Friday, 11 May 2007

Assesor's Comments

I have started transcribing a tape of an assessor's comments on my PhD confirmation paper and seminar. It must be a good practice for the actual transcription. Prof BM's comments were really hard, tough, but fair. In summary, his comments were (my thoughts are in brackets):
  • Both my argument and approach were too soft (I agree);
  • Is the topic just about "housekeeping"? (my topic is workplace management!);
  • What are two frameworks used for? (qualitative research should not have a priori assumptions!);
  • What are service organisations' cases used for? (I stated the purpose in my paper!);
  • Are you taking a comparative approach? (No!);
  • You need more cases (Why? Single case is even acceptable!); and
  • How will you code the data collected? (What? Why is coding needed?).
I totally get lost. In particular, I do not understand why coding is needed. My study is a case study, not a discourse analysis. My case is a system or program, not individuals. Why, why, why? My approach is phenomenology. My analysis is pattern matching.

Do I get myself involved in the methodological disaster again???

2 comments:

Celeste said...

But I think you still need to code your data - sort of like a "filing system" so you can find it easier, and compare it (to itself) easier. The code will not be as complicated as for a discourse analysis (gosh I hope they don't ask me what coding I am using!). Coding can be like using "key words" for different bits. Don't be put off by the word "coding".

I can't help with the other comments I'm afraid....

Still, your first stage is done now! Do you need to resubmit, or are the comments just to help you?

きら(Kay) said...

My confusion is rather with the term "coding". I think it depends on what methodology I adopt. If case studies were treated as a method, then the term "coding" does not appear unless the researcher takes different analytical methods (e.g., DA or grounded theory). Other metods use diverse terms such as indexing, categorisation and even just a description.

Thank you for seeding yout thought that is much helpful (than some scholars!).

I will add a new entry regarding your question. Thanks, Celeste!