Refers to and in depth understanding and knowledge of research area at a level enabling the development of a position – a research methods unit should contribute to developing this understanding
About the to analyse and synthesise information from a variety of sources – demonstrated in a literature review.
15 March 2015: Blogged about feeling as though I’d wasted the last eight months as my research seemed to have been in the wrong direction. Feedback on this was to get my question sorted and print it out in big letters so I can look at it all the time. I’ve got my question sorted but am yet to print it out. I think it’s a good plan!
17 March 2015: Meeting with Sevilay in the Library. Since I began in August last year everyone, repeatedly, says ‘get to know your library contact’. Because I already knew Sevilay through work I was like ‘eh’. Well today I met with her and it was awesome. While it served a little bit of reinforcing what I was doing was okay, she also said useful things like, “Trove is also good” and “This is how you tell what is peer reviewed and what isn’t”. Feeling a bit more ‘in the know’ now and feeling good about it. Of course, still so much to learn.
21 March 2015: Undertaking the third version of my section on commodification of my literature review. Still sucks, but at least it’s no longer something I’m embarrassed to show to someone else.
5 April 2015: I blogged about the session with Michael De Percy on 3 March in my work blog (not this one). What was interesting was the feedback I got in relation to this and how it applies to my thesis. Someone took the time to write an email to me about the way I write. He emphasised that I need to have confidence in my writing and my abilities. He explained how my writing is too self depreciating and how I need to have belief in what I’m saying to present the solid argument. This is not the first time I’ve heard this and I’ve kept the text of the email close as a constant reminder of how I need to believe in myself and what I’m doing.
25 April 2015: I’m transcribing the events I’ve been to into my portfolio against the other learning outcomes and realised that I really haven’t focussed on this area so I revisited my skills analysis to see what actions I had put against this outcome. In my analysis I have put topic related activities but this relates more to the second outcome. In discussions with my supervisor this week he emphasised the cross disciplinary nature of my research and how I would benefit with a lot more cross faculty liaison. I then realised that the PLC is the best part of my synthesising information from a variety of sources. In our meetings we discuss different research topics, methodologies, ideas. We are cross disciplinary ourselves. I also plan to submit the literature review section of my proposal for the final portfolio. I believe this approach will address this learning outcome.
12 May 2015: Session on understanding research frameworks in relation to problematisation (PLC Research paradigms). This was a follow up session to an earlier one run by David and while this was about research theories, it gave me a broader understanding for how I will shape my problem and contextual my problem within research theory.
29 May 2015: It’s not perfect but I think this is actually the best attempt for a literature review section yet (Business expectations – Lit 29 May). I’ve considered the reading in the context of my research and thought hard about what the documents I’ve read are saying between the lines. I’ve used a new product called Scapple to help me out and I think it’s been my saviour. Anyway, let’s see what feedback I get from here.
Credentials or Citizens? 