Researcher's Notes: Your Journal

 

I was thinking whether or not to write on this topic, some might consider it too basic, instead that's what gave me motivation. We tend to ignore doing what we think is too basic.

Today's blog is about another version of blogging - writing your own research notes into your journal.

It's never too late to begin one whether you're a student who just entered college or if you're already at the year when you are about to begin your thesis writing.

I suggest getting a nice notebook, one you're comfortable with. I use an MS Word file linked to my MS Online account since I have chicken scratches masquerading as handwriting.

This becomes your journal or research notes. Name it, like, The Journal of Ronald Castillo or Castillo's Research Notes.

NOTE: Never share this special notebook to anyone. The thoughts you write there can and will become your future researches.

Jot down your observations, reflections every time you encounter a piece of news that's interesting to you. Mark the date and even time when you make an entry,

Just jot them down. No need to fret about composing your sentences. They can be phrases or short sentences or even a scribble of interconnected words (these can become conceptual maps!).

As you go on you will notice that your phrases become sentences.

Your terms become full ideas.

You begin to jot down puzzles and questions.

You begin to jot down possible answers.

You might even be able to find possible ways to prove your possible answer.

All these become building blocks of your future researches, for researches are works of proving ideas.

All these become building blocks for your publications, for publications are works of organizing and sharing your ideas.

Sometimes, you can even copy an entry in your journal and then refer to it in your thesis. I've seen published articles of social scientists who went on immersions, jotted their notes, and referred to these notes in their manuscript.

So, go and get your notebook and start making entries.

Check out our MTG card quote for today. See the quote at the bottom of the card.

Image copyrighted to Wizards of the Coast https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=571369

Logos: Relevance of '-logy' stuff

If you've ever watched Fullmetal Alchemist, you'll notice that Roy Mustang has a tool on his hand. A glove that has a symbol on the backhand part.

Here's an image of them gloves

Image from https://www.spotern.com/en/spot/tv/fullmetal-alchemist/65348/the-gloves-of-roy-mustang-in-fullmetal-alchemist

What's freaky is how the details of that symbol actually does reflect actual alchemical symbols, and reading the components of Mustang's gloves tell us that it IS about genereting and directing fire.

It's not about the drawing of a flame though. It's about the circle, the elemental triangle symbols (one of which is the code for fire) and the salamander (the elemental of fire).

On a different part of my life is me who plays a different version of Dungeons & Dragons called Mage: the Ascension where the setting is the real world and mages exist. In this world, nages are grouped into traditions, each specializing on a particular kind of magic. This specialization is cause through their PARADIGM, their frame or perspective at looking at the world.

For example, the mages which specialize in forces such as fire, water, lightning, etc., have a paradigm similar to the alchemists which use diagrams to shape the world. In comparison, the mages which specialize in mind magic use the perspective of "do" a meditative idea linking body and mind much like Buddhist monks and martial artists.

Among the nine are mages who specialize in the magic behind the magic. Those who understand the basic element of what constitutes doing what they do.

The last one sounded so abstract, right?

That brings us to our talk today.

We are usually studying a particular field and a specialization in that field. 

For example

• Political Science > Comparative Politics
• Political Science > Gender Politics
• Asian Studies > Southeast Asia
• Asian Studies > International Relations
• Economics > Macroeconomics 
• Economics > Business and Entrepreneurship

Note: Just to address technicalities, sometimes we have a field, then a track, then a specilization (Political Science > Comparative Politics > Social Movements)

Understanding this helps us give a pathway in our study track, and our eventual career paths.

This is quite concrete, in some way since it tells us what topics we focus on, where we are headed, what we do with knowledge. Just like the first two examples of mages that I mentioned above.

The third mage is puzzling though, and that is where we encounter the words which end with '-ogy.'

Methodology

Ontology

Epistemology

I listed them in degrees of abstractness. 

Methodology is the study of methods. We are familiar with it because we encounter it a lot in research and thesis writing. There are academics and researchers whose specialization is method instead of a specific topic.

In a way, ontology, has one leg in being concrete and the other in being abstract. It's the study of being. Beings can be quite abstract, you're a being, and God is a being, and humans are beings. Sometimes we are attempting to study stuff ontologically and yet we did not know that what we we're trying to do was an ontology. For example, when we argue on what being gay is, that's an ontological discussion.

We can insert phenomenology here as a another abstract thing which can relate to ontology. When we study migrants, we can focus on what makes a migrant a migrant (the being), but more often, part of being a migrant is the experience that they undergo or have undergone. Phenomenology is the study of experience. 

Finally, we have epistemology, and this is the study of knowledge itself. The study of how we know what we know, much like the third example of mages a while back who understand the magic behind the magic.

In the most basic sense, we know that we search for knowledge when we study. Epistemology gives us understanding of the process on how we gain knowledge, and even on the higher levels of understanding information.

This is best understood in sociological political science research, which is where I'm specializing now in my PhD studies here in Taiwan.

I enrolled in Research Theory of Ethnology, the class has lots of classic readings. We're required to read them all, we submit a summary every week, and we are required to participate in weekly discussions.

The spartan training supplements the content of the class, and it bears excellent fruit.

Ethnography is a method and a field of study which focuses on civilizations and cultures. That's my operational definition though (there's political issues in the definition).

Ethnology is an epistemology which provides pathways for ethnography to work.

The magic behind the magic. 

So, know what end you are trying to achieve, it will inform you what "-logy" you are doing. 

In research:

• It will help inform you of much more literature to enrich your study.
• It will help you craft your design.
• It will help you form your argument better.
• It will help you better understand your topic.

In academic life:

• Need I say more? It helps you study better.
• It gives you better understanding.
• It helps you review.
• It will give you mastery on the subject.
• It leads you from knowledge to wisdom.
• Need I say more?

In debates:

• It helps you understand the angles around the topic.
• It helps you strategize your argument.
• It helps you dismantle the opposing arguments.
• It makes you open to the truth if the opponent is making sense, making you the bigger person.
• It elevates debate to discourse.

So, how do we do epistemologies and thus gain access to the magic behind the magic of knowledge? There is an entire body of materials on epistemology. But here are practical stuff.

• You are doing it whenever you do reviews of related literatures.
• You are doing it when you focus on how a researcher did their method.
• You are doing it when you focus on how a researcher formulated their argument.
• You do it everytime you read this blog.
• You did it when you gave value to your 101 class (i.e. Psych 101, Econ 101, it's Political Science as a Profession or Pol 201 or Pol 3211 in political science at the University of Santo Tomas)
• You do it when you value the "intro to" classes.
• There are certain "minor" or general education classes (logic, rhetoric) which also help you epistemologize.
• You also do it when you read, listen, participate in pedagogical and co-curricular stuff. I.e. attending conferences, publishing, apprentice as a Research Assistant or Teaching Assistant.
• Read on updates regarding your discipline. These are usually in purely academic journals where the articles are about what's going on in the field rather than the specific topics.

Of course, I won't end without our Magic:the Gathering flavor text of the day. Check out the quote on this card.

Image Copyright to https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=442960

Speed Reading: My Strategies

Mind you, I used to be a slow reader since I like to enjoy fiction. This kind of clashes when I need to read non-fiction and then there's limited time since the readings are needed for class.

All of us students encounter tons of readings. Students of Political Science take this as a measure of pride. Hence, conversely, to balk from readings is in a way shameful.

But how do we deal with tons of readings, be agile in moving across multiple materials, be fast in consuming them, and consume them properly with comprehension?

I'd like to directly point out our MtG card for today below, check out the quote and think on it.

Know the readings, don't memorize them all, but strategically memorize and understand the key parts. This is one strategy.

Let's go further

Sparta

It was nice that on day one of one of our major subjects here in Taiwn, our professor Dr. Lev Nachman iterated one of the lessons I learned from Elle Woods in Legally Blonde 1. Divide and conquer the readings in groups.

If there's one reading, divide the outline, each member does a part, make quality notes, then discuss AS a group.  Voila! What could have consumed several hours in reading is consumed in a shorter time.

But what about the human component? You know, how can you trust group members to do quality?

I once thought that a Spartan attitude is the best, be strict, threaten to remove members who can't contribute.

But sometimes this isn't easy specially since these people are probably friends and classmates.

But truth is, the essence of Spartan training isn't simply about being strict. It's quality itself.

My group doesn't do notes, we discuss in a weekly basis on a regular schedule.

Anyone who can't, will of course not be able to contribute.  They're excused, but they also get nothing since they miss the discussion

Before, we had the official contingency that members take duplicate parts so that if one can't attend, then somebody else can cover.

But the thing is, the Spartan group is working well and everyone is seeing the results so much so that none wants to miss meetings and everyone does their part.

Quality over stress.

Hunt

It's officially called "gutting" strategy (thanks to my classmate, Marvin, for informing me of the name), I call it hunting. It's just one word, but this skill developed from training under Dr. Nachman, my professor in being an International PhD in Asia Pacific Studies, and also from Dr. Work, my professor in Research Theory of Ethnology.

Remember in a previous post, we have ACE-Fa from Dr. Work 

• Argument
• Conversation
• Evidence

Dr. Nachman had a similar albeit more detailed outline.  Here it included: variables, method, data (which in a way coincides with evidence), findings, and takeaway.

Let's have something tasty to better process. We have a nice delicious noodle dish in the Philippines called palabok. It's got rice noodles and a seafood sauce topped with (depending on the province) either bits of seafood like shrimp and squid or ground pork, but either way there's also pork crackling crumble on top. Nice right?  Relevance, the mix of toppings eventually became a name for people who add too much details on what they say eventually to the expression: "You say a lot of palabok!" to people who give long winded statements. In editorial jargon, we call this in English as "fluff." 

Relevance? The readings usually have a lot of fluff.

But if you begin the reading by hunting, you can skim to find what's needed and in a short time, consume the material.

So if you hunt, you are looking for WHAT and WHERE?

• Problem/Puzzle - usually at the introduction and/or abstract.
• The answer/argument - usually same location, also iterated in the conclusion.
• Conversation - RRL
• Method - you should know this by now
• Data - see previous bullet, but seriously, when we look for data, then tat means we're hunting for the evidences that the reading is using to prove the argument, so hunt based on this.
• Takeaway - look inside yourself 👀

Sniff and taste the blood, the sport of hunting will give you a nice prize at the end.

Ignore the bluff

We usually feel intimidated by the length/volume/breadth/number of the readings.

If you divided and conquered, multiple readings is dealt with.

If you hunt, you then ignore the number of pages of an article or book. Who cares, what you need are the actual gems that you're hunting for, and you know where they are. Bonus if the writer used signposts (i.e. My argument, this is because, evidenced by... - just samples).

In the end, you will realize that you understood the reading and didn't think of the page numbers.

Ignore the threat, it's a bluff. Chill and enjoy the hunt.

Photo Copyrighted to Wizards of the Coast, Inc., https://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=83133&type=card

Jargon, Method, Design

Matches

It’s quite possble that we can have brilliant ideas but the panel of experts to whom we submit a proposal find the proposal unacceptable and gives us a ton of, “why not do this instead.”

This can mean that either you’re encountering “reviewer 2” (there’s a current FB group now who makes fun of the personas of “reviewer number 2.”)

Or

The way the proposal was constructed did not easily convey the brilliance that was being communicated.

Let’s get the easier one out of the way first: grammar and composition.

• Make sure to have checked with Grammarly (even with the free one).
• Maker sure to double check using MS Word Editor (even if you used a paid version of Grammarly).
• Make sure to have someone else reread for you (you can make a mistake and not see it when you reread simply because you thought what you did was correct, so be humble and ask a friend to be critical and be thankful for critical comments).
• Make sure to reread since it’s you who wrote it and restating certainb parts or not should be your decision.

Now for the more adavanced: Jargon.

Jargon is the secret handshake of the discipline where you hope to be accepted as either a bachelor of, a master of, or a doctor of.

Each discipline has their own way of wording and saying things (note “wording” as using terms, and “saying” as way of composing sentences and even paragraphs). Each discipline also has their own writing style i.e. APA, MLA, Chicago (those are not just for citations).

Research also has its own nuances when it comes to communication.

There’s the design of the research (which is technical, like case study, phenomenology, hypothesis testing, descriiptive profiling) and the design of the manuscript (the organization of the manuscript content, which can be a bit creative but yet should be tempered logically).

Oftentimes, these should mix like a nicely chosen set of clothes in order to work well.

Take for example, using the phrase “to prove” is usually quantitative jargon specially if you are trying to etablish that your independent variable does affect the dependent variable.

This does not mean that qualitative does not prove. So, you also have to dig deep on what you are trying to prove.

Measure is also a word that tends to be quite quantitative. It’s going to be weird if you are describing the impact (i.e. Fragmented, unified, facilitated, corrected) and then you use the word measure when you are not even measuring (high, low). Again, what are you using the evidence for?

We talked about “beginning at the end” last week, and it’s a good thought also for today.

What are you trying to do?

So, make sure that your jargon, your method, and your design matches with what your envisioned purpose of the research is.

A larger purpose

Speaking of purpose, there's another end which should be considered when you think of why you are writing. Each of the three ranks of higher education produce an magnum opus (Trans. from Latin = Great Work," opus for short).

• Bachelors (undergrads) and the Masters (1st rank of postgrad) both produce their own thesis.
• Doctors (PhDs) write a dissertation. 

Here's a trivia. Universities are defined as a community of scholars. Individuals who produce knowledge.

The Bachelors produce knowledge by testing existing theories (I will consider that as a minimum, if you can produce the ones in the next rank, why not). 

Doctors produce knowledge by formulating theories and even laws within the discipline (I.e. Huntington's Theory on the Clash of Civilizations, Michel's Iron Law of Oligarchy).

Masters are in between, they can either test theory or create one.

How does this factor in on your research?

Knowing that you are either producing or testing theory helps you develop your review of literatures.

• It helps you in how to treat your theoretical framework and conceptual framework.
• It helps you in finding out what evidence (data) you need,
• It helps you determine what method and design to use in gathering and analyzing the evidence.
• It helps you know what jargon to use.
• It gives you a bigger purpose. Don't write for submission, write because you have something to say (as what I've said in Principles of Writing, and in the first post last October).

Just look at this link for inspiring examples so that you can have a perspective on why in the nine hells are you taking your degree. This is not to pressure, it's to inspire.

Also check out our MTG card for today below. It's Minamo School of Wizards, the Japanese MTG version of Hogwarts, nicely situated above a waterfall. Check out the quote in the card.

Photo credit to Wizards of the Coast, Inc.,    https://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=79179&type=card

Begin at the End

There was a nice discussion on differences on dependent variable treatment yesterday in Dr. Nachman's class where we talked about choosing dependent variables.

You see, dependent variables are the end half of an argument's equation.

Independent Variable (ID) -> Dependent Variable (DV)

The ID impacts on the DV,

      or the ID causes the DV... etc...

In quantitative research, you don't select sample cases based on the dependent variable for the reason that quantification usually means you are trying to prove the relationship that the ID cased or has an effect on the DV.

But in qualitative, you can sometimes make the sample choices based on the DV because you are not proving that the ID did impact on the DV but rather what you are trying to discover is on how.

But that's not why we are here today, I simply used that to introduce our topic. Begin with the end in mind (which in a way related to making choices based on DVs 😀 ).

What we've been focusing on in the past few weeks are things that help us write or help us begin to write, or even the ingredients that we can use as we do so.

For today we have these important life-research lessons, akin to my predilections on being practical and economic in any action that I do.

Esteemed educator and researcher Dr. Allan De Guzman speaks of the tenet - "When the why is clear, the how is easy."

So, keep that in mind as you begin to even think of writing. What's your end goal?

Let's further translate that here into practical samples.

Why write if the only goal is submit in class? There's a weirdness to this. Professors usually have "publishable" as the top quality for the highest scores for class papers.

Here's a scenario, we usually have insight or good manner of expressing ourselves or both. These things get us recognition on the potential of our work. But, are they journal ready?

That's our goal for today because it's sad that sometimes it's such an effort to revise after submission that papers with good potential already get pushed on the side and seldom get submitted,

Here are important strategies to note.

• What discipline or sub-discipline are you writing for? This will impact on several things that may need to be redone if you did not have this in mind.
• If you know the discipline, then you will know two things (or find out). 1. What journals do publish such material as you have in mind to write. 2. What's the writing style?
• Most disciplines have their own style. For example, most political science researches use APA, but political theory use Chicago (and usually footnote rather than parenthetical in-text citations).
• There's also another factor, sometimes the journal itself has a preferred citation style, so after you determine the discipline, look for your target journal.
• But how about if you get rejected and need to shift journals and the new journal has a different preferred style? That's where citation tools are useful. I checked with a prominent journal and even they say that people should not be doing manual method of writing bibliographies/references anymore. This is because if you need to shift, then all you will need to do is change the format of the tool and the entire list of references (along with the in-text) will be updated. Remember our last magic card, use the tools!
• TAKE NOTE THOUGH! I used the wording "writing style" awhile back on bullet 2. APA, Chicago, MLA... those are not just citation formats. They are Manuals of Style. The way they organize written text contain unique nuances that say "hey, this is written for this particular academic community who happen to speak the same academic language." So, the heading style, outline numbering, and even captioning may be different. Not all of these cannot be automated, though there are tutorials on YouTube on how to automate (I wouldn't say they're complete though). The rule here is know the style and adjust as necessary. 
• Another element of writing style is what mode of English do they use? American or British? So, best to begin with this in mid too.
• More often than not, the "sciences" use third person in writing. But there are particular subdisciplines in political science which doesn't do so. Again, if you know the journal, then you're better off.

Those are but a few, but they can help save you a big chunk of time and even help you publish.

Don't let your ideas go to waste as simply submissions that end up only in your hard drive.

Check out the systematic system on how goblins use artillery in today's MTG card (I don't agree in using people as cannon fodder though, just be systematic please).

Image copyrighted to Wizards of the Coast: https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=45467