Let me start this post by saying that I did not expect the defense to wipe me out physically, emotionally, and cognitively for such an extended period of time. Now that I am sleeping better, I wonder if I am still suffering from post-defense fatigue or from allergies. Probably both. I'm still a bit in a mental haze in my day-to-day routines.
Aren't you done?
No, I need to make a lot of revisions to my dissertation before I submit it to the Graduate College, which is the last step before earning the PhD.
But you passed--
Yes, under the condition that I make these revisions. Ideally, I would have liked to have had another month or two to edit my dissertation before defending. However, I wouldn't be able to defend during the summer because most of my committee members would not be around at the same time. I wanted to defend before the spring semester ended. I knew this meant that my dissertation would not be as polished as I and my co-chairs would have liked for the defense.
How much do you have to revise?
My first impression to the defense was that I had to revise more than I expected. But after thinking it over (obsessively: therefore lack of sleep), I had many of these revisions in mind before defending. My committee made it clear that I had to make all of them, plus a few more.
I haven't confirmed with my co-chairs yet, but it seems that Chapters 1 and 2 need the most revision in terms of reframing and/or strengthening my argument for the research project. Chapter 4 and the first half of Chapter 5 also need a lot of revision, but that seems to be more of reorganizing than rewriting. Chapters 1 and 2 will probably take at least one week each to revise. Chapters 4 & 5 will probably take a week.
What about Chapter 3?
My most embarrassing mistake was here. In February, I changed the verb tenses in Chapter 3 so it read more like a descriptive process narrative than a proposal. Those changes were saved on Dropbox on one computer. I then made content changes a few days later on my flash drive on another computer. When I saved those new changes on Dropbox, it saved over the previous version with all the grammar changes. That was the last time I looked at Chapter 3 for revisions, unfortunately and embarrassingly. Making those grammar changes were tedious, but I must repeat the tedium again. Ugh!
How does this change your original revision plans?
Yes, well I foolishly thought my committee would suggest a few minor changes. I thought this would take a week or two and then I would spend the rest of June checking and double-checking the format according to APA and the Graduate College template requirements, which is probably more tedious than checking the grammar in Chapter 3.
Now it appears that May and June will be too tedious for one person to bear (I lightly jest), so I am now more seriously considering to hire a proofreader for APA and the template. This will afford me more time to make better revisions to the content and organization of the paper.
Do you recommend others to follow your path?
Not really. One reason is that it's hard to follow most PhD candidates' paths because the situations and contexts are different. Even if someone had the same dissertation committee and a similar dissertation as mine, that candidate's writing and revising strategies may completely differ from mine.
Will you be able to get it done in time?
Yes, I am not worried about that. I am looking forward to not having to worry about it anymore. That is in August.
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Saturday, May 3, 2014
The Defense
This blog was titled "The Road to My Dissertation Defense" until I successfully defended my dissertation yesterday, but I am far from done. The purpose of this post to share my 3-day emotional ride before, during, and after the defense. For your reference, I defended on Friday, May 2nd from 10am to 12pm.
The Two Days Before
On Wednesday, my employer provided me the opportunity to practice my dissertation defense presentation with my colleagues. I started the day in a good and lighthearted mood. Because I was surrounded by supportive colleagues, the practice or "rehearsal" went well, and I left it feeling even more confident than when I started. The rest of the day on Wednesday went smoothly with little worry about the defense.
Thursday was a different story. Although I wasn't consciously worried about my defense, I didn't sleep well. I didn't think it was my nerves that prevented a good sleep. I thought it was more the weather, which was rainy and colder than average. It was more likely the pollen, which gets pretty bad around this time of year. Many people I knew in Iowa City and Cedar Rapids were suffering from colds and/or allergies. I thought a cold may dampen my defense, but it won't prevent me from defending well. I was determined to get a better night sleep. I feel asleep early and quickly.
Friday, 4am - 10am
Unfortunately for me, I woke up at 4am worrying more about my job than my dissertation defense. The atmosphere at my place of employment has been quite tense this week. I believe this is because the semester is winding down and the anxiety of the teachers and students feeds off on everyone else. Additionally, our department has been hosting big year-end events at least once a week. This drama will end with our last event on May 16.
Sometime between 5:00 and 6:30, I managed to get a little bit of sleep. I only realized this when I woke from dreaming. My dreams were not anxiety dreams, which resembled The Grand Budapest Hotel, so I was sleepily entertained.
I officially awoke at 6:30. My anxiety probably made me feel more alert than the previous morning. The anxiety was most about the unknown as I had no idea what was coming, and I did not bother anticipating any of the committee's questions. As the time drew closer to 10am, my anxiety turned into excitement as in "I'm finally getting this done" and to borrow from Phil Collins, "I've been waiting for this moment for all my life..in Iowa City."
Listening to Chris Joss' album You've Been Spiked, I calmly drove to the university with under an hour left. I got a good parking spot in the parking garage, and I had plenty of time to make sure my paperwork was in order, to buy some bottled water for the committee, and to set up the room including food, drink, and technology. I was thankful that several of my colleagues attended to support my defense. Their presence made it easier, especially when I saw nodding, which I think meant I was answering appropriately.
The Defense
Although I believe I handled the defense well, there were times in which I had periods of extreme anxiety based on a committee member's interpretation or misreading of my dissertation. None of these were too bad, but I panicked internally more than I needed to. I blame my adrenalin. This unnecessary stress is perhaps the main cause of my emotional exhaustion immediately following the defense.
My emotions also differed for each committee member who was asking questions or providing feedback. I am aware they were playing roles with how to approach or attack my defense, and I hope I responded appropriately. I tried to stay good-humored all the way through. Compliments were also a necessary breath of fresh air or burst of sunshine.
Friday, 12pm - 2pm
After the defense and all the committee members left with their congratulations, I felt wiped out but not relieved. This defense was scheduled earlier than usual in the process, so I still have a lot of revision to do. For the first hour, my mind raced on how to make all these revisions in the next seven weeks. I wandered around downtown Iowa City looking for food, but my mind was often distracted by dwelling on a revision plan.
Back at home for the second hour, I had to coach myself to calm down and to take a break. Earlier, I had promised to do no work for the rest of the weekend. But I felt guilty because I didn't do too much with my dissertation for the past two weeks, after I submitted the dissertation to them. To relieve myself of some anxiety, I wrote out a revision timetable to convince myself that I could get it done. However, I was not too happy with the first draft of my timetable.
Friday, 2pm - 6pm
I had the opportunity to go back to work and join in a celebratory event for two teachers associated with our department, but I felt like the reminder of work would cause work-related stress to replace dissertation-related stress. I need a healthy distraction, an escape. My daughter provided the best suggestion, "Let's go on an explorer trip." So my daughter and I convinced my wife to join us on a sunny afternoon hike through Hickory Hill. Walking has always been the best stress relief for me, and walking through the woods is even better. We took a long, long walk through the woods. And my daughter was showing us how much she has been learning and growing since the last time we walked through the woods about a month ago. My mood had completely changed.
After our walk, we drove straight to a local pizza place for dinner that the whole family enjoys. And we had a stress-free dinner with great pizza and excellent service. As I was leaving the building, I was surprised at how many strangers were smiling at me as they walked (and even drove) past me. I know it was probably the sunny and warmer weather, but I felt like I had a post-defense glow.
The afternoon ended with lots of love and support from friends, family, and colleagues on social media. Their emotions finally overtook the stressful emotions that built up for and welled up in the defense. It was happy, but not an ending.
In my next post, I will describe more about how I got to this point through writing and revising, and why I need to revise more than the average person who defends successfully.
The Two Days Before
On Wednesday, my employer provided me the opportunity to practice my dissertation defense presentation with my colleagues. I started the day in a good and lighthearted mood. Because I was surrounded by supportive colleagues, the practice or "rehearsal" went well, and I left it feeling even more confident than when I started. The rest of the day on Wednesday went smoothly with little worry about the defense.
Thursday was a different story. Although I wasn't consciously worried about my defense, I didn't sleep well. I didn't think it was my nerves that prevented a good sleep. I thought it was more the weather, which was rainy and colder than average. It was more likely the pollen, which gets pretty bad around this time of year. Many people I knew in Iowa City and Cedar Rapids were suffering from colds and/or allergies. I thought a cold may dampen my defense, but it won't prevent me from defending well. I was determined to get a better night sleep. I feel asleep early and quickly.
Friday, 4am - 10am
Unfortunately for me, I woke up at 4am worrying more about my job than my dissertation defense. The atmosphere at my place of employment has been quite tense this week. I believe this is because the semester is winding down and the anxiety of the teachers and students feeds off on everyone else. Additionally, our department has been hosting big year-end events at least once a week. This drama will end with our last event on May 16.
Sometime between 5:00 and 6:30, I managed to get a little bit of sleep. I only realized this when I woke from dreaming. My dreams were not anxiety dreams, which resembled The Grand Budapest Hotel, so I was sleepily entertained.
I officially awoke at 6:30. My anxiety probably made me feel more alert than the previous morning. The anxiety was most about the unknown as I had no idea what was coming, and I did not bother anticipating any of the committee's questions. As the time drew closer to 10am, my anxiety turned into excitement as in "I'm finally getting this done" and to borrow from Phil Collins, "I've been waiting for this moment for all my life..in Iowa City."
Listening to Chris Joss' album You've Been Spiked, I calmly drove to the university with under an hour left. I got a good parking spot in the parking garage, and I had plenty of time to make sure my paperwork was in order, to buy some bottled water for the committee, and to set up the room including food, drink, and technology. I was thankful that several of my colleagues attended to support my defense. Their presence made it easier, especially when I saw nodding, which I think meant I was answering appropriately.
The Defense
Although I believe I handled the defense well, there were times in which I had periods of extreme anxiety based on a committee member's interpretation or misreading of my dissertation. None of these were too bad, but I panicked internally more than I needed to. I blame my adrenalin. This unnecessary stress is perhaps the main cause of my emotional exhaustion immediately following the defense.
My emotions also differed for each committee member who was asking questions or providing feedback. I am aware they were playing roles with how to approach or attack my defense, and I hope I responded appropriately. I tried to stay good-humored all the way through. Compliments were also a necessary breath of fresh air or burst of sunshine.
Friday, 12pm - 2pm
After the defense and all the committee members left with their congratulations, I felt wiped out but not relieved. This defense was scheduled earlier than usual in the process, so I still have a lot of revision to do. For the first hour, my mind raced on how to make all these revisions in the next seven weeks. I wandered around downtown Iowa City looking for food, but my mind was often distracted by dwelling on a revision plan.
Back at home for the second hour, I had to coach myself to calm down and to take a break. Earlier, I had promised to do no work for the rest of the weekend. But I felt guilty because I didn't do too much with my dissertation for the past two weeks, after I submitted the dissertation to them. To relieve myself of some anxiety, I wrote out a revision timetable to convince myself that I could get it done. However, I was not too happy with the first draft of my timetable.
Friday, 2pm - 6pm
I had the opportunity to go back to work and join in a celebratory event for two teachers associated with our department, but I felt like the reminder of work would cause work-related stress to replace dissertation-related stress. I need a healthy distraction, an escape. My daughter provided the best suggestion, "Let's go on an explorer trip." So my daughter and I convinced my wife to join us on a sunny afternoon hike through Hickory Hill. Walking has always been the best stress relief for me, and walking through the woods is even better. We took a long, long walk through the woods. And my daughter was showing us how much she has been learning and growing since the last time we walked through the woods about a month ago. My mood had completely changed.
After our walk, we drove straight to a local pizza place for dinner that the whole family enjoys. And we had a stress-free dinner with great pizza and excellent service. As I was leaving the building, I was surprised at how many strangers were smiling at me as they walked (and even drove) past me. I know it was probably the sunny and warmer weather, but I felt like I had a post-defense glow.
The afternoon ended with lots of love and support from friends, family, and colleagues on social media. Their emotions finally overtook the stressful emotions that built up for and welled up in the defense. It was happy, but not an ending.
In my next post, I will describe more about how I got to this point through writing and revising, and why I need to revise more than the average person who defends successfully.
Sunday, February 23, 2014
Chapters 4 and 5
This past Wednesday, I met with the co-chairs of my dissertation committee about Chapter 4 and possibly graduating this May. It was surprise to me that they suggested that Chapter 4 could be split into two chapters, thus making my study a six-chapter dissertation. For the next month, my co-chairs will read through my 102-page chapter to see if it would be better represented in two chapters. The reasoning for two chapters, besides the length, is that it has two major parts. The first part reports the shared patterns across the multiple cases and the unique findings of the single cases. The second part ties these findings to one model and one of the acculturation theories from the literature. The end result is a new model that I created.
After discussing my concerns about my current revisions to Chapter 4, I found it much easier to complete my first round of revisions yesterday. I had a list of 19 revisions to make, but I decided against most of them that suggested expansion and collecting more literature. I will save those suggestions for future papers associated with the dissertation. So yesterday I completed my first round of revisions and my second draft of Chapter 4. I will wait to hear from my co-chairs next month to begin the third draft of Chapter 4 and perhaps creating Chapter 5 out of a significant portion of Chapter 4.
For now, I will continue as if Chapter 5 is the final chapter. March is dedicated to writing and revising Chapter 5. I will have less free time compared to February, which granted me more time than I allotted for Chapter 4 thanks mostly to the harsh winter weather. In March, I will have three weekends partially or wholly taken up by conferences. And it is the weekends when I make the most progress in terms of writing. Fortunately, Chapter 5 will only be about 1/3 of the length of Chapter 4.
As for graduation, I doubt that I will graduate this May. I have to apply for my degree by Thursday this week and submit the first draft my whole dissertation to the Graduate College by the end of March. I could do both, but I would be doing so without any feedback and I would be in a rush. These three conferences in March make it more hectic as well.
What makes graduating in May most difficult is to gather my dissertation committee before the Graduate College's deadline for the final draft in early May. I would have to assume that my committee would request no major revisions so I could turn it in within a week or two. If I didn't have a full-time job, this would not concern me. However, I work in another institution of higher education that shares a similar academic calendar as the University of Iowa, so I will be facing crunch time at the same time in both institutions as the spring semester winds down.
After March and my next meeting with my co-chairs, I plan on revising all the chapters in April. The biggest revision may be turning Chapter 4 into two chapters. If that is not the case, I am sure that my co-chairs will still have some major suggestions for revising Chapter 4 anyway. I plan to dedicate at least half the month on this. The other half will be spent on revising the other chapters, so I will be ready to defend in early May.
In March, I will be sending out a Doodle poll as part of my request for a dissertation defense in early May. Sometime in the first half of April, I will send my committee the current drafts of all my chapters. I feel mostly ready to defend Chapters one through four, and I look forward to writing Chapter 5 very much. I am certain that I will feel ready to defend Chapter 5 by late March.
All this means I will most likely not be able to graduate in May. Instead I will apply for my doctoral degree in June to graduate in the summer. With my defense behind me, I will have more time to make final revisions and correctly format the dissertation. For a summer graduation, the Graduate College needs my first draft in early July and my last in late July. However, I won't be able to walk in the commencement ceremony until December, which is all right by me.
After discussing my concerns about my current revisions to Chapter 4, I found it much easier to complete my first round of revisions yesterday. I had a list of 19 revisions to make, but I decided against most of them that suggested expansion and collecting more literature. I will save those suggestions for future papers associated with the dissertation. So yesterday I completed my first round of revisions and my second draft of Chapter 4. I will wait to hear from my co-chairs next month to begin the third draft of Chapter 4 and perhaps creating Chapter 5 out of a significant portion of Chapter 4.
For now, I will continue as if Chapter 5 is the final chapter. March is dedicated to writing and revising Chapter 5. I will have less free time compared to February, which granted me more time than I allotted for Chapter 4 thanks mostly to the harsh winter weather. In March, I will have three weekends partially or wholly taken up by conferences. And it is the weekends when I make the most progress in terms of writing. Fortunately, Chapter 5 will only be about 1/3 of the length of Chapter 4.
As for graduation, I doubt that I will graduate this May. I have to apply for my degree by Thursday this week and submit the first draft my whole dissertation to the Graduate College by the end of March. I could do both, but I would be doing so without any feedback and I would be in a rush. These three conferences in March make it more hectic as well.
What makes graduating in May most difficult is to gather my dissertation committee before the Graduate College's deadline for the final draft in early May. I would have to assume that my committee would request no major revisions so I could turn it in within a week or two. If I didn't have a full-time job, this would not concern me. However, I work in another institution of higher education that shares a similar academic calendar as the University of Iowa, so I will be facing crunch time at the same time in both institutions as the spring semester winds down.
After March and my next meeting with my co-chairs, I plan on revising all the chapters in April. The biggest revision may be turning Chapter 4 into two chapters. If that is not the case, I am sure that my co-chairs will still have some major suggestions for revising Chapter 4 anyway. I plan to dedicate at least half the month on this. The other half will be spent on revising the other chapters, so I will be ready to defend in early May.
In March, I will be sending out a Doodle poll as part of my request for a dissertation defense in early May. Sometime in the first half of April, I will send my committee the current drafts of all my chapters. I feel mostly ready to defend Chapters one through four, and I look forward to writing Chapter 5 very much. I am certain that I will feel ready to defend Chapter 5 by late March.
All this means I will most likely not be able to graduate in May. Instead I will apply for my doctoral degree in June to graduate in the summer. With my defense behind me, I will have more time to make final revisions and correctly format the dissertation. For a summer graduation, the Graduate College needs my first draft in early July and my last in late July. However, I won't be able to walk in the commencement ceremony until December, which is all right by me.
Tuesday, February 11, 2014
Analysis Paralysis
As an MA student over 10 years ago, I first encountered and experienced the phenomenon known as analysis paralysis, which can prevent a decisive action to take place. I was trying to pick a topic for my first graduate thesis paper, and I was given no restrictions on the topic except that it had to be in my field. I flailed around for about 2 weeks before I picked a topic based on a list of hot research topics provided by one of the professional teaching organizations in my field.
I did not like the feeling of knowing the range but not have a strong passionate feeling for one particular area. I did not have one burning question that I wanted to answer through research. My MA experience taught me to keep abreast of the research trends to be more aware of what the field is interested. Before I took on the persona of a researcher, I thought that that approach was not conducive for innovation. I believed that the need for research should arrive from practice. In my field, it was the practice of teaching. I believe now that many teachers still hold this feeling. What good is research if it cannot be (inspired from or) applied to the classroom? That question is the worm can opener of questions in education research.
Now as a PhD candidate with experience enough to navigate around the trap of analysis paralysis, I have found myself the closest to that phenomenon since I was an MA student. With the help of my dissertation committee, and especially my co-chairs, I was able to avoid analysis paralysis during my data analysis phase. I saw the temptation to investigate areas that did not directly answer my research questions, but I resisted. Now that the first draft of Chapter 4 is complete and I have a new model that arose from the patterns that emerged from the data, I felt like I avoided the trap. However, revising Chapter 4 brings a deluge of self-doubt. After reviewing my first draft of Chapter 4, I start asking myself questions:
At this point, I feel like a part of Chapter 5 is writing itself. The part I'm referring to is the about the ideas for future research. At this point, I feel like this section would be limitless. While I was analyzing my data before writing Chapter 4, I reserved a spot for ideas for future research. I didn't believe these ideas would continue to flow (faster) during and after writing my first draft. Is this a blessing or a curse to have a flood of future research ideas? Or is it a sign of obsessive-compulsive disorder, which is a disorder that seems to thrive in doing research? Or is it a sign that I need my life back? Or is it a sign that I need a vacation? To me, the last two questions seem like a form of quitting or abandoning my research interests. But they do seem to drive everybody crazy except me.
I have a meeting with my co-chairs next week, so I hope that this meeting will help clear my head and re-focus my direction. In conclusion, this is what it feels like to be on the verge of analysis paralysis after feeling like I avoided it earlier in the research process.
I did not like the feeling of knowing the range but not have a strong passionate feeling for one particular area. I did not have one burning question that I wanted to answer through research. My MA experience taught me to keep abreast of the research trends to be more aware of what the field is interested. Before I took on the persona of a researcher, I thought that that approach was not conducive for innovation. I believed that the need for research should arrive from practice. In my field, it was the practice of teaching. I believe now that many teachers still hold this feeling. What good is research if it cannot be (inspired from or) applied to the classroom? That question is the worm can opener of questions in education research.
Now as a PhD candidate with experience enough to navigate around the trap of analysis paralysis, I have found myself the closest to that phenomenon since I was an MA student. With the help of my dissertation committee, and especially my co-chairs, I was able to avoid analysis paralysis during my data analysis phase. I saw the temptation to investigate areas that did not directly answer my research questions, but I resisted. Now that the first draft of Chapter 4 is complete and I have a new model that arose from the patterns that emerged from the data, I felt like I avoided the trap. However, revising Chapter 4 brings a deluge of self-doubt. After reviewing my first draft of Chapter 4, I start asking myself questions:
- Is there enough evidence to make this claim?
- Should I add well-known theories to support my grounded theory post-hoc?
- Why did I ignore some literature in Chapter 2 that would have directed me down another (better?) path of analysis?
- For qualitative research, how conservative should I be in making claims versus making assumptions?
At this point, I feel like a part of Chapter 5 is writing itself. The part I'm referring to is the about the ideas for future research. At this point, I feel like this section would be limitless. While I was analyzing my data before writing Chapter 4, I reserved a spot for ideas for future research. I didn't believe these ideas would continue to flow (faster) during and after writing my first draft. Is this a blessing or a curse to have a flood of future research ideas? Or is it a sign of obsessive-compulsive disorder, which is a disorder that seems to thrive in doing research? Or is it a sign that I need my life back? Or is it a sign that I need a vacation? To me, the last two questions seem like a form of quitting or abandoning my research interests. But they do seem to drive everybody crazy except me.
I have a meeting with my co-chairs next week, so I hope that this meeting will help clear my head and re-focus my direction. In conclusion, this is what it feels like to be on the verge of analysis paralysis after feeling like I avoided it earlier in the research process.
Saturday, January 18, 2014
Revisiting Chapter 1
Upon having my research proposal accepted back in March 2013, it was suggested that I concurrently revise Chapters 1 and 3 while I collected and analyzed my data. Although I took the suggestion for revising Chapter 3 as that made the most sense to me, I held off on revising Chapter 1 until now. I believe that revising Chapter 1 after writing the first draft of Chapter 4 is more beneficial because that process will better help me connect Chapters 1 and 4 when it is time to write Chapter 5.
Today is the day that I finally revisited Chapter 1, and I did this by first listening to my research proposal, which I recorded on my Macbook Pro using Garageband. I have to admit that the sound quality of the recording was superb being that my computer was on the other side of the meeting room from most of the committee members. Sadly, this has been my best use of Garageband.
I remember that my co-chairs recommended me to listen through the proposal about a month after the meeting, but I was not mentally prepared for that. I took notes on the most vital elements concerning participant selection and data collection to begin the process, so I did not have an urgent need to listen to that meeting, which now seems less painful than I remembered it to be. All I remembered was that I would need to listen to the recording once it came time to revise Chapter 1.
A mix of emotions hit me while listening through this proposal. After the initial feeling of discomfort, I felt delighted because most of the sticky points in the first half of the meeting have already been resolved. Most of the difficult issues were about participant selection, a process that has come and gone long ago. I think what made this part of the proposal difficult was that I had more confidence than my committee members since I was unable to show enough evidence of participants.
Another eye-opening moment was learning about how stubborn I was. Even though I took much of their advice, I did not convey this to them. I should have said something like, "Thank you. I understand your point, and I will make the changes as you suggest." For some items, I had a high degree of uncertainty, but I did not want to take all of their suggestions, especially because some of them conflicted with earlier suggestions given by my co-chairs.
In retrospect, I am glad I was stubborn with a few points, but I should have acknowledged that my committee's advice was helpful for the many other points. I also believe I was a different person at the time because my anxiety of the research proposal may have been eclipsed by the anxiety of being on the market and on the cusp of getting hired. I survived.
While I was listening to the research proposal meeting, I took notes on all suggestions for change concerning Chapter 1. I was surprised that the suggestions were fewer than I remember. However, there was one important suggestion that is contentious because there was a disagreement between my co-chairs and the rest of the committee. And most of this disagreement occurred when my co-chairs were not present at that time of the meeting. I know my co-chairs would like me to disregard most of this suggestion, but I need to confirm if I should disregard most or all of the suggestion. If it is all, it would make a far easier revision of Chapter 1.
There were a few surprising elements in the research proposal that seem to end up in my favor. The first is that some members of my committee did not like a research question that I was unsure of when I wrote it. Now that my data analysis is (mostly) complete, I have found that I can take out this question. The other surprising element was that one of my committee members already had a clear idea for publishing my results that did not become very clear to me until I had completed my data collection. I will be writing more on this later, but this element has given me more confidence to pursue a certain publication path once this dissertation is completed.
My next step is now to revise Chapter 1, but I can't completely revise it without confirming a few items with my co-chairs. Depending on the input from my co-chairs, this revision to Chapter 1 could take as little as a day or as much as four days. Nonetheless, this revision is not as lengthy as I thought it might be.
Today is the day that I finally revisited Chapter 1, and I did this by first listening to my research proposal, which I recorded on my Macbook Pro using Garageband. I have to admit that the sound quality of the recording was superb being that my computer was on the other side of the meeting room from most of the committee members. Sadly, this has been my best use of Garageband.
I remember that my co-chairs recommended me to listen through the proposal about a month after the meeting, but I was not mentally prepared for that. I took notes on the most vital elements concerning participant selection and data collection to begin the process, so I did not have an urgent need to listen to that meeting, which now seems less painful than I remembered it to be. All I remembered was that I would need to listen to the recording once it came time to revise Chapter 1.
A mix of emotions hit me while listening through this proposal. After the initial feeling of discomfort, I felt delighted because most of the sticky points in the first half of the meeting have already been resolved. Most of the difficult issues were about participant selection, a process that has come and gone long ago. I think what made this part of the proposal difficult was that I had more confidence than my committee members since I was unable to show enough evidence of participants.
Another eye-opening moment was learning about how stubborn I was. Even though I took much of their advice, I did not convey this to them. I should have said something like, "Thank you. I understand your point, and I will make the changes as you suggest." For some items, I had a high degree of uncertainty, but I did not want to take all of their suggestions, especially because some of them conflicted with earlier suggestions given by my co-chairs.
In retrospect, I am glad I was stubborn with a few points, but I should have acknowledged that my committee's advice was helpful for the many other points. I also believe I was a different person at the time because my anxiety of the research proposal may have been eclipsed by the anxiety of being on the market and on the cusp of getting hired. I survived.
While I was listening to the research proposal meeting, I took notes on all suggestions for change concerning Chapter 1. I was surprised that the suggestions were fewer than I remember. However, there was one important suggestion that is contentious because there was a disagreement between my co-chairs and the rest of the committee. And most of this disagreement occurred when my co-chairs were not present at that time of the meeting. I know my co-chairs would like me to disregard most of this suggestion, but I need to confirm if I should disregard most or all of the suggestion. If it is all, it would make a far easier revision of Chapter 1.
There were a few surprising elements in the research proposal that seem to end up in my favor. The first is that some members of my committee did not like a research question that I was unsure of when I wrote it. Now that my data analysis is (mostly) complete, I have found that I can take out this question. The other surprising element was that one of my committee members already had a clear idea for publishing my results that did not become very clear to me until I had completed my data collection. I will be writing more on this later, but this element has given me more confidence to pursue a certain publication path once this dissertation is completed.
My next step is now to revise Chapter 1, but I can't completely revise it without confirming a few items with my co-chairs. Depending on the input from my co-chairs, this revision to Chapter 1 could take as little as a day or as much as four days. Nonetheless, this revision is not as lengthy as I thought it might be.
Sunday, January 12, 2014
A Much Needed Lull
After an intense two-week period of writing Chapter 4 of my dissertation followed by a flight back to Iowa and a two-day period of teacher development, I had time to work less intensely this weekend. My only goals were to review my participant summaries, to prepare my one-question feedback form on Qualtrics, and to contact my participants for the purposes of member checking. This took a total of three hours.
Although I enjoyed my time watching movies with the family, I also let Chapter 4 ferment in my brain. I was reflecting on the various ways to analyze my data. My literature review in Chapter 2 presented many alternatives for analyzing the data. I do not regret the two models I chose from the Chapter, but there was one theory that I wish I could have included because it was more up-to-date and more rigorously applied than one of the models. So the purpose of this blog post is to rationalize the choice of one model over another.
Recognition
The model I chose is more widely known to people outside the field of intercultural communication, and most members of my dissertation committee fit this audience description. This does not necessarily make it a better model, but it makes it more accessible.
Better Fit to Grounded Theory
The model I chose better fit my grounded theory because it was more flexible and its criticisms in the literature were mostly supported by the findings in my study. That said, the other model was created out of the criticism of the older model, yet it did not replace the older model. In this regard, I feel like using the newer model with my data set would be a next step or another paper.
Less Change to Research Questions
If I had chosen the newer model, I would need to reframe my research purpose and questions. In this regard, the newer model could have replaced my grounded theory, but I could not have predicted as the patterns did not emerge until I completed my data analysis. This is one reason that I would like to write another paper using the newer model with my data set. Perhaps I will discover that this paper is stronger than my dissertation.
Also, I had chosen the newer model, my argument for conducting this study would move even further away from second language teacher education and closer to intercultural communication, the former of which was more emphasized in my graduate studies. I am in the College of Education, so I need to and I want to keep my study more relevant to second language teacher education. I also want to demonstrate the importance of intercultural communication and sociocultural anthropology in second language teacher education.
Other Models and Theories
Chapter 2 reviewed other models and theories that I could have used, but they were not as strong as the ones I chose and the third alternative I mentioned above. They do not arrive to "bigger picture" conclusions of second language teacher education. For example, my findings provide some evidence for proposed classifications in cross-cultural training research, but this argument takes away from the main idea of my study. Perhaps it could be included in Chapter 5.
Looking back, Chapter 4 is about 100 pages that builds my grounded theory on two models. I believe that including any other models or theories would add more content but would distract from answering my research questions. What Chapter 2 has shown me is it has provided me various ways of analyzing my data set for different audiences and publications. However, I do not want to continue publishing research with a data set that grows older and perhaps less relevant through time. Once I complete my dissertation, I may only want to spend another year or two before I move on to collecting more data or moving on to another line of research. I will be giving this process more thought when I get closer to wrapping up my dissertation.
Although I enjoyed my time watching movies with the family, I also let Chapter 4 ferment in my brain. I was reflecting on the various ways to analyze my data. My literature review in Chapter 2 presented many alternatives for analyzing the data. I do not regret the two models I chose from the Chapter, but there was one theory that I wish I could have included because it was more up-to-date and more rigorously applied than one of the models. So the purpose of this blog post is to rationalize the choice of one model over another.
Recognition
The model I chose is more widely known to people outside the field of intercultural communication, and most members of my dissertation committee fit this audience description. This does not necessarily make it a better model, but it makes it more accessible.
Better Fit to Grounded Theory
The model I chose better fit my grounded theory because it was more flexible and its criticisms in the literature were mostly supported by the findings in my study. That said, the other model was created out of the criticism of the older model, yet it did not replace the older model. In this regard, I feel like using the newer model with my data set would be a next step or another paper.
Less Change to Research Questions
If I had chosen the newer model, I would need to reframe my research purpose and questions. In this regard, the newer model could have replaced my grounded theory, but I could not have predicted as the patterns did not emerge until I completed my data analysis. This is one reason that I would like to write another paper using the newer model with my data set. Perhaps I will discover that this paper is stronger than my dissertation.
Also, I had chosen the newer model, my argument for conducting this study would move even further away from second language teacher education and closer to intercultural communication, the former of which was more emphasized in my graduate studies. I am in the College of Education, so I need to and I want to keep my study more relevant to second language teacher education. I also want to demonstrate the importance of intercultural communication and sociocultural anthropology in second language teacher education.
Other Models and Theories
Chapter 2 reviewed other models and theories that I could have used, but they were not as strong as the ones I chose and the third alternative I mentioned above. They do not arrive to "bigger picture" conclusions of second language teacher education. For example, my findings provide some evidence for proposed classifications in cross-cultural training research, but this argument takes away from the main idea of my study. Perhaps it could be included in Chapter 5.
Looking back, Chapter 4 is about 100 pages that builds my grounded theory on two models. I believe that including any other models or theories would add more content but would distract from answering my research questions. What Chapter 2 has shown me is it has provided me various ways of analyzing my data set for different audiences and publications. However, I do not want to continue publishing research with a data set that grows older and perhaps less relevant through time. Once I complete my dissertation, I may only want to spend another year or two before I move on to collecting more data or moving on to another line of research. I will be giving this process more thought when I get closer to wrapping up my dissertation.
Sunday, January 5, 2014
Finishing Chapter 4, Draft 1
Yesterday, I came to the most painful part of writing Chapter 4: tying up the loose ends and deciding if some data should go unreported. As I wrote about the more minor points, I continued to ask myself, "Is this important enough to include in the Chapter?" There are times when I say maybe and others when I say no. I keep the "maybe" points in to get my co-chairs point of view. However, I predict that they will tell me to throw them out, but I'm not certain enough.
Once I got beyond that part, I was able to finish the last section and write the conclusion to the Chapter. I missed my arbitrary page-limit goal by only 3 pages, but I know that I can easily add 3 pages as I noted to myself to flesh out the introduction. Because I'm exhausted, I left the introduction bare bones and it does not reflect what I discovered through the writing process. With my conclusion better written than the introduction, I know that I need to revise the introduction when the time comes to Chapter 4, draft 2.
I have decided to leave Chapter 4 alone for the next week or two. I've been more intimate with Chapter 4 than anything else while I was "vacationing" in Florida, so it's time that I take a break. Incidentally, I finished the first draft with exactly 24 hours remaining in Florida, but I'm a bit too exhausted to celebrate...for now.
Besides exhaustion, how do I feel? I feel that I wrote small islands of good research writing surrounded by an ocean of poor writing with incomplete arguments, positions, or evidence. One reason for these incomplete arguments is that I don't have my full arsenal of literature with me because I'm "on vacation." Another reason is that I gave enough for the beginning of an argument or position, so I could flesh it out later. Like I wrote in the earlier post, there may be some arguments or positions that I may need to remove completely, so I did not want to spend too much time composing well-formed arguments and positions for every point.
I'm also keenly aware of the sentences and paragraphs that are wholly poor reasoning. I changed the font color in the areas to red so I could later decide if that reasoning needs to be either reworked or removed. In those areas, I feel like I was rushing to conclusions and/or making points that may be better made in Chapter 5.
There is one very weak area in my data analysis and Chapter 4 because there is one participant in my study who may be going through a major stage of his adjustment process during the time I was composing Chapter 4. I hope to hear from him after I send him my summary of his experiences and observations as part of the member check.
The member check is the next step in my dissertation process. The responses from my participants will help better inform me when revising Chapter 4, especially the one participant I mentioned in the previous paragraph. Another major step is learning how my colleague coded my data using my themes. She may reveal parts that I either overlooked or misinterpreted. If this is so, my corrections in the revision will definitely improve the quality of the chapter.
I do not expect to hear from my participants about their member checks or from my colleague about her coding procedures for at least a month. In the meantime, I will be making smaller revisions to Chapter 4.
Once I return to Iowa tomorrow, I plan to send my co-chairs my Chapter 4 outline, my conclusion, and a graphic representation of part of my grounded theory. Their input will also greatly affect how I approach the first revision of Chapter 4. I foresee the months of January and February on Chapter 4 revision and Chapter 5 pre-wrtiting.
Once I got beyond that part, I was able to finish the last section and write the conclusion to the Chapter. I missed my arbitrary page-limit goal by only 3 pages, but I know that I can easily add 3 pages as I noted to myself to flesh out the introduction. Because I'm exhausted, I left the introduction bare bones and it does not reflect what I discovered through the writing process. With my conclusion better written than the introduction, I know that I need to revise the introduction when the time comes to Chapter 4, draft 2.
I have decided to leave Chapter 4 alone for the next week or two. I've been more intimate with Chapter 4 than anything else while I was "vacationing" in Florida, so it's time that I take a break. Incidentally, I finished the first draft with exactly 24 hours remaining in Florida, but I'm a bit too exhausted to celebrate...for now.
Besides exhaustion, how do I feel? I feel that I wrote small islands of good research writing surrounded by an ocean of poor writing with incomplete arguments, positions, or evidence. One reason for these incomplete arguments is that I don't have my full arsenal of literature with me because I'm "on vacation." Another reason is that I gave enough for the beginning of an argument or position, so I could flesh it out later. Like I wrote in the earlier post, there may be some arguments or positions that I may need to remove completely, so I did not want to spend too much time composing well-formed arguments and positions for every point.
I'm also keenly aware of the sentences and paragraphs that are wholly poor reasoning. I changed the font color in the areas to red so I could later decide if that reasoning needs to be either reworked or removed. In those areas, I feel like I was rushing to conclusions and/or making points that may be better made in Chapter 5.
There is one very weak area in my data analysis and Chapter 4 because there is one participant in my study who may be going through a major stage of his adjustment process during the time I was composing Chapter 4. I hope to hear from him after I send him my summary of his experiences and observations as part of the member check.
The member check is the next step in my dissertation process. The responses from my participants will help better inform me when revising Chapter 4, especially the one participant I mentioned in the previous paragraph. Another major step is learning how my colleague coded my data using my themes. She may reveal parts that I either overlooked or misinterpreted. If this is so, my corrections in the revision will definitely improve the quality of the chapter.
I do not expect to hear from my participants about their member checks or from my colleague about her coding procedures for at least a month. In the meantime, I will be making smaller revisions to Chapter 4.
Once I return to Iowa tomorrow, I plan to send my co-chairs my Chapter 4 outline, my conclusion, and a graphic representation of part of my grounded theory. Their input will also greatly affect how I approach the first revision of Chapter 4. I foresee the months of January and February on Chapter 4 revision and Chapter 5 pre-wrtiting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)