As part of this week’s blog question asks us to incite some
inter-blogger commentary, I was struck with the realization that I haven’t
really been commenting on other people’s blog posts. I then began to wonder whether anyone had
been commenting on mine. As a newcomer
to blogging, I figured that I would be somehow notified if someone commented on
one of my postings, but I just went back and looked over all of my entries,
only to realize that I had received some comments that I’d been unaware
of! To correct this lack of response, I
will put in some time this week to respond to some of the comments on my posts,
but for now I’ll speak to the portion of the question that asks how our
research has evolved.
I have struggled throughout this course, as my research
project methodology (oral history) wasn’t covered in class. I found it difficult to articulate a research
question, as oral history isn’t generally used as a method through which
hypotheses are tested, or through which quantitative research is
performed. Rather, it seeks to identify,
record and preserve people’s personal accounts for their own value. I believe that this still qualifies as a kind
of research, however I found it difficult to position this particular research
methodology within the context of the class and the proposal paper.
Nevertheless, I’ve been able to get through a first draft of
my research proposal, and I thought I would use this opportunity to ask the
members of the group a couple of questions about parts of my proposal that I’m
still unsure about. So here goes:
What are your general thoughts about the length of an
introduction? The examples of proposals
from last year that Prof. Galey provided all tended to have brief and very
concise introductions, but mine has turned out to be two pages long. I figured that it was important to frame my
research project within the context of current discussions in geography
(because my project involves recording stories about locations in Toronto), so
that the reader would be able to understand that there exists a gap in
knowledge that my project would fill. It
didn’t feel right to launch into a sort of thesis statement before introducing the
discourse within which I want to contextualize my project. But I worry that it’s wound up too long.
I’m also interested in asking the other group members how
much detail they’ve gone into in their methodology sections. Again, as oral history methodology isn’t
particularly rigorous, I mostly just described the general principles of oral
history, how I would locate the interview subjects, what equipment I will use
in the recording and editing of the interviews, the kinds of questions I will
ask, how I will present the interviews on a website, and the precautions I will
take to ensure the preservation of the recordings. If anyone else has a project whose
methodology lies outside of the general methods we’ve discussed in class, I
would love to hear a bit about how you tackled your methodology section.
Any feedback at all would be greatly appreciated J
I would not worry too much. From your description of your project, it sounds like you have everything as it should be. You might be worried that your introduction is too long, but you say yourself that you did not feel right stating your thesis without a good introduction. If you have said all you need to say, and did not use any "filler", then I think you will be fine. Same for the methodology: if you have said all you can say, I think you are fine.
ReplyDeleteHi Lauren,
ReplyDeleteA little last minute, but I thought of something that would be worth adding to your methodology section (although you may have included it already!). Consider discussing why oral history methodology is the best technique for the purposes of your proposed study. Why do you choose it above all others, and why is it the most effective? Otherwise, your research proposal sounds incredibly interesting. If you ever put it into action one day, it would be an amazing project!
Thanks Eva! That is also a really helpful suggestion. I did actually include a section describing why I think that oral history methodology would be best suited to my particular project, so the fact that you brought this up makes me feel more confident in my proposal. Thanks so much for your advice and good luck on your proposal too!
ReplyDelete