Month: January 2015

Before entering this doctoral program I know almost nothing about qualitative research. Coming from a technology field, Dr. Gross’s class is the first time I know terms like “participant observation” and “focused group”, and it took me a while to figure out the term “coding” refers to an interpretive technique not programming…Until now I still didn’t have much experience using qualitative methods (although I plan to) in my research, but I’m trying to be more familiar with how qualitative research should be conducted through research project(s) which will not directly related to my dissertation topic. Now I’m conducting interview about usage practice and user intention of multilingual search queries–the topic I used for Dr. Gross’s class. Since I do not have much training about how to conduct interview, sometimes I feel I over direct the participants too much, which may hurt the objectivity of the results… It seems qualitative research requires higher level of research skills, relatively, than quantitative, since the researcher’s experience and skill sets have more chance to influence the quality of data. However, I do get many interest findings from the interviews, which I’ve never known or found from quantitative data (I collected real-time multilingual search queries directly from search engines too). And for the “why question” (not only for this study), in most cases can only be answered by qualitative research. So I will definitely employ qualitative method in my dissertation, which (probably) focuses on people’s perception of quality of collaborative knowledge creation  and how they feel certain design can facilitate the knowledge creation and exchange, as well as improve the quality of the “final product”.

I may be wrong but given the nature of my research interests—cultural heritage institutions and historically black colleges and universities—I am pretty sure that I will engage in qualitative research. (I really feel, though, that I should heed the consistent advice to have quantitative research in my tool kit. So the mixed methods route seems lucrative). Accordingly, this week’s readings are good road maps. The “Planning and Designing Qualitative Research” chapter was a rubber-meets-the-road, easy read. As mentioned in class, it was insightful, digestible and still sophisticated. I have tucked this reading away as a top reference.
Likewise, I was edified by the Denzin and Lincoln article; I must admit that I enjoyed the beginning more than the end. It became a tedious read after a while. I put it down and came back to it. The discussions on the politics and ideologies behind qualitative research were fascinating. I was drawn to the sections regarding colonialism and “otherness.” I feel as though I have a grasp on the various eras in terms of qualitative research methodology. More importantly, I thoroughly understand that I need to strive for value-free research.
The Westbrook article added to the concepts we learned in Research Methods. For instance, it provided more explanation on constant comparative, content analysis and other qualitative techniques. It was neat that this reading revolved around LIS research.
In closing, I feel that qualitative methodology is the natural course for those whose interests entail cultures, communities and underrepresented groups. One of my favorite books, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot, was an ethnographic slash biographical slash context analysis slash metaanalysis study of (ironically) one of the biggest medical breakthroughs in history: the discovery the regenerative human cell, HeLa. I am not quite as ambitious as Rebecca Skloot nor do I have ten years, as she did, to finish my research. Nevertheless, I see the possibilities!

I first leaned about qualitative methods is in one of my anthropology class. And I was amazed and impressed when the professor told me how he researched mysterious local experiences about how an uneducated child can sing an lost long epic in Mongolia. The stories he provided were so live  to me, and it somehow broadens my worldview, as well as arises my respect to human nature. Isn’t it a cool job to listen to write down different stories?

My first qualitative research experience is my undergraduate thesis about serendipity around scholars: sometimes researchers will encounter information that they eagerly want but cannot find originally. It’s a quite interesting experience, I listened to 11 stories and coded them using grounded theory. I was amazed about the richness of my final findings! Just from 11 stories, I began to understand the active and passive information searching procedures. And I understand why some people encounter information more often than others. So cool!

For quantitative research, you need to know the story in advance. And just try to prove or disprove your hypothesis. The surprise from quantitative approach (at least to me) is much less than the qualitative one.

More important, what I want to study now is an unrepresented population (i.e. deaf). Their intentions and culture are always misunderstood by public. And I believe qualitative approach will provide more authentic, holistic, and meaningful stories about that group.

In thinking about “qualitative methods” as I understand it at this point, I suppose the first thing that comes to mind is how “squishy” and subjective it is – I suppose this is true both in concept and in operation, too.  Coming from a field that enjoys putting as concrete a face on things as possible, and looks for bright-line rules on which one may hang one’s hat, analyzing an issue or question subjectively is not exactly my comfort zone as such.  Not that I’m a whole-hog positivist by any stretch – but neither am I a gung-ho constructivist or naturalist.  I like to both explore AND explain.  Put simply, I am seeing more and more clearly that both quantitative methods and qualitative methods are somewhat incomplete just on their own – and find the case for at least considering the applicability of BOTH methods to a research problem or question to be more and more compelling. This is, I feel, especially true in my area of interest – which I will short-hand as “information policy concerning information rights”. I want both to be able to explore and understand the dynamics behind policy by collecting information on how people experience it, and to explain the “output” or “upshot” of these policies by measuring their real effects in terms of, for example, impacting information seeking and sharing behaviors – in the interest of trying to propose some new ways to rethink and recast policy to minimize its impact on our intellectual freedoms (specifically as expressed through our information seeking and sharing behaviors…).

My interest in qualitative research is fairly recent. Last semester I explored the library and information studies (LIS) serious leisure literature. This is a relatively new field of research for LIS with populations varying from coin collectors to knitters. A common thread among all of the studies reviewed was that they are qualitative research. The researchers were attempting to understand their populations rather than predict with preconceived notions. Many of the studies took an evolving iterative approach to achieve an understanding of their topic. This iterative discovery process is very appealing to me. This is how I do most things in life. Why should I not understand how to do this when researching as well? To be honest I will most likely not be focusing on serious leisure but I do believe that it was a good introduction of the potential of qualitative research. I feel that this approach will become an important tool especially if I decide to conduct research in a new field or when the human experience is of utmost importance.

I have always been far more drawn to qualitative research than quantitative. Primarily, this is because all of my undergrad degrees are in disciplines which focus on qualitative methods: religion, women’s studies, and English. But more than that, I am interested in the lived experiences of the people I want to study. I realize that quantitative methods can provide excellent information and can even enhance qualitative work. However, especially with my current research interests, life stories, personal responses, and other qualitative information will be much more helpful. Though plenty of quantitative research provides solutions to real world problems, I feel that qualitative offers more opportunity for practical application in such areas as social justice. Measuring various budgetary breakdowns, educational statistics, and other numerical data is important for governmental programs and other reasons, but they will tell you absolutely nothing about the individuals you are studying and what their day-to-day experiences actually are–how they see the world, their hopes and fears, and the often minute ways things can be done to improve their every day lives.

Why do I want to conduct qualitative research? Put simply, I grew tired of reading about which factors explained which percentage of the variance in an experiment. I grew tired of reading about researchers attempting to create perfectly sterile and replicable lab conditions while reducing the complexities of human existence into numbers. While quantification is necessary to communicate many research findings to a lay public, I find sorting through the messiness that is humanity to be much more fulfilling. In doing so we are able to extract the nuances of human behavior and describe them in rich detail. Some of these nuances and qualities may never be large enough to be quantified, but that does not mean they are not important to the individuals who exhibit the qualities. They do have value, and qualitative research helps others see the value of those qualities and nuances.

Why am I interested in qualitative research?  I guess it primarily stems from my love of the field of Sociology.  It took me 14 years to finish my Bachelor’s.  Over those 14 years, I switched majors more times than I can remember.  I could never quite decide what I wanted to be when I grew up.  Then, one day, I discovered Sociology.  Suddenly, I was excited about going to class and reading materials and learning.  I had found my passion.  (In fact, if UNF hadn’t discontinued their Master’s in Sociology, I might have ended up on an entirely different path.)

But back to qualitative research . . . Sociology is the study of society and social interaction.  I would argue that these are things far too nuanced to study quantitatively.  It would be difficult to quantify the subtleties and intricacies of our everyday interactions, and the influences on those interactions.  Some people would argue that human behavior is predictable and, thus, can be quantified and measured.  But I would argue that, even in “predictable” situations, quantitative research doesn’t tell the whole story.  In order to get the rich data necessary to understand WHY that behavior is predictable (or not), qualitative means are indispensable.  In other words, I don’t think it’s enough just to be able to predict.  I think the goal should be to understand.

A great example is a standardized test score.  You can take students’ scores and try to “predict” whether they will succeed or fail in school, but what if an extremely bright student had the flu on testing day, or his mom was in the hospital?  Or what if a struggling student got frustrated and made a lot of really good guesses?  These are things that tell the stories behind the numbers.  And without qualitative methods, those stories don’t get told.  I don’t want that to happen.  And that is why I want to do qualitative research!

‘Sup, everyone!

So, I’m a first-year doctoral student at the iSchool. My research interests include cultural heritage institutions such as historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and particularly their libraries. I’m also interested in the information worlds of underrepresented groups. I’m inspired by the work of the late Dr. Elfreda Chatman, who studied the information realities of janitors, incarcerated women, the elderly and others. My interest in small worlds or information worlds (the latter is Dr. Gary Burnett’s “baby,” really) speaks to my reason for enrolling in this course; I appreciate the contextual and cultural insight that qualitative studies can elicit.

I worked in academic libraries for 11 years in various capacities but mostly public service. I enjoy outreach and instruction. I received a B.A. in Literature from the University of Florida in 2004 and an M.L.I.S. from the iSchool in 2007 (though, I’m not sure that it was Florida’s iSchool then). As the ten year mark approached I thought a lot about the next step in my career, in terms of advancing to middle management or changing jobs altogether. Pursuing a Ph.D. felt like a natural next step. I am extremely grateful to be in the program.

I love spending time with my family, watching Dance Moms and cooking…sometimes all at the same time!

Hello, everyone.  Sometimes I feel like we all already know everyone really well and everything about each other, but that’s probably not the case, so here you go:

I graduated from UNF with my B.S. in Sociology in 2004.  18 months later, I became an Earth Science teacher at Orange Park Junior High School.  I worked there for seven years, first as a classroom teacher (two years of Earth Science, one year of Social Studies, and one year of Language Arts), and then as the school media specialist for three years.  Once I set my sights on the library job, I applied for FSU’s Master’s program and earned my MLIS in Spring 2013.  For some unexplained (and perhaps unexplainable) reason, I decided to pursue my doctorate, and so here I am in my second year.  (I think we’re all just a little bit crazy, but at least we have company.)

My areas of interest include Education Informatics, OERs, school library, Information Worlds, and all things sociological.  I don’t really know what to say about my intellectual style.  I guess I’m more of a visual learner, but I like words.  I’m not a fan of diagrams and models, for whatever reason.  I tend to get lost in them, unless they’re very simple.  I’m a big picture person, rather than a lover of minutia, so maybe that’s why.

And I guess that’s it for an introduction!  Until next week . . .