My Thesis Is Not A Joke

I will be meeting my committee member very soon to talk with him about some nitty gritty details about my methods. I think he'll have a lot of things to say, especially about how I am going to "code" my study.

I have to pratically prepare a speech on: research questions, how to answer them (aka what methods used and how to code), theoretical framework and so on.

Before that I'm meeting with another professor to talk about gaining access to participants, plan a learning experience and find out timeline.

Then back to my thesis adviser to show her my meta-analysis (now looking really bare), outline, and ask her about theoretical framework.

So many things to do!!!!!

Is it going to be that hard?

I hope that the process can only get smoother from here.

Will be meeting with two really important professors in the next month in order to clarify some important method issues and quality of results.

The topic area and research question is very much fixed but now the next step is to figure out how to access and assess those data.

I will be talking to more people to find out their perspectives and see if I can learn anything from them.

Is qualitative really that controversial? Doesn't everything stem from interpretive standpoint? You basically EXPERIENCE something before you want to study more about it right?

And so why do so many people have so much problem with this paradigm? Isn't this all about understanding how people feel?

Must everything be quantified in order to be valid?

(Bizarre...)

February 17, 2005
11:20am

Submitted the Application.

Now all I have to do is pray.

Thank you A.

Wishing you all the best for your thesis. And thank you for your help and advice.

Moving forward!

Update #1

There are so many things to complete, too many deadlines.

I have to get ready a writeup soon for application. It's supposed to be short but the problem arose when you have so many insights and research to quote. So what to write and what not to write? I tried and managed to do a 2 and 1/8 page writeup. Trust me, it wasn't easy. I felt I could do my lit review there and then.

Also, I have to start writing the lit review outline. Previously what I thought was going into the lit review seemed more appropriate in the introduction section. This is good. It means that my lit review will not be overflowing. Tip for me: Focus on the main arguments and research done. Background and reason for research go into intro.

I also have to come up with a tentative timeline to show the committee that I can truly graduate in May 07. I almost suffered a heart attack when I saw what was proposed. Am I sure I can meet those deadlines? I don't know! But nevertheless, I will try!

I kept my committee updated, got to explain a few concepts to them. All done... Waiting for feedback. I added in a new component to my study as I felt that it will be more relevant to the program. They all also seemed to tie together. It means that I have more research to pursue and more readings to do. Yippee...

I don't know but I feel more comfortable seeing how the question sounds. It seemes to make sense now and it falls into one philosophical paradigm. And I am also able to formulate some subquestions as delimitation (Cresswell, 2004) for my study, so that I don't go overboard.

You know, when you are doing research, EVERYTHING IS INTERESTING.

But I must also remember, I AM NO WONDERWOMAN.

What's new... umm.....

Meetings.

Still reading O'Keefe (whenceforth, thou O'Keefe, wilt thou cease haunting my random thoughts?)

I organized my readings! Yeah!

Begin meta-analysis (???)

This is going to be fun.