Sandeford+Julius+Schaeffer

Abstract Draft: S. J. (Sandy) Schaeffer, III
(updated 11/29/2006 after class)

__Paper Title:__ //**Using Wikis to create shared scientific knowledge: Experiences as a qualitative graduate student**//

Using my experiences as a graduate student of qualitative studies, I will describe my personal experiences in a class context using Wiki technology to create scientific knowledge as a community exercise. Focus will be on the process by which our group of novice Wiki users developed the necessary skills to collaborate effectively and create shared academic work. Questions to be explored include: How does collaborative development differ in a Wiki space versus traditional online learning environments? What are the implications on social inclusivity (or exclusivity) presented by the use of Wiki technology to create shared scientific work? What are some implications for the use of Wikis in qualitative research and education? My discussions will be grounded in pertinent contemporary literature..

11-29

This week I was buried in effort related to my second analysis project (which was brutal).

I actually read the wrong readings (I think) and really spent little time on anything else other than worrying about the end of the semester. One of my major concerns is our team-Wiki project.we are still struggling with how/ what we will do to be successful. Perhaps she will be kind?

The end of every semester ends up much like this and yet somehow I survive.

On a positive note, I have completed my residency project & turned it in to my advisor. This means I can take comps in the spring (Joy!) oh well-no rest for the weary.


 * 11-15 - 2nd analysis**

= = Reduced story in classs:

I was sitting in a Washington DC food court adjacent to three young adults that I imaged could be college students – possibly at Gauladette university? My thoughts wandered to what considerations we have in the use of instructional technologies for such students. What awarenesses induce us as campus leaders to provide for their needs? Why had this topic not come up in my previous topic considerations? Is it possible that my awareness is too low? Am I a possible reflection of schools in general?

Perhaps it would be informative to revisit my existing data and interview selected campus individuals who would serve their needs? By reducing what I hear in these conversations, perhaps I can tell a story that informs us on the attitudes of campus leadership to the role of instructional technologies to assist these students?

11-15

We discussed what to do about the QI conf.in may tool. my idea on Wikipedia: the backdrop is the issue of the politics of evidence of Wikipedia vis-a-vis scholarly norms. Then the specific evidences are our Qualipedia experiences in this class.tow we reconcile the validity of our output?


 * what constitutes Validity?
 * who are the gatekeepers?
 * who will be impacted by these changes? How will their needs be considered and addressed?
 * What about data collection among constituents (librarians, publishers, scientists, etc.)?
 * Karen will deal with the "silent" contributors. If it becomes a reality, what about those who will not be able to contribute?


 * 11-12:** Alternate data for my analysis #2 URL: [|http://www.misprofessor.net]

This is the website that was developed by my faculty member.


 * 11-12**

Yahoo!! This weekend I've had the opportunity to present my first formal qualitative research project at a scholarly conference. I completed my residency project in which I explored the motivational factors that influence faculty members' likelihood to innovate in their teaching. I conducted in-depth phenomenological interviews with four (4) faculty and analyzed the results using coding, categories & themes.

I presented these results in the form of a poster session at the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL) at its annual meeting in Washington, DC. I had about 15-20 folks stop and study my presentation and engage in relatively in-depth discussions. A number of them were quite experience with qualitative studies - particularly attendees from the UK - although several Americans were as well. Frankly, I was nervous given it was my first time to present qualitative results, but it turned out to be an excellent experience.

I'm looking forward to a future opportunity to present qualitatively again.


 * 11-8, class**

It dawns in me that all research is inherently first-person and should be represented that way, It's not possible to claim that personal any research is not subjectively influenced by your personal feelings about what is relevant


 * 11-5, Narrative Readings**

Good example of a narrative - Ruth Shalit on Weisberger at Colby http://linguafranca.mirror.theinfo.org/9802/shalit.html

11-1 Poem

 * __Loving my students__**

//( A faculty member's ode to the love of students)//

Really great instructor, I love the class. A compliment instead of a criticism.

It made a big difference in my teaching and added interest to the presentation.

More interesting... more attractive, Something students would look at.

I went too fast for the students and they just couldn't comprehend that fast!

So, it was not only easier for me, but better for the students... more interesting for the students... more interesting for the students.

11-1 class notes
Discussing the QI conference... -How did the technology impact our (my) understanding of rigor, quality of class, etc. Perhaps even the politics of evidence. -Do we want to act out something about our experiences with Wikis let. Avoid the "paper reading" exercise. -Good idea: Always have a broad-based IRB that covers enough to let you collect data more generally and continually. -__Qualitative Inquiry Congress__ for a new code-ethnics on Q research and appropriate IRB standards. -[|www.qi2007.org]May 2-5 in Urbana, Ill.

Keep thinking - What does this have to do with my research?

What if we did a session on Wikipedia and the"politics of evidence" for scholarly reporting? Is Qualipedia/wikipedria concrete eviolence that we're in a post-modernist period? Where knowledge is defined by a global network of scholarly collaborators?

For example-is the def. of absolute knowledge as elusive as an asymptotic curve ever crossing the X-axis? As unachievable as the walker ever reaching a wall (a la Xeno)?

For __**next week (11-8)**__ we are to share ideas on how to potentially participate in QI using our wiki experience as a central theme.

11-1-2006
The majority of this last week was spent developing my inductive analysts CI) assignment -which was exhausting by the way.

One thing that is difficult for me (and shared by others) is the non-linear nature of the expected accomplishments for this course. Kakali is probably sad to hear me say this- as We've learned it's what is expected in the course. So, perhaps this is going exactly as it is supposed to. On the other hand, I know I'm learninga great deal about Wilkins, poetry, alternate ways of representing experiences and scientific inquiry.

10/25/2006
Long week. Worked mostly on the analysis assignment and really only felt anxiety about not getting back to our collaboartive "Phenom" wiki efforts. Too much travel and family issues over the weekend...

10/18/2006 - Gone a week: out of site, but not out of mind
Well, I missed class last week (10/11) as I was out of town for an educational technology conference. Missing a f2f session of this class is somewhat like missing a really good gathering in college (except that there's no drinks, no music, and we have to work really hard). With a small group and only meeting on a weekly basis, missing one session is not easy to do and it's hard to not feel behind. So, to a certain extent, I feel behind. On the other hand, I was able to function reasonably well with my tablet-PC, wireless connection at the conference, and access to email and the wiki space. I was able to submit my assignment electronically after virtual dialog with Kakali. That seemed to work rather well.

I also found the Wiki space to be both helpful (and somewhat troublesome). On the helpful side, it was really straightforward to go in and post content and see all of the shared space and what's going on. Because of the clarity of the purpose of the Wiki in this class, I know it's a place of defined purpose and record in the class. If I don't see something there it's not 'official' in the class (or at least that's how I'm interpreting it.) I can see what the recap of the last week was to not feel completely 'left out'. On the troublesome side, I'm a bit concerned about our team adjusting culturally to an asynchronous, virtual lab exercise without precise guidlines. I'm very excited about the potential of completing our shared project online (as I'm confident is the same for all of us), but I'm concerned when we're not making great strides towards completion. Tonight I hope the Phenoms can set aside some quality f2f time to collaborate on how we next proceed on our semester project. The last couple of times we did that, we had a good spirt of output in the next few days. When we let it go undiscussed for a few weeks, the space goes a bit quiet.

So, I'm coming to the conclusion that an effective Wiki exercise over a prolonged period needs either (or both): (1) A period of adjustment both technically and culturally in which the team members acclimate to a virtual project approach and/or (2) Some built-in f2f time as a group to 'recalibrate' notions and expectations.

I'm particularly facinated by this portion (the wiki) of the semester's activities because my daily job is to advise and recommend faculty on the use of instructional technologies - and social-networking is the hot topic "du jour". Having a concrete experience like this as as student is of immeasurable value to me as a professional. So, I'm not at all dissappointed in where we are at this point and appreciative of the opportunity to adapt to such a new learning approach.

Sandy ==

==

10/4/2006 - Taxonomical Exercise
Form: Outline Cover Term: **Music in Alex’s World**

1) Artists/Albums a) The flaming lips / Transmissions from the Satellite Heart b) Neil Young – Decade c) Sonic Youth – Daydream Nation d) Beatles/White Album e) Pink Floyd / Dark Side of the Moon f) Mogwai – Young Team g) Sam Roberts – We were born in a flame h) The Smashing Pumpkins – Siamese Dream i) Miles Davis - Bitches Brew j) Santana / Abraxis k) Stereolab / ? l) Belle & Sebastian / ? m) Led Zepplin / ? n) The Doors / ? o) Hendrix

2) Musical Kings a) Elvis b) John Fogerty

3) Ways to enjoy (appreciate) music a) Hanging out (& drinking tea) b) Walking w/headphones on c) Dad’s albums d) Seeing on TV (e.g., MTV)

4) Mood impacts on Alex a) Images in his head b) Elimination of silence c) Going “someplace else”

5) Visual Stimuli a) Seeing Elvis’ name b) Seeing a record store sign

=Domain Analysis (Alex & Music) - 10/2/2006=

This section of material for the class session on 10/4/2006 is a domain analysis of Alex's reflections on music that we initially examined in the 9/27 class. There are two parts: (1) my domain analysis of the musical reflection and (2) a paragraph of what this means to me in terms of understanding Alex.

__Structural Question__: What are all the kinds of musical groups and specific albums that Alex really likes? (Note. – Alex’s narrative is packed with inclusion examples and I could have filled up several screens) __Structural Question__: Who are some kinds of musical “kings”?
 * __SEMANTIC RELATIONSHIP__:** Inclusion (X is a kind of Y):
 * //The Beatles//** is a kind of **//musical group//**
 * //Pink Floyd//** is a kind of **//musical group//**
 * //Santana//** is a kind of **//musical group//**
 * //Bitches Brew//** is a kind of **//record album//**
 * //Elvis//** is a kind of **//musical king//**.
 * //John Fogerty//** is a kind of **//musical king//**.

__Structural Question__: What are some ways that Alex is able to enjoy music?
 * __SEMANTIC RELATIONSHIP__ :** Means-End (X is a way to do Y)
 * //Drinking tea and hanging out//** is a way to **//enjoy music//**
 * //Walking with headphones on//** is a way to **//enjoy music//** (poem)

__Structural Question__: What are some ways that Alex infuses meaning into his life?
 * __SEMANTIC RELATIONSHIP__:** Rational (X is a reason for doing Y)
 * //Listening to my dad’s music//** is a reason for **//enjoying life//**.
 * //Listening to music with headphones on while walking//** is a reason for **//enjoying life//** (transform the world – in poem)

__Structural Question__: What are some mood impacts as a results from listening to music? __Structural Question__: What are some external stimuli that result in Alex thinking about music?
 * __SEMANTIC RELATIONSHIP__:** Cause-effect (X is a result of Y, X is a cause of Y)
 * //Bringing images to my head//** is a result **//of listening to music//**.
 * //Elimination of silences//** is a result **//of listening to music//**.
 * //Going “someplace else”//** is a result of **//listening to music.//**
 * //Seeing Elvis’ name//** results in **//Alex thinking about music//**
 * //Seeing a record store sign//** results in **//Alex thinking about music//**.

Reading Alex's reaction to the picture of a music store only reinforced an image of Alex that I had developed by watching the interview videos from earlier in the semester. That is: Alex is a person who's sensory systems are always on 'go' and he uses as many of them as possible to take in data (stimuli) about the world around him and channel that into his creative writing efforts. Music, conversation, pictures; all of these are stimuli he seeks out and uses to shape new colorful images in his mind that reappear in the form of creative narrative in his writings. His choices of music also reflect a fairly pluralistic perspective on engaging musical genres (Flaming Lips to Miles Davis) although he does seem to be mostly oriented to high-energy musical artists that challenge the prevailing conservative 'norms'. He struck me as an engaged optimist in the interviews and this was only reinforced by his discussions about music. In a way, he reminds me of me as a 19-year-old'; only I was awful (and still am) as a creative writer.
 * __PERSONAL REFLECTIONS ON ALEX:__**

Sandy Schaeffer, 10/3/2006, 8:30PM

//**9/25/2006 - Note that I posted all of the Mall Observations to a separate page called "Schaeffer-Observations" in the menu on the left.**//

__INTERVIEW NOTES & REFLECTIONS - Sandy Schaeffer (9/19/2006):__
=Feminist Interview:=

This was my first time to observe a feminist interview, but it was immediately obvious to me that it was a different style of interview from any of the other qualitative data collection experiences than I had seen to this point. The most natural thing for me to do as I was observing it was to simply “take notes” in a journal format. Below is a recap of my journal notes on the Feminist Interview. I used the same journal technique for the Phenomenological as well. The first thing that struck me was the initial question: “What makes someone a writer?” Why was this interesting? Well it seemed like a wide-open question. If the purpose of good qualitative study is to ask open-ended questions, this one was about 175 degrees wide-open. It really left about 10 lanes of room open for the participant to share his thoughts.
 * The initial feeling I had of the interview as more of an intellectual debate than a scientific data collection effort. It seemed more of a peer-relationship and not a researcher-subject relationship. Obviously, much less of a threatening context for the participant.
 * The posture and body-language exuded familiarity between the researcher and the participant. This added to an environment that generated a feeling intimacy that is not typically seen in scientific research.
 * The center of the universe seems to be the participant. They are allowed to tell a very personal story.
 * I noticed that it seems the researcher is as free to reflect personally as the participant.
 * Given that the interviewer shares as much as the participant, how important is it to design a study that seems to depend on researcher-generated data, how do you circle the dialog back to researcher-managed? This is clearly a technique that requires a high level of sophistication to keep it from becoming a totally casual conversation.
 * It seems the feminist approach allows for a very thorough and honest understanding of broad aspects of the participant’s world or psyche.
 * If what you need in terms of data can best be gathered in a relaxed, prolonged conversation, then this is the ideal style interview to use for gathering it.
 * The phenomenological style allows for a very multi-directional, flexible interview flow. The participant can be very natural. Obviously, the interviewer has to be comfortable and confident in such an exposed environment. The risk of directionless open-ended conversation is high, which puts greater demands on the interviewer to be sophisticated and experienced in this technique to keep it productive towards the research goals.

=**__Phenomenological Interview:__**=

This was the second interview video I watched and studied. It was clearly a very different technique from the feminist technique I had just finished viewing. There is no doubt there are very different techniques that generate a very different interview experience.


 * Now, this is a style that is more typical to my expectations of data-gathering. It is clearly: ask a question, listen, take notes which is much closer to the techniques we studied in my first qualitative class. It felt more like a traditional observational science somewhat like a field biologist examining the behavior of an animal in its natural world. (I realize that may be somewhat extreme, but how this style seemed in contrast to the feminist interview style that I had just obsereved.)
 * It seems to be predicated on good questions (i.e., well-thought and well-designed BEFORE the interview occurs) as well as a participant who can address the questions in a rich way.
 * Question: How much risk is there of the participant wandering extensively away from the delivered question? How does a researcher bring it back on track safely? (I thought of this question as a by-product of the one answer in this interview that lasted about 6 minutes.
 * In this style, the interviewed seemed more invested in the process than the participant. It seemed like a lot more work for the interviewer.
 * All of this reminds me that the style of interview must be one that is natural for the researcher as much as it’s appropriate to the nature of the study. If the interviewer is not comfortable in the style, then the data-collection could readily suffer. So, maybe the trump card with selecting an interview style should be the researcher’s natural comfort level?
 * It seems to me that successful data collection in this style of phenomenological research is highly dependent on the researcher having a good understanding of the participant’s world before beginning the interview process.
 * Discovering the “essence” is tricky. It is hard to design a conversation that is both tangential to the desired topic superficially, yet get to a necessary level of clarity at some point in the dialog.
 * The best answer in the interview came when the researcher was very honest and straight-forward about the purpose of the study question: “I’m interested in the essence of…” At which point the participant gave a very direct and clear answer. The participant even seemed grateful for the more direct question.
 * It struck me that listening and processing skills are profoundly relevant to good phenomenological data collection.
 * I see risk in this style that the data collection could be incomplete if the researcher is too rigid in question direction and wanders down a dead path. There is further risk if they haven’t structured the questions and time to really get to the ‘essence’ of the phenomenon. You need to be a good question ‘sculptor’ a good listener, and a good timer. Further, knowing what constitutes “essence” is very important on the front-end of the dialog session. The researcher must be alert and able to begin to hear it (or at least sense it’s coming). I believe a researcher should not always assume it will tumble out of the data analysis stage as that could be too late if you fail to query correctly towards its visibility in the interview.

=**__In-Depth Interview:__**=

This was the third interview video and was clearly, the most structured of the three.

=**How does all of this inform my research?**=
 * The first thing I noticed was the very direct and narrowing/clear nature of the initial question asked: “Tell me about a time you were…and more inspired to write?”) It was obvious the researcher desired a more narrowed answer from the participant. The first technique I noticed that reflected a more detailed and direct/narrow focus was when the interviewer asked for a second example of the phonemenon that had just been asked and addresed. I felt like that technique was designed to create a stronger picutre of the participant's view of the desired phenomenon.
 * One thought I had while studying this last interview style was that perhaps an in-depth interview should follow a typical one because you need to have a starting point understanding of the particpant for the in-depth that could be developed through an initial standard phenomenological interview exercise. The degree to which the interviewer knew the participant was reflected in the number of risky closed ended questions (yes/now) asked that still resulted in very rich responses from the participant that went well beyond the yes/no that could have come out. Over the course of the three interviews, it became obvious that this participant was not shy about responding to a question - no matter how closed ended. So, the interviewer had developed an awareness of this trait.
 * In-depth interviews are perhaps the most technically-challenging of the three interview styles studied in this exercise. Doing well at it requires a very real-time "sharpness" and analytical skills on the part of the interviewer in order to keep framing new questions that progressively elicite a clearer picture of the continually-narrowing phenomenon being sought.
 * No matter where the participant went with an answer, the researcher still asked questions that kept things on task to the central theme through astute and agile questioning. The researched seemed the most alert and attentive of the three examples.
 * Lastly, If found the closing question intriguing in which the participant was asked to provide an example of a "not" or opposite expereince. Perhaps another way to gain clarity on the topic of interest is to see what it is not. I had not considered that subtle approach until watching this interview.

As a student of qualitative research, I had an “aha!” moment about half-way through the 2nd video. It struck me how powerful a learning tool, rich media video can be – when properly done. In this same vein, the combination of the video content and the variability of the different interview techniques tells me that there are many different forms of data to be collected that can inform the researcher in many ways beyond the standard interview and transcription of text. While we have talked about this point abstractly in class on several occasions, this direct experience from a learner’s perspective was very powerful. I’m quite convinced now of the value in pursuing multiple forms of rich data.

I wonder how much the interviewer is aware of the different styles while in the midst of an interview of any one of the different types?

OLD NOTES Hello class. This is my first entry into my personal wiki space. Tonight is class time & I'm experimenting with new technology approaches as a student.

OK - So it's Sunday morning and I'm deciding how to balance a family life with being a student working on their dissertation. So, my wife and I decided she would drive on our family outing today (to U of Mississippi Library for her studies) and I'll read my materials for the coming week. We're going to see a Hummingbird festival in Holly Springs on our way back.

Now, I suddenly remembered that signing in relevant. Must do every time to not be anonymous!!!

9/13/2006 (class discussion)

Question: How do we decide what data to include from the data collection phase? For example, there may be too much or you may collect data that appears to be unrelated to the study (surprise data).

Answer: (K had this in her dissertation defense) - If the data informs against the question, then it's valid to include. But, it's ultimately your call as a researcher and you have to support the position.

Note: How does this study contribute to the literature on this method/question? Perhaps and "aha!" moment during the study.

Kinds of additional data:
 * Archive documents (e.g., website for innovative course, technology documentation, pictures of innovative technology components)
 * What about audio recordings of a lecture session that reinforces the innovations discussed in the examples cited by the faculty member.
 * Artifact data from TAF grants, etc. - but must be kept anonymous!!