Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edstat-l
Date:         Mon, 12 Oct 1992 10:58:46 EDT
Reply-To:     Marsha Shepherd <ACMARSHA@ECUVM1.BITNET>
From:         Marsha Shepherd <ACMARSHA@ECUVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Are you teaching what you think?

A type of course frequently seen in all disciplines is the Research
Methods course. Many (most?) of these courses have the students
decide on a study topic, design the instrument to be used for data
collection (usually a questionnaire), collect the data, analyze the
data, and write up the results.  As such, these courses are very good.

However, one problem I have frequently seen in many of these courses
concerns the research project where the "correct" analytical technique
is outside the scope of the course (and often outside the scope
of the teacher's background).  Usually the teacher tells the student
to analyze the data in a simplistic "incorrect" manner in order to
stay within the realm of the course.  What concerns me is that the
student goes away from the course with the impression that the technique
used is "correct".  I've actually attended courses where the instructor
says "this data is not correct for this analytical technique but we'll
use it anyway".  Unfortunately, the students do not remember the
instructors warning, they just remember doing the analysis on that kind
of data.

This relates back to a previous note on this list to teach students
"correct" techniques from the beginning.  The damage being done in
misleading the student is more serious that many instructors believe.
Telling the student to do something just for the course leaves the student
with a lasting impression of what was done, not that it was incorrect.
Later, when the student runs into the same kind of research topic in an
environment where a more "correct" analytical technique is expected, mass
confusion sets in.  The student, who thought s/he understood statistics,
must go back and relearn some basic principles, learn the importance of
something they were never taught (like assumptions of the tests), and
realize that simple studies may lead to complex analytical techniques.
The confidence of many students is undermined which leads to frustration
and "mass confusion".

What can you do when the simple answer is not the correct one??

The obvious solution would be for the instructor not to allow the
situation to develop, but many instructors will tell you this is easier
said than done.

The next solution would be to do what many people on this list have
advocated: to develop cooperative teaching between the instructors and
statistical consultants.  No matter how much statistical education an
instructor has had, the likelihood of a student coming up with an analysis
problem outside the scope of the teacher's background is still very real.
Being able to incorporate statistical consulting with the research methods
course could be beneficial to all parties.  It would be unreasonable
(as well as impossible) for an instructor to cover all statistical
techniques, but to ignore certain techniques completely when the situation
arises does a disservice to the student.  However, cooperative (team)
teaching is currently not supported in many institutes of higher education
where these problems are more likely to occur.

So, what do you do when the simple answer is not the correct one?

A. Do you spend a disproportionate amount of time helping the student with
   the correct technique - which involves statistical background the student
   has not had?

or

B. Do you mislead the student with simple answers and hope the student does
   not get into a future situation where what you told them messes them up?


(PS... Remember that this student is a future researcher or future teacher
       who might teach this simplistic approach to a new generation)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU