Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

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 fr om 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 it’s 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 ind ividual (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 ori entation 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 glim pse 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 literatu re/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 resea rch. 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 h er 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