Writing Up

Apart from the substance of the paper, I think that the difference between a good and bad paper is the style, exposition, expression and intonation.  In other words, how it is written.  I know based on my experiences, even if you have the idea to begin with, it just does not come out the way you want it to immediately.  Editing and re-writing is the touch that makes the paper sharper, tighter, clearer and shorter.  Something that I will remember is that the clearer you can write the more confidence you show.  The sign that a researcher knows their topic inside out is if they can clearly communicate it to others who do not know it.   

As Kerry mentioned in class, this course has taught us the practice of qualitative research.  The aim of this course was to induct a habitus in us - an understanding of how to conduct qualitative research and the implicit rules of the game.  This is the practice of building a good argument that requires you construct it an argument initially to see if it works, break it down, change, swap, rework it and build a new one.  Given that the process of doing qualitative research is a practice and the rules of the game in each field are tacit and evolving, is something that is learnt and continuously modified.   

I have conducted my interviews with academic staff and I am now in the process of coming up with the best story I can given the data that I have.  I have developed predictions/expectations based on my theory ANT and will see what argument I can best construct.  Following Kerry's suggestions, I hope to find similarities, differences, surprises, and some data consistent with expectations.  I think that the power of qualitative research is in showing how there are many alternative explanations for the same outcome, and also there can be many different outcomes.  This diversity and variation is not a shortcoming, but rather, a strength as it would be too simplistic to believe that everything is the same and you could make sweeping generalisations or universal laws.  For example, if there are some surprises it may be because the theory lacks something and must be extended, it is the wrong theory, or the data is wrong.  Some data may fit one theory and other data may fit another theory.

There are two key styles to present your qualitative interview data.  I am familar with the classic quote and comment and have used it previously.  With this style, you can clearly see how the evidence fits with the claim.  However, the analysis of a narrative has some appeal, although seems relatively more difficult.  For our project I will see which style is the most appropriate to convey my argument.  I need to always have in the back of my mind, do I have evidence to support my conclusions?  With the interview data, you need to be true to what they say but you don't need to put everything in.   

In addition, I have been looking at some documents (annual reports and media releases) on two companies and their dealings in relation to their proposed joint venture, which presents exactly the issues I am considering.  I think that this source of data provides a more real life touch to my research problem.   

During this course, Kerry has continually provided us with tips to help us along the way, such as
the style sheet, the difference between errors in substance and errors in communication, as well as many others which I have found very useful.