week 4 teaching dq

yet another tired and not that well written exploration of what and how research students work and progress through school. The article reviewed about 5 back was much better written, provided a stronger application of the mechanics of the patterns involved with turning a human into a professional researcher (Coffman et al, 2016).

To research requires very specialized thinking patterns. Those thinking patterns require years and years of careful neuropathway development, which this article did not even come close to touching on.

the other article was actually worse, emphasizing words which were not actually described correctly on a scientific method format  (Johnson, 2011). The words used were ok, but the descriptions did not actually match the meanings of Quantitative approach. Quantitative approach is not just about gathering a large group of people and asking them questions, although that is a quantity of people, it actually does not count unless the parameters of the questions are sufficient. Which in this case the questions and answers were insufficient for the task. The sample was far too small and the questions far too vague and misleading. It was entirely unclear what the point to this article was other than to publish. It had virtually no scientific value.

Coffman, K., Putman, P., Adkisson, A., Kriner, B., & Monaghan, C. (2016). Waiting for the Expert to Arrive: Using a Community of Practice to Develop the Scholarly Identity of Doctoral Students. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 28 (1), 32-33.

Johnson, D. R. (2011). A Quantitative Study of Teacher Perceptions of Professional Learning Communities' Context, Process, and Content. Seton Hall University Dissertations and Theses, 67.