Week 11

by

This weeks reading was very long, but will absolutely be helpful while we interview our subjects for the upcoming report. I never realized there were so many different ways to interview until reading the first article. When I interview my mother I believe that I will be using a combination of structural, descriptive, and contrast questions. I will probably rely on my descriptive questions, describing her use of the Internet and other technology. She just got an ipad and she uses it mainly to read books, so I am going to ask her what I the major differences she finds between reading an actual book and reading a book on her ipad. Structural questions are used primary to get specific details answered opposed to descriptive open-ended questions. I will ask my mother structural questions and I intend to use in my paper; such as how often do you use your email? How many hours do you watch TV a day? A more descriptive question would be to ask my mother why she uses her email? Why do you watch the shows on TV that you choose to watch? The first article goes deep into the steps that should be done in order to conduct a proper interview. The part of the article that I found interesting was the advantages and disadvantages of qualitative interviews. An advantage is that a researcher can phrase his/her questions to discuss controversial issues that otherwise would be chosen not to be answered in a survey. It is much easier to lie when answering a bunch of questions on a sheet; it is harder to lie to a persons face. A main disadvantage is interview bias. This connects with last week’s topic semiotics, and the meaning of words. It is easy for a researcher who is looking for a specific answer to ask leading question and trick the interviewee, reminds me a bit like court.
`The next article is about actually writing the report, for me the most tedious and least appealing part. It talks about how good writing is concise, something that is very hard for me. I can never just get my point across and I tend to ramble on. Good ways to focus on this horrible quality in my writing is in the editing process. I really need to go back and read in a way where I am thinking, “do I really need this?” I envy people who can just spit out what they want to say. These two articles reminded me of a trilogy of books written by Stiegl Laarson. The main character is an investigative journalist. He writes books using qualitative research. He writes about the most controversial issues of the time. The three books were fiction, but it still made me realize that I could never be an investigative journalist. I have difficulty picking out the essential points in a paper, and they tend to come out long-winded and confusing. I will be able to get a chance to work on these poor qualities in the upcoming research report, and I will be using points from these articles.

Advertisements

One Response to “Week 11”

  1. sleung17 Says:

    I agree with you about report writing! I’m a self-confessed waffler and basically grab the oppurtunity of a large word count to waffle on! I think article 2 about report writing should somehow set a framework for me to work on…the hints are particularly useful also on how we should structure our work too. Good luck on your report!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: