I have thinking about the felt-difference between qualitative and quantitative research methods.
Last semester I worked on a research project that had a hypothesis (sort of, at least I knew the direction in which I thought the research would take me); the methods were very detailed and pre-determined, there were clear steps to follow that could be articulated before-hand (those things that went wrong were things that I could blame on inexperience).
This project though has been completely different. I did have methods articulated and steps to guide me in collecting information. Then I have to go through and analyze the information.
First of all, I have determined that I am collecting ALOT of information, perhaps too much to analyze in the amount of time that I have. During the optional class meeting, Kendall suggested that I select only some of the information to analyze. I am more and more convinced that I will have to make that choice soon not only because of the quantity of information but because part of the project is not going as planned (this is probably happening to everyone). I am questioning whether those "unforeseen" difficulties will force me to have to exclude that information. The Weekly reflections which the students were supposed to submit have been problematic. A couple of students are very diligent in submitting those and providing detailed responses while others are writing very general comments and others still are not submitting them at all. Out of the 6 students only two have submitted all the reflections with the type of comments which I can analyze. I guess their non-responsiveness is something which I can discuss in my report but it will not help me answer my research questions about how to redesign assignments.
Also, I designed the comments which I am receiving from the students to be completed after the activity has been performed as an evaluation of what was done and how it could be improved, but now I realize that the questions should have been looking forward (this idea of looking forward is something that I want to explore in the PD/PAR literature) to how the future activities could be designed. I approached the project as if the unit we were designing was a "prototype" and then the "protoype" would be evaluated after it was designed by the "expert."
One of the changes that I made was adding a pre-project set of questions which asked the students to help in the design of the unit. The following weeks they would participate in evaluating what had been planned. Ultimately, though, those weekly reflections do not really empower the students. They are able to give me suggestions for design of future classes, but not in ways that will help them. I can see how given those questions they would not be too interested in submitting the reflections or too committed to providing detailed information. Perhaps if the unit activities repeated, that is if we did the same type of things in week 2 that we did in week 1 then the comments they made in week 1 would affect the way week 2 was designed. Also, if the study was longer and we used unit 1 as the prototype and then they used/participated in it and then evaluated it,then the next unit would be redesigned using those comments. Perhaps then the way the project was structured with the reflection questions would be more useful.
What I mentioned at the beginning of the felt-experience of this project is that somehow I am failing these students. That because I did not really think through the design then they are not getting the full benefit which they could have experienced if the project had been designed differently. PD seems to be not only about helping future users/students but also improving the experience of those who are currently involved.
The project that I worked on last semester did not produce that feeling/angst. I created a control group and a test group, then ran the experiment to see if the groups reacted differently to the treatment. At no point during the study did I question the effect the study would have on the participant. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the design of an instructional video. In fact, I don't think that study was designed to have an effect on the participant. They were supposed to reveal (through survey questions) how they reacted/engaged with the video but not how they felt or how the experiment affected their concept of being a student.
This project also entails design but of an instructional unit. The contact that I've had with the students, the fact that these students are "my students" unlike the others who were students in other classes/sections, probably has something to do with the connection that I feel with these students.
Also, having interviewed the students and having them really open up with their responses to the questions makes me as a researcher be more conscious of who they are, what their aspirations are, and that the design of the course (of this project even) would have benefitted them more had it been different.
PD has changed the way I view the students more as "real" participants but I think the design of the project has hindered the extent to which they can participate. PD requires "real" participation, and I think the promise of PD in this project is not fully (and I want to say it's not even close) realized. They are not co-designers in the sense that they will benefit from the "new" design of the class and they are not co-designers in the sense that they have control over what design choices will be made. They perhaps will influence the design, but not really "co-design."
Ultimately, I will benefit from the experience. I will collect my data and then evaluate it and write up my report and learn (I hope) something about research (design). What they produce will be left behind for me to commodify and to a sense exploit for my own needs.
My question is: given the design (flawed as it is) of this project
How do they benefit? What do they take/gain from participating in this project?
That is a question which I need to ask in the post-project interviews.