Today everyone brought a draft of their prospectus and I brought in the evaluation forms I use on the prospectuses in ECON 448 (Econometrics.) Each person read through two prospectuses of group members and made comments on the evaluation forms. I evaluated both Sara and Brent's prospectuses. Both did a great job of describing their projects and the steps that they need to take in order to have great papers by the end of the semester. My prospectus addressed my project on the relationship between marathon performance and the recession/unemployment. It was evaluated by Justin and Brent. They both gave me some very useful feedback that I can use as I move forward on the project.
Peer evaluation can be very useful. Your peers can be full of great ideas that you can incorporate into your own work to make it even stronger than if you worked alone. It is also similar to how research is conducted beyond college. When I present my papers at conferences there is a discussant who follows. The discussant gives a presentation that evaluates my work and offers suggestions and criticisms. Sharing your work with others as you progress through the early stages of the project can save you from making mistakes that others will find and criticise later (and perhaps in not in a manner as constructive and kind as your colleagues!)
Additionally, sharing your work can be motivating. I certainly did more work on my project this week than I otherwise would have since I knew my group mates would be doing their part and I would be a weak link in the group if I was not prepared.
I continue to be impressed with how much work everyone is doing and how prepared each person is when we meet.
Each person left with an assignment unique to their project. Tyler, Nic, and Jorge are to read appropriate sections in their Econometrics textbook dealing with the new modeling that they will employ. Later I will review that material with them and show them the appropriate commands in Stata. Sara is going to work with me on drafting her survey questions and getting her IRB form finished. Brent is going to polish off his interview questions and start making contact with his potential interviewees. He has already submitted his IRB form. Justin is going to develop a list of the variables that he needs in his data set so that we can get together and put the spreadsheet together. I am going to work more on my draft that I brought in today and continue to develop my data set. I also need to get an IRB form completed for the survey portion of my paper.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Student help with a grant application
Dr. William M. Rodgers III (Rutgers University) and I are working on a project concerning the effects of clinical depression on labor market outcomes, such as unemployment and labor market participation. The project requires funds for a variety of things including data, travel, etc. My department chair (Chris McCart) is always very generous with travel funds, but these are limited.
Grants are another potential source of funds. I am in the process of applying for the Mednick Memorial Fellowship Grant, but needed fresh eyes to look over my application. I brought my draft to our research group for help. Reviewing a grant application is helpful for students, particularly those going to graduate school. Grants are commonly used to fund research, including that done during graduate school. Obviously it was helpful to me as well to have a group of bright students reviewing my work.
The group was great! We all read through the application and they called out issues that they found. Many of them also had questions about how grants are used, how tightly the timelines must be followed, and how the budgets are calculated.
After class, I incorporated their edits, finished off a few last pieces, and submitted the application. I am so grateful to have such a great group of editors. Keep your fingers crossed!
Grants are another potential source of funds. I am in the process of applying for the Mednick Memorial Fellowship Grant, but needed fresh eyes to look over my application. I brought my draft to our research group for help. Reviewing a grant application is helpful for students, particularly those going to graduate school. Grants are commonly used to fund research, including that done during graduate school. Obviously it was helpful to me as well to have a group of bright students reviewing my work.
The group was great! We all read through the application and they called out issues that they found. Many of them also had questions about how grants are used, how tightly the timelines must be followed, and how the budgets are calculated.
After class, I incorporated their edits, finished off a few last pieces, and submitted the application. I am so grateful to have such a great group of editors. Keep your fingers crossed!
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Great couple of weeks
The Mentor Demonstration/URE @ RC continues to make progress. Below is a brief overview of our past few meetings:
1/27/2011
The topic for today was developing a hypothesis. Everyone was asked to write out a description of their research topic. We started by going around the room sharing these descriptions with each other. I was impressed with the level of work that the students have already put forth (and glad that I had remembered to do my homework!) There was a great deal of discussion about each project, and several great suggestions offered.
Next I described how a researcher might go about developing a hypothesis. This process includes having a refined research question(s), looking to the literature pertaining to that research question(s), and then developing a hypothesis that is specific, precise and subject to verification and testing.
We then each worked for several minutes writing out specific research questions based on our topics and the literature that we had already reviewed. We shared these questions with each other and offered comments and suggestions to each presenter.
We left with the goal for the next week being to continue to review the literature. Our discussion next time is the literature review.
2/3/2011
The topic for today was the literature review.
First I described several reasons/uses of the literature review, including:
1) Informing/educating your reader/audience
2) Putting your work in context with existing work
3) Showing you (the researcher) what has already been done so that you can see how/if you are contributing to the existing body of work
4) Teaching you (the researcher) lessons learned by previous authors (mistakes not to make, heads up on difficulties/obstacles/likely criticisms)
5) Helping you (the researcher) refine your research question and build your hypothesis
Next, I logged onto the computer and showed the group some fruitful and respectable places to look for relevant literature, including WorldCat, EconLit, Jstor, and Google Scholar.
We then went around the room and shared the literature that we each had found over the previous week and talked about how it fit, or didn't fit with our research questions, and any other updates.
Brent: Spoke with Drs. Filer and Lyon about potential interview questions and set up a meeting with a potential contact for the interview
Nic: Looked at online resources but has not found many useful additions yet to the literature review that he did for his ECON 448 paper (it was a very good one!) He is still hopeful.
Tyler: Emailed Dr. Stauffer about where he should go with his paper; potentially a focus on monetary policy in Europe; looked at news articles about the European Debt Crisis and noted that there was an abrupt halt in the popular press on the subject (did a celebrity get married or something to take it out of the headlines?)
Sara: Found some great studies on obesity and productivity but all focused on children or adults (good for her...she is the first!)
Jorge: Keeps talking about this Jorge Friedman guy that Nic does not believe exists...too convenient a name we think. He did review the literature and spoke with Dr. Nik-Khah about some potential angles for his paper.
Justin: Did a LOT of work searching the literature which is a new experience for him. He is learning to sift through it all and pick out what is helpful. So far he has found some great pieces.
Dr. Kassens: Found very little in the academic literature on the impact of the recession on marathon performance, but many articles from newspapers (including the WSJ article that got her thinking about the project); wondering if I should not only look at big marathons like NYC, but more "local" marathons as well
Finally, Brent Cox shared a draft of his literature review so that students in the early stages of their work can see a student sample.
Our goal for next week is to continue working on the literature review and the topic for next time is IRB Approvals.
Great session!
2/8/2011
There was a short turn around (Thursday to Tuesday) for our meeting this week, yet many students (and teacher) had done quite a bit of work.
The topic for today was IRB approvals. I reviewed with the students the purpose of the approval and where to find the documentation.
Next I passed out the updated RC IRB form and reviewed the different parts.
I then passed out three sample IRB forms that I have completed in the past so that they could see how different types of projects must focus on different items.
Finally, since there are two students who need IRB approval in our group (Brent and Sara) we split into two groups to help them with their forms. Nic and I helped Brent with his approval form while Tyler, Jorge, and Justin helped Sara. I had several comments from colleagues that passed by the classroom while we were doing this about how hard everyone was working and how animated everyone was. I take this as a good sign. We are being productive and having fun!
Our topic next week is developing a prospectus. Additionally everyone has the goal of posting a draft of their literature review on our SharePoint team site for peer review.
1/27/2011
The topic for today was developing a hypothesis. Everyone was asked to write out a description of their research topic. We started by going around the room sharing these descriptions with each other. I was impressed with the level of work that the students have already put forth (and glad that I had remembered to do my homework!) There was a great deal of discussion about each project, and several great suggestions offered.
Next I described how a researcher might go about developing a hypothesis. This process includes having a refined research question(s), looking to the literature pertaining to that research question(s), and then developing a hypothesis that is specific, precise and subject to verification and testing.
We then each worked for several minutes writing out specific research questions based on our topics and the literature that we had already reviewed. We shared these questions with each other and offered comments and suggestions to each presenter.
We left with the goal for the next week being to continue to review the literature. Our discussion next time is the literature review.
2/3/2011
The topic for today was the literature review.
First I described several reasons/uses of the literature review, including:
1) Informing/educating your reader/audience
2) Putting your work in context with existing work
3) Showing you (the researcher) what has already been done so that you can see how/if you are contributing to the existing body of work
4) Teaching you (the researcher) lessons learned by previous authors (mistakes not to make, heads up on difficulties/obstacles/likely criticisms)
5) Helping you (the researcher) refine your research question and build your hypothesis
Next, I logged onto the computer and showed the group some fruitful and respectable places to look for relevant literature, including WorldCat, EconLit, Jstor, and Google Scholar.
We then went around the room and shared the literature that we each had found over the previous week and talked about how it fit, or didn't fit with our research questions, and any other updates.
Brent: Spoke with Drs. Filer and Lyon about potential interview questions and set up a meeting with a potential contact for the interview
Nic: Looked at online resources but has not found many useful additions yet to the literature review that he did for his ECON 448 paper (it was a very good one!) He is still hopeful.
Tyler: Emailed Dr. Stauffer about where he should go with his paper; potentially a focus on monetary policy in Europe; looked at news articles about the European Debt Crisis and noted that there was an abrupt halt in the popular press on the subject (did a celebrity get married or something to take it out of the headlines?)
Sara: Found some great studies on obesity and productivity but all focused on children or adults (good for her...she is the first!)
Jorge: Keeps talking about this Jorge Friedman guy that Nic does not believe exists...too convenient a name we think. He did review the literature and spoke with Dr. Nik-Khah about some potential angles for his paper.
Justin: Did a LOT of work searching the literature which is a new experience for him. He is learning to sift through it all and pick out what is helpful. So far he has found some great pieces.
Dr. Kassens: Found very little in the academic literature on the impact of the recession on marathon performance, but many articles from newspapers (including the WSJ article that got her thinking about the project); wondering if I should not only look at big marathons like NYC, but more "local" marathons as well
Finally, Brent Cox shared a draft of his literature review so that students in the early stages of their work can see a student sample.
Our goal for next week is to continue working on the literature review and the topic for next time is IRB Approvals.
Great session!
2/8/2011
There was a short turn around (Thursday to Tuesday) for our meeting this week, yet many students (and teacher) had done quite a bit of work.
The topic for today was IRB approvals. I reviewed with the students the purpose of the approval and where to find the documentation.
Next I passed out the updated RC IRB form and reviewed the different parts.
I then passed out three sample IRB forms that I have completed in the past so that they could see how different types of projects must focus on different items.
Finally, since there are two students who need IRB approval in our group (Brent and Sara) we split into two groups to help them with their forms. Nic and I helped Brent with his approval form while Tyler, Jorge, and Justin helped Sara. I had several comments from colleagues that passed by the classroom while we were doing this about how hard everyone was working and how animated everyone was. I take this as a good sign. We are being productive and having fun!
Our topic next week is developing a prospectus. Additionally everyone has the goal of posting a draft of their literature review on our SharePoint team site for peer review.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)