Ethnographic Profiling

I believe a few others voiced this opinion in a different context, but I agree nonetheless that this week's readings really helped put work in other courses into perspective. As most of us know all too well, assignment 2 in INF1001 (due last week) was to analyze Susan Leigh Star's article "The Ethnography of Infrastructure" (American Behavioral Scientist, 43.3 (1999): 377-391). One of the questions that seemed to be coming up frequently among other INF1001 students I spoke to was "ok, so what exactly IS the ethnography of infrastructure?" Indeed, in Star's article it is very difficult to tell what her methodology really is, despite the fact that she suggests that methodology is the focus of her entire paper. It was nice to have readings this week that looked at ethnography from different angles, and especially to read Luker's distinction between full-fledged ethnography on the one side and participant observer on the other, to actually get a sense of how ethnography can be carried out, and, more importantly, in relation to Star's article at least, what constitutes doing ethnography and what doesn't.

Don't Diss Research Methods!!!!

It took me a while to understand the purpose of taking Research Methods, however the more assignments I have to do for my other Information classes the more grateful I become for enrolling in INF1240. In my undergrad, I would always conduct my research using the same methods; mostly critically analyzing what other scholars had to say about my research topic. Luker's readings this week talked a lot of interviews and why they are helpful and how to properly conduct them. This was useful as for INF1300 I was required to interview someone who has never worked in a library. This was one of the toughest challenges as everyone I know has at some point in their lives worked in a library. The few people in my life that have not worked in libraries did not want to be interviewed as they think libraries to be "boring". This reminded me of why it is important to answer the "so what?" question. Luker mentions that interviewers need a "hook" and asking people to let me interview them because they are my friend and should therefore have a obligation to my library cause was not good enough. Finally, once someone agreed to be interviewed it was a difficult process as the person providing me with the information that I desperately needed seemed to have the 'upper hand'. I always believed that the interviewer would hold the power and this experience allowed me to see the interview power struggle in a different light, one that I would have never thought.

Peering through that Window

Please forgive my lack of updating for the last two weeks, but between thanksgiving and drowning in assignments this blog had completely slipped my mind.
Anyroad...

I just finished interviewing my brother for an assignment in INF1300 (those in that class will know what I'm talking about). I found it to be an interesting experience. It was fun, but a little difficult. I found I kept trying to lead him into the answers I was looking for without even meaning too, because I wanted the data I was getting from him to fit the picture in my head of how I was going to construct my paper later on. Thankfully he is my brother and stated his opinion regardless of what I was trying (even unintentionally) to get him to say. However I began to think of how it might of gone if we hadn't been so familiar with each other. Would another person perhaps be more easily lead?
We briefly touched on in class (and with Knight) the issue of interviewees trying to anticipate what "right" answer the interviewer is looking for, thereby contaminating the data. At first I thought this to be a character weakness of the potential interviewee but now I think this has more with the interviewer and there unintentional fishing or leading. I'm also inclined to wonder how much might be portrayed not just by words but tone, facial expressions and body language, all those little ticks that happen that you don't contentiously notice but the other person might.
Since interviewing would be essential to my research topic, I wonder if it wouldn't be more prudent to get a third party to do the actual interviews rather than the person who has an emotional investment, so to speak, in the outcome of the data. Thereby reducing the possibility of data contamination?

The Search for Gold

This week’s required readings presented various research methods that we could incorporate into our SSHRC proposal (or for all future research). As I was doing the readings, as useful as they would be for the future, I failed to find numerous parallels with the methodology I chose to incorporate in my proposal (getting a little worried?). Nevertheless, something that suited my research question was documentary analysis. According to Knight, this method is entirely legitimate for a study and thus a paper can be based on these documents alone (104). Therefore, for my research paper, I intend to analyze a Toronto Public Library architecturally. In doing so, this can only be achieved by reviewing physical documents. Although, as Knight points out (107), various archives and thus documents are available online (which he is surprised that this form of research is not done more often-yet this method is was I mostly learned and utilized in my undergrad-am I a minority? Kind of hard to believe). Nevertheless, I am very sceptical (based on my initial research) that I can find all the documents I require (for ex. floor plans) electronically. Time for some digging…

Participant-as-observer-as-member

That is my identity as I conduct research for my proposal.

Luker explains in chapter 8 that being a member of the society you are researching introduces the problem of overlooking what the outside observer would find quite strange.

But Stebbins explains that' fitting in' means that the observer is prepared to write a scientific account of that social world. Failing to fit in results in a bad field study.

As an active YouTube user - How can I continue to 'fit in' with the YouTube society but at the same time maintain a distance that allows for proper ethnographic research?

Any suggestions? :(

FOCUS

I found it quite interesting, as I wrote my proposal this week, yet very difficult to propose a research question. As I was writing my paper I was tempted (and partly hoping) that I could just elaborate on my ideas into writing the full research paper instead of just writing a brief summary. Although I know that not everything is set in stone, there was this pressure to get the thesis idea right the first time.

An issue that Shawn previously posted about raised the dilemma of categorization of our proposals and the difficulty of writing about something that we not yet have started (i.e. in her case in the methodology section). This is something that I was similarly struggling with. How can you propose something if you have not fully researched your thesis extensively (as you would when your writing the research paper). As well, it seemed as if the stress associated with this proposal seems to resemble the emotions that I will be feeling with the final research assignment (maybe experiencing a déjà vu for when I will be writing the final paper?). Nevertheless, Ive given my thesis plenty of thought yet will this [my effort] ever be enough?

Shirk def. 1. a. intr. To practise fraud or trickery, esp. instead of working as a means of living (OED)

Hi ladies,

Late as usual ...

I enjoyed reading your posts regarding the assignment. I too struggled with the concept of categories, but in the opposite way to Shawna - I know we come from similar academic backgrounds, so I can't really pull the "I was taught to write this way" card, but I always come at a task like this with the idea that making the argument seem organized is the job of the rhetoric, not a set of headlines. I don't think this attitude put me in a particularly good position this time.

What I'd really like to talk about in this post is an issue that Shawna and I are experiencing, and maybe others in this group are as well: the SSHRC eligibility requirement that states that those who already hold a Master's degree are ineligible for funding. Now, if you have a good argument for this regulation please post it, because I am truly puzzled. As my (likely soon-to-be) thesis advisor pointed out, the value of all post-secondary education is changing, and there is a rising trend of people going back to school for additional graduate degrees. Therefore, as time goes on SSHRC's seemingly arbitrary regulation will exclude more and more deserving (not necessarily speaking of myself) people from getting the funding they need. Both my advisor and, as he mentioned to me in conversation, our TA, are writing to SSHRC asking them to justify this regulation; I think those of us who are affected (or who simply want answers) should do the same. After identifying the right person to direct inquiries to, I will post the info for anyone interested in adding their voice.