More ideas for my 610 research proposal which is DUE next Monday!

Concepts to consider:
•Relational links: semantic vs. structural (my study looks at structural)
•Revisit associations: general vs. specific
•Types of knowledge: declarative vs. ____
•Types of memory: recall vs. recognition (my study looks at recall)

New literature to incorporate:
•Concept maps are node-link diagrams that depict concepts and relationships within a knowledge domain (Andrews 2008, 520) - within a knowledge domain
•Knowledge network representation technique (Dhindsa 2010) – better than saying metacognitive tool (metacognitive tool too vague unless I define)
•Network of nodes and links that accurately and meaningfully represent relations between these nodes (Pinto 2010)
•Knowledge a structured entity (Brookes 1980, 254)
•Little research has focused on establishing existing knowledge and measuring how it changes through using information (Kari 2007) – could pre- and post- CM be used to illustrate this change?
From Herl article: construct validation of an approach to modeling cognitive structure of US history knowledge (Herl, Baker and Niemi)
•Two memory theories: hierarchical (Ausubel) and associationist (Deese)
•Concept mapping as learning strategies (instructional tools)
•Nice wording: “growing consensus among researchers”
•Hierarchical: “part of” and “example of”
•Hierarchical vs. associationist concept maps
•Idea of relational links
•Scoring systems for concept mapping provide quantitative assessments
•Research in cognitive structure identifies patterns in subject domain matter of experts
•Experts structures: cohesive, tightly integrated
•Novices structures: superficial relationships
•Define declarative knowledge: factual, describable information whose organization is flexible (West 1986)
•Herl’s study used experts’ concept maps as criteria to score students’ concept maps
•Herl’s study measured students’ content knowledge and looked at the semantic relationships between concepts; my study looks at structural components
•My study asks: CAN pre and post concept maps illustrate knowledge change?
•Nice wording: “This task was designed to…”
•Nice wording: “adapted from previous research”
•To score the organizational structure of the concept maps, Herl used the C measure (C measures the degree of similarity between neighborhoods of terms in maps)
•They did two types of analyses: descriptive statistics and significance tests
•The number of terms and links were countable statistics
•They used a pre-defined list of terms (selected by experts)
•They used a pre-defined list of links (determined from prior research), such as prior to, led to, response to, similar to, part of, used for

A few notes about conceptual frameworks

These notes come from Punch's text on Social Research.

Operationalize each concept/variable. This means connect concepts to empirical (observable) indicators!
Concept = knowledge change
Indicators = addend, insert, or delete concepts

The purpose of conceptual frameworks is to show the concepts, their conceptual status in relation to one another, and the hypothesized relationships.

Not all quantitative studies need hypothesis, only those that clearly reflect a theory. So, if THEORY, then HYPOTHESIS.

That's all for now...now back to work on my proposal.

Observing Becca's class

Today I observed another doctoral student teach an undergrad course in the school of information sciences. I want to list some of the remarkable strategies she used. Becca is a natural instructor! Her 50-minute session was student-centered and memorable.

1. At the beginning of the class, she stated the core concepts and then said "why is this important?" Then, she answered this question with an example.

2. Her powerpoint slides were like guided notes. There were blank spaces that she filled in during the lecture using custom design. This supported learning and student engagement.

3. The slides were short and sweet. They illustrated important, concise concepts. She didn't talk from her slides.

4. Becca added LOTS of real examples. Many examples to illustrate concepts. The examples were meaningful to college students...like JCrew's website.

5. She asked lots of probing questions. Her lecture was a lot like a discussion.

6. She showed good and bad examples of website designs.

I want to watch Becca teach again!

Why environmental literacy?

Some big picture thoughts/conclusions based on the literature review conducted for SIS 495. I want to capture these ideas!

-INTERDISCIPLINARY: Interdisciplinary nature of environmental sciences matches the interdisciplinary nature of information science.

-COMPLEXITY: Complex environmental issues and data necessitate literacy.

-PARTICIPATION: Environmental issues are participatory and involve participation of citizens in things like data collection (citizen science) and policy decisions (voting). Generation Y (today's college students) is known for its spirit of volunteerism. Higher education a good fit for a course enabling informed participation in environmental issues.

-STANDARDS: Science standards map to ACRL information literacy competencies. There is a clear similarity. See Manuel K. 2004 for an comparison chart.

-MANDATING LEGISLATION: National legislation passed in 1992.

-VARIABLES: To assess environmental literacy, look at knowledge, skills, and participation. Must operationalize these concepts. Relate the concept to empirical indicators.

Some thoughts on the big picture of my research proposal

Okay, this whole research process has been fuzzy and vague. I'm reading a book called Introduction to Social Research by Punch. It's been a helpful read to get to the bottom of research, what it's all about, and how to go about doing it. Help at last!

By the end of my first semester of doctoral studies, I will have written a quantitative research proposal, a daunting and huge task considering I've never done ANY research before!

Well, here goes an attempt to simply state what it is that I want to know?

The assumption - we know knowledge structures change with the incorporation of new information. This is a cognitive dimension of information use. It is using information cognitively to construct or modify knowledge. Brooke's fundamental equation of information science supports that our knowledge structures change.

Research area - information behavior

Research topic - cognitive information use

Gap - But, it's hard to observe and measure this process of knowledge change and few studies have attempted it.

What I want to find out (General RQs) - So, I want to know if pre- and post- information concept maps will measure knowledge change. Do they provide a lens to observe this? And how to knowledge structures change as evidenced in pre and post concept maps?

Aim - further understanding of the cognitive aspects of information use, that is, how information is used to build and modify knowledge (knowledge change).

Conceptual framework - Similarity of Brookes equation and concept mapping.

Hypothesis - thus, following his theory I propose concept maps will be an effective tool to measure this.

Specific RQs:
RQ1 Are concepts added or deleted?
RQ2 Are linking words (across concepts) added or deleted?
RQ3 Are cross-links (across domains) added or deleted?
RQ4 Are concepts inserted? (this changes the structure)
RQ5 Are concepts moved around? (this changes the structure)

Research design - single subject experiment; repeated measure
00----X-----01-----x-----02
00=pre-map (current knowledge)
X=intervention (information)
01-post-map 1 (knowledge change 1)
x=intervention (information)
02=post-map 2 (knowledge change 2)

Data collection -

Data analysis - Is there a significant difference between the maps in terms of (t tests):
-Concepts (RQ1)
-Linking words (RQ2)
-Cross links (RQ3)
-Map structure (RQ4, RQ5)

A few ideas about the methodology for my 610 proposal!

Before I forget...

Here are my current, draft research questions:
RQ1: Do pre- and post-information concept maps measure knowledge change?
RQ2: If so, how do knowledge structures change as evidenced in the pre- and post-information maps?

Measurement ideas!
RQ1: Look at the number of:
-Nodes/concepts
-Links
-Labels
Compare the numbers of each of the three variables between the pre- and post-concept maps.
Is there a significant difference?
Do the numbers of nodes, links, and labels increase (one-directional)?

RQ2: Assess the nature of change according to these categories (Todd, 1999):
-Appending
-Inserting
-Deleting
Consider, are these categories mutually inclusive/exclusive?

Question? Do I want to do more than 2 repeated measures?
pre-information map
post-information 1 map
post-information 2 map

Ideas from Creswell chapter 8 (pp. 158-167)
- A pre-experimental design (Study a single group and provide an intervention during the experiment. No control group to compare with the experimental group)
- Compare pre- and post-information concept maps
- A within-group design (Study only one group)
- For example, a repeated measures design (Assign participants to different treatments at different times during the experiment)
- A one-group pre-test-post-test design (a pre-test measure followed by a treatment and a post-test for a single group)
Group A 01----------X------------02
Group A pre-info map---------new information-----------post-info map
-Potential threat to internal validity would be a selection threat (participants can be selected who are more naturally adept at the concept mapping technique)
-Paired t-tests for data analysis? (I'm comparing two paired measures)
-My hypothesis is testing the difference between pre- and post-info concept maps (a test of difference rather than relationship)

Just some thoughts to capture for my methodology section!

Conceptual framework and Research questions (RQ)

Our conceptual framework and research questions (RQ) are due Nov. 3. This is the next big deadline for the 610 proposal!

The assignment (as I understand it):
-Pull out the pieces from my literature review that inform my RQs and hypotheses.
-Write a paragraph(s).
-Explain/justify my predictions based on the evidence of my lit review and theory framework (for me, this is Brookes' fundamental equation).
-Also, this section should lead into the final methodology section.

That's all for now! :)

Today I want to remember these things as I work on my proposal for 610

I am right where God wants me to be today (and this includes studying in this doctoral program!).
He's on my side.
I will do the best that I can and leave the rest to God.

Good thoughts... :)

Research proposals

Okay, so today in 610 class, we talked about "operationalizing" concepts in postivist social science research. How about actually operationalizing the term "operationalizing"? :)

I did get many useful things out of this class. We talked about the first steps of research. I remain unclear about the process, so this was helpful to me. I'm trying to apply these specific steps to my own research proposal. Draft one that I submitted a week ago Monday missed the mark, to say the least. I'm not surprised because I didn't know what I was doing. However, I do feel my thoughts about research are progressing, and I'm beginning to better understand this process. The theory of research is clarifying; the doing remains daunting. I'm not alone, I can tell by the queries in my class.

To capture some of my understanding of the process and possible applications to my research: (note - this follows a positivist, deductive approach to research)

1. General statement of interest - How people use new information to build/transform knowledge, and how we can measure this knowledge change.

2. Reframe as initial question - Do successive (before and after) measure knowledge change?

3. In what ways can I get an answer? - Look at before and after concept maps. Before map --> new info --> After map
Is there a change?

4. Reframe as research question - Does a college environmental science student's concept map change (become more complex) after receiving new information?

5. Operationalize (know what I'm doing; identify, refine, concepts, relationships)

6. Hypothesis

Possible variables: (variables must be observable)
Independent - before concept map
Intervening - new information
Dependent - after concept map

Possible hypothesis(es):
Successive concept maps measure knowledge change.

Null - No difference in before and after concept maps.
Alternative - After new information concept maps are more complex than before new information concept maps. (one-directional change)

Possible method(s):
Five independent judges will evaluate the before and after maps.
Average the five.

Just some ideas I wanted to jot down before losing them!!

Another search attempt in Web of Science

From the Advanced Search Interface:
TS=(curricul* AND (academi* OR universit*) AND (environment* OR ecology) and informatic*)
12 results
No relevancy - almost all 12 hits related to medical informatics or health sciences

From the Basic Search Interface:
Environment* Informatics
590 results
Refined to subject area=ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
30 results

Adding 9 of them to Zotero!

Web of Science search strategies and results today!

Search executed on Tuesday morning, Sep 28, on Web of Science
Advanced search interface

Set #5    #3 AND #4
    195 results
    Databases=SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI Timespan=All Years

Set #4    TS=curricul*
    43,831 results
    Databases=SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI Timespan=All Years

Set #3    #1 AND #2
    1,733 results
   
Set #2    TS=(universit* OR academi* OR (higher education))
    >100,000 results

Set #1    TS=((environ* OR eco* OR sustain*) AND information AND education)
    5,605 results

Refined by Subject Area=(INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE (25) – 25 results, not much relevant

Refined by: Subject Area=(EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES ) - 36 results, most about medical education

Looked at related articles of Title: Evaluating the impact of an environmental education programme: an empirical study in Mexico

Refined this search set to subject area="environmental studies" – 42 results, this refined to the denotation of "environment" i'm interested

Observation - interesting, "environment" also refers to a more general denotation of environment, such as a learning environment

Overall – high recall but little relevance resulting from the above searches

Studies to incorporate from my initial lit review

In no specific order, just capturing!

(4) Todd, From information to knowledge: charting and measuring changes in students' knowledge of a curriculum topic, 2006
Kuhl, Seeking Meaning, 2004 (4)
Vakkari, P. Information seeking in context: a challenging metatheory in "Information Seeking in Context" pp 81-96, 1997 (4) (*) - just scan
Wilson, Human information behavior, 2000 (4) (*)
Ausubel, Educational psychology: a cognitive view, 1978 (4)
Cooke, N.J., Knowledge elicitation in "Handbook of Applied Cognition" pp 479-509 (1999) (*)
Gordon, S., Implications of cognitive theory for knowledge acquisition, 1992 (4)
Markham, A. Knowledge representation in "Steven's handbook of experimental psychology" pp 165-208, 2002 available online from UTK Libraries (4) (*)
Talja, S., Constituting 'information' and 'user' as research objects. A theory of knowledge formations as an alternative to the information man theory  in "Information Seeking in Context" pp 81-96, 1997 (4) (*)


(5) Sherratt, C.S., The application of concept mapping in reference and information services, 1990
Novak, Learning how to learn, 1984 (5)
Stice, C., Hierarchical concept mapping, 1986 (5) (*)


(2) Okebukola, Attaining meaningful learning of concepts in genetics and ecology, 1990
Bransford, Contextual pre-requisites for understanding, 1972 (2)
Klausmeier, H.J., Conceptual learning and development, 1974 (2)
Sternberg, RJ., Mechanisms of cognitive development: a componential approach, 1984 (2) (*)


(1) Pinto, M., Measuring students information skills through concept mapping (2010)
Tolman, E.C., Cognitive maps in rats and men (1) (*) - just curious about this one!
Buzan, T., Use your head, 1974 (1)
Novak, J.D., A theory of education, 1977 (1)
Novak, J.D., Learning, creating and using knowledge, 1998 (1) (*)
O'Donnell, A.M., Knowledge maps as scaffolds for cognitive processing, 2002 (1) (*)

(3) Andrews, K., Tressler K., Mintzes, J., Assessing environmental understanding: an application of the concept mapping strategy
Chi, M., The nature of expertise, 1988 (3)  (*) - curious about this one, too
Mintzes, J., Testing a punctuated model of conceptual change, 2007 (3)
Markham, K.M., The concept map as a research and evaluation tool, 1994 (3)
Quinn, H.C., Successive concept mapping, 2003 (3) (*)
Wallace, J.D., the concept map as a research tool: exploring conceptual change, 1990 (3)

(*) means especially want to read

Other ideas for studies for concept mapping in the information sciences

Aid the reference interview (do I understand the user's information needs?)
Evaluate information literacy skills
Communicate information
Organize and represent knowledge
IL instruction

The light's coming on for my research topic!

Capturing ideas!

I love this paragraph from Todd's 2006 study as he states the phenomena of his research: "The research reported here is about information use: the transformation and integration of found information into existing knowledge, and the creation of new knowledge. Wilson defines information use as the physical and mental acts employed by humans to incorporate found information into their knowledge base or knowledge structure (Wilson 2000). Vakkair (1997) and Spink & Cole (2005) acknowledge that information use research is the least developed in information behavior research."

This speaks to what I want to study. I want to:

• Develop a methodology to measure knowledge change OR
• Analyze the role of concept mapping as a tool to discover and measure how knowledge changes through using found information (from found information to transformed or new knowledge) OR 
• Analyze the role of C.M. to depict how knowledge changes through Kuhlthau's Information Search Process (ISP) which is articulated in 6 steps
• Is concept mapping an effective tool to measure the impact of new information (knowledge change)?

I propose that C.M. offer a way to depict knowledge change that is easily interpreted and meaningful. By knowledge change, I mean:

• how knowledge is transformed or created through using found information
• how we use our prior knowledge and experiences to make sense of new information and thereby transform/expand our knowledge
• the impact of new information on our knowledge structures.

The significance of this study is to add to our knowledge about information behavior, particularly in the area of information use which is one of the least developed (Wilson 2000).

I will potentially link my research efforts to these theories/conceptual frameworks. Assumptions/theories/frameworks that guide my research: verify the years/theory names/spellings 

• Kuhlthau's ISP (2004) - learning (knowledge construction) from new information is a process 
• Dewey's Phases of Reflexive Thinking (1933)
• Kelly's Personal Construct Theory and 5 Phases of Construction (1963)
• "Past experience and prior knowledge form the basis for constructing new knowledge (Todd 2006)" --> According to Todd, this assumption comes from Dewey 1933 and Kelly 1963
• Bruner's Interpretive Tasks 
• Sternberg's Componential Theory of Knowledge Acquisition (1984)
• Ausubel's Assimilation Theory (meaningful learning theory) (1963)
• Brooke's Fundamental Equation of Information Science (1975)
• Novak's Concept Mapping (early 1970s) - verify the year
• Ault's step's in concept mapping (1985)
• ACRL IL standards..students apply new and prior information to....create....  (ACRL 2000)
• Kuhn's Paradigm Shift (1962)

In another entry, I free-write what I know about these topics: concept mapping, knowledge change, depicting information to knowledge, ...

Yesterday's curriculum meeting

As is the tradition, our group met yesterday to report on our research efforts regarding the new Environmental Information course (SIS 495) to be offered next Spring 2011. It was a productive meeting!

We began with crafting a draft course description (4 sentences or so). Students can start registering for the spring semester next week, so we need to post this description on the SIS website. The class will be a special topics class for the IS&T minor in the School of Information Sciences. We hope that with the success of this course, it will become a fixed course offering.

We looked at other syllabi to generate ideas. Although there appears to be few, if any, classes out there on environmental information, there are closely related topics (environmental informatics, for example).  Mike Frame offers a grad level course on envir. informatics. We're all required to take this course as part of the ScienceLinks2 fellowship. It's offered next fall 2011.  We want to distinguish the class we're building from this course so it's not redundant. A few other courses throughout the campus related to environmental sciences, as well. We are exploring these and looking at their syllabi.

We will submit our course description on Monday of next week.  Prior to then, we will review the draft individually.

Before out meeting next Thursday, the team is collecting ideas for topics to cover in the course. Our Open Wet Ware site stores our ideas as we continue to add them to this wiki. Some topics include: GIS software, metadata, environmental information management systems, visualization, disaster week, communicating data, complex data, etc.

I'm currently working on the literature review, and I will tie it all together by identify recurring elements/themes. As I read articles, I record main ideas, authors, key words on a notecard for each reading. I will lay them all out and arrange them to identify patterns and gaps. My plan is to report my findings at next week's meetings. Elizabeth has done an extensive review of the literature, as well. She typed up her findings in a word document which I have yet to review. I'm thankful for her important contributions!

I am also very thankful for our team.

Whew - a lot on my mind! (regarding research topics...)

This week has been intellectually rich and challenging. Within the next week I have three significant assignments due (in addition to normal readings and statistics assignments):
1/ Lit review on environment information curriculum at the university level - key themes/authors/what's been done andwhat's missing?
2/ Deliver a 15 minute lesson for my pedagogy seminar class - the lesson will be video recorded and critiqued
3/ 5 page research proposal (draft) - The proposal will identify a significant problem/phenomena, review the relevant literature, and discuss the significance of the study to the field (does it contribute new knowledge or inform practice?).

The third assignment is most challenging because I don't a clear research question. I have many ideas, and the more I read, the more confused I feel!  However, I lift this assignment up to God and I ask Him to help me develop a research project that is significant, interesting, and fruitful!  I am thankful for His help in the past, and I know He will guide me through my doctoral studies and research.

A few of my own ideas:

• Phenomena to observe: how humans construct knowledge from new information
• Theories: George Kelly's personal construct theory, Ausubel's assimilation theory, Dewey's constructivism

Ideas from brainstorming session with Bates and Wang:

• Significance of study - new knowledge about information seeking
• Measure - impact of new information (current knowledge to change of knowledge)
• Treatment - information
• Observe - difference between groups or over time
• Potential question - is concept mapping an effective tool to measure knowledge change?

Other ideas for questions (before I forget):

• Does concept mapping help in focus formulation (stage 4 in Kuhlthau's model)? - see Gordon 2000
• Do ____ experience the information seeking process as described by Kuhlthau in her model? (PhD students, NGS editorial staff, university faculty)

Now it's time for me to step back and do some processing. I'm going to the library now to pick up a few books about these above-mentioned theories.

What I learned about ISP and more interesting theories!

This morning I read about Kuhlthau's Information Search Process (ISP). She has a great website! Carol Kuhlthau professor emerita at the Dept. of Information Science at Rutgers University, and her model of ISP is highly recognized in LIS.

I want to capture just a few thoughts. First of all, Carol's model is a result of 2 decades of empirical research and longitudinal studies. Theory building doesn't happen over night!  Secondly, her model relates to several theories. These theories interest me:

• Kelly's personal construct theory (1963)
• Constructivist theory 
• Assimilation theory (Ausubel 1963)
• Concept mapping (Gordon 2000)

Other related theories include:

• Vygotsky's zone of proximal development
• Belkin's ASK
• Taylor's level of information needs
• Gardner, 1985

Now, not all of these theories contribute to the development of her model; some merely relate.  I discovered these related theories as I read literature that cited and/or expanded upon her studies.

I am assigned to give a presentation on the ISP model this week in my 610 class. The purpose of the presentation is to:

• give a short statement about the theory/theory and how it fits in a broader paradigm 
• discuss the limitations or shortcomings 
• discuss what I liked about it or how it's informed my own thinking
• share a brief idea on how to apply it to research

I think this will be a useful assignment. I may apply it to an educational context (university level, science or environmental literacy).

That's all for now...now to design the presentation!

IS 495 Curriculum Meeting #2

Thursday afternoon the ScienceLinks2 fellows meet with post-doc Miriam Davis plan the new course we're developing for the Information Science department. It's called "Environmental Information." Miriam is the lead, and David, Elizabeth, Jim, Priyanki, Todd and I involved as part of our assistantship.

Meeting two was an update. We shared what we had accomplished over the past week. At the first meeting, we assigned tasks and responsibilities. My job is the lit review. The purpose of this review is to learn what's been done and what's missing in undergraduate environmental information education. On the 30th of Sept., I will present what I have noticed in the literature - common themes, what kind of research has been done, who are the authors, etc.  I won't compose a formal lit review with citations or a bibliography at this point, but this will be included in the paper we eventually publish.

We were all reminded to DOCUMENT our methods, such as "on Sept 12 I searched Web of Science using these search terms and got this many hits" or "on Sept 14 I looked at the NGS website and called the science librarian..." This is vital for our future paper.

Another important thing we were reminded was to use our Open Wet Ware site. This is a wiki where we  record our search methods, key terms and synonyms, useful syllabi and literature, etc.  I have yet to utilize this site, but this is a priority!  I used wiki software at Nat Geo, so I just need to reteach myself. :)

Dr. Allard, our advisor, suggested I assign ascension numbers to the articles/resources I discover.  This is an idea I want to try, in addition to making notecards with info such as: author of article, key points, research methods, etc.

We had a visitor at today's meeting. Vandana Signh is the coordinator of the Info Science and Technology major at UTK so she is interested in our course. Our course will be offered as an elective for this minor.

This was a good meeting, but I felt overwhelmed afterwards. So much to do!  I will lift this up to God and ask Him to help me and show we what to do and how to manage the many responsibilites of my studies.  My friend Justin reminded me of a wonderfully encouraging verse in Jeremiah, "for I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans to prosper you and not to harm you . . . "

:)

The big picture

I just met with Miriam Davis, post-doc research associate. She was so kind and helpful. She gave generously of her time to entertain my questions.

I've been struggling with how to manage and organize the volume of potentially interesting resources/articles I find. I'm still developing my research interests, so I don't really know which articles will be most helpful for my future work. Right now, I want to find out what's out there - what's been done - where are the gaps - and how might I create a significant research question that fits in the literature. 

How do I organize everything I come across? Where do I draw the lines when collecting works of potential interest? I can see how I might quickly collect hundreds articles and not even know what I have!

Miriam affirmed that it's very wise to be thinking about these things now and asking these questions. She shared her ideas and strategies with me. She uses the desktop version of End Note. It seems to have lots of practical application, and looks to be especially helpful when writing papers. It will cite references and add them to the end in a bibliography in just a few simple steps. Citations can be edited and the format changed. (APA, Chicago) In addition, a few interesting fields include abstracts and keywords, and entries can be searched by all fields.  Also, attachments can be added to records.

She also mentioned Zotero, with the Pendergrass Ag-Vet Library recommends. I've looked at the web-based application in the past but have little experience using it for functional research tasks.

Miriam also told me about her friend Trena Paulus from the Department of Educational Psychology. I may like to select my cognate in this area. As Miriam described, her friend is wise, experienced, and an excellent researcher. She has shared many organizational strategies with Miriam. One is to organize/store articles in digital folders (alpha order by primary author last name, for example). Trena teaches Research Methods, a Qualitative Research class, and more. I want to meet Trena!!

A good meeting with Miriam!

Helpful meetings today

Wow, this is my fourth post for the day. There is just so much on my mind and many things I want to capture!

Today I had meetings with several people, and I feel grateful for these interactions. To start the day off, I met with Elizabeth in Hodges in the early morning hours. We talked about our research interests and how they intersect. We want to work together, and we think a collaboration would be fun and inform our collective and individual research interests. I am so excited to work with Elizabeth!

After my meeting with Elizabeth, I met with Dr. Ed Cortez at 8:30. I asked him about his career path and research interests, and I shared my current research ideas with him. He suggested potential ways for me to be involved. Apparently, SIS is forming a collaboration with the San Paulo University under the leadership of Mike Frame.  Mike teaches "Environmental Informatics" at UTK as a adjunct professor. This sounds like an interesting project, and I want to learn more.  I could inform my research interests related to environmental literacy/education at the university level.  I'm also interested in how learners construct new knowledge.

My final meeting of the day was unplanned. More of an encounter or discussion, I talked with Miriam Davis (the post-doc leading the Environmental Information course) about methods for capturing my thoughts and ideas. That's why I started this blog today! She organized her ideas in binders throughout her graduate studies. We're going to meet someday over lunch to share more ideas about organization and particularly citation management software.

This was a good day, filled with many fruitful meetings!  I am thankful. :)

Interesting theories

This week I read chapter 5 of "Theories of Human Communication" by Littlejohn and Foss. I liked this chapter! It discussed theories of messages. Of particular interest to me are these theories:

• Action-assembly theory (actions are integrated into a network of knowledge, nodes, mental models): John Green
• Strategy-choice models, including constructivism (conceptual categories, personal constructs): Jesse Delia, Barbara O'Keefe

Pages 120-124 were of particular interest to me!

On organizing . . .

Working on my lit review for Environmental Information this week, I experienced information chaos! 


I wondered: what is the best way for me to manage all these citations / resources? I'm currently using Connotea. It was made for researchers and scientists, which is why I tried it.  Some databases allow me to directly add a citation to Connotea with an "add to" button, while others don't have this option. Those that don't aren't so efficient. Would another citation management tool be easier to use, better serve my purposes, and make sense to me?  I have yet to try EndNote.

And then I also wonder, what tags should I use to describe relevant articles? They should be consistent so I can retrieve resources by topic. Right now, my tags are many and varied and lack consistency.

An idea I came up with while reading about literature reviews - I will make an index card for each article I read. On each card, I could write:

• author name
• journal title
• key points/topics 
• tags
  

After reading several articles/resources, I could arrange the cards (which represent the article) in various ways:

• by journal title to see which journals are most helpful to me
• by author name to identify experts
• by key points/topics to identify what's been done and where are the gaps - AND where does my research fit within the current discourse?

Just some ideas!

Environmental Information Literature Review

I'm in the middle of my fourth full week of doctoral studies at the University of Tennessee. This has been a fascinating, energizing, confusing, and overwhelming experience. And fun!!!

So much new information to process. How will I organize it all?
So many responsibilities to juggle - classes, ScienceLinks2 projects, my own research, family, friends, church, health....  What's the best way structure my time?

This week, I began a literature review on Environmental Literacy/Education at the university level. This is an interesting topic to me, one that I'd like to incorporate into my own research. The lit review is for the new Environmental Information class (IS 495) the ScienceLinks2 doctoral students are developing with Miriam Davis. She's a post-doctoral student, and she'll teach the class in the spring. We will have opportunity to teach the this course in future semesters throughout our doctoral studies.

I utilized these search techniques:

• browsed the Journal of Environmental Education online contents (very helpful and encountered several useful articles)
• UTK Libraries article search using these terms / phrases: "environmental education" "environmental literacy" "university"  (this search was preliminary, I didn't try synonyms such as "ecology" "sustainability" etc.)
• looked at the references at the end of articles and tagged those of interest for future retrieval; noted potentially relevant journal titles, and looked for patterns in journal names/authors - who's publishing and where?
• searched directly in Web of Science, refining my results "environmental education research" (this is the name of a journal)

I also spoke with Miriam a few times, and she provided many helpful resources:

• Bruce Grant's website about ecological education
• a DataONE powerpoint presentation to provide context for the lit review
• a literature review on biodiversity information needs of environmental decision makers by Beth Meko, a UTK graduate student
• and a few additional articles

In my initial scanning, I noticed several common thread / key words including:

• ecology
• participatory
• data intensive
• social learning
• contextualized learning
• place-based
• transformative learning
• situated learning
• constructivist learning (I like this theory!)
• service learning

What else did I find?

• I encountered a book review for The Handbook of Sustainability Literacy
• more research on introducing youth to environmental issues in k-12 than at the university level

This is a fun topic...more to come later!