# data[].attributes.body
Dr. McGovern
Drexel University

# data[].attributes.body
Explanation: “where the emphasis is placed on the way human beings give meaning to their lives; reasons are accepted as legitimate causes of human behavior; and agential perspectives are prioritized,” (Morrison, 2007).

Interpretivism was superficially included during the second series of research in 1999. The methodology was manipulative, sought to verify the hypothesis, and used primarily quantitative methods.Prior to this research from 1995-1998, evaluation was focused on student outcomes and quantitative data, but when Raby and her colleagues took over, they looked at faculty-perceived success and pedagogical growth. This included Raby and Kaufman holding the informal group discussions themselves, which is not typical in a positivist paradigm. However, this was not exactly an open dialogue because of the prescriptive set of questions that could be replicated, thus returning to a positivist approach. Feelings and opinions were included in questions during qualitative observation but this is because they were deemed measureable by the researchers.

Another possible aspect of Interpretivism was the desire to apply this knowledge across disciplines to contribute to pedagogy in general, however authors worded this in way that was trying to prove INMP’s worthiness as revolutionary in pedagogy, which goes back to positivism and the underlying ontology and epistemology.

# data[].attributes.body
1999: Mixed qualitative and quantitative evaluations through an informal focus group was applied during faculty training and included questions of student success and faculty pedagogical development. Attached to quantitative data through student learning outcomes and assessment were specific qualitative questions about project issues and faculty change in teaching methods.

2004: Faculty members who had been part of the project aided in the development of learning objectives for future practice in the program, but in the article all that is stated is, “basic elements of evaluation, traditional and nontraditional, were developed.” (Raby, 2011).

2005-2011: The only information given is that these informal evaluations were directed toward student success.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ORU International Crisis Policy Simulation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Four countries represented by ORU students make simulated decisions and negotiations concerning a mock terrorist group created by their teachers. Students test their leadership, diplomatic, public relations, and communication skills in real-world scenarios.

# data[].attributes.body
Because of the positivist approach to research, there is little room for negativity or discussion of project issues. Many conclusions were based on faculty professional opinion and evaluations that were not given to students, yet were based on how students performed in class. Also, because of the objective nature toward people in a positivist approach, individual faculty situations were not considered, such as a new professor who lacks an alternative model to teaching international negotiations with which to compare to the INMP. One conclusion was that students “learn and retain more than students in “traditional” classes, yet research on those students was not presented in this article. There would have to be a comparative study in order to be accurate in these conclusions. Also, how the researchers came to these conclusions is not clear based on the lack of information given about methods.

# data[].attributes.body
Originally I chose to study this article because it was so straightforward and clear, however analyzing it with a critical eye after reading this week’s material forced me to realize the many flaws involved in research with a positivist paradigm.

# data[].attributes.body
(a)Why is IMNP a viable model for linking technology and internationalization of the curriculum?

(b)How is the INMP an innovative approach to teaching and learning at the community college?

(c)What are the noted links between the INMP and faculty development?

# data[].attributes.body
The article concludes that this model has been untouched in the past twenty years because of its innovative approach to pedagogy. Positive results of INMP included that students (a) learn and retain more than students in the “traditional” classes (b) substantially increase their knowledge of the issues and recognize relationships between abstract and concrete concepts that were central to discussions (c) are highly involved in the decision-making process and believe they have contributed cognitively to it (d) develop critical thinking skills, and (e) participate more fully in class. The research questions and noted results are realistically too abstract to accurately measure through the predominantly quantitative methods used in this research. Qualitative attempts were actually quantitative in nature and although researchers seemed to try to stray away from a purely positivist approach, research methods ended up returning to their epistemological roots.

# data[].attributes.headline
Paradigm: Positivism- “hard science” researchers

# data[].attributes.subject
Paradigm: Positivism- “hard science” researchers

# data[].attributes.body
Explanation: “accepted that facts can be collected about the world; language allows us to represent those facts unproblematically; and it is possible to develop correct methods for understanding educational processes, relations and institutions.” (Morrison, 2007).

The ontology of this study is the belief that hypotheses can be clearly reached and that an educational project can be proven effective and be a model for best practices in pedagogy. All the research seeks to prove the research questions and hypotheses, pointing to an objectivist epistemology, that the findings are without a doubt true. A noted challenge is joined with simple and viable solutions and although discussed in the article, issues do not seem to affect the positive outcomes of the program. The authors write, “Although problems can exist with the use of simulations, the benefits, especially in the case of INMP, far outweigh the drawbacks.” (Raby, 2012). This research indicates an underlying belief that through quantitative and qualitative research, clear conclusions can be realized.

With a positivism paradigm, there is little expression of the authors’ feelings toward the project except the underlying assumption that international awareness is necessary for all students. They state that this global-mindedness should be spread across all disciplines and be permeated throughout the curriculum.

# data[].attributes.body
The work gives a brief history of the International Negotiation Modules Project (INMP) and of community colleges’ role in expanding awareness of international issues across curricula. INMP utilizes the International Communication and Negotiations Simulations (ICONS), a computer-based simulation tool, to enhance teaching and learning in over 50 community colleges and 115 classes across the United States and one in Thailand. Students participate in pseudo-international negotiations mixing technological and face-to-face communication, which is a more accurate representation of actual negotiations. The INMP model can be used in other fields of study and in the workplace to include aspects of international awareness and computer literacy. A visual of students utilizing this model is shown in the video below.