Writing Goals: 2018-05-29 Make Template; Fill 1 Entry
For today, my tasks will be goal-based. I will be working on
1) hacking out the template for a section that details my research settings, and
2) filling in that template for at least one (1) of those settings.
By way of an explanation: Sociocultural Anthropology is a discipline that privileges "experience-near" data, so case-studies rather that statistical analysis are preferred and evaluated more kindly. I purposefully set about a multi-sited research project which provided me with over 60 research sites, and well over 500 subjects for observation (public spaces and events, no IRB necessary). Among these 60+ sites and in places in between, I actually interviewed or simply talked to a little over 150 people (IRB approval was duly obtained for this).
The advantage of this is that I have a wide range of participants that I have been able to draw from, and in certain cases I even have the power levels required to do certain statistical analyses familiar to some sociocultural anthropologists (relating largely to free lists, pile or card sorts, and consensus analyses - sampling realities have limited the applicability of more conventional analyses like ANOVA and so on).
The drawback, is that I have far too many interlocutors and sites in my study to be kept in the mind of a reader. Thus, rather than asking my readers to keep track of so many sites and voices, I am collapsing these data into several archetypical dojo. As well, some personae are presented in the dissertation as composites of actual people - though I try to avoid this wherever possible.
This might seem odd, reckless, or dangerous to people from different disciplines, but it is practice that has been employed in sociocultural anthropology before, and there are systematic procedures that have been developed for such a process. Though I would be happy to speak at length with anyone who has questions about this, I will not fully outline this here. That being said, I will mention a couple key components.
First, I am upfront and clear that I have created these composites for presentation of the qualitative findings in this dissertation, though--in the interest of maintaining my interlocutor's anonymity--I do not expressly indicate when I am using a composite and when I am not. Second, I have conferred with those interlocutors whose statements and opinions are presented within a composite personae, to confirm or refute whether my characterization has remained true to the spirit of their perspective.
My goal is not to present the exhaustive or definitive truth about karate in the United States, nor even to write from a position of "authority" upon the subject. Instead, my goal is to provide a legitimate account that resonates with the personal and corporate experiences of karate practitioners and karate organizations found within my study and in the United States at large. If this method of creating composites seems foreign to anyone reading this, please consider it within the light of these goals--rather than those of your own discipline and its specific demands--and then feel free to direct any questions of challenges you have in my direction.
1) hacking out the template for a section that details my research settings, and
2) filling in that template for at least one (1) of those settings.
By way of an explanation: Sociocultural Anthropology is a discipline that privileges "experience-near" data, so case-studies rather that statistical analysis are preferred and evaluated more kindly. I purposefully set about a multi-sited research project which provided me with over 60 research sites, and well over 500 subjects for observation (public spaces and events, no IRB necessary). Among these 60+ sites and in places in between, I actually interviewed or simply talked to a little over 150 people (IRB approval was duly obtained for this).
The advantage of this is that I have a wide range of participants that I have been able to draw from, and in certain cases I even have the power levels required to do certain statistical analyses familiar to some sociocultural anthropologists (relating largely to free lists, pile or card sorts, and consensus analyses - sampling realities have limited the applicability of more conventional analyses like ANOVA and so on).
The drawback, is that I have far too many interlocutors and sites in my study to be kept in the mind of a reader. Thus, rather than asking my readers to keep track of so many sites and voices, I am collapsing these data into several archetypical dojo. As well, some personae are presented in the dissertation as composites of actual people - though I try to avoid this wherever possible.
This might seem odd, reckless, or dangerous to people from different disciplines, but it is practice that has been employed in sociocultural anthropology before, and there are systematic procedures that have been developed for such a process. Though I would be happy to speak at length with anyone who has questions about this, I will not fully outline this here. That being said, I will mention a couple key components.
First, I am upfront and clear that I have created these composites for presentation of the qualitative findings in this dissertation, though--in the interest of maintaining my interlocutor's anonymity--I do not expressly indicate when I am using a composite and when I am not. Second, I have conferred with those interlocutors whose statements and opinions are presented within a composite personae, to confirm or refute whether my characterization has remained true to the spirit of their perspective.
My goal is not to present the exhaustive or definitive truth about karate in the United States, nor even to write from a position of "authority" upon the subject. Instead, my goal is to provide a legitimate account that resonates with the personal and corporate experiences of karate practitioners and karate organizations found within my study and in the United States at large. If this method of creating composites seems foreign to anyone reading this, please consider it within the light of these goals--rather than those of your own discipline and its specific demands--and then feel free to direct any questions of challenges you have in my direction.
Hi Noah! How did your first day of writing go? Did these goals seem achievable? I like that you started with an outline/template for your data--that seems useful. Were there any bumps along the way?
ReplyDelete[I posted this comment yesterday, but to my introduction entry, for some reasons.]
DeleteBy the end of the day's session, I have completed the first task (composing my template for this section), and I have started the second task (complete 1 out of the 9 iterations of this template).
Thus, I have fallen short of my second goal, but not by so much that I am disappointed in my progress today. Net result, I've upped the page count of the dissertation no more than three pages, but I've set down the format I'll be using to populate this section.
In the name of reflection, I'd say that part of the reason I fell short is that I got derailed looking for a detail in my notes that I was not able to find. I probably could have just inserted a programmer comment to plug that element in once I stumbled upon that tidbit again, but it got under my skin and I felt I had to try and hunt it down. Getting distracted like this is probably not the best for my page count, but I think it's useful to me for keeping things organized conceptually as I'm writing.