DD Shift

I’m hearning the Alias theme song.

Happily, I am reaching the end of my readings.  The last one which is a handout entitled “Taking Fieldnotes” provides a one-page summary of just that.  It, just like the reading prior to this one, puts stress on the double-entry method.

The handout is a bit more specific about what should be contained in the observation part of the field notes:

• demographics,
• specific quantifiable details of what is observed,
• description of sensory input,
• specific language used, summaries of conversations,
• notes on subjects reactions to being observed,
• page numbering.

As a part of the reflections:

• personal reactions to observations,
• questions for further investigation,
• speculations about the observations,
• (as later reflections) what items stand out out and why?

I am hearing the song “Till the End of Time” by DeVotchKa.

Today I spent some time on one of my favorite writing-assistance sites, the Owl at Purdue!  This site has been around since the dawn of time, it seems.  Usually, I refer my own students to the site for reference on grammar or proper citation methods, but today it’s my turn to learn.

Specifically, I focused on the Conducting Primary Research part of the site written by Dana Lynn Driscoll.  The site basically rehashed several things from other readings that I have already had, but it gave me a few more things to think about before I get started with my own primary research.

The site claims that there are four different types of primary research that can be done:

• interviews,
• surveys,
• observations and
• analysis.
  (What is Primary Research and How Do I Get Started?)

These categories, of course, are not exactly the same as other sites, but they tend to cover the same scope and types of information-gathering techniques that are addressed by other sites.  What stuck with me from this is that they claim that analysis is useful “when you want to find some trend or pattern” (ibid.). 

I tend to be partial to the idea of analysis.  From my perspective, this is the only meaningful way to track progress in the areas where I am interested in doing any research.  My professional “gut-feel” isn’t going to cut it.

While this site’s Analysis summary did not introduce anything new for me, I did stop for a moment to think more critically about how analysis will need to occur in my case.  If I do choose analysis as one of my main ways of gathering information, it will force me to refine my understanding of the different syllabus points that the I.B.O. has in the area of programming. Further, I will need to construct more concrete ways of measuring student success in these syllabus points. Many of the syllabus points have concrete skills that students must learn, but the nature of the skills lead them to be embedded in several other skills. To describe them in a different way, they tend to be higher-order thinking skills. Perhaps thinking about these as higher order thinking skills will give me an idea of how to assess them better.

One thing that the site discussed more concretely than the others thusfar was the ethical aspects of research.  To summarize what I found most important:

• For individuals, I need permission and I need to make sure that I structure the study such that I don’t cause any physical or psychological harm.
• It is not the case that I have to get permission to do analysis on publicly available phenomena.
• Individuals need to know whether or not they will be treated anonymously or not.
• And, I may need to see approval from some ethics board at my university before I begin my study.  I need to find out if this is necessary before I begin my study.
  (Ethical Considerations in Primary Research)

Another thing that this site highlighted is something that I have been concerned about for a while.  One of the pitfalls of primary research is “not considering other related factors”. (Common Pitfalls of Primary Research)  In other words, how do you limit the scope of what you include as “related factors” to a reasonable set of factors?  The site highlights this as a problem, but it does not make any suggestions on how to methodically go about determining where the boundaries ought to be.

I’m concerned about this because I am the type of person who tends to look at the more complicated explanations of things rather than the obvious.  It’s not that I am ignoring the obvious, I just don’t see it.  It is always illuminating for me to speak with people who can see the obvious explanations, especially when I have been pondering a problem for quite a while.  I’m worried that I won’t see the trees through the forest, and hence misinterpret the forest because of my limitation.

One thing that might seem insignificant, but was really helpful was a suggestion that came in the Observation part of this site.  The site suggests that when making observations that you keep a double-entry notebook.  On one side of the notebook, keep “objective” observations.  On the other side of the notebook, jot down “interpretations”.   While this seems simple, it does give me an organizing strategy for my notes that I didn’t have before.  I’m happy for any sensible help in this arena.