It was a good critique session I had with Dr M today. While how I position my paper will depend a great deal on how my analysis turns out, at least now I can see possible paths that I may want to look deeper into from suggestions given by Dr M. One thing I learn today from Dr M which Prof DH also underscored in a sharing session I attend last week is that it would be best if we have research that challenge conventional thinking because it makes it a good story to read. So research is like storytelling. Well it's not about cooking up lies but how to position your research from an angle that is never thought of before. Like this book.
The conventional thinking is that it is wise to follow an elite few instead of the masses but his book tells a different story that many are actually smarter than the few. I am wondering now what is conventional thinking about some phenomenon in MMOG that I can show the contrary. Hmmm. : ?
Second best to this kind of story, I think, is what Prof DH said. If you can't tell this kind of story, then tell a story that goes well with conventional thinking but which people cannot describe in details. So your research is like providing the "thick description" of something people have accepted but can't describe. Well, I can think of Steinkuehler research on cognition and learning in MMOG. The conventional thinking is that people know learning occurs in MMOG but cannot describe how it takes place.
So what what kind of story will you be telling from your research?
Courtesy
-
*I read somewhere that when people first meet up, they are usually polite
to each other. *
*Greetings and best wishes are exchanged oftenly in the nicest w...
8 years ago
No comments:
Post a Comment