Phenomenology focuses on human experiences concerning specific situations or experiences and tries to describe them. It is a widely accepted philosophical and psychological qualitative research method. Hermeneutic phenomenology is interpreting texts to explore lived experience (“Phenomenology Research Overview”). Transcendental phenomenology focuses on meanings of lived experiences of concepts or phenomena for people (“Phenomenology Research Overview”). Its purpose is to describe the essence, the nature of experiencing a phenomenon. Thus, phenomenology is a specific attempt to investigate and describe phenomena as lived by people who experience them directly.

I agree that phenomenology is a bright example of the qualitative research method as it strives to describe unique and subjective experiences of people. I can apply the author’s idea to my own writing, and it can help me to analyze my personal experience more deeply and thoroughly than usually. I can extract more information about my experience by analyzing a number of my texts within the framework of one research problem. Having an opportunity to study plenty of material can help to notice and define specific information that is not obvious within the framework of only one text. However, I agree with the author that staying unprejudiced and unbiased is very important for applying this research method. In this respect, one question remained unanswered for me after reading the material. It is unclear how to define for sure whether a researcher succeeded in staying neutral and objective in the course of investigating. Phenomenology is a qualitative research method and it deals with rather complex abstract categories of human experience and knowledge. Therefore, a question concerning the criteria of staying unprejudiced and unbiased remains.

Much useful information can be found in credible online encyclopedias. For instance, Britannica provides clarification that phenomenology strives to investigate experience without addressing theories relating to its causal explanation (Spiegelberg and Walter, “Phenomenology”). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines phenomenology in an interesting way as the investigation of reflections of things in human consciousness (“Phenomenology”). Thus, phenomenology is a striving to study human consciousness and objects reflected in it directly, without applying preceding knowledge.

Works Cited

 “Phenomenology.” Plato, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/phenomenology/. Accessed 30 March 2020.

“Phenomenology Research Overview.” Cirt, https://cirt.gcu.edu/research/developmentresources/research_ready/phenomenology/phen_overview. Accessed 30 March 2020.

Spiegelberg, Herbert, and Walter Biemel. “Phenomenology.” Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/topic/phenomenology. Accessed 30 March 2020.

In the article “Autoethnography: An Overview”, the authors thoroughly discuss what is an autoethnography, and what is this approach on research and writing. Ellis et al. goes on making readers understand the concept of autoethnography by discussing piece by piece the words and ideas that all contribute to the concept of autoethnography. Though it was also mentioned in the text, the points of explaining and stressing how an autoethnography is both an autobiography and ethnography implies that this type of writing centers on understanding personal experience and cultural experience in writing, it also goes to make readers open to idea that qualitative research is not necessarily limited to some neutral, limiting and conventional ways but in fact is influenced by personal knowledge, experience, and such.

The authors described the term as a systematic analysis (graphy) of personal experience (auto) to further understand cultural experience (ethno). This implies that doing autoethnography involves or influence one’s person and social experience. The process would also involve interviews, field notes, etc. as evidence to such claimed cultural and personal experience.  Although uses both techniques and product of two types of writing, autobiography and ethnography, which could be an advantage in further understanding qualitative research, autoethnography is also criticized for the same reason. The raising concern is on how autoethnography would be too much of the other and lacks the element of the other when it comes to writing standards as been mentioned on the critic response on autoethnography. Nonetheless, it would be a main goal of an autoethnography to make the readers be connected with the story or writing with its elements as it has a component of personal fractions from the writer.

Whose Story Is It? An Autoethnography Concerning Narrative Identity

The authors discussed the understanding of an autoethnography by first outlining their understanding of autoethnography in writing short stories, in historical, philosophical, theoretical, and methodological contexts, which is then followed by a short story example and a thorough analysis from a narrative identity perspective.

Grant and Zeeman emphasize the stories in lives and how every person is living in a “storied” life defining our emotions, behaviors, and perspectives, to which also influence cultural engagement. This implies that an author’s work is very much fueled and is also limited to his or her knowledge. In relation, it then gives way to the idea that a scholarly work especially in human science are influenced by the personal perspective of the author and is impossible to just follow a neutral limiting concept. The sense of beauty in writing an autoethnography was further shown in the short story by Grant, by letting the readers pip into his memories. It would look like an autobiography on the first glance but as the elements are examined, social and cultural aspects and experience are present, for instance the author’s narration of his life as a young man in Scotland. This tries to show how it was, what the culture are to be able to fully understand the story, to which also drives the story to be moving and is trying to connect with the reader. Similar reaction was shown in the discussion part of the article. Critique on the short story by can however be influenced by the discussions of the author. The literary aspect of an autoethnography is what attracts readers in to this type of writing, a metaphor for instance as also used by the author in his short story gave deeper representation of ideas than just stating them directly. With the sense of incorporating personal experience and knowledge in writing, this does not however, easily give license to poor researched writing. It must be noted that to be thoroughly connected with readers, they must be able to relate and comprehend with what the writer is presenting and use globally accepted evidence for instance.

Resources

Ellis, Carolyn; Adams, Tony & Bochner, Arthur.” Autoethnography: An Overview.” Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, vol. 12, no. 1, 2010, Art. 10, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1101108. Accessed 16 Mar. 2020

Grant, Alec & Zeeman Laetitia. “Whose Story Is It? An Autoethnography Concerning Narrative Identity”. The Qualitative Report, vol. 17, no. 36, 2012, pp. 1-12. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1735&context=tqr. Accessed 16 Mar. 2020

The text attempts to convey how language is more than informing people. It states that language implies “being,” the identity one acquires by communicating with others, and “doing,” the engagement with certain activities. The arguments provided demonstrate the reality of these two aspects, although the author not always provides convincing examples to establish all the claims.

            The author, attempting to show that language entails not only “saying,” but also “being” and “doing,” points to a game called Yu-Gi-Oh. He states that people cannot understand the game by reading the definition of its rules, and to really comprehend the practice one would need to play and watch it. However, the author might not be considering that the appropriate words could simply not have been used. The explanation about a certain trait of the game is quoted in the text to convey how words are not enough to make one understand how the game works, but an improved definition could be as effective as playing Yu-Gi-Oh. It is plausible to argue that a sophisticated text, capable of explaining all the steps within their contexts, could make the reader fully aware of the practice’s content, thus, denying the necessity of “doing” in this case. The fact that definitions from dictionaries would not help does not mean that language, in this case “saying,” could never be enough.

            The text argues, nonetheless, that language’s meaning comes from practices. This is a different claim, and it is a more plausible one. It is reasonable to conclude that, although one could comprehend an activity by reading an appropriate description of it, language is always associated with an activity. The author claims that, without those activities, such as the game cited, the words describing them would be meaningless. However, this statement fails to recognize the role of fiction, as it describes events and activities that do not exist, but still have meaning. It would be more precise to state that language is always connected to any kind of activity, real or fictional. Hence, the author’s claim on language as “doing,” although reasonable to some extent, cannot explain every human activity, and it overestimates the role of “doing,” as in the case of suggesting that “saying” would not be enough to explain certain activities.

            It is claimed that language is also “being.” When you are a student, people expect you to talk in certain ways. As in the games, the author suggests, every activity has rules, and, in order to be a good student, one needs to acquire this identity by following them. The arguments concerning the “being” aspect of language are sound: they demonstrate that “saying” is not the only goal of language. Language is used in those practices having social goods in mind. If one values being a good student and wants to be one, being a good student is a social good to this person. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that the person in this case is not using language just to inform her teachers. She is talking in a certain way to achieve another goal, that is, being a good student.

            The author points that discourse analysis needs to be critical. It is not enough to describe language and its structure. Since language derives its meaning from social practices, as the author argues, it is important to approach the political elements of a text. This statement is supported by early evidence from the text, suggesting that meaning is always connected to certain activities. Thus, the point made by the text about language’s political relevancy is well supported by the evidence provided.

            The text manages to establish some of its claims about language. The aspect of “being,” and the social goods related to it, is described in depth. Language as “doing,” although failing to respond to some objections, is shown in the relationship between language and practice. This relationship entails political elements, which imply the necessity of critical analysis.

Dr. Charles Nelson uses a case-study approach to analyze the evolution of the second language structure (L2) techniques from his tactical and compositional course. Case Studies are a dynamic, preliminary study that involves examining certain events in past theories and analyses (Zucker 2009). In its thesis “The Building Blocks and Reading” Nelson’s fundamental analysis also examines the scientific hypotheses of complex adaptive processes. Before the six-month study is evaluated, it was performed through several surveys and self-evaluations.

What I first liked about this week’s readings was the consistency and the focus of the research method, the case study, apart from my shock at the founder of “Building Blocks and Training.” This follows the ‘standard’ (loosely-used) style of study that students learn in their graduate years, particularly while reviewing the literature first, then gathering and evaluating case-specific data.

However (Masooch94 2019) notes that the hypotheses are formulated and the results are evaluated in detail. This is an example of rooted philosophy. Despite this disparity, the comparison between the two is identical, as shown in Zucker’s “How To Do Case Study Work” case studies, with the use of a negative case for contrast. A downside, though, was noticed in the same paragraph as the specific case study can be, as “generalization… is restricted to the case itself or the form of case.” A significant supporter of science, listed many times in the lectures, argues that such an incapacity to generalize entirely does not only entail case studies but all study. Furthermore, the case study is also interesting, as described above, in undergraduate courses. I remember following a Research and Technology lesson during my early undergrad years and the process was actually known. Students were invited to read and then suggest and perform research literature on a chosen topic. Of course, it’s a very scaled-down analysis because it was an introductory course of research in general, but only twenty random participants were questioned.

 Dr. Nelson’s observations about the variableness, usability, and accessibility of building blocks for studying the structure and learning strategies of L2, as well as his demand for curricula to provide a range of simplified low-level foundations for a case study, are far more detailed and proficiently technical examples of a case study, So that they can take it and replicate it to fit their needs, cross it over, recombine it with previous strategies and substitute it in their position. The need for more analysis, typical results in academic studies, opens up the possibility of further observations that a similar study will be able to compare in the future. It would be my wish to provide further evidence of students’ growth, especially at the beginning of a semester, if I have one criticism of the research study. On-demand from the students I can understand the necessity of confidentiality, but I think it would be important to examine and reflect further the evaluations of the students.

The perspectives, tactics, and development of the pupil are clearly illustrated by the stories throughout the discussion section, such as Ahmet’s midterm and final assessments. Also, I found that the Writing Center has been listed throughout the report. I can see how uncertainty or embarrassing it would be if a student is asked to attend tutoring. Collaborative work was a key factor for students throughout the six months of Nelson’s analysis and several doubtful students noticed that the methodology was successful by the end of the six-month cycle. The mission of the Writing Center is primarily based on partnership.

Sessions are discussions, when students are taught by tutors, serve as information facilitators that the student may, but may not, grasp, and direct students to develop their overall writing, not just the one job they have completed. I assume that in this manner we try to keep to the different levels, thinking styles, and writing experiences of all students, and expect that their instructors do the same so that they receive equal help from all sides.

Questions:

• Does the order of building blocks change?
• Is a particular sequence of building blocks more effective?
• Are there other building blocks?

Works Cited

masooch94. “Iv. Case Study Research/‘Building Blocks and Learning.’” Writing Studies Research & Methods, 29 Apr. 2019, writingstudiesrm.home.blog/2019/03/04/iii-case-study-research-building-blocks-and-learning/.

Zucker, Donna M. “How to Do Case Study Research.” How to Do Case Study Research, 2009, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/39729804_How_to_Do_Case_Study_Research.

The article basically talks about the grounded theory methodology and how it is relevant in research. The article has defined the grounded theory as the discovery of emerging patterns in data. The article has also highlighted the fact that the grounded theory is basically the generation of theories from data. The grounded theory methodology is a research tool because it enables researchers to look for and conceptualize social structures and patterns that are of a person’s interests by way of constantly comparing data.

What I like most about the article is that it has efficiently elaborated on the aims and objectives of the grounded theory methodology which include the progressive integration and identification of categories of meaning from data and information. When categories are identified and integrated, the result is the formulation of theories that would shed light on research processes conducted. The article has also emphasized that there are different categories to research and that there will always be existing relationships between the variables of research.

In addition, I also liked the fact that the article has also introduced the basic principles that underpin the grounded theory methodology. These basic principles include learning how to identify different categories and integrating the meaning behind these categories to research. After categories have been identified, the article has emphasized how it was necessary to establish relationships between the categories in order to formulate relevant theories. The article defines categories as events, occurrences, or processes. These categories share key characteristics

and features with one another which is why it is not difficult to relate such categories to one another.

The article has also introduced the basic principles of the grounded theory. These principles comprise of the categories, coding, constant comparative analysis, negative case analysis, theoretical sensitivity, theoretical sampling, theoretical saturation, and memo-writing. All these principles pave the way towards identifying the core category which would lead to the completion and realization of research processes and methods undertaken. Research processes and methods involve the process of identifying factors and categories that would be the focus of studies which means that the grounded theory methodology entails undergoing through the research process in order to find answers to problems or questions identified.

As a synopsis, the grounded research methodology is basically the research process which involves identifying the research question, data collection, data analysis, the research report, and the presentation of results. This was manifested in the example in the article which was about negotiating commitment and involvement in the relationship between nurses and patients. I have learned that the researchers sought to understand what the effect of gift giving was to the relationship between nurses and patients. During the data analysis process, it was determined that giving gifts really did initiate a relationship between patients and nurses. This relationship was found to have strengthened the bond between nurses and their patients. Later on, a theory was formulated about how giving tokens of appreciation established trust and led to better communication between patients and their healthcare providers.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the article has defined the grounded theory methodology as a means of completing research methods and processes. In addition, it has also emphasized the importance

of identifying categories in research studies so that the researchers will be able to formulate relationships between these categories. By providing an example of a research study that has applied the grounded theory methodology, the article has successfully demonstrated its importance regarding how theories are made based from how different categories relate to one another.

The grounded theory methodology was also emphasized to have several different principles that are being applied when research is being conducted. Research follows through a specific process in order to find answers to problems or questions. The grounded theory methodology employs the use of the research process in order to formulate theories based on categories that have been introduced.

Different students have different methods of learning especially when it comes to reading and literature. Linear writing is very common in literature because it refers to traditional text which requires the reader to read the contents from the beginning of the text until the end. The readers would then have to understand the context as he reads the text and ideally develops an analysis right after reading the entire text. On the other hand, hypertext writing pertains to the opposite of linear reading and learning because it allows readers to follow their own unique path of exploring the context of the reading material. Hypertext writing encourages better analysis and understanding because it allows readers to create their own order and interpretation of the reading materials they have engaged in.

The article is very informative because it informs readers about the difference between linear writing and hypertext writing. It also associates both linear writing and hypertext writing to how well students respond to reading materials with the use of both of these methods. The article emphasizes the fact that hypertext writing and observational learning have major impacts on a reader’s capacity to understand and analyze the reading materials that they are engaging in (Braaksma et al. 264). In linear writing, readers are expected to go through reading materials in the most common order. This order encompasses reading a text from beginning until the end because this is how the author of the text wishes the readers to engage in such literature.

The article emphasizes that in linear writing, the readers will only be able to grasp the full context of the reading material once the reader has completely read and understood the entire text. On the other hand, hypertext writing encourages readers to explore reading materials in their own unique ways and interpret the ideas in ways that would suit them best (Braaksma et al. 271). The article sought to determine the impact of hypertext writing towards a reader’s self-efficacy and the text quality when a reader creates an analysis of the reading material he has just finished reading. The article emphasized the fact that hypertext writing had effects on content knowledge, essay writing, and overall comprehension.

It is predictable that the results of the experiment specified in the article shows that readers who have no background knowledge about the reading material scored better in hypertext writing compared to linear writing. This is because hypertext writing allowed the readers to interpret the text in their own ways and there were no restrictions to how they interpreted the reading material (Braaksma et al. 285). These readers were not bound by the linear quality of linear writing. On the other hand, readers with background knowledge about the reading material were able to efficiently analyze the reading materials even though the materials were written using linear writing.

Conclusion

            In conclusion, the article has emphasized the significance of the effects of hypertext writing to readers’ overall comprehension, content knowledge, and essay writing. In hypertext writing, readers have the liberty to read and analyze reading materials in a way that would be most convenient for them. In linear writing, readers are expected to read and engage with reading materials in the way that the authors of the reading materials have intended. Therefore, linear writing requires readers to focus on the context of the reading materials while following a strict order in accordance with the authors’ intentions and pacing. However, hypertext writing helps improve knowledge acquisition, self-efficacy, and text quality by allowing readers to explore reading materials in unique ways that give them the liberty to modify their interactions in a way that helps them understand the reading materials better.