Skip to content

meeting Wed 14 Oct

October 14, 2009

Present:  Natalya, Suyin and Meher. We talked about our projects.  Meher talked about applying Bordieu’s habitus to her work on an indian filmmaker so i (Nat) learnt a bit more about Bordieu and we talked about how his models fit and dont fit.  I talked about my recent adventures in methodologies, and my next plan, which is to talk to stakeholders about the appropriateness of different methods…  questions like how patients would respond to bedside interviews, and they suggested where I could find stakeholders (patients, nurses, doctors, etc.)

Advertisements

Getting an agenda for next meeting…

October 6, 2009

So it looks like we have a good session lined up next week, in that there is one interesting informal talk (Katie) and quite a few people who are chewing over their methods for their DA.
Katie’s description of what she might talk about follows.

Anyone else who wants to take the opportunity to have to explain their methodology / method / design to a sympathetic audience?
That’s for Wed 14 October  2-3:30pm, building 3 (Bon Marche), level 2, room 210

Katie’s thing:
I would be happy to talk about methodolgy from the ‘other’ side – at the point of analysis, and trying to frame work….  I have just spent a couple of months reading and post-rationalising my methodology after my return from a year of fieldwork…

For those that don’t know about my work – I spent a year in Milan following 3 groups of undocumented migrants, essentially completing 3 microgeographic studies. I used qualitative methodologies, adapted from ethnography, including participant observation + long, unstructured interviews, as well as media analysis. Dealing with migrants without visas in an increasingly racist climate came with its own ethical difficulties – not least the high level of observation that the groups were under by other researchers and journalists.

Wed 30 Sept meeting

September 30, 2009

Present:  Meher, Suyin, Natalya.

Instead of Natalya presenting  her shiny-glossy approach>methodology>methods, which she couldn’t do due to confusion, we talked about our process of finding the right methods for our projects, and about ethics applications.

Although I got quite a lot out of our small meeting today [says Nat], maybe we should try to get some kind of agenda or task-at-hand going for the group…

Kate sent this (free articles for a month):  http://www.uk.sagepub.com/email/online/2009/9384.htm

One of the articles  (Writing Our Way Into Shared Understanding: Collaborative Autobiographical Writing in the Qualitative Methods Class Judith C. Lapadat) describes a process of getting students to become experts on a chosen methodology:

Each class member chooses to read a different book-length research
study and selection of chapters or journal articles, and each investigates a
different qualitative approach, then presents to the class. …. Therefore, each
person becomes the expert on the topic or article he or she has chosen …
In the lively discussions that ensue, we critique, problematize, and politicize.

Should we try something similar?

Sandra commented to me:  we can even do one of each (on everyone’s approach)…  Or cluster it around epistemologies/ ethics/ etc topics… In the meantime some of us doing DA end of the month – definitely into our methodology and would find all useful.

Lets discuss this and other things we could do.
Please post ideas / thoughts to the mailing list at fasstasticmethodologygroup@listserv.uts.edu.au.
To subscribe to the mailing list, fill in the form at http://listserv.uts.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/FASStasticMethodologyGroup

Next meeting:  two weeks time…  Wed 14 October  2-3:30pm in building 3, level 2, room 210

I know of two people who would come if the meetings were on Friday.    On the one hand change can be disruptive, on the other maybe others would prefer Friday.  May as well ask.

email to FASStastic

September 18, 2009

next meeting is Wednesday 30 September, 2-3:30pm in building 3, level 2, room 210

Next meeting Natalya and hopefully someone else will present their Approach -> Methodology -> Methods.
If you want to be the second person, that would be great.  Let us know.

Reading:    denzinlincoln2005_1
Someone commented in the Talking Research Methods session on methodologies, that having a sense of the history of methodologies is really important so this is the introduction (historical overview) and a chapter about paradigms from Denzin and Lincoln.  (attached) Its general, and its contested, but supposedly it’s a classic reading.

Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) 2005, The Sage handbook of qualitative research, 3 edn, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.

16 September 2009

September 16, 2009

Our first meeting.

We presented ourselves.  We noted that the disciplines present in the room had different ways of classifying things (approach or methodology or method?)  We bandied some terms about.  We decided to meet again, and to take it in turns presenting our approaches in more depth.  Perhaps we will come out of the exercise able to comprehend and reply to comments about methodology during a doctoral presentation / doctoral defense / or other doctoral activities.

Next meeting:
Wed 30 September  2-3:30pm  Nat to present her Approach -> Methodology -> Methods.  Someone else should present too, there is space and time for it.