come up with the lesson and two equivalent tests. The tests will consist of 4 scenarios with 3 MC questions about each.
NEXT MEETING - With Neal and Nicky -Thurs. 4/21/22 at 11:30 am in OM 385
NEXT MEETING - With Gabby and Ryann - Fri 4/22/22 at 10:30am in OM 385
Experimental |
Control |
|
Pretest - Normal
Dist and z scores |
Pretest - Normal Dist and z scores | |
Read Lesson |
Read Lesson |
|
Study by
Retrieving (followed by seeing the lesson again as feedback?) |
Study by
re-reading |
|
Study by Retrieving | Study by re-reading | |
Study by Retrieving | Study by re-reading | |
Posttest - Normal
Dist and z scores |
Posttest - Normal Dist and z scores |
If we put the lesson on D2L, how do we implement the retrieving? How do we know they weren't looking at the lesson while retrieving? How do we know the control subjects are doing the re-reading. How about if the lesson presents an example of a normally distributed population, giving the mean and standard deviation. Then there are a series of questions about z scores in that population along with the answers. Then for the practice sessions, the control subjects would see similar lessons with questions and answers, but just with different numbers. But for the experimental subjects, in their practice sessions they would see the same lessons that the control subjects see, but they have to "fill in the blank" to answer the questions. Maybe the questions could be conceptual, not computational.
Example lesson:
There is a normally distributed population with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. A z-score is a way of measuring how far an individual score is above or below the mean. The distance from the mean uses the standard deviation as a unit of measure. So in this population, a score of 60, is 10 points, that is one standard deviation, above the mean. So its z-score is +1. A score of 30 is 20 points, that is, two standard deviations, below the mean. So its z-score is -2.
Using z-scores enables one to have a "standard" way of expressing how high or low an individual score is in a normally distributed population. For example, if two individual scores, each from a different normally distributed population have a z-score of +2, they can be considered equally "high" scores, even if the distributions have different means and standard deviations. Suppose there is an individual score of 40 in a normally distributed population that has a mean of 30 and a standard deviation of 5. Then suppose there is a score of 74 in a normally distributed population with a mean of 70 and a standard deviation of 2. The score of 74 is not really "higher" than the score of 40, because both are two standard deviations above the mean in their own populations. They both have a z-score of +2.
Here's another example. Suppose a student gets a score of 86 points on a
math test that has a mean of 80 and a standard deviation of 3. The same
student gets a score of 90 points on a history test with a mean of 75 and
a standard deviation of 15. In terms of z-scores (standardized
scores) that student did better on the math test than on the history test
because the 86 on the math test has a z-score of +2, but the 90 on the
history test only has a z-score of + 1.
Example first practice:
There is a normally distributed population with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. A z-score is a way of ___________________________________________________. The distance from the mean uses _________________________________. So in this population, a score of 40, is 10 points, that is ___ standard deviation(s), ______ the mean. So its z-score is -1. A score of 70 is 20 points, that is, ___ standard deviation(s), _____ the mean. So its z-score is +2.
Using z-scores enables one to have a "_______" way of expressing _____________ an individual score is in a normally distributed population. For example, if two individual scores, each from a different normally distributed population have a z-score of +2, they can be considered _______ "high" scores, even if the distributions have different ______________________. Suppose there is an individual score of 400 in a normally distributed population that has a mean of 300 and a standard deviation of 50. Then suppose there is a score of 740 in a normally distributed population with a mean of 700 and a standard deviation of 20. The score of 740 is ____________ than the score of 400, because both are two standard deviations above the mean in their own populations. They both have a z-score of +2.
Here's another example. Suppose a student gets a score of 172 points on a math test that has a mean of 160 and a standard deviation of 6. The same student gets a score of 180 points on a history test with a mean of 150 and a standard deviation of 30. In terms of z-scores (standardized scores) that student did ______ on the math test than on the history test because _____________________________________________________________________.
Fri., 04/22/22 at 10:30 am on OM 385
Met with Gabby and Nicky.
Prior to the meeting, Gabby sent a draft of an example lesson on Statistical Significance.
Also, Ryan sent a draft of a draft
example lesson on normal dist. and z-scores
I made Ryann and Gabby Guest Instructors on my Sandbox course.
Ryann and Gabby will work on how to get D2L to do what we need.
| previous | back to top | next |
Tues. 4/26/22 Prior to lab meetings
Since Dr. Sun (Soo Y. Sun) of Alvernia expressed interest, I'm looking into using Moodle as the LMS. I can have Neal check it out to see if it would work for us.
For example, I assume I, as a faculty member, will have to make an account as something like a course administrator. Then, the question is, could students who were not from Kutztown be enrolled in the "course?"He might need to contact Moodle and explain what we'd like to do and see what they could do for us.
Thurs. 4/28/22 - 11:30am OM 385
Had planned to meet with Nicky and Neal. Neither showed up. Perhaps I didn't communicate that we would make these meetings weekly.
Fri. 4/29/22 - 11:45am OM 385
| previous | back to top |
Thurs. 5/5/22 - 10:30am OM 385
Gabby stopped in and gave me a tutorial on Google Docs to use instead of an LMS.
Thurs. 5/5/22 - 11:30am OM 385
Met with Ryann. We talked about the contact list. In some cases we will be sending our request to someone that we know teaches Statistics, in other cases it will go to a person who might teach statistics in some semesters, and in yet other cases we may need to send it to the Chair of a "Social Sciences" department (Cheney). So Ryann will create the contact list and another draft introduction/request to collaborate email. It will be on Google Docs.
We quickly checked out whether Google docs forms could be used to present our materials. It looks like it might be possible because a "form" can be a quiz. Gabby and I will check it out. The thing we're looking for is automatic "grading" of the "tasks/quizzes."
Thurs. 5/5/22 - 8:28pm At Home
After the semester ended
Thurs., 5/12/22
Gabby sent her summer availability: MWF 5:30; T H All day.
Wed., 5/18/22
Ryann sent an email saying she had completed the email list for the Psych profs at PASSHE schools. She asked if she should just send the request for collaboration to the list or wait until she head from me. I responded that I'd like to see the proposed text for the request for collaboration first, to see if I thought it needed any editing. I also asked her to send me the email list.
Fri, 5/20/22
Got response from Ryann. I edited the letter to ask the respondents to "reply all." I asked Ryann to go ahead and send the request as I edited it, and to CC me, Neal, Nicky, and Gabby. The letter and the email list is in "2022_05_20-PASSHE list and Psy Faculty_Lab 2022.docx" in the folder for "Statistics - Practicing Retrieval/Responses re collaboration." Also, I updated the files on the OSF project"Statistics - Practicing Retrieval" to match the files among my files.
Mon., 5/23/22
Got response from Ryann. She sent the email request for collaboration. She said many faculty were on vacation and sent "out of office - will respond when returned." Some specified dates of return and some were not until July. Advised her to try sending it to the whole email list at once to avoid multiple sends.
Tues., 5/31/22
Sent the following email to Ryann, Gabby, Neal, and Nicky:
Subject: Progress on Dr. Ryan's research
Materials for Mod 1 - Use of effect
Thurs., 6/2/22
I did hear back from Ryann. She didn't say who all the emails on her list
were (just Psych faculty who teach Stats, just Psych faculty, or the whole
faculty). She did say that she got an email back from Shippensburg that no
one received her email because it was marked as spam. She also created a
better list that only included email addresses (no names) so she could
just copy and paste a whole list next time instead of doing each address
individually. I used that list to make an Excel spreadsheet and
added Millersville, Alvernia, and Kutztown. However, I also emailed Ryann
back to get an answer about who all those people were on the lists (some
were long enough that they couldn't be just stats profs). I also
have updated the Second email to recruit. I'll wait until Ryann tries to
cut down the lists to just stats profs (I suggested she email chairs of
departments). So I haven't sent the Second email to recruit yet.
I'll send it when I get a new email list - hopefully shorter.
Mon., 6/6/22
Heard back from Ryann that she will work on cutting down the email list. She then sent a draft of the email to send to the chairs. I edited it a bit and emailed her back.
Thurs., 6/9/22
Finished my first demo experiments. Emailed the research assistants to register for PsyToolkit so I can send the demos to them.
Mon., 6/14/22
I had emailed the links to the res. assts. asking them to try the pretest. I don't think I sent a link for the study session (survey with embedded experiment). At any rate, apparently they don't need an account on PsyToolkit - I can just email them the link. Ryann got back to me saying she tried the pretest and just wanted to know what the to-be-learned materials that would be tested would be - just materials from the two modules or from the whole stats curriculum. I responded, just the modules. I also told her that she could, if she wished, start writing questions now, but that I would, as soon as possible, send out the review materials which would contain the learning objectives.
Tues., 07/05/22
In an exchange of emails with Ryann, I checked on the status of a list of just Psych profs. who teach stats. She said she had emailed the chairs back on 6/6, but with no responses. I asked her for a list of the chairs, which she sent today. So, I'll try emailing the chairs myself. Perhaps I'll include links to the example of the first part of the first session.. I'll also send those links to the research assistants, as well as a list of the learning objectives, and a request to work on more examples. Then we can work on the test to use as pre-post-retention.