Tag: SIP

Field Notes – SIP Workshop 3

This workshop came as a saviour to me. I had done my focus group a couple of weeks before the workshop and I was lost with the amount of data, not really knowing what to do with it. I could sense some themes coming out of all these points of views but it was just a gut feeling rather than something I could demonstrate.

Understanding the analytical filtering of primary and secondary data started to lift the blurring fog on my data. Semiotic analysis was interesting to study but ultimately didn’t really apply to my research. 

The data poetry was a total revelation and a very useful one too! Doing the exercise on Jordan transcript during the workshop made me realise that this was the best way to analyse and extract meaningful point of views. Saying that, I was surprised that the data poem that each group ended with was somewhat different, extracting different meaning from the transcript. What was important was to stay true and rigorous to the meaning and the intention of the data to create an honest and relevant explanatory narrative.

Working in groups on the thematic coding had the effect of a bright new light on my data!

I could finally see a way of making sense of the data by classifying them in different research themes. This is when I realised that my research question had 3 main themes in order to extract improvements: the content of the lecture, the pedagogies and the learning outcomes. It became obvious that I needed to classify the data following these themes. 

I was delighted at the end of the workshop and couldn’t wait to put my new knowledge into practice. It also allowed me to have a good understanding of what I was doing for the first time!

Field Notes – SIP Workshop 2

The workshop started by a recap of Action Research and then moved on to the action research cycle. Adding our actions on Miro allowed me to understand better the different phases of action research and how to implement them.

Messy Work, Meshwork and Meh Work:

I have to say that learning that mess was an important factor of action research was liberating to me. At the time, I had done the 121 interview and the students’ Padlet feedback and I was preparing the focus group. I could sense that a lot of different point of views had already been expressed and I was feeling a bit overwhelmed with all these different ways of thinking. I wasn’t quite sure where all this would lead and didn’t have a grasp on how to make sense of the data. 

One sentence from Cook’s study[1] (2009) really resonated with me:

“In research, having multiple viewpoints, where each new view and theory is a springboard for further reflection, is an important way of finding new ways of seeing.”

I also very much enjoyed the Meshwork idea that space is actively created rather than something out there to be discovered. I was also interested in the notion that meshwork allows for dynamism and change which is what I wanted for my research. I could relate to this concept as I was researching the lecture that I had created but also was interested in the connection difference between Meshwork and Network.

The Meh work section highlighted 2 different approaches: the Modernist, which deals with the matter of fact and the Design, which deal with the matter of concern. The Design approach resonated better with me as it touched on an aspect of the research that was very important. Why does it matter to me? Why did I wanted to do a lecture on the bias in the film industry and researched it? The answer to these questions resides in the ethic of the research. It was important to me because I had been the recipient of these biases throughout my working experience and I wanted to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

Learning to review efficiently and thoroughly an article to extract all the purposes, questions, information, inferences, concepts, assumptions, implications and point of views allowed me to be much more efficient in my reading. I took the habit of making notes and references which greatly helped when writing the research.

What I found difficult to get my head around was the referencing. I do not know if it is because I am dyslexic but it took me quite a while to identify the different referencing methods and to apply this new knowledge to my research.

Sampling was interesting to know about, but ultimately was irrelevant to my research as my sampling was random amongst the population of MA Film students that participated to the lecture. 

The data collection tools swap shop was fascinating and was only slightly hindered by the fact that not everybody was ready for the exercise. Saying that, it allowed for a peer to peer exchange of ideas and concepts that was useful to all. The very first information I extracted from this session was the difficulty in elaborating questions. The syntax, the clarity, the order of the questions were all important factors that would help getting relevant and informative data. It was a great help to hear other people’s questions and to see the difference between the intention of the person asking the question and how actually it is received and perceived by a participant. Being able to be in turn an interviewer and an interviewee allowed me to understand the complexity of questioning and the importance of its accuracy.

We also look into our data collection methods and this was a bit more reassuring as I had planned (without fully realising it) quite few different ways of getting data. It is actually one of my peers in my group that highlighted that I would end up with a lot of data considering that I wanted to do a Padlet feedback after the lecture, a 121 interview, a focus group and a questionnaire. I have to say that I hadn’t thought of the volume of data I would get and this peer’s reflection made me realised that I had no idea how to deal with all the data I would get.

Thankfully Workshop 3 will be all about data analysis…

[1] Cook,T. (2009) The purpose of mess in action research: building rigour though a messy turn, Educational Action Research, 17:2, 277-291

Thoughts on my SIP and Workshop 1

I decided on the topic of my SIP before the summer when I wanted to create my new lecture The Bias of the Film Industry. When working on the lecture, I realised that a study would be necessary in order to assess if the learning outcomes were reached and if the lecture needed improvements.

During the summer, I pitched the concept of the lecture to friends, family and colleagues to gage the interest on such topic and had numerous conversations about biases. I also read bell hooks’ book Reel to Real: Race, Class and Sex at the Movies1. I had encountered bell hooks during the L&T unit through her books; All About Love and Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. At the time, I really engaged with her critical analysis of societal bias and her theory of engaged pedagogy. When researching for books about bias in the film industry, a simple Google search on “racism in the film industry” gave me a list of books to read. Reel To Real was part of the list. Knowing the great ability of the author to analyse biases and their impact on individual and her subversive spirit, I couldn’t wait to get my hands on it. 

Reading her book allowed me to get a more sophisticated critical analysis on the racial, gender and class representation in cinema and on the power and effect that movies have on individuals. Two concepts that were to become an important part of the lecture. My reading list didn’t stopped at bell hooks (See Lecture Bibliography in Workflow) and I also watched many films such as Disclosure2.

In September, I started to work on the structure and content of the lecture and all too soon it was time for our first SIP lecture.

I have to say that it was quite a shock to realise the complexity of academic research. From formulating a precise research question to structuring a focus action plan and analysing data in order to implement results; the task seemed voluminous and the time given to achieve it seemed short.

The SIP lecture was a great help to focus my attention and my readings. 

I really enjoyed the philosophical aspect of academic research and indeed my research is fully in line with my educational and moral values. 

Reading McNiff allowed me to understand the methodology of an action research. I realised that I needed to study how to interview, how to formulate interview questions and how to collect and analyse data. I also needed to find a strategy and design a structure for the overall research.

A lot of reading and work ahead but for now, the lecture is scheduled in a few days’ time and I need to concentrate on it.

I am equally exited at the prospect of lecturing this subject and nervous.  I am aware of the sensitive nature of the lecture and I am concerned with possible emotional backlash and students being triggered by the lecture’s topics. To be ready for this I have read many papers on the challenge of having courageous conversations in an educational context thanks to Shade of Noir’s website. 

I am also pleased to do the lecture as it will mean that I will be able to start my study. Apart from the fact that much of my brain is busy with the lecture, I do not feel that I can concentrate my efforts on my research until the lecture is done.

  1. b. hooks. (1996) Reel to Real: Race, Class and Sex at the Movies. Routledge
  2. Disclosure: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8637504/?ref_=fn_al_tt_20