I’m currently reading a paper publication related to the work that I’m doing. It’s a publication that I will most probably refer to a couple of times in this research, mainly because of the various possibilities of future works stated in their study. The title is called ‘Constraints on representational change : Evidence from children’s drawing’. I find this publication really interesting, in many ways. First of all, the title itself kinda explains the content of the paper. Secondly, simple English is used to convey the idea and what’s most interesting is that despite the complex ideas and discussions are made, there is a good flow of presentation where useful diagrams are depicted along with the given explanation.
The introduction starts with asking and answering why children’s drawing is found feasible for the study. There’s also a good list of literature review covered in the first part of the paper. The author makes the explanation clear by giving the underlying theoretical concepts relevant to the study before detailed descriptions are discussed , this includes an overview of the participants (which are of course children), the methods of experiment employed(children are asked to draw diagrams with many cycles of different types of changes made to the diagram; it’s interesting to look at the drawings the children produce such as a house with wings and a helicopter with legs!), results of the tasks performed and a comprehensive discussion on the findings are made with comparison of arguments from their work and previous researches . Examples or analogy are also widely used in order to make the context easy to comprehend.
It’s interesting that although this paper was published in 1989, the ideas and concept coordinates with my current research. During the time of writing, they did not mention anything about chunking. Probably because the theory of chunking wasn’t quite established at that time. However, their findings clearly focus on issues related to this particular subject. Somehow I’m amazed by the conjunction between my research and theirs which was done almost 20 years ago! It’s great to ponder abt how magnificent research evolves over time. Given the same information, probably I’d represent the findings in a more visually appealing approach, perhaps with the use of posters or power point slides. I believe this paper comes from a journal, therefore if I were to produce other publication for this, I see that the original publication can be divided into a few papers that could discuss on various aspects of the findings. Hehee..this has given me a motivation to start writing a publication of my own for this DPhil research..I’m motivated!
The introduction starts with asking and answering why children’s drawing is found feasible for the study. There’s also a good list of literature review covered in the first part of the paper. The author makes the explanation clear by giving the underlying theoretical concepts relevant to the study before detailed descriptions are discussed , this includes an overview of the participants (which are of course children), the methods of experiment employed(children are asked to draw diagrams with many cycles of different types of changes made to the diagram; it’s interesting to look at the drawings the children produce such as a house with wings and a helicopter with legs!), results of the tasks performed and a comprehensive discussion on the findings are made with comparison of arguments from their work and previous researches . Examples or analogy are also widely used in order to make the context easy to comprehend.
It’s interesting that although this paper was published in 1989, the ideas and concept coordinates with my current research. During the time of writing, they did not mention anything about chunking. Probably because the theory of chunking wasn’t quite established at that time. However, their findings clearly focus on issues related to this particular subject. Somehow I’m amazed by the conjunction between my research and theirs which was done almost 20 years ago! It’s great to ponder abt how magnificent research evolves over time. Given the same information, probably I’d represent the findings in a more visually appealing approach, perhaps with the use of posters or power point slides. I believe this paper comes from a journal, therefore if I were to produce other publication for this, I see that the original publication can be divided into a few papers that could discuss on various aspects of the findings. Hehee..this has given me a motivation to start writing a publication of my own for this DPhil research..I’m motivated!
No comments:
Post a Comment