On Tuesday we had Skype discussions with a Module Three focus. We
talked about a number of things. Those attending will be posting significant
moments or ideas on their blogs so have a read around the community.
Overall,
we discussed interviews and similar data collection tools. Some people are
doing surveys. However, I would say due to the small numbers of respondent and
the spaces for people to explain their ideas that people reported they are
making in their surveys - they are really more like web-based interviews. The
questions and topics are not ones where the number of people thinking X is
important. This is because you are trying to find out more about something (X)
- Not trying to find what to think. And why would you just automatically think
the same as the largest number of people anyway!! So, we confirmed that
hearing what people thought was important to nearly everyone’s inquiry in
Module Three: it is not about numbers (quantitative data) it is about the
quality and depth of understanding (qualitative data).
But then people were worried about getting the 'right' data. The
interviews (data) are not the answer. You are not going to people to piece
together an answer for your inquiry. You have to question and analyse the data
- you are using to ask why does someone say that, how they said, is it what the
literature said, what perspective does what they are saying come from.
And
where are 'you' in all this. You can't be invisible, non-bias, it’s your
inquiry every choice you have made is 'bias'. it is not about disappearing and
leaving it up to your participants to sort out for you through their answers.
It is about being aware and reflective on your own presence in the
research. How were you during the interview, did the weather affect you and how
you spoke? Why did people say what they said and what response did you have and
why that response? What did they challenge in your own assumptions. If
it was exactly what you expected why??
In
the PM chat we said it is like pieces of a puzzle (or adding spices to a pot)
each bit of the inquiry - you, participants, literature, reflective journal - all
add and mix together so you can discuss the topic with more knowledge at the
end of the module than you could at the start.
We
also pointed out that the literature is not to find someone to tell you the
'truth' or the 'history' of something. It is a 'truth' or a 'history'
and there will be different versions. You are looking at the literature to find
out what other people think. This is to use the literature to inform and
question your own thinking.
Points
we made at the end of the discussion were:
- Its
about interpretation
- Not
looking for the answer in the interviews - looking for new why questions?
- its
like a jigsaw puzzle
- You
can/have to be part of the picture
- Don't
restrict yourself with the literature explore further afield - don't just have
one source
- Us
the literature to inform what you ask or look for in the data collection
process.
- All
you are doing now is part of the inquiry - it’s not clean and simple "I go
out and ask questions and get the answer". It is messy full of questions
and changes and thinking/feeling - because you are trying to find out something new
to you.
Skypes with a Module One focus were on Monday. We asked
Module three in the Tuesday discussions to write something useful or
significant about Module One in the comments below on this post. If you are a
Module Three and were not at the discussion you can still writing something in
the comments below too – a gift to Module Ones…
