The readings of
this week elaborate the various ways in which digital tools can be used for
collecting data. Gratton& O’Donell’s and Mathews& Cramer’s studies show
importance of digital tools when data is collected from vulnerable populations
or from people live in geographically isolated areas. Both of these studies
discuss that video-conferencing is highly valued method in qualitative research
in terms of providing active interaction between researchers and participants. I
quite agree with them that videoconference or like using Skype bring diverse
group of people closer and allow them to communicate. In some of my seminar
courses at IU, international guest speakers participated in our class sessions via
videoconferences and we were able to ask questions and discuss issues they
mentioned. They were all very interactive discussions.
Using digital
tools might decrease the challenges researchers may experience. If we consider
Gratton & O’Donell’s study as a case, they afforded to conduct focus-group
interview with Aboriginal communities in Canada via teleconference, and it is
very great. However, after reading the article, couple of questions came to my
mind regarding participants. In the article, the authors mentioned some
Aboriginals live in an area that does not have any road. They chose participants who live in Sioux Lookut district and 22 participants used the Internet
at least once a day. If unemployment rate is very high and participants could
not get benefit from health service due to living in a rural area, how did they
have Internet access everyday? Also I am very curious about how many participants
were in each focus group.
Pulus, Lester
and Dempster’s study introduce multiple digital tools for generating data.
Among them, using Smart pen for data collection is very interesting, and could
be useful for my research with pre-service teachers. It may allow collecting
rich data including recordings and printed materials at the same time. Also I
am very curious about Photo-Voice. I know that one of my friends is using
photos to understand the interpretations of children towards social issues. Photo-voice
might be used to conduct study with children and seniors. Also I am thinking
about that using photo-voice could be useful for low- English speaker and
special need children. Many low English speakers experience difficulty in
expressing their ideas clearly, so photo-voice may help them to support their
ideas with images. I know many special need children are visual learners, consequently enjoy engaging with images. Photo-voice could be an alternative program for
them.
Naime, you raise an interesting question. Internet access is certainly not universal. In fact, as I sit in Bogota, Colombia typing my response here, I've lost my connection three time already. A storm took Internet with it today. So, access -- what does it require? It requires finances of some kind, although some locations are making Internet more readily available at no cost. Nonetheless, I too would be curious to see what the researchers would say about their participants' access. Although, it is probably also important to keep in mind that income level and Internet access are not always tightly connected.
ReplyDelete