Hillary LeDesma

Qualitative Research in Education

Practice study 1- Observation is a public place:

I found this exercise to be a lot of fun. My partner and I chose to observe two girls we knew. The
most interesting aspect of my observation was the visuals. They were having a social
conversation and it would have sounded perfectly normal if you just listened, but as we watched
we learned that they had both of their faces in their phone the whole time. They kept this active
conversation going about family, social life, and school, but did this while texting and playing
with each of their phones. I think this just showed how we, as a generation have relied on
technology for a social crutch.

I then began to wonder how a researcher decides what to focus his/her attention on. When
in a public space there is so much going on at once. I wonder if the space matters just as
much as the people we observe? If so then how does a person balance observing both?
We talked a little more about this in class: It really depends on what the purpose of the
observation is. A description of the scene will always be necessary but it depends on if
the scene will help the observation in any way.
I still have question about this that went unanswered.

Practice Study 2- Interview with an adult:

The biggest question I had when approaching this practice was who to interview. I wanted to
interview someone I didnt know, but wasnt sure how to approach someone comfortably yet. I
decided to ask a friend. I thought this would be useless, because I already knew her, but it turns
out there was much more to know. We interviewed at 7th Street Caf. This proved to be a
distracting environment. I went on with the questions.

I started typing our conversation at first, but then I found she started slowing her words
down because she wanted to make sure I caught everything. This was nice, but I thought
it would be more interesting if she didnt have so much time to think about her answers
before she spoke. I then stopped typing and just listened; I decide I would summarize our
conversation after.
This was one of my biggest questions: I wasnt sure how to capture our conversation in
writing without affecting the interview. I then wondered if every word was even
necessary.
One student made a point to stress how important video and audio can be in an
observation because it gives you a chance to look back at it, but then I was sure people
would act differently once they knew they were being recorded or videotaped.
If it is important to write our conversation down as its going, then what it the best way to
do this? Typing? Recording? Writing? Summarizing?
This question still needs to be answered for me.

After reading a few of the articles assigned, I began to consider my own moral and ethics and
how this would apply to research. I find that it is easy for me to bond and get close to people. I

Hillary LeDesma
Qualitative Research in Education

love people and how interesting they are in every unique way. I found that in various article,
credibility was questioned because the researcher got to close. I wonder how I should approach
this. I am also a big advocate on privacy, so Im not sure if I would be comfortable in the grey
area of privacy and privilege. I have also already completed and passed the IRB course and have
some knowledge on the rules of such situations. I found that it is most important that the
participant is kept safe.
The Nathan piece was so interesting because I wondered how she crossed certain boundaries, yet
stuck to her ethics on privacy. She even gave up her officer position so she wasnt obligated to
report and undergraduate who broke rules or laws.
I remember doing research last year in a Latin American Immigration class. I was slowly
interviewing a student. She was only 11 and I wanted to push for more question and answers, but
I had to realize I was also her tutor who needed to help her with her homework. She was also a
child, so the last thing she wanted to do was sit and talk while all her friends played outside. I felt
those were my boundaries. I wasnt going to push this child into answering my questions. This
made the research more difficult though. I had to wait for answers through conversation.
This is also where I found techniques to getting such answers. I found that especially children
like finding similarities people them and others. Our conversation tended to be about things I had
in common with her, which made it easier for her to connect with me, thus give me more
answers. I used this with my one on one interview with an adult. I probed questions, but first
noticed a similarity between us before asking. She then felt more comfortable opening up.
I dont think this question about my ethics and morals will ever be answered until I experience
such a research myself. I really cant wait to dive into a research project and interact with people.
I think it is then that I will truly know where my boundaries are.

Research Journal 2 Installment:

Hillary LeDesma
Qualitative Research in Education

The big research paper is becoming a huge part of the class. I had trouble coming up with a good
topic for my research. I know there is much to study, but it was difficult to come up with
something controversial enough about Bucknell. I think because I am still getting used to
Bucknell myself. I think this would make me have a biased because Bucknell is very different
than where I am from. I am from Houston, Texas where there is more life and diversity
everywhere I turn. I think it is easy for my to make assumptions and stereotype a place like
Bucknell in central Pennsylvania. I only hope I can recognize me bias when I am writing my
research considering I will have to analyze the Bucknell campus and m topic. I initially wanted
to research how comfortable male and female students felt in the classroom depending on how
the room was set up. I considered using this idea for places like 7th Street Caf and the Bison as
well. I am thinking about changing it though because I dont have much interest in this topic. I
feel it is important to really be interested in a topic if I plan to spend all this time working on it. I
guess I want my topic to be more controversial and bring something new to the surface about the
Bucknell Campus. I think because I tend to be very empathetic it is easy for me to rationalize
certain opinions for people because I do not want them to be seen I the wrong light. I can only
hope that I choose the right people to interview.
So lately we have also been talking about a literature review. I am feeling a little stressed because
I have two research papers for two of my classes this semester. This means I am going to
interview 8 people and write two literature reviews. I am not too worried about the literature
review because I have written one before. I guess I am hoping that I can bring something new to
the conversation. I guess even if it is an issue discussed, getting so specific to the Bucknell
Campus can offer a unique perspective. I think that is one of the most difficult things about doing
research, is coming up with something unique and provocative to study.
I changed my topic officially. I have decided to study students perceptions of male versus
female professors on the Bucknell Campus. I thought this would be interesting because I
remember reading an article about how students have different assumptions and expectations of
female professors that they do for male professors. I imagine this would go on at Bucknell as
well considering we have a nice range of female and male professors. Although there are some
majors that are male dominated and some that are female dominated so it might be difficult to
capture the perspective of all of Bucknell considering we are only interviewing four people. I
think this is something we have to debate about. Can four interviewees really capture the whole
Bucknell campus? Is it fair or right to allow this? To make assumptions about Bucknell
considering I only interviewed four people? I dont think it is fair on the audiences part. I must
also consider that this is simply a class paper, I am not actually getting published, so it may not
matter as much. I still think it is not fair to the campus. I can only hope that I find a range of
interviewees who capture Bucknell the best. This means I will need to ask maybe two males and
two female students. I should probably ask people not all from the same background or group of
friends. This might make my data inconsistent. I was thinking about doing my first interview

Hillary LeDesma
Qualitative Research in Education

with a friend I have; we arent very close but I am pretty sure he is in a major dominated by male
professors. His perspective might be useful.
I have set up an interview for the Wednesday after fall break. We have been working on
interview questions in class, so I think I have perfect timing. I need to generate my questions and
we have discussed the four types of questions that researchers use: knowledge, opinion, emotion,
and feelings. We worked on developing questions for the topic of nontraditional students at
Bucknell University. When coming up with those kinds of questions it was not so bad, but I am
finding it difficult to come up with my own.
I had my interview today; it was not as uncomfortable as I expected. I assumed it would be odd
and I would get short responses, because my topic is odd. I asked to record him and he agreed. I
used a recording device that was not so difficult to figure out. He told me he felt most
comfortable being interviewed in his living room, so that is where we went. I understand why he
felt comfortable, but it was a little distracting. I was great at staying focused on him, but he had
trouble because things in the house were distracting him. Hi friends were also there. I am sure
that made it weird, not only for him but for me too. One of his friends was pretending to record
him. They eventually sat down and started playing a FIFA video game. I wonder if their presence
had any influence on his answers. I had a list of questions but asserted that I we do not have to
stick to them; I had them up on my computer. I think it was easier because I knew him and he
knew me well enough. I started asking him questions; he seemed to go into depth with most
answers, which was great. He is a political science major and has only had male professors at
Bucknell, but had opinions about female professors as well. I started asking my questions then
realized how boring some of the first ones were. I could tell he was not too interested in the
earlier questions either. I hope I can change those so it does not make the interview seem so
much like work. It wasnt until the end of the interview, that my interviewee seemed more
interested. They were more provoking questions and he said he had never considered them
before. He even said that those were interesting questions. I think for those questions it was great
to catch someone off guard so that I can get their true feelings about the topic. The interview
ended up not being as long as I had hoped, but I did feel he hit some really interesting points that
I hope to analyze in my next interview. My only issue with the interview was my bias. I felt like I
sometimes led my perspective throughout the interview, which probably influenced his
perceptions on the topic. When he did not understand a question I gave my personal opinion as
an example and that might not have been the best idea. I feel as though I really need to revise my
questions so they do not lead him in the direction I want. I feel that also could misinterpret my
analysis. Ultimately I am finding it difficult to play an unbiased role in my research considering I
myself am a Bucknell student and am female. I hope to do better in my second interview.
We got to see Professor Henne-Ochoa interview Donna in class. I got to see different techniques
he used to lead his interview. He did not look at his questions, too much which was great. I felt I
looked at my questions too much so that I know the next questions, which might of caused him
to end his answer and wait for the next questions. His interview also had a lot of ahah

Hillary LeDesma
Qualitative Research in Education

moments which I thought was so interesting, because he picked up on patterns and key points in
her answers then went back to allow her to reflect on them. I thought this was an interesting
technique. I dont remember there being any point in my interview that I felt I could go back and
reflect on for a moment. He also gave his interviewee power over the tape recorder. He also had
some great follow up questions that I liked. He over seemed more natural at it all. That was one
of my first official interviews and I was not so natural.
We had some discussion on what it means to have a topic, and should your interview questions
reflect that topic. I find that very interesting and something I am really struggling with. I dont
want to lead my interviewee to a certain answer because it would be better for my paper. I want
his honest perspective, but I also hope to get some interesting information. I think that is what
the first interview should be. I should be general and allow his answers to make my topic more
specific. I can now take some of the interesting things he said to guide my set of questions for the
next interview. Some of the questions should be the same, but I do see myself adding more
questions to get a more specific answer. I am still working on not showing biased throughout my
interview and also not leading my interviewee to a specific answer. I am still worried, that after
all four interviews, there wont be too many consistencies and I wont be able to develop an
argument. I already feel that form the first interview; some of his answers were not ones that I
expected. That just goes to show that I came into this paper with a set assumption, but through
the interviews I am seeing that there are other perspective and ideas about my topic that I never
expected. I can only hope that throughout my other interviews I can work on not leading them
too much towards my topic.
I also had to transcribe it. Transcribing sounds a lot easier than it is; it took me a long time to
work through the recording. It was also through transcribing that I was able to step back from the
interview and pay attention to things I may have missed, such as his little comments and
inflections. I was also able to reflect more on my questions and decided I should come up with
better and more provoking questions because it was obvious he was not as interested either.
I was also given advice to not fidget and pay attention to my body language throughout the
interview. I was lucky enough to have a friend who already felt comfortable around me, but in
another interview my body language may inhibit the interview. I learned how the way I present
myself would direct my interviewee on how to act or respond to me. I dont remember the first
interview too much, but I am becoming more aware of what my body is saying. I hope to make it
seems as though it is an open conversation and that I am just listening. I didnt know such subtle
movements could make such a big difference. I can only use the things I am reflecting on and the
discussions we have in class to guide me in the right direction moving forward.

Hillary LeDesma
Qualitative Research in Education

Research Journal 3 Installment:

Since my last installment, I have completed 3 more interviews, a follow up, and I have
finished all 3 observations. I feel I am set with all my date and am now in the process of
finalizing my analysis and paper. I now have 4 interviews total, two men and two women. As you
read in my last installment, I was having trouble with the questions for my interview. I thought
they were really boring and did not open the doors for all possible answers. I was only through
discussions with other students and the reflections we did in class about our own research that I
decided to make my interview questions more open-ended. It was then that my interviews turned
more anecdotal. I just listened as students told me stories of their experience with both and
female professors. I think I got the most out of these stories because I was able to sit back an
observe how they told the story and the gestures they made to let me know more about their
emotions. This is what I wanted all along, but I did not get this until my third interview and on.
In my third interview I watched as she told me the stories of her different experiences in two of
her classes. It was obvious she did not want to offend or generalize anything, but as she told the
story of how different the classrooms were, I knew she began to make connections herself. It was
almost as if I watched as she realized the differences between her professors. It was this
experience that allowed me to reflect on my topic again. My topic was to study students
perceptions of male versus female professors on the Bucknell Campus, but it was through my
interviews that I realized it would be difficult to grasp a students true perceptions. I felt the
students I interviewed were wary about coming off sexist or did not want to offend anyone. It
was here that I decided I would simply ask about their experiences in the different classrooms.
Their stories are what told me more about the topic and has allowed me to also look at how they
experience the classroom with the different professors and how they behave.
Considering my topic is better focus I began to observe classrooms for my field
observations. I observed my own classes, which at first thought it might conflict with my
research but realized it may be helpful. Considering I already have experience with the class and
how the class normally runs, I am able observe the class better. I observed one of my classes with
a female professor and ran into some obstacles. I observed the way the class was and how the
students reacted to her. I found them not answering her questions and paying little attention to
her. There were other aspects of the observation let would lead me to believe the students do not
respect her and may be treating her differently. Although there all a lot of other variables that
may be leading them to act this way. For instance, the class is in the middle of the day, a time
when students are restless and ready to be done with classes. It could also be the structure of the
class considering it is lecture based, which can be very disengaging. I am not sure whether I
should distinguish the many variables that make the experience of the classroom that way. Would
it be wrong to not even include them considering I and trying to analyze something. I am then at
this point in my paper where I am trying to figure out if I am trying to prove something or simply
present the data. I guess it would be difficult to prove anything considering my data set is so

Hillary LeDesma
Qualitative Research in Education

small and I am not making any generalizations. I guess I just have a topic and I have data and my
job is to present it and try to make sense of in with my topic.
Throughout the process I was introduced to coding. This is going to help us with time
considering we do not have as much time to transcribe all of our interviews. Considering this is a
small data set but how long interviews can be, coding was the best way for us to organize our
data. I was absent the day coding was explained, so I did not have a great idea of what it was or
how to use it. I came into class and we were able to practice it. We practiced with an interview
Professor Henne-Ochoa did. I realized it can get pretty complicated but is the best way to
organize the information. I thought it was not so bad to code the example because we I was able
to work with a others. It was much more difficult when coding my own interview because there
were so many possibilities and I did not know where to start. I jumped into my first interview
because I had already transcribed it. It was here that I started off with general codes. I then used
these codes to reflect on my second interview and see if any of the same themes came up. They
did a little bit, but I felt I was stretching it out. I feel like I am forcing the two interviews to align
so that I can catch similar themes. This is also one of the reasons I changed the way I conducted
my interviews and the questions I asked. I used the themes to centralize my topic and let them
guide my next interview. Coding is still something I am working on, but after listening to my
interviews over and over I can tell what the central themes are beginning to be.
I conducted my follow up interview today with my first interviewee. It was much shorter,
but I asked him to provide my with any anecdotes and express his ideas on the experiences he
had with male versus female professors in the classroom instead of his perspectives. It was
through his stories that I realized although he never intentionally perceived his professors
differently, his experiences were noticeably different in the two different types of class rooms.
This proves that my strategy is a success and that I am going to be able to get some beneficial
data.
So I am sitting here with all of this data and still not sure how to turn it into a research
paper. I have some important themes, but I am still unsure how to turn it into a paper. I am glad
we were provided with a list of the aspects of the paper that we need for the final product. I still
wish I was given a clear example of what this type of paper should look like considering the
small data set. I also want to earn how to use the quotes in the interview in the paper. How much
of the actual interview should I use or should it be mostly analysis. This part of the process is
still bothering me but I hope to just create each piece and smooth it all together at the end for the
final product. This is also our first experience with this type of paper so I hope it is taken into
consideration.