There was a lot to think about with this week’s readings and
I found them a nice introduction to the discussion of data collection. I’m
always amazed by the plethora of tools available and the unique manner in which
others have applied these resources. So some thoughts:
1. Horan’s (2011) reliance of his iPhone to include
recording, transcription services, geotagging etc was fascinating, but I kept
hoping he would address possible concerns about how all of this technology
might remove him from his observations and the data his conversation dealt
mostly with the affordances and none of the constraints. (I understand this was
in the form of a less formal blog post so the discussion of constraints isn’t
necessarily required I’m just curious about his own reflexivity on this process
– nosy me!)
2. Paulus et al. (2013) reiterate “methodological
approach and research questions will shape the type of data collection
techniques” utilized for a research study (p. 70). In addition to this my
selected environment will have serious effect on the digital tools utilized. I’m
not only interested in how students make sense of visits to history museums,
but also how the visits affect their overall development of historic
understanding. Two fold research focus – so that’s fun…With this I would love
to try a museum walk along and have participants record their observations and
thoughts while moving through an exhibit. The idea of linking this data to a
GPS record might seem like a bit of overkill particularly in a small gallery,
but it would be incredibly useful in matching up participant observations with
artifacts of interest. Based on previous research debacles* I think this would prove
useful in not only analyzing the experience, but in guiding follow-up
interviews and connecting the data gathered from both techniques.
So I’m excited to read more about what others have done in synchronizing
information across contexts but I’m also nervous about how to best analyze this
information and of course how to best justify the use of these methods in my
proposal and in resulting write-ups of research!
*During one of my initial inquiry courses I learned
exactly how hard it can be to map out a museum visit and attempt to take
accurate field notes--let alone attempt to make any sense of these notes and
then connect them to audio recordings! In my overzealous innocence, I attempted
to not only record the movements of three children and their parents through
WonderLab, but in my analysis I attempted to match these field notes to the recording
I gathered by having the children wear audio recorders. Needless to say my
field notes were a hot mess. See below.
Lesson Learned: Two sets of transcriptions + one set of
messy field notes = my own personal nightmare!
:) The "hot mess" field notes! Have you considered Sarah Pink's work around sensory ethnography? Her work may inform the direction you head. Also, both NVivo and ATLAS have developed some pretty streamlined approaches to integrating and synchronizing geospatial information with interviews. Check out the geo-referencing discussion here: https://www.surrey.ac.uk/sociology/research/researchcentres/caqdas/support/integrating/georeferencing_and_caqdas_linking_to_google_earth_with_atlasti_6.htm
ReplyDelete