Share a gap analysis of your organizational setting.
What You Need to Know
In class, you used the GAP Analysis worksheet to Identify an organizational issue that, if addressed, could positively impact organizational effectiveness or outcomes. You justified your selection of the elements that are part of the problem, process, or program and your decision to frame the gaps the way you did. Additionally, you used data to support your description of the gaps. So, now the focus will be on revisiting that analysis as you prepare to develop your actual AIP topic statement. This topic statement will form the basis for the rest of your coursework as you transition to the first of 6 courses that will culminate with your AIP. This week, complete the following:
• Review the GAP Analysis Worksheet [DOCX].
• Read the examples that are included on p. 2 of the worksheet.
Using your readings from this week and the four examples of gaps provided on the second page of the worksheet, complete the following:
• Complete the GAP Analysis Worksheet [DOC]. (ATTAACHED) You should identify one gap that exists in your elementary school setting and justify your decision to frame the gaps the way you did.
• Use the Ishikawa (Fishbone) Diagram Template [DOCX](ATTACHED) to identify the root causes that are contributing to the GAP. Remember that the head of the fish represents the problem or issue, and the ribs represent the major causes of the problem. Finally, the sub-branches are where the root causes are identified.
• Post your GAP and Ishikiwa diagram to the discussion.
Gap Analysis and Ishikawa Diagrams – Part 1
The superintendent in an urban school district has commissioned a study of the principals and assistant principals to determine their view of a new (and expensive) technology program that placed laptops in all middle school and high school classrooms in the district. His concern is that teachers are not using the laptops to their full advantage. He plans to use Gap analysis and Ishikawa diagrams to develop a causal analysis of the problem
In the last, you have been learning about the purpose and value of quantitative, qualitative, and action research methodologies through an exploration of the elements of various research designs embedded in these approaches. You investigated what should be considered when planning to collect data, how to organize and analyze the data once you have collected it, and how to make sense of what the data tells you about the variables and constructs you are investigating. This week, we move on to explore how gap analysis and Ishikawa Diagrams can be used to inform problems of practice. ORIGINAL PROBLE OF PRACTICE PAPER IS INCLUDED
The following are articles pertinent to the various tests relevant to your assignments in this course:
• Independent samples t-test: Demirbilek, M. (2015). Social media and peer feedback: What do students really think about using Wiki and Facebook as platforms for peer feedback? Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(3), pages 211–224.
• This study might be interesting for learners who are considering comparing two groups on one or more variables.
• Descriptive analysis: Liu, O. L., Bridgeman, B., Gu, L., Xu, J., & Kong, N. (2015). Investigation of response changes in the GRE Revised General Test. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 75(6), pages 1002–1020.
• This study might be interesting for learners who are interested in how large data sets are descriptively analyzed.
• Paired-samples t-test: Vinnerljung, B., Tideman, E. Sallnäs, M., & Forsman, H. (2014). Paired reading for foster children: Results from a Swedish replication of an English literacy intervention. Adoption & Fostering, 38(4), pages 361–373.
• This study might be interesting for learners who are considering comparing the effects of an intervention on just one group
• Pearson r-test: Reed, M. J, Kennett, D. J., & Emond, M. (2015). The influence of reasons for attending university on university experience: A comparison between students with and without disabilities. Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(3), pages 225–236.
• This study might be interesting for learners who are considering comparing two groups on one or more variables and then examining possible associations between the variables.
• One-way ANOVA: Rezaei, A. R. (2015). Frequent collaborative quiz taking and conceptual learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(3), pages 187–196.
• This study might be interesting for learners who are considering comparing three groups on one or more variables.
• Correlational analysis: January, S-A. A, and Ardoin, S. P. (2015). Technical adequacy and acceptability of curriculum-based measurement and the measures of academic progress. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 41(1), pages 3–15.
• This study might be interesting for learners who are considering the relationships between several variables – in this case, several measures for various grade levels.
• Correlational analysis: Ketterlin-Geller, L. R., Gifford, D. B., & Perry, L. (2015). Measuring middle school students’ algebra readiness: Examining validity evidence for three experimental measures. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 41(1), pages 28–40.
• This study might be interesting for learners who are considering the relationships between several variables – in this case, the relationship to various math content and algebra readiness.
• Chi-square test and ANOVA: Etmanskie, J. M., Partanen, M, & Siegel, L. S. (2016). A longitudinal examination of the persistence of late emerging reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49(1), pages 21–35.
The following readings from Pyrczak and Oh’s (2018) Making Sense of Statistics will inform your understanding of these topics:
• Chapter 21, “Introduction to the t-Test,” pages 121–126.
• Chapter 22, “Independent Samples t-Test,” pages 128–133.
• Chapter 23, “Dependent Samples t-Test,” pages 134–138.
• Chapter 24, “One Sample t-Test,” pages 139–142.
• Chapter 25, “Reports of the Results of t-Tests,” pages 143–147.