Reading:
-Read Craft of Research chapters 7-10 and 12-13.
-If your research methods will include interviews, surveys, or behavioral observation, click here to read this short article by Kim Eby.
-If you still feel unclear about what a scholarly source is, this brief handout might be helpful.
Writing:
-Obviously if I don't have your annotated bibliography (10 sources) and background literature review, those are absolute priorities at this point.
-Write the first draft of your methodology section by Sunday night Oct. 30th. Here are the sample methodologies we reviewed in class: A, B, C. Also remember to post your comment about one of the sample methodologies by Thursday Oct. 27th.
-Expand your annotated bibliography to 25 sources by Wednesday night Nov. 2nd (15 for "creative" projects). You can use the same format and just add to what you already have. Note for fair warning: according to the syllabus this is the point at which I will grade the annotated bibliography.
-The corresponding revision to the background literature review will be due on Monday night Nov. 7th.That Crazy Movie About the Physics Dissertation: is here.
Reading Methodology B is confusing to me, but I gather that the author intends to examine and compare data as their chosen method of research.
ReplyDeleteI like how the author broke down the methodology into three components and described in detail the process to obtain the necessary data. However, just referring to the Business Component, I am concerned the author will not have enough daylight to explore all that is articulated. Compound that X2 and scope may be a tad too big.
ReplyDeleteI read methodolgy A. It was about a creative project, it was long and detailed. (I would have been overwhelmed with all she planned to do!)It seemed as if she has a good handle on what she needed to do. But, in many of the steps decisions out of her control could easily derail her project. She also depends on a lot of other people in her process.
ReplyDeleteMethodology Method B.
ReplyDeleteWhat a start with a very confusing extremely long sentence. I almost forgot
what I read, but read it four times and finally understood it. Good idea that
the author felt she/he did not need relevant personal data and identifiers.
Suggesting that perhaps the author's new framework would be used.
Author suggested limited and new method of framework for security
professionals. Perhaps not knowing whether more data may be required for this
type of investigations.
Maybe is just too late to understand long sentences. Not sure why the author
wants less information regarding identifying thieves. In my opinion the more
the better for identification of a thief.
"reduce the risk to the entity and individuals in the event of a data breach"
that's odd why not protect the information instead.
ALice Q.
ReplyDeleteI read all three methodologies to gain a perspective on writing from a specialized field for a more generalized audience. Sample A. read like a laundry list in spite of the fact that the writer was very knowledgeable and goal oriented. I didn't have the sense that the organization of these many details was under control.
Sample B was written by an individual deeply ensconced in IT security parlance. I was unable to discern whether their methodology was appropriate for the intended goals because I couldn't understand if the framework accommodated the details or whether the plan actually lead to the desired result.
Sample C succeeded where the others did not. The writer included the weighted importance of interviewees within the plan to interview them. I think a mental/concept map would not only aid Aaron but ourselves and also serve as a convenient checklist next semester.
Methodology B is difficult to understand to a layperson. I thought it focused quite a bit on what the author was not going to do as opposed to what he was going to do. Maybe to a technical person it made sense.
ReplyDeleteI read methodology A. The writer's plan was clear and what I like most is the step by step process used to guide the reader. One thing I found confusing was the conclusion where all the steps were supposed to come together. More details could have been given regarding how information from the survey would be validated and used to support the theory.
ReplyDeleteI read methodology C and thought that it was very clear. In the beginning writer addressed the topic of his project. He divided his methodology into three different categories which made it easier to follow and understand. He also made clear of the methods and techniques he will not be exploring.
ReplyDeleteI read methodology C. I thought it was well organized, clear and concise. It flowed well, was easy to read and understand. It was divided into three topic sections as described in the first paragraph and it also described which issues and arguments that would not be covered in the research project. I think this is a good example to follow.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I missed this section of class, I ended up reading all 3, which were VERY different. The one I am going to comment on is Methodology A. I was able to tell this was going to be a creative project which is going to involve a LOT of steps and also a lot of different people. I think that in this example, she/he put in far too much detail which I think may hurt them in the end; "cannot see the forest through the trees" type thinking. The flip side is, because I am not doing a creative project, you may need this level of detail to help obtain your goals. I found it ab it confusing at times and I also got lost in the details and who was going to be doing what.
ReplyDeleteMethodology A was very detailed and I liked that, but in the middle towards the end it got a bit confusing and she also talks about the weather being a problem and also how it could affect people's reaction to the project... that was a bit strange to me.
ReplyDelete