Now that the dissertation is over…

…I have a little time! What to do now? On my hit list:
1) re-vamp my math review book;
2) get the DREI designation (;
3) further my research;
4) find one full-time position, instead of a multitude of positions;
5) lose a little more weight;
6) keep teaching and tutoring!

What else to do? Hmmmm….

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A link to my abstract…

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Thanks for Your Patience

Well it has been a while since I updated my blog. Now that I am finished with my dissertation, I should be able to get back to jotting down my thoughts and ramblings again. Hooray! I will try to make these updates weekly. Please feel free to respond. I would like my blog to become an active community.

Thanks for sharing the path.


Dr Sam

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Please Help With My Research

Appraisers about to take the USPAP Update, please consider participating in my PhD research. Please go to the following link and help our profession!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Woohoo! IRB Approval

Walden U’s Institutional Review Board has approved my data collection for my dissertation. This is a milestone that took about a month. I appreciate the IRB process as they make sure my participants are protected. It also helps make sure my documentation is in order. Although the ultimate responsibility is mine, IRB helps make sure my documents are logical and comprehensive.
Now, onward to data collection!


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Gresham’s Dynamic

Just discovered Gresham’s Dynamic: bad ethics drives good ethics from the marketplace or profession because cheaters prosper. I intend to correlate this with Bandura’s Tactics of Moral Disengagement and a few other odds and ends in the near future. Any thoughts from the peanut gallery?


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Working, working working

I just came back from the AECT 2012 conference. A fun time was had by all! Met Vicki Napper again, and became the Ethics Committee rep to the Training and Performance Division. And made a presentation based on my dissertation. On a related front, I am making progress on my dissertation. Whew!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Using the Defining Issues Test (DIT) or some alternate assessment to test pre-licensees

Hey all!
Just a quick thought based on Izzo et al’s work:
It would be a VERY interesting project to test several folks about to take their licensing exams (real estate, appraisal, etc) and then track them over several years. IS there a correlation between DIT score, level of Cognitive Moral Development (CMD), and jurisdictional sanction/conviction? Hmmm..

Izzo, G. M., Langford, B. E., & Vitell, S. (2006). Investigating the efficacy of interactive ethics education: A difference in pedagogical emphasis. [Article]. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 14(3), 239-248. doi: 10.2753/mtp1069-6679140305

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dissertation City

I am now knee’s-deep in my dissertation. Chapter 3 is submitted, and I have gotten feedback from my Committee Chair, Tim Green. I am awaiting word from my Methodologist, Evelyn Johnson. When my changes are approved it will be time for my oral defense. Then I can get Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval from Walden University, and start collecting (and analyzing) data. Then Chapters 4 and 5, and a final oral defense. Then a doctorate! And a walk on a stage. Whew!
I recommend the dissertation process for anyone interested in scholarship. The process has cemented disparate concepts, conjuring them from separate alcoves in my mind and synthesizing concepts into a gestalt.
Way fun!


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Appraising Your Ethics (AYE!)

Jonassen et al. (2009) reported the creation of a special learning environment which they called Engineering Your Ethics (EYE). In short, they “…integrated ethics scenarios with personal perspectives on the problem, applications of theories and ethical canons, and various tasks for engaging ethical problem solving” (p. 236).
Ethics instruction revolves around two principal methods: decision-making (or linear) and dilemma. The former represents a one-size-fits-all methodology, whereas the latter presents two opposing (and equally undesirable) points of view that students must chose between. The authors prefer the latter method.
The article goes into much greater depth than I care to detail here. Suffice it to say it is founded in the pedagogical principles of ethics instruction. My thought is to create an Ethics Module for appraisal ethics instruction that is modeled after EYE and call it AYE: Appraise Your Ethics. Thoughts?


Jonassen, D. H., Demei, S., Marra, R. M., Young-Hoan, C. H. O., Lohani, J. L., & Lohani, V. K. (2009). Engaging and Supporting Problem Solving in Engineering Ethics. [Article]. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(3), 235-254.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment