Land of Confusion

This week's readings were very interesting, and they raised several issues that I hadn't previously considered. More than ever, I feel like a lot of my ideas about these topics are in flux, and I don't know where I land on these topics.

1. Challenges of temporariness and related ethical issues
All experiences are temporary moments in time, and traditionally, researchers would work to capture those through videos, photos, audio recordings, and field notes. But now that there are resources such as SnapChat -- an app that markets itself based on the temporariness of anything that's posted, what does that mean for researchers? The Pihlaja YouTube study described in the Page, Barton, Unger & Zappavigna (2014) text highlights this challenge. Pihlaja was attempting to study dialogue through comments on YouTube videos, and some people went back and deleted their comments. How could that data then be handled? It existed, and if it was a more traditional setting, would a subject be able to retract their comments or actions? But in an online setting, that becomes more of a possibility, and I feel like it's a gray area for how to handle that as a researcher. Going back to SnapChat, if all posts are ephemeral by purpose, can the researcher even ethically use screencaptures for research? If not, how could you research that platform effectively?

2. Terms of Service
I have never taken the time to read any of the Terms of Service for platforms like Facebook and YouTube, but I know that several platforms have pretty restrictive expectations. YouTube, for example, doesn't allow you to download videos from their platform, but there are many other services (e.g., KeepVid) that will allow you to download YouTube videos. Similarly, Facebook claims ownership of the content that is posted on its platform, but then other services like Texifter allow you to download Facebook content for analysis. What are the legal and ethical issues involved with those practices, and how do digital researchers handle those?

The Fuchs (2014) chapters were fantastic in helping me understand some of the critical Marxism. I'm fairly familiar with Marxist theory, but these chapters unpacked the concepts in easy-to-understand ways while drawing in concrete examples from modern social media practices. One part that really stood out to me was the section in chapter 1 about the dialectic and contradictions. It seems that we give corporations like Facebook a lot of power when we agree to their evolving terms of service, and perhaps one way to take back some of that power is through using other tools (e.g., Texifter) that can help us better understand how social media works. Are critical theorists more flexible in their thinking about some of these platforms' rules and expectations? And if so, how does the IRB feel about that?

I'm not sure where I fall on any of these issues anymore. The more I tread into the waters of online research, the murkier my surroundings feel. I'm not deterred by that, but there's an element of unknown that's a bit intimidating--especially as an inexperienced researcher. I'll clearly need to explore these topics further.

Online Research: The Other Fifty Shades of Gray

If there was one thing made clear about online research this week, it was that it's still a gray area that is open to many interpretations and context-dependent decisions. While the Association of Internet Researchers has attempted to offer some guidance about ethical research practices, even those are described in shades of gray--acknowledging that there are still as many questions as answers. The three fundamental tensions center on human subjects, texts/data vs. people, and public vs. private spaces.

Maybe I've become too cynical about Internet privacy after all of the Wikileaks drama and other scandals in the last few years, but I have no real expectation of privacy on the Internet anymore. I know that I've probably signed away rights on all sorts of sites by agreeing to TOU policies that were too long for me to take the time to read. Amazon and countless other sellers track my every shopping query, and they remind me of such as they post ads of the specific products I've perused to my Facebook sidebars. Emails, browsing histories, IP addresses -- everything can be tracked, so I'm not terribly swayed by privacy concerns on Internet research. What does resonate with me, however, is the argument from the Swedish Research Council in the Elm chapter that "People who participate in research must not be harmed, either physically or mentally, and they must not be humiliated or offended" (2009, p. 84). For me, this is the fundamental issue that is critical to my integrity as a researcher. I'm not overly concerned about rules about public/private spheres because there is such a blur between those. But I do care what my research subjects think about how I treat them. I would not want to harm, humiliate, or offend the people who are important to my research interests, nor would I want to jeopardize my future relationships with them in any way. I recognize that my research areas are pretty tame, so there's little risk of harming others. But there are so many consequences that may be unpredictable, and it's wise to be thoughtful throughout the process, not just when getting IRB approval. It therefore makes sense that the AoIR guidelines would be rather nebulous.

One thing that stood out to me in the readings this week was the idea that there is not really an international consensus on ethical practices for Internet research--particularly in regards to the definition of human subjects. While the AoIR guidelines are a good starting point for a framework, interpretation and application may vary from country-to-country and probably university-to-university as well. Given these variations, I'm curious what that means for Internet research. Are there some countries or universities that are researcher "hot spots" where online researchers want to go? Or are there some that are shunned because they're too strict or too loose with their research requirements? It seems like the uneven approaches could create some interesting dynamics among scholars.

I was also very interested in reading the Salmons chapters because I plan to do most of my dissertation interviews online. A couple of questions I hope she can address:

1) What are some strategies and challenges with recruiting participants in online research?
2) Are there any particular tools that are especially good for online qualitative interviews?

There's an App for That...

As an early iPad adopter and someone who trains teachers on how to use iPads in the classroom, there have been times when I've felt overwhelmed by the number of apps and resources available to choose from. Sometimes having unlimited options can feel paralyzing, and I often consider that when I decide which apps to share with other teachers and how many to share at one time. I was reminded of this when I browsed the options available for use on the Nova website. There were over a dozen note-taking apps alone! I know much depends on personal preferences, but I'm curious to hear from our class presenter, Everett Painter, about some of the considerations he uses in selecting tools to use.

I tend to gravitate toward tools that can accomplish several objectives on its own or is designed to interface with other apps or devices. Evernote, for example, can be used for note taking and audio recording, and it syncs with Skitch and Penultimate. Evernote and Skitch also have desktop platforms so I can move between my computer and mobile device as necessary. Those affordances push me toward some apps over others. So I guess I'm wondering:

• Which of the apps have a web/desktop platform in addition to the mobile app?
• Are there any apps that are mobile-only but offer unique features that can't be accomplished by a laptop? 

As far as the readings this week, I really appreciated the Corti, van den Eynden, Bishop & Woollard (2014) chapter. As a beginning researcher, there are many aspects of the research process that I'm not sure I could anticipate in advance. I recognize the importance of planning, and I liked how the chapter broke steps down into checklists of questions to consider. There were many there -- especially about formatting and storage -- that I hadn't really thought about before. I am certain that I will return to this chapter in the future as I plan my research.

I'm also fascinated by some of the ethical questions that come out of doing Internet research. As the Paulus, Lester, & Dempster (2014) pointed out, there are lots of grey areas when it comes to online research, and I'm excited about entering a research area that is still so new and undefined. I know that forging new ground carries with it a lot of extra responsibilities to get it right, but I also look forward in participating in debates about what those standards should be. I will definitely be tracking down some of the recommended resources mentioned in the chapter's bibliography so that I can learn more about the ethical issues of online research and familiarize myself with those practices as I plan my research. 

Reflexivity & Technology: Who Am I?

I am a techie. 

I wasn't always that way, but as I've gotten older, I've seen so many ways that technology has helped me work more productively. 

I think my love of technology really started in 2008. I had been teaching fifth grade for three years while my husband was in law school, and he accepted a one-year federal clerkship in Montgomery, AL. We decided to leave Atlanta for a year to move to Montgomery, and I decided to spend the year finishing my master's degree from Michigan State through online classes and by Skyping in to live classes. I spent most of my time at my computer working on coursework, and since we didn't know many people in Alabama, I relied on technology to stay connected to teaching and other educators. It was during this year that I started participating in #edchat and other chats on Twitter, and I started reading and following a lot of teaching blogs. I connected with many other tech-savvy educators, and I saw a lot of potential for teacher learning through online collaboration since I was experiencing that myself. 

For a long time, I was a lurker in these online conversations and blogs. But over time, as I became more comfortable with the tools and had more confidence in myself, I began to participate. I started my own blog and networked with many other teachers more formally. We've had several meet-ups, and these teacher bloggers have been some of the most inspiring and motivating teachers I've encountered. I find that I learn much, much more through them than I typically do through my school-sponsored professional learning opportunities. It's because of these experiences that I want to study teacher bloggers for my dissertation research. I want to explore how their online experiences impact their classroom experiences and their feelings of self-efficacy. I also want to see if there's a difference in the self-efficacy beliefs of bloggers vs. lurkers -- those who read the blogs, but don't comment or write anything of their own. My experiences of being isolated for a year in Alabama and transitioning from a lurker to a blogger really changed my understanding of technology's potential, and it's a focal point of my research interests. 

As I was going through this week's class readings, I was struck by a couple of issues. First, I do think there is a point where we experience "information overload," and that point can change from day to day or topic to topic. I love using sites like Twitter, but I feel like I can only take them in small doses because there is so much available. And while I can focus my attention on the thought leaders around a particular topic, I'm not sure that will help me build relationships for future collaboration opportunities. I have to widen the net to find others who share my interests but who might not be at the forefront of the field yet. That's a tough issue to balance, and I'm not sure that I've figured that out yet.

The second thing that struck me were the ethical issues raised by online collaboration and document sharing. My whole life is in the cloud now. Between my Dropbox, Google Drive, and Evernote accounts, I'm completely beholden to having my work saved in those spaces so that I can move seamlessly between devices. The cloud poses some definite downsides. Last year, for example, Dropbox had a security breach, and they reset all of my file sharing links without telling me they were doing that -- not fun for my collaborators! But overall, the cloud makes me much more efficient and productive on-the-go. It seems like qualitative researchers will need to accept that as a reality of modern research practices and develop some guidelines for ethics that embrace that fact. I like that I'm entering the field at a time when there's still a lot of dialogue about that.

I'm a long-time Evernote user, but I do have a question for Dr. Britt: is it better to organize by tags or by notebooks? 

I've heard conflicting perspectives on this. One hardcore Evernote user that I know insists that it's a waste of time to create notebooks because you can locate everything you need through good use of tags. Others say you should segment out different topics through notebooks but still tag individual notes. None of the people I've discussed this with have been researchers, however, so I'd like to hear another perspective.

Wow! My thoughts this week really meandered. Thanks for sticking with me through this -- lots to process.