It’s interesting, as much as I branded the pitchfork of ill contempt to the seemingly closed, haphazard group structures for this assignment in my Channel 16 post in January, I only managed to just now comment on another blog’s posts (link), within hours of the whole INF1240 blog structure coming to a close.
Why? Speaking for myself, I actually felt a little intimidated. By commenting on another groups blog I felt I was stepping on their ‘turf’ so to speak. I kept thinking, “what right do I have to question or critically respond to their work?” After all this isn’t my group. I had spent quite a bit of time cruising the other blogs looking for the perfect time to pop my head in and give my two cents, but I always got cold feet.
Reading Luker (2008) over again, I think I have found my answer.
In Chapter 4 if you remember, she uses the cocktail party metaphor to express the way we as researchers have to manage jumping into conversations without looking overly brass or alienating everyone else in the conversation (Luker 2008, 65-70) . Her solution/strategy for this: understand how to frame your interests. Framing as understood as how you tactfully bridge a conversation with your own interests and attempt to make your topic or interests relevant to that conversation.
This I feel as research advice is what I take away from Luker, and I know I have a long way to go.
I will take this with me when I do further research and try to approach the question even before I start my research. I will begin by asking myself how I could explain/relate my interest in X research to someone else who may not be, but who I want as an audience for my work. As a research strategy, I hope it will enable me to integrate the ideas of my subject matter more seamlessly into my future work and writing, to allow for not only a broader audience for my work but also a more rigorous approach to research design.
Luker, K. (2008). Salsa dancing into the social sciences: Research in an age of info-glut. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.