Education Research paper

What similarities and difference exist between the two articles regarding the author’s reasons for conducting their respective studies?

The similarity existing between the two author’s reasons for doing their research is that both were guided by challenges facing learning among children especially in technical subjects. They also wanted to identify ways that can make learning simple for children, especially in hard subjects. On contrast part, while the Action Research Article was in to discover a model that utilizes heterogeneity in cooperative learning, the researcher in Differentiated curriculum enhancement article author wanted to compare peer tutoring using hands –on activities with teacher guided instructions. The latter researcher wanted to ascertain while the other wanted to invent.

Describe the ways in which participants were chosen in each study. What reasons did the authors give for the choice of members?

In Differentiated Curriculum Enhancement Research, 13 eighth-grade science classes were selected with a total of 213 students of which 109 were male, and the rest were female, 44 had disabilities. The classes were matched to classroom teachers and randomly assigned either to experimental or control group. The reason was to ensure each teacher taught, at least, a control and an experimental class. This was to ensure that the results were academic without bias

In the Action Research Article, the researcher selected highest and lowest math science students in science classes. First highest and first lowest were to make the first group, second highest and second lowest to make the second team; and then the procedure was repeated until the last group had eighth highest and eighth lowest math students. The remaining students were set in groups to make each group have four participants. The researcher also ensured gender and race balance in the groups. The reason he came up with this type of participants was to come up with a heterogeneous group that would lack any research bias.

Compare the types of data collected in each study. How were these data sources used to answer research questions?

Both data suggests a way to make learning in hard subjects easy. The data in differentiated curriculum article was quantitative in nature while that from action research article was qualitative in nature. The quantitative data collected was critical for the research since it wanted to establish the differences between two variables. Therefore, numbers would be best in determining comparison trends. Since the research Action Research article wanted to set behavior patterns among students who are not quantifiable, the data manages to create a model that can help in teaching rocket science.

Students being the principal actors interacting with variables, they provided the best information critical enough to answer the questions of the research. They presented their view; attitudes as well as results from tests that managed to respond to the research question. Sources of data were therefore well selected since they directly interact with variables.

How were results reported in each article? Describe differences and similarities in reporting methods.

In Differentiated Curriculum Enhancement Article, results were reported in a quantitative manner. Data was coded, and Trends were established through calculations. Results were then explained to give qualitative meaning to the established trends.

In the Action Research Article results were presented in a qualitative manner where trends were observed and presented in an informative manner. There was no coding of trends in the research and, therefore, results only explained observable trend among the research participants.

The similarity that exists in the two is that both used elements of qualitative presentation in their results. While the Action Research Article focused on qualitative representation, differential Curriculum Enhancement Article used qualitative results presentation on the second part of its results presentation.

How do the authors of each study explain their intentions for future research based on their findings (see Discussion sections)?

The author in Action Research Article describes his plans for future research by saying that, if any person can find his model of middle school teaching useful, then the author would be euphoric though he warns that the model was for his class. Therefore, he is indirectly asserting that the model or rather the topic matter may have some deficits. This assertion makes the author say that he intends to improve it in the future meaning he has an intention to carry out a prospective study to improve what he has. He plans to conduct a future study by himself though he doesn’t reveal the exact research recommendation. The other in Differentiated Curriculum Enhancement Article recommends what should be done in future research by saying that the research should consider using differentiated curriculum enhancements with peer mediation in other grade levels as well as subject areas. He, therefore, recommends teachers of middle school students to consider using differentiated had on curriculum enhancements through peers as an important way of delivering quality instructions to teach. He does not intend to do future research by himself but he gives exact recommendations of what should be done in future research which he is sure will uncover critical instructional variables

In what ways does each article contribute to the educational knowledge base?

The Differentiated Curriculum Enhancement Article is critical in helping improving learning in that it suggests the use of supplemental peer-mediated hands- activities that can provide a valuable review as well as practice to help students with disabilities. The article also informs the education sector that collaborative hand –on activities are very useful for facilitating learning of middle school science contents as it makes students enjoy learning. This curriculum enhancement is significant to education policy makers to come up with strategies that can help students with disabilities science as well as other classes.

The Action Research Article contributes to the educational knowledge base by revealing that rocket science or other difficult subjects can be approached well through cooperative learning. This method is very useful in conceptual knowledge as well as creative problem solving. The approach brings heterogeneity in learning. Therefore from an academic knowledge point of view, this research is informative in getting the best way to teach hard subjects in schools.

Sherry Roberts is the author of this paper. A senior editor at Melda Research in

"Janet Peter is the Managing Director of a globally competitive essay writing company.