Wednesday, February 1st 2012

For the past few years I've been using a notebook for the Storyboard project. I would write on a new page each day and then rip out and dispose of the page when the information had been incorporated into the digital thesis. This also served as a list of which HTML files needed to be uploaded. Now that I've changed computers, the FTP program which I'm using can sort files by date so the notebook has become partly redundant. I think I'll still use a notepad for convenience even if I don't write in it as often.


Thursday, February 2nd 2012

My feedback from both supervisors regarding my Literature review shows that I still have a lot of work to do. I'm only now realising how much this section is about others people's writing and less about my own ideas.


Friday, February 3rd 2012

Today I replaced 'Bibliography' with 'Cognitive models' as one of the 12 items on the main menu page. (This page has since been removed. The opening statement from this page was; 'The emerging contribution of this study to cognitive science is that explanatory animations can literally and figuratively function as cognitive models. The emerging contribution to educational research is that the process of creating explanatory animations is a powerful diagnostic tool to reveal incomplete or incorrect assumptions.')


Saturday, February 4th 2012

My focus regarding the significance of storyboard as conceptual models is shifting towards the richness of the model rather than the actual mechanics of cognition. I suspect that there are specific processes involves in conceptual consolidation but that these processes are particular to the topic (e.g. terminology, variables, etc.)


Sunday, February 5th 2012

One of my supervisors emailed a few readings through today:

Gobert, J. D. & Clement, J. J. (1999). Effects of student-generated diagrams versus student-generated summaries on conceptual understanding of causal and dynamic knowledge in plate tectonics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1), (39-53).

Vere, S. A. (1980). Multilevel counterfactuals for generalizations of relational concepts and productions. Artificial Intelligence, 14(2), 139-164.


Monday, February 6th 2012

The Gobert and Clement (1999) reading is good because it deals with children who are of the same age as the Storyboard participants (i.e., Grade 5 and 6).


Tuesday, February 7th 2012

I am reevaluating whether to continue this journal as a daily habit. It is beneficial but sometimes I see it as a chore. I think I will continue it as I might be glad later. I still don't know if this will officially count as data in the thesis in terms of the word count but I shouldn't concern myself with that.


Wednesday, February 8th 2012

The structure of this web site reveals my conceptual framework for this project. This is yet another area which has not been officially sanctioned in terms of my presentation / submission options for this thesis.


Thursday, February 9th 2012

I feel that I still need to address perception in this study.


Friday, February 10th 2012

The scope of the term 'model' in this study is also shifting away from the mind (cognitive model) towards the concept (conceptual model).


Saturday, February 11th 2012

The significance of structure as mentioned in my entry from 8th February came into focus again tonight. In preparation for 'Managing Innovation' (Melbourne Business School scholarship final subject) I watched the movie 'Life Story' about the discovery of DNA. The models which were being devised and modified made me wonder whether the structure of my thesis has additional significance.


Sunday, February 12th 2012

I picked up 'Vygosky and Creativity' (2010) from the library today as the previous borrower has finally returned it. I'm glad that I've already ordered my own copy from Amazon as this is proving to be very useful material.


Monday, February 13th 2012

I need a different phrase for 'Cognitive model' or even 'Conceptual model'.


Tuesday, February 14th 2012

Maybe 'Explanatory blueprint' is the term that I need but I don't feel that it is.


Wednesday, February 15th 2012

Multiple levels. New section is on creativity.

Convention v calibration.


Thursday, February 16th 2012

There is now a new section is called in the Literature review called 'Modelling creativity'.  I'm sure if it belongs here but it is an issue that I want to discuss.


Friday, February 17th 2012

At the Melbourne Business School (MBS) today I heard the word 'ideation'.  It's about generating new ideas so I want to include this concept somewhere.  Ideation also begs the question 'Where do you get your information?'  Storyboard participants were not restricted in terms of where they sourced information and, of course, Google was never far away. In one sense, this is then a non issue as it is not unrelated but unimportant.

Today I also started a new 'Discussion' section.


Saturday, February 18th 2012

There seems to be a lot of overlap between my MBS subject (i.e., Managing innovation) and this PhD. The overlap involves knowledge, creativity and design.


Sunday, February 19th 2012

I've been at the MBS for three straight days now doing an intensive weekend workload for 'Managing innovation'.  'Data' was mentioned as a plural term which was new to me.


Monday, February 20th 2012

'Self scaffolding' is a term which I have started to critique in the Literature review.

Tuesday, February 21st 2012

The issue of teacher involvement has really come into focus for me lately. Today I read a chapter about a choreography class at the YMCA in New York City:

Oreck, B. & Nicoll, J. (2010). Dance dialogues: Creating and teaching in the Zone of Proximal Development. In M. C. Connery, V. P. John-Steiner & A. Marjanovic-Shane (Eds.). Vygotsky and Creativity (pp. 107-124). New York: Peter Lang.

This reading spoke to me on several levels due to my primary occupation as a Performing Arts teacher.  Dancing is my weakest area of expertise but the issue of empowering students to make their own creative decisions seems to apply to all artistic endeavors.

Wednesday, February 22nd 2012

I revisited and tightened up the Discussion section today.


Thursday, February 23rd 2012

Today I saw the movie 'Late Bloomers' with William Hurt.  Hurt played an architect and his character made a reference to the American architect Frank Lloyd Wright which made me wish that I had more time to look into design, purely for reasons of interest.  Design is also a concept that I have mentioned many times during this project.  At MBS it has been described as a marriage between form and function.


Friday, February 24th 2012

I changed the 'index.htm" graphics today for the Storyboard homepage.

Saturday, February 25th 2012

Today I read about the conventions of quotation marks from a University of Melbourne guidelines PDF document.  Apparently, as an Australian, I should be using ' instead of ".  


Sunday, February 26th 2012

I asked myself a hypothetical question today which might eventually find its way into the Discussion or Research methodology sections.  The question is: "What could have been done differently in the Storyboard 2011 project?

For example:


Monday, February 27th 2012

Today I'm wondering whether I should incorporate commentary throughout the Storyboard thesis as a metacognitive device?


Tuesday, February 28th 2012

Today I added two new headings to the Research methodology section inspired by the word 'juxtaposition':


Wednesday, February 29th 2012

Today I emailed my supervisors wondering about how best to approach the Literature review as follows:

I had promised to get an update to you by the end of the month so here it is:

‘Vygotsky and Creativity’ arrived two weeks ago and I’ve now read it from cover to cover.  Important works like this end up informing many sections of my thesis and not just the Literature Review.  This leads me to seek your collective advice on what is the best next step for me.

I’ve amended the Literature Review according to the suggestions that you both provided me but I feel that this is the least complete part of the thesis and might continue to be so for several months as, mentioned above, important works permeate the whole thesis.  If I’m correct about this then there appears to be at least two options:

1.    Submit a more complete (or less likely to change) section such as the individual reviews of each participant or another section such as the ‘Research Methodology’

2.    Alternatively, using my same line of reasoning, it could be argued that no section could be considered complete until the Literature Review is complete.

Either way, I am still working on the Literature Review every day and as always, the online version is the most up to date.  I am happy to format any section that you would like sent as a hard copy as this can be tedious.



Main menu