I could cry. This is my second post because the first one apparently wasn't good enough for the blog site to save. Oh my gosh I am so mad right now.
Anyway...I guess I can remember a little...LA reading...I was wondering if there was a connection between the idea of experimental research and Pavlov's dog? Cause-effect, right? The idea that the researcher is actively involved in manipulating treatments? I also had a question about null hypotheses...it means that there will be no difference between the treated and controlled group, and the researcher has to either reject or accept it...is this before or after the research? And to prove the research could produce a desired result, they have to reject it...meaning...they believe there will be a difference. (?? 155)
Pretests...randomization means one is not needed and therefore controls threats to internal validity. Then why would it be helpful? (157) Wouldn't it give participants an idea as to what the research is about? Isn't the idea to keep them from knowing? Or at least try?
And as far as statistical significance (162)...is seems so ambiguous...results could be statistically significant, but maybe not because they were interpreted wrong. It seems almost better to research what isn't as opposed to what is.
As far as p values...I learned in the research design class about the significance of .o5, and the book talks about setting p values for composition research at .10 or .20, is that because there needs to be more room for error? Why?
Internal validity...I feel a little ahead of the game here having learned some of this...but in looking at all the threats to keeping research and its participants valid, there's a lot to cover. I've seen articles that do not address all threats to internal validity based on how they conducted their research. If it wasn't random, there is much to be addressed. Are these articles written by people who just don't know, think the reader doesn't know, or knows better but purposely leaves it out to make the research appear valid? Don't editors catch this stuff?
KS-good. A much lighter reading. Isn't this the psychology of conversation? Analyzing utterances and talk and responses? And then the whole idea of Grice's principle (112) would be hard for a lot of people to do without much practice. Taking turns? Sounding sincere when taking and listening? I know people that lose interest in a conversation literally 10 seconds in if you are not talking about something that pertains to them. They will, without shame, turns their head and start looking around. Last I checked, I'm not that boring. I've taking to half-jokingly (only half, whch I'm sure they know what the other half is) saying...what, my 8 seconds is up?
Anyway...talk about writing (115)...I was trying to figure out the connection between that and the LA reading...now I see it...the effect(s) of talk in one-one one and group writing instruction. That's a huge task to take on. Now researchers are making assumptions based on their own discourse when they try to interpret talk about writing. Isn't that alone a threat to internal validity? I don't even know if that question makes sense...I am assuming I understand all this. What nerve. Anyway, doesn't talk in general negotiate in terms of the social and educational? Between two equals and then those who are in educational situations...one asking or trying to understad and the other trying to help them define it? The give and take? On 121, they talk about the influence of talk on a piece of writing...does this mean that the writer chooses to change or not change it based on peopl'es opinions? Don't we talk about peer review but that ultimately it's the writer's choce to make changes? Then it isn't the writer's thought anymore...it's a combination of everyone else's who thought the writing wasnt' good enough.
I think I'm done. Feels like I am dropping off at an odd spot, but although this was a lighter reading than LA, its was still filled with a lot.
Showing posts with label Tara. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tara. Show all posts
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Saturday, February 28, 2009
#7
LA-I like the idea of descriptive research and classification studies. There's a lot less work involved than in quantitative studies...no control groups, no treatments, a lot less confusion. There are numerous variables, but it still seems like a neater study to conduct. I also like the prediction factor and how that might play out after a study is completed.
Still, all the math and the weights really overwhelm me. As usual. Weights are about making variables equal? Why? Am I reading that right? What determines if variables are stated in raw score form or standard form?
Brodkey-A lot to read and re-read in terms of the way it's written. Very heavy. Anyway...I agree. Although assignments have a purpose, unless you know students are intentionally putting in zero effort, what they write should, yes, analyzed for errors, but only *after* they have been allowed to express their thoughts and have them validated. The idea of error analysis becomes secondary because although they know they have to go back and fix conventions, they also know what they wrote was approved. If error analysis is primary, why should they put their thoughts on paper if they won't actually be "read"?
And about discourse and the letters...those teachers were more relaxed...the writers...and they made errors because they were not THE teacher. They were completing an assignment. There are times I get emailed from my brother, an engineer with an MBA...and there is not one capitol I when he uses it alone, and sometimes there is no punctuation. I know full well he knows how to write "I" and use basic conventions correctly. But he may be in a rush, not care, knows he is capable if and only if there is a grade or money involved...could be many reasons. Even laziness in terms of typing. These people wrote that way because they were students, no matter what their role in life was outside of being a student in her class. Subconscious? Possibly. Like my brother, I sometimes think it takes more effort to go out of your way to undo what you've learned. I mean, don't you have to purposely NOT make an I capitol? I'd have to think about not using the shift key simultaneously with the i. I don't think about it at all when I type. Like just now. ...and at the same time some of the teachers who were corresponding appeared to think they were better than the students? Interesting. You can see the students think that. The one exchange, although the author didn't show all of it, tells me that the one student (Dora) never mentioned the murder again because Don was not interested in hearing it. He would ask her surface-level questions, but as soon as it got deep, she sort of made a joke of herself and reverted back to allowing Don to take the reigns in their correspondence. I wonder if this is because she thought he wasn't interested, or she thought he was too smart for the things that go on her "bum" world. Did he really not care? Seems like it. He ignored her attempts to tell him more personal things...and she never got a response to those things. So she stopped bothering to make him feel like she thought he was funny. He seemed very self-absorbed and purposely oblivious to me. There's this push-pull thing with many of the correspondences in that class...among all the students...the ABE students attempting to give off a smarter air than what is reality, knowing they are corresponding with educated people...and the teachers actively pushing them off their little pier of hope. The only one that seemed to over come this was the peer-type relationship of Ellen and Pat.
For me, I think knowing what you are capable of far outweighs actually trying to make people see it. It makes you more approachable, and by far, it is more impressive when others find out themselves rather than someone asserting their education, or money, or talent. I was almost embarrassed for the educators that sort of pushed the ABE students to the side as if their lives just were not of the importance that the life of an educated professional. Very interesting article...
Still, all the math and the weights really overwhelm me. As usual. Weights are about making variables equal? Why? Am I reading that right? What determines if variables are stated in raw score form or standard form?
Brodkey-A lot to read and re-read in terms of the way it's written. Very heavy. Anyway...I agree. Although assignments have a purpose, unless you know students are intentionally putting in zero effort, what they write should, yes, analyzed for errors, but only *after* they have been allowed to express their thoughts and have them validated. The idea of error analysis becomes secondary because although they know they have to go back and fix conventions, they also know what they wrote was approved. If error analysis is primary, why should they put their thoughts on paper if they won't actually be "read"?
And about discourse and the letters...those teachers were more relaxed...the writers...and they made errors because they were not THE teacher. They were completing an assignment. There are times I get emailed from my brother, an engineer with an MBA...and there is not one capitol I when he uses it alone, and sometimes there is no punctuation. I know full well he knows how to write "I" and use basic conventions correctly. But he may be in a rush, not care, knows he is capable if and only if there is a grade or money involved...could be many reasons. Even laziness in terms of typing. These people wrote that way because they were students, no matter what their role in life was outside of being a student in her class. Subconscious? Possibly. Like my brother, I sometimes think it takes more effort to go out of your way to undo what you've learned. I mean, don't you have to purposely NOT make an I capitol? I'd have to think about not using the shift key simultaneously with the i. I don't think about it at all when I type. Like just now. ...and at the same time some of the teachers who were corresponding appeared to think they were better than the students? Interesting. You can see the students think that. The one exchange, although the author didn't show all of it, tells me that the one student (Dora) never mentioned the murder again because Don was not interested in hearing it. He would ask her surface-level questions, but as soon as it got deep, she sort of made a joke of herself and reverted back to allowing Don to take the reigns in their correspondence. I wonder if this is because she thought he wasn't interested, or she thought he was too smart for the things that go on her "bum" world. Did he really not care? Seems like it. He ignored her attempts to tell him more personal things...and she never got a response to those things. So she stopped bothering to make him feel like she thought he was funny. He seemed very self-absorbed and purposely oblivious to me. There's this push-pull thing with many of the correspondences in that class...among all the students...the ABE students attempting to give off a smarter air than what is reality, knowing they are corresponding with educated people...and the teachers actively pushing them off their little pier of hope. The only one that seemed to over come this was the peer-type relationship of Ellen and Pat.
For me, I think knowing what you are capable of far outweighs actually trying to make people see it. It makes you more approachable, and by far, it is more impressive when others find out themselves rather than someone asserting their education, or money, or talent. I was almost embarrassed for the educators that sort of pushed the ABE students to the side as if their lives just were not of the importance that the life of an educated professional. Very interesting article...
Sunday, February 22, 2009
#6
Quantity-not quality- now has new meaning. One that involves a TON of work. So, a study could take a good length of time, and ultimately, defined variables may have absolutely no relationship to one another.
But, the bottom line here for the LA reading—easy to follow. The examples they gave helped define the steps taken in conducting the study. I refer to it often, but my research design class really made life difficult in terms of trying to understand the types of research. The books were very statistical. They were written for those who had already started their research and needed some sort of instructional manual. This actually explains the processes and why numbers were chosen and why you need a large number of subjects and why certain methods were used. (85) One thing they didn’t define further about independent variables is that they can’t change. It may even go beyond age and gender…it could be education, jobs, and discourse. These are also things that have an effect on outcome. See, I took something from the research class. But like I mentioned in my last blog, I feel like this is an instruction manual…and I don’t have the benefit of some in-depth research project to relate the instructions to. It’s just very difficult to especially relate to the mathematical portions of the text…more specifically the standard deviation calculations. (91)
KS reading- Is experimental research the long version of a classroom inquiry? The idea that teachers can use two variables to see if there are correlations tells me this is accurate… (220) How big are the groups supposed to be? How many variables do you need? Is there a limit? It seems like there are so many perspectives the researcher needs to take in terms of their subjects and variables and how the variables are affected by the way a subject thinks or doesn’t think and how it all does or does not relate to the research question. It’s really so in-depth that I almost feel overwhelmed by the study and I’m not even conducting it. (224) I’ve read studies that do not have a limitations section. Do all good studies have one? Are they supposed to? What does it signify if researchers do not include them? Page 238 indicates that they need to be discussed…so why do some studies not have them? To avoid talking about problems the study had? I would imagine they offer important insight. I wish I had a better ending to this blog than to drop it after the last question, but my brain feels way too full after reading this.
But, the bottom line here for the LA reading—easy to follow. The examples they gave helped define the steps taken in conducting the study. I refer to it often, but my research design class really made life difficult in terms of trying to understand the types of research. The books were very statistical. They were written for those who had already started their research and needed some sort of instructional manual. This actually explains the processes and why numbers were chosen and why you need a large number of subjects and why certain methods were used. (85) One thing they didn’t define further about independent variables is that they can’t change. It may even go beyond age and gender…it could be education, jobs, and discourse. These are also things that have an effect on outcome. See, I took something from the research class. But like I mentioned in my last blog, I feel like this is an instruction manual…and I don’t have the benefit of some in-depth research project to relate the instructions to. It’s just very difficult to especially relate to the mathematical portions of the text…more specifically the standard deviation calculations. (91)
KS reading- Is experimental research the long version of a classroom inquiry? The idea that teachers can use two variables to see if there are correlations tells me this is accurate… (220) How big are the groups supposed to be? How many variables do you need? Is there a limit? It seems like there are so many perspectives the researcher needs to take in terms of their subjects and variables and how the variables are affected by the way a subject thinks or doesn’t think and how it all does or does not relate to the research question. It’s really so in-depth that I almost feel overwhelmed by the study and I’m not even conducting it. (224) I’ve read studies that do not have a limitations section. Do all good studies have one? Are they supposed to? What does it signify if researchers do not include them? Page 238 indicates that they need to be discussed…so why do some studies not have them? To avoid talking about problems the study had? I would imagine they offer important insight. I wish I had a better ending to this blog than to drop it after the last question, but my brain feels way too full after reading this.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Ethnographies
This is a hard one to blog. I find myself reading to try to understand what ethnographic research is; usually I have thoughts flowing and that’s what I blog. No thoughts were flowing. I kept re-reading to make sense of the denseness of the wording and sheer time it took to undertake an ethnographic study. I’m not understanding if there is actually a difference between this and a case study…??? Page 45 (LA) distinguishes the two in their subtitle, but the reading does not make a distinction. Is it that the ethnography only examines whole environments and case studies whole environments as well as whole groups and individuals?
Page 46 (LA)…this was something I was wondering about…what do you do when you collect too much information? How do you know when to say when in terms of stopping the observations for a case study? And considering the pitfalls, mostly with human perception and judgment, how do we know a case study is even accurate? Are they reliable sources to refer to as a citation? How do we know if we are looking at a biased case study that was written with for observer’s agenda and is an accurate account of what was observed? The fact that the advantages are barely half a page and the disadvantages cover two-and-a-half pages I guess answers that question. The authors actually make a point of discouraging researchers from doing a case study with that it uses more journal space.
I was wondering about replication…in other words, if I was researching a specific topic and found case studies to use as references, how many would I have to read in order to determine how reliable the outcome was?
KS does a better job of giving the facts and allowing the reader to determine both sides—positive and negative. They talk about (156) what a good ethnography looks like, gaining access, and the amount of work involved, but they steer pretty clear of trying to sway the reader. They talk about (167) making sure to pick up on what appears to be mundane, day-to-day grind detail, but this is the very detail that may provide details to the relationships and patterns the researcher is trying to find. This is actually a great read with a step-by-step breakdown that LA did not provide.
Page 46 (LA)…this was something I was wondering about…what do you do when you collect too much information? How do you know when to say when in terms of stopping the observations for a case study? And considering the pitfalls, mostly with human perception and judgment, how do we know a case study is even accurate? Are they reliable sources to refer to as a citation? How do we know if we are looking at a biased case study that was written with for observer’s agenda and is an accurate account of what was observed? The fact that the advantages are barely half a page and the disadvantages cover two-and-a-half pages I guess answers that question. The authors actually make a point of discouraging researchers from doing a case study with that it uses more journal space.
I was wondering about replication…in other words, if I was researching a specific topic and found case studies to use as references, how many would I have to read in order to determine how reliable the outcome was?
KS does a better job of giving the facts and allowing the reader to determine both sides—positive and negative. They talk about (156) what a good ethnography looks like, gaining access, and the amount of work involved, but they steer pretty clear of trying to sway the reader. They talk about (167) making sure to pick up on what appears to be mundane, day-to-day grind detail, but this is the very detail that may provide details to the relationships and patterns the researcher is trying to find. This is actually a great read with a step-by-step breakdown that LA did not provide.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Case Studies
Authors like to refer to Stephen North. I wish I could act like I know who he is, but I don’t. In researching him, I saw that he looks a lot like Dr. Drew from Celebrity Rehab on VH1. Anyway…
Verrry interesting. So, the author’s perception is that in many cases writing a case study seems not to be about the reality of what was observed, but more…the perception of reality the observer wants the readers to see. Interesting. What I’m picking up on here is that, possibly, what you read in a case study is definitely biased and riddled with cultural perceptions and judgments. (133-134) So are they stories or case studies then?
But what these case studies are all about is the writing. The writer’s perception can and will get in the way of what was actually observed. Like Julie said Thursday, there’s no way humans can observe without their own cultural discourse creating some type of bias in assumption why their subject is doing something in a certain way…what they referred to as moral judgments (148). Most of us did that, even if we were conscious of trying not to, during our practice observations in class.
I was wondering how much information to include in the narrative. KS discusses the fact that the researchers could, and possibly should have included the perception of their subject (148) in order to get the full account of something observed that may need to be clarified. I suppose this is also a way to not fill gaps in the observation with judgments.
The LA reading has really helped clarify the way the observation should be written up…I felt lost leaving class…I knew how to observe, but now I have to do it again and this time, make it look good on paper. There’s a lot of information to include, but like I mentioned in my last blog, I needed this to clarify information from the research design course. Types of studies are thrown at you with no real explanation…just what you needed to know to do well on the tests. While I’m all for testing, there’s something to be said for getting there and doing it to better grasp understanding.
Verrry interesting. So, the author’s perception is that in many cases writing a case study seems not to be about the reality of what was observed, but more…the perception of reality the observer wants the readers to see. Interesting. What I’m picking up on here is that, possibly, what you read in a case study is definitely biased and riddled with cultural perceptions and judgments. (133-134) So are they stories or case studies then?
But what these case studies are all about is the writing. The writer’s perception can and will get in the way of what was actually observed. Like Julie said Thursday, there’s no way humans can observe without their own cultural discourse creating some type of bias in assumption why their subject is doing something in a certain way…what they referred to as moral judgments (148). Most of us did that, even if we were conscious of trying not to, during our practice observations in class.
I was wondering how much information to include in the narrative. KS discusses the fact that the researchers could, and possibly should have included the perception of their subject (148) in order to get the full account of something observed that may need to be clarified. I suppose this is also a way to not fill gaps in the observation with judgments.
The LA reading has really helped clarify the way the observation should be written up…I felt lost leaving class…I knew how to observe, but now I have to do it again and this time, make it look good on paper. There’s a lot of information to include, but like I mentioned in my last blog, I needed this to clarify information from the research design course. Types of studies are thrown at you with no real explanation…just what you needed to know to do well on the tests. While I’m all for testing, there’s something to be said for getting there and doing it to better grasp understanding.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
No Title #2
I really related to this article. Observation, for me, is almost a survival mechanism...using it to predict reactions of others to stay one step ahead. It has saved me from making the same mistake twice in countless situations...both personal and work related. It would be more than enjoyable to observe for the purpose of research...it's more relaxing that observing because you are trying to predict bad behavior of some kind on a more personal level and take action. That said, the idea of observing some human behavior is intriguing.
I found myself re-reading-many many times-the difference between qualitative and quantitative observations. It finally made sense on the 5th read...quantitative seems to be just observing for the sake of observing. Qualitative is observing with a purpose, a purpose relevant to the subject. I think. ...the attempt to find the significance of the observation? I don't know why I am stuck on this again.
I am worried I will not cover all I need to cover in terms of ethical issues. And with all the variables and processes, this observation project is not going to a cut and dry look-and-report type of project. Of course, I did not expect that, but I'm concerned that I will miss something with regard to the method and how it's all supposed to be done.
So, my next question...do you choose your membership role before or during the observation? And can it change as the observation progresses or once you choose a role that's the one you must stick with so as not to compromise the integrity of the observation...???
A lot of what I learned...or tried to learn...in my research statistics class has been clarified by reading this article. Because the class was taken over the summer, it was very abbreviated, and I often felt I was getting the bare minimum of information, skipping over what would have brought me to the conclusions I was told I would reach if I used x y z method. Now the whole idea of validity and reliability, the idea of generalizing, using different observers and ensuring findings are not just chance (381) makes sense. It seems obvious, but when you learn it backwards, the obvious is not so clear.
After reading about the various settings the named researchers chose to do their observations (385) was intriguing (minus the bathroom observation...) and had me wondering what exactly I would observe and where. I feel unprepared to take it on, but this article gave some great guidance and information that I'll be referring back to.
I found myself re-reading-many many times-the difference between qualitative and quantitative observations. It finally made sense on the 5th read...quantitative seems to be just observing for the sake of observing. Qualitative is observing with a purpose, a purpose relevant to the subject. I think. ...the attempt to find the significance of the observation? I don't know why I am stuck on this again.
I am worried I will not cover all I need to cover in terms of ethical issues. And with all the variables and processes, this observation project is not going to a cut and dry look-and-report type of project. Of course, I did not expect that, but I'm concerned that I will miss something with regard to the method and how it's all supposed to be done.
So, my next question...do you choose your membership role before or during the observation? And can it change as the observation progresses or once you choose a role that's the one you must stick with so as not to compromise the integrity of the observation...???
A lot of what I learned...or tried to learn...in my research statistics class has been clarified by reading this article. Because the class was taken over the summer, it was very abbreviated, and I often felt I was getting the bare minimum of information, skipping over what would have brought me to the conclusions I was told I would reach if I used x y z method. Now the whole idea of validity and reliability, the idea of generalizing, using different observers and ensuring findings are not just chance (381) makes sense. It seems obvious, but when you learn it backwards, the obvious is not so clear.
After reading about the various settings the named researchers chose to do their observations (385) was intriguing (minus the bathroom observation...) and had me wondering what exactly I would observe and where. I feel unprepared to take it on, but this article gave some great guidance and information that I'll be referring back to.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Can't think of a title: Take One
Alvarez Article: Funny I am reading this now...I completed action research using blogs during the first marking period with both my reading remediation students and my one lang arts class...it was mostly because it was a choice I made to fulfill a requirement for Julie's class in the fall, but I have to say that it also came from knowing that both I and my students needed to feel like something was accomplished when not only the week or lesson was over, but when the year was over. I have never been a rote-type of teacher; if it's boring for me then it's boring for them. So, the idea that I could, as an option for this research, ask my students-in so many words-how relevant or not relevant something was, I say that's a step in the right direction for everyone. Alvarez said it is a transforming experience (p. 3) , and I agree 100%. it makes you do something about an issue or where something may be lacking...something only the students can tell you from their perspective.
...and the idea of sharing power in the classroom (p.6)...what better way to get students engaged. I am not the perfect teacher, but I remember being in classes when I was young where there just was no choice. It was all done the same way each year at the same time with no deviation. I knew that when I became a teacher, it would have to be different. I didn't know how because I didn't have the experience, but the trials and errors were really good experiences and students appreciated knowing you'd be willing to change if something didn't work.
L & A: Oh, boy. What a snore this book is going to be. But the rhetorical inquiries...it feels like this means that there should be awareness of your thoughts and the ability to articulate them as if a question is going to be posed. We all have constant thoughts generating as we teach...the concern portion. Then questioning those concerns. Can it be that easy to generate an inquiry? Empirical...this is trying to prove the research wrong? Or show where it is lacking? As boring as the book looks, I'm thinking this is interesting enough that I might be able to look past it. Then again, I am only on the intro. The key to this seems to be that the inquiry should mesh with what you are doing to gain insight and to compare (p.7) ...like Alvarez said...makes sense.
There is so much that goes into effectively carrying out research that you really have to actually carry it out for a lot of this to sink in and makes sense. Searching the relevant literature is one thing, but the rest of it is just overwhelming. Well, it wasn't so bad when I turned to see the table on pages 12, 13, and 16. It became a little less overwhelming. I had taken the statistics class over the summer and really felt like there was a huge gap in what I was learning because I was only learning what she thought we needed...but that left a lot of confusion and unanswered questions that there simply wasn't time to answer. Since the authors claim right off that they are not experts, and considering the way they have chosen to write the book, I don't think doing this "official" type of research will be so bad...I hope...
KS: Aha. See. These authors said what I said...page 316: "The best way to become adept at literary criticism is to do it." I realized while reading this chapter that...well, at least after sorting through her summaries of North and Phelps...that she decided at some point that his ideas meant enough to her to want to research the other side of them. But...I also think that she sort of forced herself to have an opinion about North and Phelps for the sake of research (323). Or is is that she has really immersed herself in it and grown in it and really developed opinions about their theories and methods? It seems the key in deciding how much research is worth depends on how interested you are in it...that would be key (p. 328)
...and the idea of sharing power in the classroom (p.6)...what better way to get students engaged. I am not the perfect teacher, but I remember being in classes when I was young where there just was no choice. It was all done the same way each year at the same time with no deviation. I knew that when I became a teacher, it would have to be different. I didn't know how because I didn't have the experience, but the trials and errors were really good experiences and students appreciated knowing you'd be willing to change if something didn't work.
L & A: Oh, boy. What a snore this book is going to be. But the rhetorical inquiries...it feels like this means that there should be awareness of your thoughts and the ability to articulate them as if a question is going to be posed. We all have constant thoughts generating as we teach...the concern portion. Then questioning those concerns. Can it be that easy to generate an inquiry? Empirical...this is trying to prove the research wrong? Or show where it is lacking? As boring as the book looks, I'm thinking this is interesting enough that I might be able to look past it. Then again, I am only on the intro. The key to this seems to be that the inquiry should mesh with what you are doing to gain insight and to compare (p.7) ...like Alvarez said...makes sense.
There is so much that goes into effectively carrying out research that you really have to actually carry it out for a lot of this to sink in and makes sense. Searching the relevant literature is one thing, but the rest of it is just overwhelming. Well, it wasn't so bad when I turned to see the table on pages 12, 13, and 16. It became a little less overwhelming. I had taken the statistics class over the summer and really felt like there was a huge gap in what I was learning because I was only learning what she thought we needed...but that left a lot of confusion and unanswered questions that there simply wasn't time to answer. Since the authors claim right off that they are not experts, and considering the way they have chosen to write the book, I don't think doing this "official" type of research will be so bad...I hope...
KS: Aha. See. These authors said what I said...page 316: "The best way to become adept at literary criticism is to do it." I realized while reading this chapter that...well, at least after sorting through her summaries of North and Phelps...that she decided at some point that his ideas meant enough to her to want to research the other side of them. But...I also think that she sort of forced herself to have an opinion about North and Phelps for the sake of research (323). Or is is that she has really immersed herself in it and grown in it and really developed opinions about their theories and methods? It seems the key in deciding how much research is worth depends on how interested you are in it...that would be key (p. 328)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)