|
 lthough
fascinating, the results of this report are not scientifically
valid. There are a number of reasons that account for this limitation.
Of prime importance is the fact that the respondents to the question
came from a very limited population. Because the response form
was on the Internet, respondents were much more likely to be
computer literate--in fact, many of them were either computer
teachers or teachers who used computers extensively within their
classrooms.
Additionally, the open-ended nature of the questions allowed for a
vast difference in the extent of the responses. Because the questions
call for free-form responses, answers varied in length, detail, and
quality.
Finally, due to the nature of the responses and the small sample size,
there is low reliablilty in the content analysis of the data. More data
will confirm or refute the validity of the definitions used in this
report, as well as allowing for more quantitative methods of analysis.
|
|
|
References
Berelson, B. (1971). Content analysis in communication research. New
York: MacMillan Pub Co.
Salkind, N. (1994). Exploring research, 2nd ed. New York: MacMillan
Pub Co.
|
|
|
 |
KeyNotes presents the views of
leaders in educational technology.
Copyright. ©
2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998, 1997 ALTec,
the University of Kansas
|
|
|
