I spoke to students and faculty at @AbertayUni about how we do #edtech research at WGU Labs, and advice for psychology PhDs looking to land an #altac role.
[THREAD] with pics, links to posts, and the full presentation at the end 👇🏼 1/
The #edtech industry has been on the rise since 2018, but #COVID19 has acted as a catalyst for online learning at scale in 2020. Edtech adoption by educators has been a huge output of this pandemic & all the more reason that our work at Labs is super relevant right now. 2/
However, there are some three key problems that I see with #edtech research👇🏼
Edtech research should focus IMO on enhancing core learning processes. I've talked about some of this here: nicolebarbaro.com/2020/06/16/usi… 3/
Our main focus, then, is to identify products that solve education access problems and learning problems as a priority.
Once identified, we conduct rigorous research to ensure that these products have positive impacts on student learning and academic outcomes. 4/
What is our research approach at Labs? We're guided by key actions (outside) and core research values (inside) that keep our research rigorous, transparent, and impactful.
#OpenScience is foundational to our research to solve general research problems in social science, but also to increase the credibility and access of company-funded research.
I saw this title and “thought this is so unlikely to be what the actual scientific paper said” and I was right. First things first – let’s look at the title of the actual paper, linked at the end of the article 2/
Well the article must at least talk about race and racism, right? Right?!
Juicy take on why replication attempts *really* fail: The phenomenon I studied was super complex and you probably didn't do something correctly.
2/
Their proposal is a(nother!) framework or "lens" to evaluate failed replications across 4 types of validity to identify the potential ways in which the replication study differed that could explain the failed replication.
[Thread] I'm a bit late but as people are prepping courses for the new semester (or already started) I wanted to share all my teaching materials for those that may find them useful! #TeachPsych#PhDchat please RT to share!
1. The Psychology of Human Sexuality [3000 level, elective, 4 credit hours]. I took an evo, cross-cultural approach. The 2-day a week course was split, I did lecture one day & discussed a recent research article the other. Term paper materials included osf.io/qn3w2/
2. Intro to Lifespan Developmental Psychology [2000 level, program req & gen ed, 4 credit hours]. Formatted for a 2-day a week full semester (fall 2019) and a 8 week 2-day a week summer semester. Scientific literacy assignments included! osf.io/af8rk/
First, the good: The basic research design is great. The classes are online courses that were run by a single admin throughout the semester. The only difference was the brief video intro by the professor. This is a really clean way to run a realistic quasi-experimental design. 2/
Now for the less good: The overall sample size is small -- 14 professors. The analysis used t-test to determine differences in overall course ratings by gender and race, and then a regression to see how gender and race uniquely predict course/prof ratings. 3/
Evolutionary theories of the female orgasm in humans tend to neglect comparative approaches to understanding the evolutionary history of the human female orgasm. New theory followed up by experimental evidence, however, is changing this. 1/
In 2016 researchers proposed that the female orgasm in humans, which is more likely to be induced via clitoral stimulation, may have been necessary and functional -- to induce ovulation in females -- further back in mammalian evolutionary history. 2/ onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.100…
In many mammals the clitoris is located in or closer to the vagina, making orgasm more likely & more closely tied to reproduction. BC of genetical arrangement changes over evolution, human female clitoris' are further away from vagina, reducing the likelihood copulation-orgasm 3/
Is the Five Factor Model (FFM) WEIRD? Are the Big Five personality traits — statistically, the factor structure yeilding 5 traits — only valid in western countries?
Well, no. The research article shows primarily a methodological problem, not a cultural problem, with the FFM. 2/
Problem 1. The article has three data groups. A US dataset, an cross-cultural internet set, and a cross-cultural face-to-face interview “survey” dataset.
Important: both cross-cultural sets have data from the SAME countries. 2/