Research findings

On Tuesday, we again touched on very important points in relation to representations of findings in qualitative research. I am personally a visual learner, therefore I like to include visual elements to my study such as maps, diagrams, drawings or cartoons. The type of representations of findings might be changed depending on  research area, research institution and research approach. For instance,  last year, for an international research, I includes some photos as a part of the findings. However, using photos for a  research exploring a curriculum theory is quite hard. Considering IU settings, areas like  literacy and art education are more flexible in terms of using various representations of  findings. In sum, personal preferences of researchers, the norms of research institution, the type of resercah, the area in which research conducted, context of research, and the sensitivity of data  are among the factors that might affect selection of alternative representations.

readings

The readings of this week elaborate the role of digital tools in supporting collaborative research. In our previous class sessions, we have discussed that technological tools help researchers to engage in reflective conversation, to edit projects collaboratively, and to share resources. Also the guest speakers talked about the contribution of teamwork in qualitative research when they use CAQDAS packages like Atlas.ti or Nvivo.  In particular, digital tools are very functional and helpful in coding process such as team members are able to compare the codes they assigned the texts. Coding a study with teamwork seems to me increasing the validity of research. More than one people check the study, it is a kind of triangulation.

Paulus' s presentation

On Tuesday, we found a chance to listen Trena Paulus, one of the authors of the book we use. I felt how we are lucky in terms of having online conversation with her. Her statements during conversation refreshed our learnings including what we have read in the Digital Tools for Qualitative Research and what we have discussed in the class. To give examples, she talked about the ways CAQDAS packages offer to help researchers such as transparency, collaboration,  being close to data and so on. Additionally, she clarified  very important points that might be concerns for us like  the tension around IRB process.

I am a late adopter of technology as Dr. Paulus. Before I had the hesitation in using CAQDAS packages,  but now I am very convinced that digital tools facilitate the task of researchers. However, my concern is now to find the appropriate digital tool as Mac user. It seems both Nvivo and Atlas.ti work well with PC. I do not  know why Mac stays behind than PC at this point.

Website

I found " learning qualitative data analysis" website very useful and functional in terms of both introducing  methods and providing resources for each research method. In particular, the website could be very beneficial for novice researchers to making a comparison among methodologies and to find the appropriate one. As a new researcher, I am still thinking about research method for my dissertation. Grounded theory or mixed methodology might be suitable for my topic, but I need more time to explore them.

Just Questions

On Tuesday, Dr. Contreas  joined to our session and introduced   Atlas.ti. Because of Atlas.ti is a very big package, he talked about basic functions of Atlas.ti researchers might use. Atlas.ti might serves as “ textual laboratory” in which researchers can do various tasks such as annotations, create concept maps, analyze both qualitative and quantitative data.It seems like Atlas.ti is very supportive in analyzing all types of qualitative data including text, recordings, video, memos, pictures and etc. The nice thing is researchers can open four different types of data and work on them simultaneously. That means Atlas.ti allows more interaction between researchers and their data. However, it is a huge package and requires time to learn and use all functions of Atlas.ti. Therefore, I  particularly want to explore creating code mapping in Atlas.ti.

In the second part of the class, we had discussions in the small groups. One of the issue that stood out to me is the language of research studies.  We talked about how language is important to access public and target populations. We also discussed who our audiences might be and how we should call them. Should we use academic language in our research studies or traditional language? Should we need to access any individual in the society? Should our research address to people in academia?

Dedoose

On Tuesday, we were allowed to see some aspects of Dedoose. In comparison to Nvivo, Dedoose seems to me easier to follow the research process. Also one of the advantages of Dedoose is that it is free and suitable for interactional research and works well with Mac. 

After Tuesday class, I start to think about using Dedoose my dissertation. In the dissertation, I am planning to conduct survey and interviews. Based on the statements of Lieber, survey monkey or some other survey tools might be used within Dedoose, and it is very good ( Nvivo is also fine to analyze survey result, however, it works well with PC than Mac) . Therefore Dedoose would be a good choice for my research approach. Now, I am waiting to figure out Atlas.ti, then I will decide on a CAQDAS package.