10.29 Re-cap on short analysis questions & interview protocols, and intro to oral history

Note on blogs and short analysis drafts: Yes, it is the middle of the semester and I am a little overwhelmed just like everyone else.  I had some other work that came due the same time as advisement, and I just wasn't able to get finished.  It may be a couple of days before I get my head above water, but know that I have good intentions and I am working on getting back to you.  I hope to have everything back in order by the weekend.   Thanks for your patience - and if you need some immediate help (or to get the hold off your account so you can register) stop by my office.

I started by giving a general response to what I was seeing on your blogs.

Short analysis project
Setting up the short analysis project:  In general, you are doing a great job of attending to the language features (and that is the hard part!), and you are getting the idea about using the language moves as evidence to answer a larger question.  Also, you are doing a good job of asking questions that the data can answer. Very good!   All interview data can ever really indicate is how the speakers act/feel/think.  The reason that is important to writing studies is because those indications suggest larger patterns about cultural discourses, Conversations, forms and so on.  Writing studies are interested in these larger formations because they shape our writing, talk and behavior (whether we are aware of them or not) => and to REALLY understand communication, it is important to think about the role played by the cultural Discourses, Conversations and identities that are out there = ready-made, for us to step into.

So what you needed to work on was identifying how the features you were noticing were shaped by larger cultural identities, Conversations, and ways of thinking and being associated with particular Discourse communities. We talked about what kinds of formations were associated with each of the two transcripts you might choose for your short analysis project (listed below, sort of approximating what we said).
Chat transcript

• Conversations about "danger" "sex" "good parents" and the Internet
• Identities for "children" as vulnerable, impressionable, and in need of protection (this is a very American conception of childhood - other cultures think of children as resilient, capable of processing experience more or less on their own, and able to take the good and the bad)
• Discourses for "rebellious adolescent" and "good sister/daughter" and "vulnerable child" (for A) and as research interviewer and friend for S
• Reflective patterns for talk typical of female talk (sharing stories and reflecting on what they mean)

Adult learner

• Discourses associated with digital technologies and computers (newcomers v experts)
• age/generational Discourses
• Female reflective storytelling-talk
• nontraditional student identity for M, research interviewer identity for S, middle aged women Discourse for both (collaborative, reflective, not coming to closure too quickly, lots of connections to other people and groups)

We also reviewed the assignment sheet.  As you draft your project - check the assignment sheet to make sure you are meeting the expectations.

Interview protocols
I also talked briefly about what I saw on the posts for the interview protocols. You are doing a great job of starting with warm-up questions and moving to open-ended questions.  For the most part, you are also asking lots of "tell me about. . ." "Can you talk a little more about. . . " and "Tell me a story where. . . "  This is the best.
A few suggestions.
Set up a brief statement of your purpose at the beginning of your protocol (as on the sample).  In most cases you will send your protocol to your participants BEFORE you do the interview, so they can think over what they have to say.  The statement of purpose will help them frame their answers.
Use the categories of analysis from your research essay and your research question to decide what kinds of questions to ask in your interview. Categories of analysis are the general groups of ideas/information that you will analyze.  In the commenting essay, the categories for analyzing the comments were length, type, Positive/negative, etc.  Your categories of analysis need to connect to the research article because you are using your research article to help you frame your study.  For example, if your research article states that children learn x, y, and z about literacy from their "play" - you will look at your participants' learning to see whether x,y, and z are there (or not) - and whether they learn other things as well (or not).
Be sure to ask participants to DESCRIBE their experiences before you ask them to ANALYZE/EVALUATE them.  Ask a "tell me about" question before asking a "what was it like" or
"which is better" or "how do you use. . ." question.  Both kinds of answers are useful, but the "tell me about" questions may give you information about how your participant feels/thinks that s/he is not able to fully articulate.

So good work on this.  Before you do your interview: get the signed copy of your consent form and  send me a copy of your interview protocol as an attachment to an email with the subject line: YOUR LAST NAME, Interview Protocol.

Developing a Research Plan.  Somewhere in there, we also talked about planning your research project, and you did some writing to nail down (one more time) the purpose, research question, and process for your research project.  The more writing you do here, the more clear you will be on what you are doing. 

Oral history.
We spent the rest of class talking about Oral History, and doing some thinking about best practices for oral history interviews.
We talked about the kinds of background we would need to think about and the kinds of questions we would ask to collect an oral history on 9/11.

For next class:
Blog 15.  Write to the points on the Developing a Research Plan Handout (posted to the right) as discussed in class
Come to class prepared to do an oral history on 911