Bracketing

Interview
We conducted a bracketing interview on March 18, 2015 using Adobe Connect. The interview was video
recorded so that participants could review it at a later date if necessary. Pinto posed three questions
designed to elicit bias from the Ms. Powers. Ms. Powers did not see the questions in advance of the
interview so that her responses would be spontaneous. The questions were:

Why did you select this topic?

What do you hope to learn from you research?
What do you hope the research will accomplish in the world?

Ms. Powers responded to each question and the Pinto took notes. Pinto noted several features in the
responses that revealed areas of bias.
(1) Ms. Powers explained chose the topic of learning through art and technology. She explained she
chose the topic because its a big part of her life, and she is passionate about doing it and
contributes to her personal engagement.
Pinto observed that this response reflected disproportionate focus on the researcher/subject rather
than to the phenomenon more broadly. Pinto suggested that Ms. Powers make a concerted effort to
emphasize a me to we approach to analysis and conclusions. That is to say, while
autoethnographic research is about the individual (in the dual role of researcher and subject), the
research needs to connect outward to other literature, AND to other learners.
(2) She explained that she did not have preconceived notions, but hopes to learn about herself and why
she does this work, finding a pattern, or getting a greater understanding of her own art and
creativity and how it relates to other people.

Pinto noted that, like in (1), Ms. Powers responses reflect an inward orientation (to the research-
subject) rather than an outward orientation relating to how the findings relate to broader literature
and to the experiences of other learners and teachers.

(3) When asked what her research will accomplish in the world, Ms. Powers expressed her hope that
those who view/read her work get a glimpse of what is important to her, and see the value in
interpretive arts-based research.
As with (1) and (2), Pinto noted that the response had a strong inward focus. Pinto strongly
recommends tying the individual (subjective) experience to broader literature/research for
comparison to overcome this area of bias. This would involve:

Making sure the discussion of findings links explicitly and directly to theory and prior
research (e.g., the work of Roth on arts-based ed) AND if possible to other similar research.
As well, this could lead to recommendations for future research that would involve

replicating similar research methods with other artists to see how Ms. Powers experiences
differ from others.
Ms. Powers needs to remain clear that this research is her subjective experience, and be
very explicit about the applicability of this research to other contexts, while also being
careful NOT to generalize based on a single case. This will require careful word and concept
selection