![[personal profile]](http://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Coding and Writing
Apr. 1st, 2016 09:35 pmWhen people say that it's all a matter of doing in order to get to the stage of planning, well, anything in a thesis, it really is the case. I suppose I never really believed it. But now i'm actually trying to code my interview transcripts - not all of it, entirely, and I'm not doing a grounded coding, but a thematic coding.
On my attempt to pull out data on the 'theme' of technology, since my vague idea of chapters was
1. Production of knowledge
2. technological & scientific knowledge/practices
3. social interactions
it sort of never really came together. I kept getting data on technology from all over the place in one interview, and looking at it in 'technological practices' didn't actually work.
But when i thought about koi, in the sense of a life-cycle. Using the construct of koi aquaculture and the impressions of particular stages of aquaculture i found within the data, I realised I could better formulate my thesis chapters in a more biological cycle.
1. Spawning/breeding practices
2. Culling
3. Growth
4. Biosecurity and Waters
When put under these broad chapters, it became less a thing about technology being answered for each part in a haphazard manner, but instead i could actually do a sort of chronology for each aspect, I believe.
I could actually see the possibility of tracing the development of biosecurity, for example. Or the development of culling techniques or reasons in one particular farm (Or with hobbyists). I would be able to trace these points in a much better way than in the more haphazard fashion.
Now I just have to pull in my data with theory to make a decent chapter on spawning. I have some scientific data on this, and some oral histories as well as other books that people have used before on Spawning techniques and behaviours. I should be able to do SOMEHTING analytical with this now! I feel actually confident about it.
So, people in the humanities - it really is a matter of doing. No one else can code for you - the coding is not the first level of analysis per se, but it's a way of looking at your data in a different way (maybe it's just a way of looking at it sideways) and when you do that, mayeb that allows you to get it coded in a different way so you can actually write somethng about it.
and writing about it? Really does help. I didn't realise it, but writing small amounts on a daily basis meant I was thinking about said data in a different way, a different light. Putting the thoughts and data down actually makes it easier to see.
Therefore if i actually put it in this way, I have at least four major technologies or practices that I can look at, and will allow me to trace various things out of .
Now it's just a matter of trying to get the damn theory in.
On my attempt to pull out data on the 'theme' of technology, since my vague idea of chapters was
1. Production of knowledge
2. technological & scientific knowledge/practices
3. social interactions
it sort of never really came together. I kept getting data on technology from all over the place in one interview, and looking at it in 'technological practices' didn't actually work.
But when i thought about koi, in the sense of a life-cycle. Using the construct of koi aquaculture and the impressions of particular stages of aquaculture i found within the data, I realised I could better formulate my thesis chapters in a more biological cycle.
1. Spawning/breeding practices
2. Culling
3. Growth
4. Biosecurity and Waters
When put under these broad chapters, it became less a thing about technology being answered for each part in a haphazard manner, but instead i could actually do a sort of chronology for each aspect, I believe.
I could actually see the possibility of tracing the development of biosecurity, for example. Or the development of culling techniques or reasons in one particular farm (Or with hobbyists). I would be able to trace these points in a much better way than in the more haphazard fashion.
Now I just have to pull in my data with theory to make a decent chapter on spawning. I have some scientific data on this, and some oral histories as well as other books that people have used before on Spawning techniques and behaviours. I should be able to do SOMEHTING analytical with this now! I feel actually confident about it.
So, people in the humanities - it really is a matter of doing. No one else can code for you - the coding is not the first level of analysis per se, but it's a way of looking at your data in a different way (maybe it's just a way of looking at it sideways) and when you do that, mayeb that allows you to get it coded in a different way so you can actually write somethng about it.
and writing about it? Really does help. I didn't realise it, but writing small amounts on a daily basis meant I was thinking about said data in a different way, a different light. Putting the thoughts and data down actually makes it easier to see.
Therefore if i actually put it in this way, I have at least four major technologies or practices that I can look at, and will allow me to trace various things out of .
Now it's just a matter of trying to get the damn theory in.
