Friday 13 October 2017

Two days spent in How to be a Researcher module

Feeling a bit overwhelmed at the moment.  So much stuff to do, and I have not yet got the structure clear in my mind.  Maybe writing about it will help.

We are independent researchers - this is not a BA - no timetable will be provided.  So I need to define my timetable myself.

Session started with 3 helpful basics - name, faculty and 3 key words:
Cathy MacTaggart - Faculty of Arts & Humanities - Women, Values, Feminine Imaginary.

Imposter Syndrome - very common to feel this - this is OK ... but you need to learn to feed yourself - using appropriate development activities for you:

Read
Visit museum/gallery/place of learning
Conversation with knowledgeable person (supervisor; peers; friends; multi-disciplinary)
Internet (reliable sources)
Build models
Observe people
Draw
Mind maps
Travel - see how other cultures do it.
Youtube
Modules
Social media
Conferences
Accessing bibliographies

Look up Research Development online - rdonline - enrolment code

ACTION - Find a Research textbook in my discipline ... and read and apply it!

Erik Borg - Research Writing

There will be a Writing for Publication module - date tba
Also Writing for Scholarly Publication normally done in second year, once you have completed your database.

Start writing early.  Start with methodology and introduction

Writing for Research themed week 6-11 November.

The Golden Circle : most people work through What, then How, then Why.  Good research works the other way - be clear about Why you are working, then go to How, which will then produce What you make.

Think - Act - Communicate.  It should be that everything we do, challenges the status quo.

We were advised to look at the blog of Pat Thompson and her comments on how to use citations and how not to do it.  It was a brilliant read from the perspective of an assessor - pearls of wisdom in how NOT to give bullets for the panel to fire at you at your viva!.  I suggest you read it. https://patthomson.net/category/citation/citation-dump/.   Courtesy of Pat Thompson.

There is an Academic Phrasebook online at Coventry Uni.  Note to self - Use It!

Academic writing is always seeking the gap in the literature, and a unique answer to a question.

Always seek out peer reviewed journals - higher quality.  Find out from Jill Journeaux, her opinion on best journals in our field.

Post Graduate Researcher Ethics

We must have ethical approval before data generation.  Submit 2 ethics forms.  First one within next 10 days to seek permission for literature search - this will be deemed low risk to gain project approval, will be completed within 6 months and can be authorised quickly.

Second application is about primary collection phase.  Speak to supervisor to set up methodology: interviews with candidates; define questions etc.. Data collection within next 3 months - medium to high risk, esp anything dealing with outside UK, vulnerable people, vulnerable locations, funding. etc.

Progress Review Panel at end of first 12 months.  Must pass to progress to year 2.

Look up Research Excellence Framework - describes how to ensure your Research is robust.

The principle of research ethics is to maximise benefits of your research whilst minimising harm.

5 Rs of Ethical Research

Record Keeping - informed consent; archiving and disposal
Regulations - law; code of conduct
Respect - research integrity
Rights - anonymity and right to withdraw
Risks - personal safety and other risks.

CU Ethics give online ethical approval.

ACTION - Create Ethics Submission

Research Evaluation. 

Research Excellence Framework (REF) focusses on Originality, Significance, Rigour.  I'm still not really clear about this but Make your position clear.  In my case, because I am defining how I, as a woman, see values and the feminine imaginary, I can write using the personal pronoun.  This may make the methodology original.

Look up Jean McNiff - Action research and practitioner research.

Finding your papers. 

How to choose your papers :

- Find the journals in your field that are robust - use the impact factor - Ask Jill
- Gain confidence sourcing journals online - Find out from the IT office how to gain access when off campus as at present I can get to the journal, but not the full text.
- Keyword search in library
- Speak to your supervisory team
- Can use papers that you used in your proposal
- Seek out papers on your topic that use different methodologies.

Pick 4

Literature Review

Purpose:
What's already there
Don't reinvent the wheel
Identify the gap - what is my contribution?
Identify good/poor methodology
Interlinking information between writing forms your Questions
Build trust with the reader - show knowledge to examiners
                                               - but now we are researchers so the actual methodology is fascinating
                                               - How to find out?
                                               - Learn methods and theories.

Identify writers you like - to emulate their style

Coverage: (more at PhD level than MRes)
- errors/omissions/negligence
- Use and application of literature (your assessors will. be journal editors!)
- Critical evaluation
- Macro structural coherence
- Relationships between literature
- Appreciation of disciplinary context.

Build towards your gap.
Sustain an argument - relating to your study

Identify problems with a specific approach - and use this to validate a different method that addresses it.

Look up systematic literature reviews and narrative literature reviews.

Ways of mapping your literature

Organisational mapping
Conceptual mapping
Spreadsheet
Relational maps

Mind maps - sets out ideas and how to organise it.  Try using post-it notes on wall - gives hierarchical outlines.

Conceptual maps
- historical/chronological
- conceptual
- taxonomic (categories)
- heirarchical

Use reworks. - ACTION Book welcome programme workshop

Write to your purpose
Be critical:  Question the evidence, method etc.  Critique the who, what, when, where, why, and how. Disciplinary knowledge - the more you read the better your questions.

Criticalness in your writing
Hedges - possibly, maybe, anything cautionary
Emphatics - certainly, definitely
Person markers - I, we, our, mine
Attitude markers - unfortunately, hopefully
Relational markers - rhetorical questions
Evaluative markers - importantly, misguided

Creating a stance
Don't sit on the fence.  "A good example..."  "However, this approach has been criticised"

Citations in Text. 

Integral and non-integral:

"Chandra et al (2004) argue for ..." - Integral - emphasises sources not ideas

"Some have argued ... (Briggs 2009)" - Non-integral - focuses on what was said - this is your argument.

Define your argument clearly - "A seminal book (Name) (Author) said ..."  
Focus on paraphrasing others.  You want to focus on your ideas - but select use of punchy quotes is good.

Checking

This is what the area shows (multiple sources) and this is what I want to focus on.  Read Pat Thompson The Citation Dump blog post - good stuff in here.

Book: Ridley The Literature Review.

Arts and Humanities Research  with Imogen Racz (my second supervisor and Art Historian) and Jill Journeaux (First supervisor and textile artist)

Imogen:
Identify the boundary of knowledge
Where is the archival material?  Is it accessible?
Start with broad questions and filter down to your question
What has been written?  In what context?
Your idea may be about the context.  To make it researchable  you may need to realign and refocus.
Originality may be to use a theory in a novel way.
Primary knowledge leads to new understanding
Try out different structures
Work out your headings and sub headings.
Keep notes and file under headings.
Try making notes on index cards - write on one side only.
(Imogen advised me to only write on one side on my notebook pages- but at least I took notes - no-one else did!).
Charts and timelines can be new knowledge - pieces of new knowledge - listing data and political events/other significant events can show links)
Artist/media/year of birth/Representation/solo exhibitions/group exhibitions as an example can show links between who knew whom, whose work was shown together and possible influences.
What is the back story - can I fill in (new knowledge)

Use good theses - look at their bibliography
- use their good sources
- BUT make sure yours is slightly different, more extensive, more recent.

Next Tuesday - Tea at Lanchester Library. 1600 in the Gallery

Jill:  Research from own practice

Looking for gaps.
Look at Grayson Perry Reith Lectures.  Good stuff.

Writers : Quality of questions - evidence - answer
Artists : Quality of questions - artwork - not necessarily an answer but an interpretation

What, why how for artists:
Knowledge gap in thought leads to research
Knowledge gap in practice - leads to a complex path for practice and research.

Autobiography - personal experience
Understanding your own culture. This is exactly where I am coming from.

Jill inspired by lace archive - drew lots.  Remade lace in drawings.  Then drew with stitch.

Look at artists collections.  Collections build meaning.  Look at Artists and collections. Collections are deep rooted in practice.

Best work comes from collaboration.  Leads to dialogue - and your work gets correction by others and is strengthened.

No comments:

Post a Comment