a "doc" chronicle

For this chapter, I will analyze threaded discussions data from five months, August to December. Each month, a section, will end with a mathematical discourse model. Data from the second month on, will be used to revise the previous month's model. That's why the first month is so important! Besides, it will give me an idea of how much time it can take to complete the whole chapter, a more accurate time line until the end of the dissertation.

I just started analyzing August’s data, the first section of Chapter 4. It is good I had some work done, because I can concentrate on the analysis, instead of organizing the data, which takes some time. The steps I had presented in Chapter 3 guide my work and the data questions guide my analysis. It all fits together and helps me move ahead.

I remember how hard it was to differentiate between the types of questions you have in a study: the research questions are general in scope, the data questions are specific, more like sub-questions that will help answer the research questions. It took me a while to identify these, more specific questions!!! But now, they really help in working with the data.

Labels: data analysis, data questions, research questions

Using an outline to write chapter two helped me a lot to organize my ideas. I used the subtopics as section headings, dividing the text by topic, and making it easier to read. As I worked through it, I made changes, renaming a section or moving sections/subtopics around. The outline really helped me to organize the chapter contents and to tie in one section with the next. It also helped me when writing because I was able to add an idea to a different section the moment I thought of it, even complete sentences, that I was able to use later on or modify as needed.

I tried to follow Roberts' and Dr. Dawson's recommendations, worked with the editions Dr. Telg gave me during my proposal presentation, also used Dr. Mirka's strategy. That is, writing sentences or ideas on a piece of paper, wherever you are, saving them in a special place, and when it comes time to write, reviewing what you have and using what is appropriate at the moment. All in all, I think chapter two new draft is much better, although I know I might have to work more on it. We'll see what happens when the new revisions come in.

As the week unfolded I worked more and more hours each day. I had that feeling, that I was finishing chapter two and really wanted to make it true. My husband took care of the kitchen and cooked lunch and dinner, so that I could continue working on the dissertation. I remembered my friend Dina when she was writing chapter four, and how she needed to take little breaks when writing. I had to too, specially if I felt I was going to get a headache. Just walking a little, or crocheting a few minutes, allowed me to clear my mind and go back to work.

So, a new draft of chapter two is out. I made a list of what I still need to do, including those things I have started and not finished, and taped it on the wall by my desk. I organized my desk and placed all the journal articles about Writing in Mathematics in a folder, so that I can easily find them later on, when I work on more revisions and when I update the reference list. Cleaning my desk as much as possible, leaves space for chapter four data, my next main task.

Now I don't know if its because I have worked many hours this week, or because I have that feeling of finishing something that I don't feel like working today. But I will push myself to work at least one period of two hours. Little by little you can accomplish so much! I know that, and I push my self to do just that.

I am moving ahead and it is scary and good at the same time! :-)

Labels: outline

In preparation for the new revisions of Ch. 2, I went back to Robert's (2004) book, The Dissertation Journey. Looking at what I already have, it seems I have climbed the "base camp" and that I am moving toward the peak -- this being the oral defense. I reread Chapter 15, "Organizing and Presenting the Literature Review (Chapter Two)" and realized I need to reword the beginning of many paragraphs -- so that I don't start with the authors name and instead use an introductory statement. I also need to paraphrase more. Finally, taking time on the outline will help me organize my thoughts and the chapter's content. Still, I need to move on ... As Dr. Dawson says, it is better to have something to work with -- my thoughts need to be on paper instead of in my mind!!

For what I've recently read about writing in math, I think I have found a better way to justify my research. Finding a hole; that is, something no one has researched yet, something I can contribute with. Up to what I've read, writing in mathematics has been researched from a cognitive and constructivist perspective, but not from a social construction view. This opens new possibilities for (to) my work.

Concepts or ideas I want to keep in mind when I continue writing Chapter Two are the following: collaborative writing, inquiry in mathematics (ability to reflect), polyvocality in mathematics (algebraic, geometric, and numeric solutions / explanations/ contributions), negotiation, conversation/ dialogue/ discourse/ discussions.

I apologize for the way this post is organized. Writing my blog is helping me organize my thoughts ...

Reference:

Roberts, C. M. (2004). The Dissertation Journey: A practical and comprehensive guide to planning, writing, and defending your dissertation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Labels: review of literature

After reading the new set of articles, writing must go smoothly. It is interesting. I have read about 'writing in math' and also about 'writing in general' (Bruer, 1993). So, putting my ideas in paper is next. But first, my outline must be updated, adding more specific ideas to it, in order to guide my writing. And, as Bruer says, not everything I've read will go in my writing. That means I should have a new version of Chapter two by next week!!

Reference:

Bruer, J. T. (1993). Writing: Transforming Knowledge. In J. T. Bruer, Schools for Thought: A science of learning in the classroom, 215-256. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Writing a general outline and adding the authors related to each subtopic allowed me to organize what I have read about 'writing in mathematics.' This also showed me I had too many articles about practices and too little research articles. So, I had to go back to the library and get a few more. Journals such as School Science and Mathematics and Educational Studies in Mathematics included research articles about this topic up to 2005. This is promising, since most of what I had before was from the eighties and nineties.

On Monday I started writing. I decided to read in the mornings and write in the afternoons. In this way, if I need to read something new to clarify my ideas I can work on that in the morning, while I keep writing the revisions of Chapter 2 in the afternoon. During the evening I can dig up an old article to clarify an author's idea or work on a specific recommendation. At first, I though I had to rewrite the whole chapter, but then I realized I can add a new section and insert references to it along the chapter. I don't know yet if this will work, but I am working on it!!

To push myself I am going to the library during the day and working on periods of time of two to three hours each. If I think I am done before my time schedule, I try to do something else until the clock tells me its time to go. Little by little ...

References:

Clark, D., & Waywood, A. (1993, October). Probing the structure of mathematics writing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 25(3), 235-250.

Mason, R. & McFeetors, P. (2002, October). Interactive writing in mathematics class: Getting started. Mathematics Teacher, 95(7), 532-536.

Pugalee, D. K. (2001, May). Writing, mathematics, and metacognition: Looking for connections through student's work in mathematical problem solving. School Science & Mathematics, 101(5), 236-245.

Stonewater, J. (2002, November). The mathematics writer's checklist: the development of a preliminary assessment tool for writing in mathematics. School Science & Mathematics, 102(3), 324-334.

Stonewater, J. (2005, January). Inquiry teaching and learning: The best math class study. School Science & Mathematics, 105(1), 36-47.

Labels: dissertation, mathematics, review of literature, time management, writing in math

In reading the new chapters and articles I had on my desk and reviewing those I had read before, I found myself finding a missing link to Chapter two. One that will make it more coherent, giving it a tunnel vision (in Dr. Ferdig's words), completing the circle (in Vanessa Goodrum's words), even finding a way to add a new purpose to the dissertation, not only one as I had before (following up on a question by Dr. Telg). This means I need to rewrite chapter two from a different perspective, almost turn it around (as Dr. Dawson suggested at some point).

I finished reading about 'writing in mathematics' to add a new section to Chapter two. What I read made me have a more general view and understanding of my dissertation's topic. For example, according to Richards (1991) there are four discourse domains in mathematics: research math, inquiry math, journal math, and school math. Since I am researching an open discussion forum, where participation is voluntary, a question about the type of discourse domain can be asked: is it inquiry math or school math? Up to what point it approximates inquiry math?

In a conversation with one of my classmates, he stated the discussions are more like school math, but the ones I have selected for analysis do not consist of "initiation - reply - evaluation sequences" (Richards, 1991, p. 16) only, that is school math discourse. They also include asking questions, proposing conjectures, presenting different arguments, presenting different solutions, asking new questions about similar topics, that is inquiry math. So up to a certain point, I am studying inquiry math. Wow, I did not realized it until now!!

Today I am planning to organize my notes, write a schematic outline, and start rewriting Chapter two. By including the idea of discourses I am also tying in the research methodology presented in Chapter three. That means it will have a better flow between review of literature and research methodology, another question I had at my proposal presentation :) and that I can answer now.

References:

Richards, J. (1991). Mathematical discussion. In E. von Glasersfeld, E. (ed.), Radical Constructivism in Mathematics Education (pp. 13-51). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Press.