Data Generation and Digital Tools

Over the next few weeks, we will be exploring the data generation process and the place of digital tools within it. This the first of many conversations around data generation and digital tools.

As we think about data sources/types, we must also keep in mind the methodological perspective(s) that we take up and the theoretical orientation(s) that frame our understandings. These considerations are also related to our own perspectives about where we think knowledge lies and who we believe is part of the knowledge construction process. I talk a bit about this in the first video. 

Furthermore, when we consider qualitative data sources, it is often helpful to think about 'organizing frameworks' that help us distinguish between data types. Silverman (2001) and many others have made distinctions between researcher-generated data and naturally-occurring data. I consider these distinctions in the video below.

Here are a few examples of naturally-occurring data sets available online:

• https://archive.org/
• http://cadensa.bl.uk/uhtbin/cgisirsi/x/x/0/49/%20;%20charset=UTF-8
• http://www.paultenhave.nl/Forrester.htm
• http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/cava/faq.shtml

Another important distinction to keep in mind is the idea of the Internet as both a 1) tool for collecting data (e.g., online interviews) and 2) a context for research (e.g., virtual ethnographies). I consider this development in the next video.  I mention Annette Markham in the video (see her blog here with related publications: http://www.markham.internetinquiry.org/research/)

There are a variety of digital tools that support a qualitative researcher who goes about the challenging work of collecting researcher-generated and/or naturally-occurring data. When we think about interviewing, for example, we must carefully consider how we go about recording the interview data (see http://www.sagepub.com/paulus/study/Chapter%205/top-tips-recorders.pdf). If you use mobile devices to collect data, there are certainly pitfalls to consider and hopefully avoid (see http://www.surrey.ac.uk/sociology/research/researchcentres/caqdas/support/integrating/georeferencing_and_caqdas_mobile_interviewing_experiences_and_pitfalls.htm).

Across data types,  qualitative researchers frequently spend time audio or video-recording data. This week we read two articles (Gratton & O'Donnell, 2011 and Matthews & Cramer, 2008) that highlighted how the Internet might serve as a tool for data collection. The authors illustrated how emergent technologies act to expand who participates in the knowledge construction process. Others have highlighted this reality as well (http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR13-2/downing.pdf). Alongside the excitement around technologies expanding the data collection landscape, there remains a commitment to understanding the methodological impact(s) of new technologies. I talk more about this in the next video.

To further are thinking around this topic, let's engage in some dialogue around the following two questions:  

• How might technology enhance our understanding a given phenomenon? 
• What are the ways in which we can ensure ethical practices as we generate data for our research studies?   

As you respond to the ideas shared here and the above prompts, I encourage you to situate your discussion in relation to your own research experiences and practices. You can make comments/responses by directly posting a comment to this blog post. I look forward to learning/thinking with all of you. 


References
Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing text, talk and interaction.
         London, UK: SAGE.

"Staying Up" with the Literature

Long before the term "information explosion" entered the lexicon, "staying up" with the literature was certainly not easy. In recent years, this challenge has fairly been described as increasing. Yet, this remains one of the daily tasks of academics -- being well-versed in the literature.

After yesterday's class, I was inspired to list out the various tools that I'm using to stay up to date with the literature. Yesterday's speakers primarily focused on organizing and annotating literature, which is central to the literature review process. Yet, what are the ways that we can assure that we are doing our part to stay up-to-date? There are a variety of tools, but I thought I'd share a simple one that I've always found useful. 

One very simple tool that has served to support my 'daily' reminder to remain steeped in the literature are my search and journal alerts. If you haven't already, I encourage you to go into EBSCO today and set up search word alerts and journal alerts.

• The first thing you'll need to do is create an account. 
• Make sure you are signed into your account.
• Then, you can use keywords of import to your work and save this search as an alert. 
• You can set up the alerts to be daily, weekly, bi-weekly, etc. 
• For details of how to do this, check out this link: http://support.ebsco.com/help/index.php?help_id=1164

Reflexivity and Digital Tools

One of my favorite topics is reflexive practice. I like thinking often about how reflexive practice shapes the research process. More recently, I've been playing with how varied digital tools may or may not underlay this process.

Pinterest is my most recent exploration -- one which, as some of you noted today, is perhaps quite 'public', but also affords news ways to construct the meaning(s) of self in relation to others. I posted here a recent board.

I've been thinking about how collaborative research projects might engage in collaborative reflexivity through the use of visual representations/textual support (as in pinterest). Perhaps this could be done more conveniently and efficiently in a shared blog. Nonetheless, it is always healthy to explore ways to push the bounds of how we represent our assumptions.

Here it goes...any thoughts?

post-class reflection

I really enjoyed yesterday's discussions. One thing that stood out for me was our consideration of the notion of affordances and constraints. This morning, I've been re-reading Gibson, Greeno and others who have talked about these constructs. I'm struck how little writing exists around these concepts in relation to technology and the qualitative research process. Perhaps, this speaks to the idea of varied fields/disciplines having conversations, while rarely talking to one another. Nonetheless, as we progress this semester, I hope that we can begin to evaluate digital tools within the framework of "affordances and constraints" -- something that is perhaps more commonly applied other contexts/fields (http://www.newschooltechnology.org/2011/08/tpack-and-systemic-integration-affordances-and-constraints/).

Laying the foundation...

3 hours post-class...

When thinking and discussing foundational aspects of qual, the image of layers always come to mind.

I tend to think about the qualitative research process as a layered process, one that is always already unfolding. Thinking about qualitative work as layered pushes me to think about the process as not being simply about procedures (aka methods). This is perhaps one of the central concerns about making decisions around the uses of technologies in qualitative research. Does the research process drive the decision making process or the tool itself?

 Another thing that is sitting with me is the whole notion of us as researchers being ready to push the technologies to do what you, as the researcher, need. I think this comes back to whether the feature of a tools drive the research or the research drives the decisions around tools.

Baron's work

I thought you all might be interested in taking a closer look at Baron's work. She has an ongoing research study focused on comparing reading onscreen to reading on paper. This touches on the whole notion of going paperless, which is something we will all be exploring this semester.  Also, Dr. Jennifer Lubke (UT-Chatanooga) will be giving us a talk on the process of going paperless as researchers on February 11th.

http://www.american.edu/cas/faculty/nbaron.cfm

Reflections on Our First Class

Introductions

It is always inspiring to meet with a group of scholars who are committed to exploring methodological affordances and limitations in relation to emergent technologies and qualitative research practices. A few things that stood out for me after meeting all you today...

The emphasis on "everyday" data sources. Many of you bring with you an orientation to making sense of 'life' (or your area of research, more generally) as it happens in everyday acts. From student interactions to online discussions to teacher knowledge to students comments to museum learning, etc., we can make sense of how life happens. Such data, I hope, will be exciting for you to explore in relation to new technologies.

I am also still thinking about our discussion regarding the sheer amount of reading that academic life brings with it. I recognize this course does not shy away from reading  - and reading extensively. One thing I was just reflecting upon is how graduate school can become a place where you begin to develop an 'internal' and 'external' library. This library is one that comes about from conversations with advisers and classmates, as well as the courses you take. The contents within this library, however, require us to develop strategies that support us in moving through masses of readings.

In academic life you often hear the phrase, "staying up with the literature". Where do we find the time to do this? With all of the duties that work, and just life in general, bring us...how can we "stay up"? This is something I think about often, as it certainly is an ongoing challenge. A couple of things to play with are learning to "peruse" the literature and mark items that are central to your work and worth really digging into again and again. Another thing to keep in mind is that these central pieces/publications are often papers that we end up reading again and again and again. Then, we use them to build arguments, and, at times, even build our research around. Perhaps this semester we can begin to share our strategies for "staying up" with the literature, as this is a really important part of carrying out research and (ultimately) speaking to a research community.

Another thing I'm reflecting upon...why blogs? Why might we choose to blog as researchers? There is certainly not one answer to this question. Just a few thoughts. Blogs, perhaps, can be viewed as everyday artifacts of thinking about and doing research and being a researcher. As qualitative researchers, we are always looking for ways to chronicle our thinking, our decision-making process, our musings, our unexpected understandings, etc. We often view writing itself as inquiry -- a central part of the research process. Blogs are one way to go about doing this in a potentially very public way. Of course, you can certainly keep your blog private, which is something I do with all of my research projects. For instance, I'm currently carrying out a study with a colleague around graduate students' experiences of grief. We have a collaborative, password protected reflexivity blog. We share reflexive musings about our data collection and analysis process, and also chronicle our collaborative process. I'm sure we'll learn of many additional examples this semester.

All this to say...I'm looking forward to what the next semester brings. I'm sure I will learn a great deal from each of you and my own research practices will be challenged.

I'm looking forward to a meaningful and productive semester...