Inductive And Qualitative Approach Versus Deductive And Quantitative Education Essay

Inductive And Qualitative Approach Versus Deductive And Quantitative Education Essay The study is descriptive nature. Research philosophy is an over-arching term relating to the development of knowledge and the nature of that knowledge Saunders et al, (2009). Since, the research is guided primarily by the scientific criteria of the measuring instruments of quantification, systematic collection of evidence, reliability and transparency, researcher adopted positivism. 3.2. Research strategy 3.2.1. Inductive and qualitative approach Vs Deductive and Quantitative study Research on special education was vast and thus in order to further strengthen the findings researcher adopted quantitative deductive approach where theories are tested through empirically. Data was collected through pre-determined instrument to obtain numerical data which can be analyzed statistically. 3.3. Study setting and Sampling method The research project took place at the randomly selected schools in the United States. The teachers in these schools were interviewed on their perceptions and attitude towards special education program. About 200 teachers who are trained under special education (previous experience with certificate in special education) and not trained will be selected using systematic sampling method. The study adopts a pure descriptive approach. Data on the demographic information of the study sample were done based on the following criteria: whether the instructors included in the study was married or single, whether they were professionally trained for special education or not, the experience of the instructor greater than or less than 10 years. Predictor Variables It is vital that the participants fill in a detailed biographical questionnaire that gives information on the gender, marital status, experience as these demographics are predictor variables on the attitude towards inclusion. 3.4. Pilot study In order ensure for the content, readability and ambiguity the pilot study will be conducted prior to the main study. Pilot interviews were carried out among a small group of teachers, to generate items for the scale in assessing the attitudes of teachers towards the inclusion of special needs children in general education classrooms. The final scale consisted of 20 items which were accompanied by five-point Likert-type self-report rating scales ranging from positive attitude to negative attitude (1 to 5). Procedure of Data Administration The researcher administered the instrument in each of the selected schools after obtaining their mission to do so from the school authorities. In each of the schools, respondents were gathered in a class and were administered the questionnaire. The instructions were read to the respondents as regard the filling of the questionnaire. The items in the questionnaire were properly filled and returned after the exercise. To ensure there was no case of any loss of items as return rate was assessed. Snow (1974) recommended eight conditions to make designs more representative: 1. Actual educational setting: This survey was distributed in the actual educational setting of the teacher participants. 2. Variation of the educational setting: The four schools were chosen primarily because they were geographically and socio-economically varied. One upper middle-class and one lower middle-class school was examined in each county. 3. Observation of the participants: The researcher observed (a) all teacher participants during the pilot portion of the survey development and (b) the teacher participants surveyed during the study. 4. Observation of the social context: The researcher made a minimum of three visits per school to observe the social context. 5. Preparation of the participants: Brief instructions were given in the cover letter, on the survey, (and in person, for the pilot portion). Strict protocol and procedures were followed. Treatment fidelity was observed. 6. Incorporation of a control treatment that uses customary approaches: The survey was designed to be understood and completed simply, using common pen-and-paper assessment techniques. 3.5. Time Horizon Cross-sectional technique was adopted where data collected at one point of time and due to its inexpensive to conduct. 3.6. Data collection 3.6.1. Primary data collection This descriptive study involved mainstream classroom teachers and special education teachers. Questionnaire method was used to collect primary data. Questionnaire was developed based on the following hypotheses: Four hypotheses were postulated at the significant level of .05; they are: H01: There is no significant difference between male and female teachers in their attitude towards the inclusion of special needs students in general education classrooms. H02: There is no significant difference between married and single teachers in their attitude towards the inclusion of special needs students in general education classrooms. H03: There is no significant difference between professional qualified and non-professional qualified teachers in their attitude towards the inclusion of special needs and children in general education classrooms. H04: There is no significant difference between teacher with less than 10 years of teaching experience and their counterparts with more than 10 years of teaching in their attitude towards the inclusion of special needs students in general education classrooms. 3.6.2. Secondary data collection A desk-based approach was also adopted for the research where the data in collected from academic publications, journals, news-papers, government publications, policies, annual reports, and company websites. 3.6.1.1. Research instrument A survey on the attitudes and knowledge of school teachers regarding inclusive education was conducted. It consisted of an 18-item scale, divided in three parts: a) teachers perceptions (8 items), assessment of teachers views with the claim that children with disabilities are entitled to education together with their typically developing peers in inclusive classrooms, b) collaboration between the mainstream and special education teachers (5 items), which explored the relationship between the mainstream and special education teacher and c) strategies to improve inclusive education (5 items), which examined how inclusion can be enhanced. The participants were asked to indicate their degree of agreement on a five-point Likert scale In order to complete the questionnaire (1 = Strongly Accept; 2 = Agree; 3 = Undecided/Neutral; 4 = Disagree; 5 = Strongly Reject). Questionaire: Part I Students with special needs fare better academically in inclusive education Children with special needs must be integrated into the regular student community Students with special needs must be placed in regular classes with back up support to achieve highest level of inclusion Academically talented students may be isolated in inclusive class rooms Placement of children with special needs in regular class rooms may negatively affect academic performance of mainstream students. Children with special needs will benefit from inclusivity Children with special needs have a right to receive mainstream education Labelling as stupid, weird, hopeless is a problem in inclusive education. Questionnaire: Part II Special needs teachera and regular teachers need to work together in order to teach students with special needs in inclusive classrooms Although the inclusive education in a concept, its implementation is ineffective due to objections from mainstream classroom teachers Mainstream teachers have a main responsibility towards the students with special needs placed in their clssrooms The presence of a special education teacher in the regular classrooms could raise difficulties in determining who really is responsible for the special students The special education teacher only helps the students with special needs. Questionnaire: Part III Mainstream classroom teachers have the training and skills to teach special needs students Special needs students need extra help and attention Students with special needs committed more disciplinary problems compared to the regular students Mainstream classroom teachers received little help from the special needs teachers Although inclusive education is important, the resources for the students with special needs in a mainstream classroom are limited. 3.7. Reliability, validity issues The reliability and validity of an instrument will be done through pilot study and face and content validity measures. Validity No matter what research design is selected, concern for factors that could affect the validity of the design is always primary. Typically, two types of validity are considered when designing research: (a) internal validity and (b) external validity. Although both types of validity are important, emphasis may vary depending on the type of research questions being investigated. For descriptive questions (as in this study), external validity receives greater emphasis because the priority of the researcher is to systematically investigate an existing sample of individuals or phenomenon, as opposed to studying the impacts of a phenomenon or intervention (as in experimental research). The factors jeopardizing external validity (or representativeness) are often more relevant to a descriptive study. Internal Validity Internal validity determines whether, in fact, the experimental treatments used made a difference in a specific experimental instance (Campbell Stanley, 1966). Relevant to internal validity, Campbell and Stanley identified eight classes of extraneous variables, which, if not controlled by the experimental design, could produce effects confounded with the effect of the experimental stimulus. Cook, T. and Campbell (1979) expanded the list to include 12 extraneous variables. The variables and their relevance to the design of this study are reviewed below: History: History addresses the specific events that occur between the first and second measurement in addition to an experimental variable (Campbell Stanley, 1966) and would only be a potentially relevant threat in this design in relation to the 15 teachers randomly selected for participation in the confirmation interview. Since these interviews were completed shortly after the survey participation, and are only used for confirmation purposes, the threat is minimal. Maturation effects: Maturation effects are defined as those processes (physical or psychological changes) within the participants that are operating as a function of the passage of time (Campbell Stanley, 1966). Inherent within the research design was the use of only one treatment (the survey), which takes approximately 20 minutes to complete. The possibility is nominal that the growth of hunger, tiredness, or other conditions, within that time period would impact the data. Testing effects: Testing effects (defined by Campbell and Stanley [1966] as those effects of taking a test upon the scores of a second testing) were also controlled by this designas only one test was used. The pilot participants were not used as study participants and the participants used for interviews were not reassessedbut were only asked to confirm their answers. Instrumentation: Instrumentation (Campbell Stanley, 1966) refers to changes in the calibration of a measuring instrument, observers, or scorers used, and can produce changes in the obtained measurements. Controls built into this design for instrumentation effects included the use of one measurement (survey). The instrument was (a) carefully developed by accepted guidelines; (b) piloted; and (c) self-administered with supervision, handling, and mindful interpretation by only the researcher who had insight of the threat potentials. Experimenter bias and treatment fidelity were consciously avoided. Statistical regression: Statistical regression (explained by Campbell and Stanley [1966], as when groups have been selected on the basis of their extreme scores), was not considered a relevant threat in this design because only one test was applied, and selection was dependent upon general experience criteria and availability, not test scores. Differential selection: Biases, which result from differential selection by the comparison groups (Campbell Stanley, 1966), were not viewed as a significant threat in this research design because no comparison groups were used. The design used was more descriptive in nature, and the purported generalization was limited to the teachers of the four assessed schools. Experimental mortality: Experimental mortality, or differential loss of respondents from the comparison groups (Campbell Stanley, 1966), is controlled within the study design because no control groups were used, and the study was completed in a relatively short period of time. The possibility of the absence of some significant (main group) participants at the time of assessment is a noteworthy threat although deemed unavoidable. The researcher had no control over participants absences. Selection-maturation interaction: Selection-maturation interaction is where certain designs are threatened due to the given respondents growing older, or the results may be specific to the respondents given age level, fatigue level, etc. (Campbell Stanley, 1966). These threats were not relevant to this design because, again, no pretest or comparison groups were used and the questionnaire was taken by various aged participants within a short period of time. Experimental treatment diffusion, compensatory rivalry (John Henry effect): Experimental treatment diffusion, compensatory rivalry (John Henry effect), is nominal compensatory equalization, and resentful demoralization. Experimental treatment diffusion, compensatory rivalry (John Henry effect), compensatory equalization, and resentful demoralization (Cook, T. Campbell, 1979) as threatening extraneous variables were immaterial because no control group was used in this design. External Validity External validity (or representativeness) is the extent to which it is possible to generalize from the data and context of the research study to broader populations and settings (Bickman, 1989; Cook, T. Campbell, 1979; Hedrick, Bickman, Rog, 1993). Strictly speaking, one can only generalize to the accessible population from which this researchers sample was drawn. Several critical aspects of the populations used must be compared in order for the populations to be deemed similar. The environmental conditions also must be examined. Campbell and Stanley (1966) investigated factors that could jeopardize external validity. Interaction effect of testing: One factor that could jeopardize external validity is the reactive or interaction effect of testing (Campbell Stanley, 1966). This occurs where a pretest might increase or decrease the participants responsiveness to the experimental variable and thus make the pretested populations results unrepresentative of the effects of the experimental variable. This threat is considered to be minimal in this design because a pretest was not used. Therefore, it is arguable the population used may better represent the unpretested universe from which the respondents were selected. Interaction effects of selection. According to Campbell and Stanley (1996), the interaction effects of selection refers to the limitation of the effects of the experimental variable to that specific sample and the possibility that this reaction would be untypical of the more general universe of interest for which the naturally aggregated exposure group was a biased sample (p. 41). It is impossible to control all the variables of selection due to realities of life (funding, participant availability, human variability, etc.). This threat warranted concern but controls were added. Although randomization or matching was not possible, and intact groups had to be used for participant selection, a larger number of participants was used (N = 100). The sample included teachers serving varied socioeconomic and geographical locations. Explicit description of the sample population and study framework was provided. The study design and instrument were cautiously fashioned. The cover letter operat ionalized the definitions used for the surveys terminology, the survey was devised under specific guidelines, particular criteria were set for the participants, application and scoring of the survey was regimented, and bias of data interpretation was knowledgeably avoided. Furthermore, throughout the study, the researcher was cautious not to generalize any findings beyond the intended teacher population of the four schools selected for the study. Experimental arrangements: The confounding effects of the experimental arrangements might also jeopardize external validity (Campbell Stanley, 1966). The artificiality of an experimental setting and the participants knowledge that they are participating in an experiment threaten representativeness and generalization. This researchers choice of self-administered questionnaires and repeated assurance of participant confidentiality substantially diminished this threat. This researcher was absolutely resolute not to treat any participant in a substandard fashion. All participants were provided the same materials, information, and consideration. Multiple treatment interference: Multiple treatment interference, or the confounding effect of pretesting (Campbell Stanley, 1966), was controlled in this design. No pretesting was intended in this research study. The pilot test was used strictly to pilot the survey instrument and process. The results were not used in the study. Special care was taken to disallow any participant in the pilot study from retaking the survey. Any risk of the application of the interview survey in addition to the initial self-administered survey, changing the participants behaviorand therefore the results were also controlled by the design. The choice to select the interview participants randomly, from the entire population being studied, greatly reduced this threat, and enhanced the validity of the studys findings. Statistical analysis The data will be analyzed using excel. Descriptive statistic are used to analyze continuous and categorical data and presented in the form mean, standard deviation and percentage, while proportions are analyzed using chi-square test. To measure the reliability cronbachs alpha will be used.

The Prodigal God: Younger Brother vs. Older Brother

Writing II-1st Younger Brother Sin vs. Older Brother Sin Luke 15:11-32 is one of the most famous parables in the Bible. It is the parable of the prodigal son. This parable is about a son who runs away with his inheritance, wastes all of it, and then comes back home to his father’s open arms. Tim Keller goes more in depth into this parable with his book The Prodigal God. In this book, Keller compares the two sons’ sins, â€Å"two brothers, each of whom represents a different way to be alienated from God, and a different way to seek acceptance into the Kingdom of heaven† (9).Throughout the book, comparisons can be made between the younger brother’s sin and the older brother’s sin. The younger brother was selfish and wanted his inheritance immediately so that he can go party. The older brother follows all of the rules to get things and doesn’t want his brother to come back. Throughout The Prodigal God, comparison can made between the two brother s’ sin in that both of their intentions are selfish and they both want control. Tim Keller’s book is more than just discussing the parable of the prodigal son.While the tradition seems to focus more on the younger brother and his sins, Keller goes more depth with the older brother and his faults, â€Å"Most readings of this parable have concentrated on the flight and return of the younger brother-the ‘Prodigal Son. ’ That misses the real message of the story, however, because there are two brothers, each of whom represents a different way to be alienated from God, and a different way to seek acceptance into the Kingdom of heaven† (9). The first way that the older brother and the younger brother’s sins are similar is that both of their intentions are selfish.With the younger brother, he wanted his inheritance early so he could go and party. â€Å"The young man humiliates his family and lives a self-indulgent, dissolute life. He is totally out of control. He is alienated from his father. † (39) This behavior showed he wanted freedom for himself and that he was impatient. Keller goes on to say that the younger brother thought of his relationship with his father as unimportant and he only wanted him for his possessions. He says that once he got tired of the relationship, he basically said that he was tired of it and he wanted out.Even though the older brother is different, his sins are still of the same context. He obeys all of his father’s rules so that he appears to be a good son, yet he is only doing these things to take advantage of his father so that he can get what he wants. â€Å"Elder brothers obey God to get things. They don’t obey God to get God himself- in order to resemble him, love him, know him, and delight in him. So religious and moral people can be avoiding Jesus as Savior and Lord as much as younger brothers say they don’t believe in God and define right and wrong for themselve s† (49).The second way in which the younger brothers and the older brother’s sins are similar is that they both want control. â€Å"There are two ways to be your own Savior and Lord. One is by breaking all the moral laws and setting your own course, and one is by keeping all the moral laws and being very, very good. † (50) Both brothers sought to control the father. The younger brother wants the inheritance to have control over his own life. â€Å"He wanted to make his own decisions and have unfettered control of his portion of wealth. (41) The younger brother felt he could handle is life without any help, but he needed earthly treasures so that he could feel powerful. The older brother is keeping all of the rules so that he can get his way with his father. â€Å"Elder brothers do good to others, but not out of delight in deeds themselves, or for the love of the people or the pleasure of God† (70). The older brother feels his obedience should keep his fat her obligated to him. When his father offers the younger brother forgiveness and a feast, the older brother is angry because he has lost control over his father.The obedience the older brother kept for so many years seems to be futile. â€Å"It is impossible to forgive someone if you feel superior to him or her. †(63) When looked at more closely, the younger brother and older brother show an unexpected similarity in their sins throughout the parable of the prodigal son. Keller states in his book The Prodigal God that the goal of this book is to lay the essentials of the gospel, and to either introduce or reassure the message of both this story and the gospel. This parable is thought of as one of the best readings in the Bible to help someone grasp the understanding of God’s love.

The President vs. a Bum

The president is a very important person. Homeless people are not. Society has many â€Å"rungs† on the so called â€Å"social ladder. † A homeless person would probably be at the bottom. Where as, the president would be near the top. A rich and powerful man like the president means a lot more to the world than a homeless man. If the president were shot the whole country would cry, but if a homeless man was shot few would shed a tear. The president of the United States known by everyone. He works and lives in the white house, which is in Washington D. C. The white house has 132 rooms and 35 bathrooms.President George Washington decided where the house was to be built in 1791. He is the leader of our country. He has a lot of responsibilities he must take care of every day. Some of which include, signing off on new bills and laws, and making sure they are enforced. When Congress sends him a new law, he may or may not agree to sign it. He lets Congress know about new laws he thinks should be passed. Leaders of other countries meet with the president to solve problems in the world by signing treaties. He decides how America will act toward other countries and he represents our country here and around the world.He is considered the commander in chief, which means he is the leader of our armed forces. They help to keep the country safe. He also flies his own plane. It's called Air Force One. It has accommodation for the president to eat, sleep, and work. Presidents through out time have played a major role in the history of the world. Homeless people are regular nobodies that have nothing to their name. They have no permanent place to live, so they stay where they can, often a shelter or free housing complex. They have been known to sleep in abandoned cars. Most homeless people have little to no responsibilities.Most of the time the only thing they look for is their next drink. You can see them outside of your locale gas station begging for change. They will say it's for something to eat or some other necessity, but it's a trick to feed their alcohol or drug addiction. Some homeless people have no friends or family. Others, all they have are the other homeless people whom they consider their friends. It can be very harsh living on the street. They are always in danger of being beat up, robbed, or even killed. Their interaction with the outside world turn out bad in most cases.They will work for food because most are at risk of starving to death because they have no money. Things that homeless people say and do don't mean very much to most people. They do not play any positive role in our everyday lives. The president and mere homeless man are very different. The president has an enormous amount of impact on everyone. Homeless people only make a negative impact on the people around them. That's a great example of how the social ladder in society today works. I would much rather be the president than a homeless person.

The Justice Theatre At A Young Age - 1011 Words

The Justice Theatre presentation #2 that we watched in the gym was very interesting and it gave a huge example of the gang lifestyle. We focus on the fun things of joining a gang and we don’t understand the negative side. When you do notice the negative side, you might feel like you have no hope for the future to what you have chosen. Gang members lead very dangerous lives. Discrimination attitudes are behind some gang violence. Joining a gang at a young age is a big problem itself. Gang members are often involved to violence, drugs and crime. Also, once a gang member joins it can be very difficult for them to get out of the gang. Gangs affect communities as well because violence can often lead to innocent people being injured or killed.†¦show more content†¦Just like last time I thought this was going to be a fake scene but this time it was something that actually happen before in vancouver but the characters was not the actual as the ones in the real situation. We all were settled and as the judge and the others were ready, we all rose up just for showing respect because that is what always happens in a real court .The accused came up to the judge and swore to say everything as the truth but only as the truth. After this it started. The accused name was, Harjit and he blamed justin (I think this was the name) as guilty for kidnapping Harjit. This changed Harjit and Harjit started to live a fearful life. Harjit started to tell his story of how he got involved with all this. He started it by saying that when he used to go to school, he used to see this group of other people who used to have expensive cars and other things and when Harjit asked where they got that cool car, the person said that you just have to do tiny tasks in return of cool cars, money, and other expensive things. When the other person (gang member) said that would you like to join us and Harjit said yeh. Harjit never knew that this was going to lead him to a total opposite world. The gang member told him that he had to transport drugs over the border. Harjit knew that this was illegal, but he still said yes. Harjit transported drugs about 2 or 3 times. And once when Harjit got