I attended the Skype meeting yesterday evening where students from Module 2 and 3 were both present. Once again we were able to make what was discussed relevant to where we all are in our process and it was very helpful to hear from those who are preparing for their Module 3 assessments.
A few very key things I will take away with me:
1) ARTEFACTS
I am very grateful for the clarification on this! It seems as though for many this term is a bit of an enigma, and I must admit that every time I hear the word 'Artefact' I just picture some sort of Egyptian pot which has been discovered in a archeological excavation......
But no! An artefact can be described as a method of communicating something to someone else, something one is trying to convey. Considering the task in Module 3 this means communicating something about the PROCESS of creating an inquiry, and creatively expressing these thoughts via a medium which is in fitting with our practice.
The Module 3 students gave examples of their artefacts, and the diversity of their techniques is very interesting. Louise will be utilising movement through dance, where as Kathleen has created a visual, graphic puzzle to represent her artefact. This section of Module 3 gives us a chance to use expression in a different way to purely writing in an academic format. Ironically this generates anxiety because I have become accustomed to essay writing, even though when embarking on the course I felt (and still feel) like a fraudulent university student! “I'm a dancer?!” But it will be a great chance to tap into my creative side which is hopefully still lurking within.
Another realisation was that the purpose of presenting an artefact was to highlight thoughts around the study PROCESS, rather than the topical substance of the inquiry. In other words, it's reflecting on how YOU felt, what you have discovered, what you can take with you above and beyond this period of study.
And isn't that what it's all about? Applying such reflections into our everyday practice to help us develop and grow?
2) STEPPING IN SOMEONE ELSE'S SHOES
We also thought more deeply about the audience perspective. As per my previous blog, I discussed how re reading my work after timely distance was beneficial because it gave me a fresh pair of eyes, as if I was someone completely new reading the document.
Similarly, when thinking about what needs to be conveyed in the Module 3 oral presentation, it can help to put oneself in the shoes of the audience. If you could imagine you are someone who knows nothing about your inquiry. What would you want them to know? What would they NEED to know in order to comprehend your anticipated message?
This is certainly something I will think about when reviewing my work in future, and equally it's a great skill to be empathetic to other people's stances. Especially during debates or in teaching a variety of students.
3) BECOMING THE REFLECTIVE OBSERVER
Finally, we spoke about reflecting on our experiences. I noticed when composing my critical reflection essay that I hadn't until that point, taken a step back to observe how gathered knowledge from Module 1 has informed me today. I was applying the knowledge, but I wasn't conscious I was applying!
Kathleen and Louise expressed how they believe this is an ongoing development, whereby through the modules the reflection becomes more automatic. It was promising to hear how they use this skill in their every day practice now, and even try to teach it to others through their work.
This will be a goal of mine as I continue. Through reflection I am able to adapt my approach which hopefully can better my practice in the long run.
By weaving life into my practice, my study, my reflections and my learning, I can develop new ways of thinking- That is the hope!
Did others take anything different from the discussion? How has your understanding of what an artefact is developed since Module 1?
Well
I never thought I'd see the day....the day when I can finally say I
have finished my draft........finished!! Well for now at least.....I'm in
slight ignorant bliss as it's technically 'Easter holidays' so
feedback isn't possible right now. But it does mean I don't have to
spend every waking moment feeling exceptionally guilty if I'm NOT
doing something towards Module 2.
I
have to admit, lockdown has allowed me to dedicate an increased
amount of time to do the work. Although quarantine isn't my preferred
state, I admit it's an effective way of getting study done!
I
came to realise recently how useful it is to get some distance from
an assignment before coming back to it. It gives the potential to
look at something with new eyes which was helpful when making edits
to my drafts. I was able to see my work from an outside perspective,
almost stepping into an external reader's lense. It was therefore
evident what needed further clarity. Sometimes I'd lose the thread of a topic
mid paragraph, or observe that a connection was unclear. I suppose
that's why peer proof reading can be a fruitful tool.
I consider it a
bit like perceiving a work of art. Five people could be looking at one
painting and all will have their own perspectives on the meaning,
style, intention, what they believe the artist was trying to convey.
The artist responsible is the one who knows their true intentions, but in publicicing their work, they should come to expect some diverse perceptions.
However,
no rest for the wicked. There is plenty to still be getting on with-
especially as I have only very roughly planned the entire twelve week
project and there are many preparation factors which need to be
considered. Equally, you can never learn enough so I hope that I can
use my time wisely to read some more literature to further enlighten myself,
(rather than get hooked on Tiger King obviously).
One
aspect I have been thinking more about is the interview process which
serves as my method of data collection. Obviously, due to the current
Covid-19 measures, face to face interviews may not be possible, but in
an ideal situation they would be preferable. Given the nature of my
research being that it is qualitative, I believe the quality of my data
would be strengthened if I can capture authenticity from a
participant. Words can only offer so much in an interview as it's not
so much about WHAT is said, but HOW it is said.
As
Robert Weiss states:
“Social
cues, such as voice, intonation, body language etc. of the
interviewee can give the interviewer a lot of extra information that
can be added to the verbal answer of the interviewee on a question.”
(Weiss, 1994).
I
have been listening to the audio version of Weiss' book “Learning
from Strangers” and it gives a great insight into the benefits of
interviewing in qualitative research.
Much of what is explained is
relatable on a personal level as I am currently a participant for a
medical trial which has been fairly extensive. The procedure I had
requires monthly follow ups for at least a year, which means that
every month I must attend appointments where I am interviewed in both
semi structured and structured formats. I also have to complete up to
15 surveys and questionnaires, some qualitative in their approach and
others more statistical.
I
have to say, from experience I find it far more difficult to answer with a quantitative value when a topic is so
intangible. Eg- “On a scale of 1-6, how much would it bother you if
you were prevented from doing
a certain behaviour?
Well each month, my scale may be considered at different extents. It
would depend on my frame of mind that day as to how I answer the
question. Maybe I'm feeling more dramatic so I'll describe a 6, but
the next morning I could pitch a 4! Yet none of these factors are
taken into account when looking at the results, and from that one
numerical value a chain of interpretation can arise during the
analysis.
Sometimes
I'm so bored of answering questions that I just explain my answer is
the same as last month “no change”. In fact, putting my critical
hat on, the researcher often can be quite leading in her questioning
with phrases such as “I presume that's the same as last month too?”
or “I'm guessing that's still a 6?”. I've only noticed the
behaviour of the researcher as I've been progressing over Module 2 as
I'm suddenly so aware of all the work which goes into recruiting
participants!
I can reflect now on the ethical procedures which have
been put in place which are far more extensive than are necessary in
my research proposal. I have also recognised aspects such as the use
of a participant number during all the audio recordings, and the
effect note taking during the interviews has on how they flow. That
being said, it's not my job to act as some sort of researcher audit
committee! But I will use reflective observation during the coming
months in the hope that I can gain more knowledge from the
interviewing process.
Another
resource I found useful was via Kvale (1996) who has defined nine
different types of interview question which can be utilised.
Introduction
questions:
to introduce the topic.
Follow
up questions:
For elaboration eg: What did you mean...?' or Probing
questions which are similar but more specific in their purpose. Do
you have any examples?'
Specifying
questions:
eg 'What did he say next?'
Direct
questions:
Which only have a yes or no answer. (I expect these will be few and
far between when I come to interview). Indirect
questions:
will be preferable as they allow for expansion.
Structuring
questions:
To move on to the next topic (perhaps if the participant is veering
off the subject).
Interpreting
questions:
To clarify that you understand- vital for accuracy of
interpretation.
Silence:
Something I never even considered! But is expected as a participant
reflects/thinks.
(Kvale,
2006)
The
next step for me would be to identify what I hope to discover through
the interviews, so I can then begin to phrase my questions according
to the above categories. I believe a process of trial and error will
be necessary and there will be a continual learning process as I
consider what did and didn't work. Of course, different participants
will respond in different ways so I will use reflection in action to
try and navigate my way through the process. Perhaps making decisions
as I go as to how to phrase a topic so that it is effectively
communicated.
One
aspect I didn't really ponder over was highlighted in an interesting TED talk I came across. The video displays Marc Pachter's experience of his career span which focused on questioning American Greats. In it, he explains what he believes makes
a great interview.
The main takeaway points I gathered are
as follows:
1) Empathy
is vital. I will aim to convey my empathic attitude during any interview, really trying
to understand and connect with what is being said. Empathy is the
root of human connection and I believe that it promotes honesty. It
hopefully would also make a participant feel at ease.
2) In
his words “All people want is to be truthful about who they are”.
He observed that the older age group perhaps had a more reflective
attitude and were able to convey the ins and outs of their lifelong journey.
I do hope to interview a range of ages, but I will acknowledge that
seeking older participants who are in the 'past dancers' category
may be preferable.
3) One
problem? The outer shell. Something I can relate to. The 'put on a
show' automatic mentality of performers. It can sometimes be hard to
crack through that outer persona to reveal the true thoughts and
emotions of someone. Especially in a short interview window.
Hopefully, knowing 3-5 of the 6 participants will help harvest authenticity.
I
have included the link to the video below. I definitely recommend
taking a look if you are planning to use interviews as a data
collection technique!
Marc Pachter: The art of the interview:
"Marc Pachter has conducted live interviews with some of the most intriguing characters in recent American history as part of a remarkable series created for the Smithsonian's National Portrait Gallery. He reveals the secret to a great interview and shares extraordinary stories of talking with Steve Martin, Clare Booth Luce and more."
Pachter (2008)
Finally, my next step: Thinking about Pilot interviews which should be a great way to establish what
may or may not work. I cannot plan these pilot intervews to be face to face just yet obviously....maybe later Spring? Summer? Will we be released from our 4 walled confinement by then? I'm keeping everything crossed!
References
Carter,
A. (2020). Fresh Eyes Quote. Jpg
http://www.picturequotes.com/fresh-eyes-quotes
Kvale, S. (2006). InterViews:
an introduction to qualitative research interviewing.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Pachter,
M. (2008, January). Retrieved April 18, 2020, from
https://www.ted.com/talk/marc_pachter_the_art_of_the_interview?language=en
Weiss,
R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers, the art and method of
qualitative interview studies. New York, NY: Free Pr.
It
seemed that many of us on Module two had similar areas of 'unknowns' as we took turns speaking about what we'd like to discuss. Adesola pointed out that in our opening requests, many of us
were focusing on the urge to just attain answers-I suppose in the hope that
we could come away with some further clarity! But it seemed significant when Adesola proposed we discussed areas of interest or 'findings out' from over the week instead. Ths shifting the aim from TAKING to CONTRIBUTING.
Ironically this is
something I have been thinking a lot about as I have been writing my Critical Reflection essay-The contribution from others. A factor which seems to have been very prevalent in my study over Module 2.
But
How?
As I begin to reflect on this evening's call, I can recognise
how the lenses which were the focus in Module one are now relevent in my present actions.
Firstly,
Alison described how she was able to carry out a Pilot interview, which almost acted like a rehearsal for the data collection to come in Module 3. I was
struck by Alison's reflections as she established what she took from the
piloted experience, other than just the tangeable data collected. Alison explained how
she came away with the message that 'There is no such thing as a
good or bad interview, there is always something you can take away
from it.'
I like this idea, and I couldn't help but connect it with a
segment of my critical reflection essay. In the segment I observe how unfruitful
endeavours still can deliver processeses of learning- Even when the task doesn't work out as one hoped. Being able to reflect on that fact IS learning in
itself. For example: Assessing- what can I do differently next time? Did I develop any new
skills? What worked? What didn't? Basically, the very purpose of
reflective practice!
Taking
this further, I could acknowledge that Alison's experience had an
influence on my thoughts, and subsequently my future actions. Via
connecting in our community of practice, an idea was raised, which
then initiated further ideas, thus generating collective knowledge.
This connectivism has become increasingly familiar, and I definitely
appreciate how the collective contribution of my peers has impacted on
my capacity to learn.
Another
instance I can associate with Module 1, is through our discussion of
analysis withn the Skype call. The contribution of ideas from others made me realise how
much I 'don't know'. As mentioned in my blog post below, I was
suddenly thrust from unconscious incompetence into conscious
incompetence! That lovely, uneasy place of insecurity. So I began to
jot down notes on areas I needed to research more about, areas in which I realised I was lacking understanding.
Serina
kindly recommended some literature which aided her in the analysis
topic. I intend to explore her suggestion, but as I am quite an auditiry learner
(Which I discovered through module 1) I wondered whether I could
access the audio book version instead- Oh look- An instance in applying my
knowledge of Howard Gardner's Multiple Intelligence theory! (Gardner, 1983)
Also,
in being quite a visual learner, I know I have always found imagery
very helpful. I can recall when I was a dance student having one
teacher who would describe the most colourful unique descriptions. I
could relate these similes to the movements I was creating and I
remember that feeling of tacitly 'understanding' what he was trying to convey. It was as through my body responded to the mental picture I was holding. I
use this descriptive method in my teaching now, especially if I recognise that a
dance class responds positively to that kind of feedback- (Just
because I learn that way doesn't mean others do!).
Anyway,
what I was going to say in relation to the method of visualising- Was
how I cannot help but liken the discursive experience this evening to looking
through a telescope. What I interpreted depended on the circumference
of the lens.
In
a zoomed in position, the focus is narrow, which provided very
specific information. An example of this would be practical examples
given such as “I plan to use colour coding as a method of
analysis.”
Zooming
out a bit allowed me to reflect on MYSELF. What learning processes am
I using and how do these link to my previous study in Module 1?
Zooming
out again, I consider the world around me and the Bigger picture.
This was prompted by a comment about the impact on COVID-19 on our
chosen method of data collection. Viewing all the influences from
around me will have a domino effect on my research outcomes.
Finally,
looking at the entire landscape. What does all this mean and how do
these connections work in research? In every day life?
Using
my questionable artistic skills, I attempted the drawing below!
It wasn't until the final moments of the Skype as Helen was summarising, that CONNECTIONS emerged as the over-riding theme of the evening. In hindsight, it all became so clear how the theme ran through all the contrasting discussions, but with foresight at 6pm we'd never have known this. Almost like joining dots back to front. Immediately, I made another mental connection- the inspirational talk by the late Steven Jobs, in which he describes what it means to connect the dots backwards. I have included a Youtube Video below, and I often re visit the poignancy of his words when I feel I have lost perspective.
Connect the Dots: Words by Steve Jobs: A Youtube Video
You cannot connect the dots looking forward, you can only connect them looking backward. So you need to trust and believe and keep working on yourself. Steve Jobs shares his wisdom and how he achieved success in life.
Figure 1: Connect the Dots. Video media.
How does everyone else make connections? Please do share your thoughts! Lets connect :-).
Resources
Connect the Dots | Steve Jobs Inspiring Speech. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SimlLjHioz4
Gardner, H. (1983) Frames of the Mind: The theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York. Basic Books.
Ethical considerations- The topic which we focused our Wednesday skype discussion on, and a topic which is relevent across all modules of the BAPP course. This seemed very appropriate as with only three of us on the call, it just so happened that each of us was in a different module which made for a very interesting session.
It was great to reflect on how my perceptions around the topic of ethics has progressed, not just through my own critical observations, but through the process of completing each module. For example, In Module 1 I didn't really have a clue what ethics were all about! I just knew I believed things about the industry, my profession, my practice and these assumptions were cemented into my reality. The first module challenged me to question these assumptions and delve into my philosphical position. Doing so has become a little more habitual as recording my reflective journal keeps the process of questioning my thoughts at the forefront of my mind.
To summarise what was discussed between the three of us, I decided to gather my thoughts by separating my perecption of ethics between the modules I have completed so far:
And what do I predict for Module 3? Kathleen explained how ethical considerations have been very prevalent when thinking about the process of interviewing. I know that when I am formulating my interview guide for the participants, I will need to acknowledge the need for tact, professionalism, and sensitivity. This applies not only just to what I ask, but the manner in which I ask. I will be responsible for adhering to all the ethical procedures I declared I would follow on my MORE form. This means practically gaining informed consent from participants and meticulously storing data correctly. The ethics involved in the actual process of research is still very new to me, so I hope to become more familiar with the procedures as my study progresses.
I also aim to begin to link my ethical considerations and the actual procedures a little more. At present, I tend to own my ethical considerations, but see the procedures and something which is imposed- possibly because I need to seek approval from the board of ethics! But in thinking about WHY these boudaries are in place, I can connect the dots and hopefully gain more understanding of ethics overall. Finally, I will strive to keep questioning my assumptions. Especially as the goal of my inquiry is to get a very broad overview of different perspectives- NOT to just prove my hypothisis (about the link between teaching approach and student wellbeing) is correct.
I guess that well known motto is rather fitting right about now:
