Author’s Chair (Thursday, June 24, 2020)

Dear Fellow Writers: I need your help with my thesis. Please take a couple of minutes to answer the following questions in the Chatbox. (Your feedback is important to me.)

1.) Do you use online grammar checkers? Which one?

2.) If you are a teacher, do your students use online grammar checkers? Which one?

3.) I am going to provide an overview of my research proposal, then read the Introduction, please provide feedback on the flow and clarity of ideas.

************************************************************************

(Google Images, May 2020)

Purpose: A Proposal to Describe The Impact on Grammar and How Online Grammar Checkers Can Help Students (Undergraduate and Graduate) With Self-Efficacy and Independence

Goal: Exploring a possible grant for an institutional license of Grammarly at Kean University

Research question: What was my experience with grammar instruction and how it impacted my identity as a writer?

Research Methodology: Autoethnography 

[According to Adams, Jones, and Ellis in Autoethnography: Understanding Qualitative Research, “Autoethnography is a research method that: Uses a researcher’s personal experience to describe and critique cultural beliefs, practices, and experiences. Acknowledges and values a researcher’s relationships with others….]

Participants: Since it is an autoethnography, I am the subject of my inquiry.

Data (Layered Account): Vignettes, reflections, observations, and a comparative comparison of online grammar checkers.

Data collection: I have collected data on the various online grammar checkers and created an evaluative comparison chart.

Analysis: I will describe my experience and connect it to power dynamics in writing theory along with socio-political context. I will foreground my views in a critically reflexive manner. 

************************************************************************

TITLE OF THESIS: An Act of Rebellion and a Tool of Empowerment: Online Grammar Checkers (Does this title draw you in? Is it original?)

INTRODUCTION 

“Do you have a Grammarly Premium account, Ms. Pham?”

“No, I do not, Daniel. I will look into it.”

My research study was launched with this request from one of my students in my 10th grade English class in a large suburban New Jersey high school. We were writing a synthesis essay on The Crucible by Arthur Miller along with other current events articles, and he wanted to edit his essay. So, I took a leap of faith and purchased Grammarly Premium ($139.95/year) that provided more error suggestions than the free version Grammarly. I allowed my 10th-grade students in my college prep and regular track English classes to use my personal Grammarly Premium account to revise and edit their essays. The opportunity to use Grammarly motivated some students to finish their essays so they can use it on the teacher desktop in front of the room. 

Overall, my students found Grammarly Premium more helpful than the free, basic version. I would have a student on my desktop computer while conferencing with another student writer. After their Grammarly session, I would ask, “What errors were you making? Did you notice a pattern?” I have a conversation on passive versus active voice, explaining that active voice is more rigorous, however, passive voice is preferred for lab reports. I also refer them to Purdue OWL for further reading on active versus passive voice (See Purdue OWL’s lesson on Active versus Passive Voice.) Based on my experience, it is crucial to have this conversation with the students after checking their essays on Grammarly so they are mindful of their grammatical errors. These conversations also serve as individualized grammar lessons. 

This year, I allowed my students to use my personal account since a majority would not purchase individual subscriptions of Grammarly Premium. In the future, I would like the Board of Education to provide an institutional subscription of Grammarly Premium or another online grammar checker. Hence, the audience of my proposal are teachers who are interested in online grammar checkers, administrators or individuals who are interested in investing in a paid online grammar checker, and students who are interested in reducing errors in their essays. The purpose of my research is to present online grammar checkers, e.g. Grammarly or another comparable online grammar checker, as an act of rebellion and a tool of empowerment.

Thank you for listening and providing your feedback!

Light at the End of the Research Tunnel

(Source: Google Images, May 4, 2020)

Key Takeaways From:

Starks & Trinidad. “Choose your Method: A Comparison of Phenomenology, Discourse Analysis, and Grounded Theory”

At the end of my Research Methods Class, I appreciate the comparative study that Starks and Trinidad on prostate cancer screening, where they use three research methods: phenomenology, discourse analysis, and grounded theory. They provided a useful hourglass metaphor (Figure 1) illustrating the similarities and differences among the three research methods. It appears that these research methods are different in the beginning and end but converge in the analytic and post-analytic stages, especially in the sharing methodologies for decontextualizing and recontextualizing data.

The researchers decided to use a comparative approach since they were undecided in terms of which research design to use. It is refreshing to read that other researchers struggle with this intellectual decision. I also struggled with my research design. Earlier in the course, I had decided on grounded theory, then decided against it since the coding aspect appeared overwhelming. Then I entertained the idea of a case study and phenomenology, but obtaining IRB approval during remote learning may cause further delays in the completion of my research proposal. So, I have decided on autoethnography, which is similar to phenomenology, in that both incorporate elements of a narrative in its research design.

Another exciting aspect of Starks and Trinidad’s research study is that they have three different audiences with three different goals: the novice researchers, researchers who are familiar with one research design but another, and teachers of research methods classes. In retrospect, I believe that they accomplished their goal of providing a framework for researchers and teachers in the three different research designs. In terms of their secondary purpose of deciding which research method to use during prostate cancer screening, I would recommend the Discourse Analysis: How the Discourses of Medicine and Public Health Construct Doctor-Patient Roles and Identities. By providing novice doctors a script when discussing prostate cancer screening with patients, the conversation will be more precise. The discourse analysis approach will produce more beneficence than the other two research methods. In a way, Starks and Trinidad had two purposes for their research study. Therefore, it is crucial to keep in mind the purpose of the research when deciding on a research design.

In my research proposal, I like the idea of multiple audiences and goals. My first audience is graduate and undergraduate students and the impact on online grammar checkers on their writing. The second audience is high-school English teachers or content-area teachers and writing instructors who are interested in helping students revise and edit their writing. My third audience is a decision-maker who may need the data to purchase the online grammar checkers for the entire institution.

In terms of Sampling, the researchers contend that it is not necessary to have a large sample of quality data. The average sample size is 1 to 10 participants. I had initially assumed that a larger sample size would produce quality results; however, it does not hold.

A key difference in the design is within the Analytic Methods, specifically under the Coding section, where phenomenologists are writing stories of people’s experiences, and discourse analysts are coding people’s language for patterns, themes, and roles. In contrast, phenomenologists use “a constant, comparative coding process” through three stages: 1.) open coding (“examining, comparing, conceptualizing, and categorizing data”); axial coding (“reassembling data into groupings based on relationships and patterns within and among the categories identified in the data”); and 3.) selective coding (“identifying and describing the central phenomenon”). Hence, a novice researcher may need guidance with the coding section of a phenomenological study.

Although the researcher may use self-reflection in the analytic stage, they must refrain from inserting their preconceived notions. In phenomenology and discourse analysis, researchers must “bracket” themselves where they set aside their assumptions so as not to bias the research study. In terms of products of a research study, there are surveys, explanatory theories, and stories. 

I want to end with the most helpful takeaway, the Methodology (Formulating a Research Question) to help me formulatemy research questions:

• What is your experience with online grammar checkers (Phenomenology)?
• What discourses are used, and how do they shape identities, relationships, and activities? (Do the copy on Grammarly such as Awesome! motivate writers?) (Discourse Analysis)
• How does the social process occur in a particular environment? (Grounded Theory)

The last question did not necessarily fit with the purpose of my research proposal, so I can rule out grounded theory (which I did). I would say that this exercise is helping in deciding the research design. Overall, this study is valuable to researchers and had wished that I had read this earlier in the semester.