LAI 615 draft paper feedback

Leah

Reading your abstract, I think your core argument is that we ought to have “a comprehensive educational framework to mitigate the effects of lead on learning and behavior in children.” Thinking in terms of the need-problem-solution pattern, I see the need and this is the proposed solution. What’s missing is the problem. Childhood lead poisoning is a huge problem–why haven’t we addressed it so far? The answer to this question should help ground your argument for why a comprehensive educational program is the solution. After all, why is education the most promising angle on this issue? Finally, I would be careful not to spend too much space on the history of lead poisoning; work backwards from your core argument and include only the history which is needed to understand why this problem hasn’t been addressed and why your proposal makes sense. I suggest you close your essay by projecting forward your ideas about what kind of research could help bring this educational program into reality. DBIR?

Isaak

I like that your essay will frame a real research proposal. The details are compelling and interesting. What’s missing for me right now is the highest-level introduction/conclusion logic; an argument for why anyone should care about this. Imagine me as a reader, asking the following questions; the widest framing should point toward how you will address these questions (or should help me understand that we approach the issue so differently that this isn’t the research for me.)

  • Do you hope your research results in an argument for broader standards coverage on exams? Revision of standards to remove those which don’t actually matter? More strategic pedagogical decisions for teachers?
  • If a teacher skipped some standards because she knew they were unlikely to be tested (and we assume all the standards are valuable), wouldn’t this lead to a worse mathematical education for students?
  • Does your proposed research provide resources to some teachers which others already have? Is there an argument for fairness here?

The lit review has a nice level of detail; looks promising. LMK if you can’t get ahold of a paper you’re looking for.

Ryan

Based on your abstract, I can see where your paper is going and I think it’s exciting. However the abstract currently has some gaps. I would suggest looking at the 7-step guide to writing an abstract. I like that this abstract is organized around the NEED-PROBLEM-SOLUTION pattern I suggested in class, but I want more detail: I see the need (though [future mediated by computers => students must learn computer science] won’t have universal agreement. I think you should say more here; e.g. CS Visions Framework.) and the problem (“Student populations are shifting to higher proportions of English Language Learners (ELLs)”), though why exactly is this a problem? (Because ELLs have distinct needs? Because CS will be harder for them to learn?) And how is the solution (using three framings) connected to the problem?

Your lit review is rich and thoughtful; it seems like as you revise your abstract it will be a process of moving thinking from the lit review into the argument structure of the abstract. Finally, a side note–generally, the kinds of claims you’ll be making in an abstract are broad enough that they won’t have citations. I usually don’t see more than one citation in an abstract, and that’s for a key text or a fact.

Seb

Nice abstract! It’s dense, well-connected, and well-argued. I can tell this got some revision. My only suggestion would be to make it a bit clearer what’s already well-established in the literature and what you’re suggesting that is new. (This sentence occupies the place where that work should be getting done: “This research would piece together the different aspects of the research conducted by scholars who have investigated this topic.”).

Your lit review is also strong. I think your work going forward is more in pulling together the rich resources you have gathered than in exploring and looking for more. Maybe after you finish your draft you’ll have a sense of where gaps remain. I think your strategy of comparing the articles and positioning them relatve to each other will pay off well when you’re putting your argument together. Feldman & Matjasko is going to be really important for helphing you frame how you want to talk about “achievement” or “development. Do pay attention to which framework(s) you’re drawing on when you talk about “identity.” People mean a lot of different things by this idea.

Christina

Hey, you’re halfway to your final paper! For me, a key sentence framing your argument is “Not only are they learning different skills from accessing and using digital media sources but they also are lacking skills that they did not get through the experiences they missed out on while “interacting” with a screen instead of parents, family members, or peers.” Toward the end of the abstract, I felt like the focus was shifting from how to understand potentially-problematic technology use in the family context to home-school relationships. This feels like it might be too much for one short paper. In a longer paper, I would suggest clearly demarcating these questions. Unless you thing that for technology use, we can’t separate how it affects kids in the home context and what happens at school. In that case, I suggest providing this framing.

Be careful about over-generalizing. For example, I’m not sure how strong a claim you mean to make when you write “From even a young age, children prefer to play with these screen-based toys over traditional toys.” If this is an evidence-based finding which will be important in framing your argument, I’d expect a citation (Possibly the Domoff et al, 2020 citation applies here too?). (All children?) If it’s more hand-wavey, something you’ve seen and meant to motivate the introduction, you might want to soften the strength of the claim.

Your lit review is really substantial; I think your drafting process is going to be largely a process of curating all the writing and ideas you’ve already organized into paragraphs. This is a great place to be, but make sure you stay open to not using some of the writing you’ve done if it doesn’t fit here. Keep it all; it will find a home in another paper if not here.

Lou Ann

In your abstract, I’m left unsure of whether you want to focus on the importance of high-quality preschool, or specifically on how high-quality early literacy experiences at preschool. Either way, I suggest making clearer the NEED-PROBLEM-SOLUTION pattern. What’s the need? Preschool or early literacy at preschool? What’s the problem? You point toward the lack of equitable access, but then suggest it’s really a problem of preschool quality across the board.

A few more specific notes: early language and literacy has been studied for centuries–in making a short-term bounded claim, you need to adopt a narrow scope. Which line of research is new? The sentence, “The quality of preschool programs, including teacher education, group size, and staff-child ratio, appears to be associated with more significant gains in children’s skills” needs a reference–in academic writing, the phrase “appears to be associated with” implies that there is solid, though cautious, statistical evidence, not analagous to “I have a hunch.”

“Thus the quality of preschool programs, not merely the access, needs to improve.” The preceding sentences were questions, not evidence or arguments which could support this conclusion.

There are some interesting findings in the literature review. I think you’ll need to narrow in a bit more as you make decisions in your abstract about what the focus of the paper is. Be very careful with the argument that “high poverty environments are less likely to hear and respond.” This resonates with long-standing harm done by educational research suggesting that marginalized people lack language or culture.

Kristen

Fantastic. This abstract is clear and exciting. I like the way you position yourself from the beginning–yes, it’s a problem.

“While inclusive practices are not regularly being used in teacher preparation programs, it is nearly impossible to expect music teachers to regularly engage in inclusive practices within the classroom.” I’m sure you can substantiate this with broader research on the importance of

“I will also challenge whether the underlying goals of music education are exclusion or inclusion, and if programs are exclusionary how we can combat this issue.” This sounds like your core contribution. I suggest a clearer transition to what has come before, so that it is identified as the core issue, rather than an add-on. I love the way you zoom it back out at the end though the sentence, “While this paper is music education specific, it speaks to existing fields of work, including neurodiversity and special education practices within special area inclusive classes,” feels underwhelming though, suggesting relevance rather than urgency.

Your lit review is deep and thoughtful, with far more here than you’ll be able to treat deeply in this paper. That’s fine; some ideas won’t make it in as you focus the paper, but they will find a home in another piece of writing. Don’t lose this work! I really like how distinct sections have emerged, and I agree with your choices, though again it’s probably more than you can handle in one very short paper!

“The questions explored in this paper emerged through looking at the IEP’s and 504’s of music students, and noticing that there may be far more ways in the students are adequately supported and represented in their self-contained classroom compared to in other inclusive classes in the school i.e., music class.” I think this sentence is strong and important, positioning you as a teacher with certain experiences framing your approach. Other readers will find it irrelevant and unnecessary.

Kalie

Your abstract makes a clear argument (“students now need differentiation via new structured interventions more than ever … this should be done through the use of a new, rigid, consistent, and data-based intervention program based on literacy needs of students.”) Most of the abstract up to this point doesn’t feel necessary; try cutting it. There’s so much later in the abstract that could use more airtime. In particular, what is the relationship between COVID-19 and the need for better policy implementation or enforcement?

Your lit review does a good job of digging into the history of policy regimes–definitely necessary for this paper. But I think you also want some research on the efficacy of interventions. “Fidelity of implementation” research could be one way in, “Design-based implementation research” another. It might be helpful to read up on logic models; these are more and more how researchers represent claims that certain interventions will lead to certain outcomes.

It would be helpful to clarify that when you use the term “intervention,” you’re talking specifically about policy frameworks like RTI and MTSS. (Any research proposal could be called an intervention.)

Grace

This abstract is very nicely-written. Though I have a few questions, the argument flows well and makes sense. It would be heplful to be a little more clear what you mean by “left-behind:” left behind in a broader sense, disconnected from opportunities? Or left behind in a narrower sense, cut off from everyday life by COVID? Saying more about what you mean by “left-behind” will help you to ground hypotheses about “how TikTok affects left-behind children’s lives are scarce,” an area where you note we have little research. What do you think TikTok is doing for these children? (Returning to this note after reading the lit review, I see that “left behind” has a specific meaning: “rural children are not able to migrate with their parent(s) and left behind in the rural areas with their grandparents or relatives.” It’s really just an issue of pulling in some of the substance from the lit review into the abstract.)

“its success in terms of user psychology and effects” is unclear–do you mean TikTok has widely-recognized psychological benefits? Do you mean it’s popular? That it’s profitable?

Finally, I suggest you frame this abstract in terms of why the research is important, not just that the topic hasn’t been studied. As a reader, I feel the whole time that you have a pretty strong sense that there’s something important here, but we don’t get to hear what it is. After reading the lit review, I can see some of the struggles that left-behind children face (the need), and some of the tradeoffs that come with TikTok (the problem). What might be the solution?

I would suggest that instead of offering applications to formal education, you frame education as a process of development and meeting needs, a process everyone wants and needs. In a real sense, TikTok is a powerful tool left-behind children take up for their education. Should we think of this as a solution which comes at a cost? Or as a transformed form of relationships which are mostly just different from other childrens’ lives?

OVERALL FEEDBACK

  • NEED-PROBLEM-SOLUTION

  • Don’t include background for its own sake.

    • “This article will provide a brief history of this silent pandemic along with an overview of where things stand today.”

  • Watch out for filler sentences

    • “This research would piece together the different aspects of the research conducted by scholars who have investigated this topic.”
    • “Technology has changed the dynamics for everyday life within our families, play spaces, schools, and communities.”
    • “Given the many unexplored research questions related to TikTok use, it is high time to strengthen research efforts to understand better the positive and negative effects of TikTok on left-behind children.”

  • Be ready to throw writing away

    • Disability Education, Identity, and Free Appropriate Public Education
    • Teacher Preparation, Curriculum, and Practice
    • Universal Design for Learning and Neurodiverse Curriculum

  • Narrow the scope

    • “Thus the quality of preschool programs, not merely the access, needs to improve.”

  • Process: I’m seeing lit reviews have in some cases reached beyond the abstract.

  • How many citations?

COREY

  • Does complexity describe the objective problem space, the problem as perceived/framed, or the practices for managing such problems? (e.g. thinking in layers; social network analysis; statistics; state graphs; ) If the problem space, what is the relationship between emegent practices and “disciplined complexity”? What distinguishes complexity thinking? (CT gets this critique)
  • Mitchell. Unsimple truths.
  • These seem kind of like a negative definition of complexity (e.g. can’t be modelled well by statistics or linear algebra.)