Field notes versus audio / video recordings

Field notes versus audio / video recordings

In any typical research methods handbook a researcher can get information regarding several methods of observing the human activity and collecting relevant data. But despite the variety of methods, the selection of the most appropriate is not an easy task, since none of these is perfect, each has strengths and weaknesses, and while one seems ideal for one case it’s not for another. 

Normally, a researcher before opts for a method, will first examine the practicality of each and if the application is attainable to a specific and real context. Thus, the first and second part of this assignment will attempt to examine and compare three of the most common observation techniques - the field notes versus the audio/video recordings and the audio recordings versus the video recordings.

At first sight, data collection with field notes seems a simple procedure without requiring expensive and complicated equipment- only a notebook and a pencil. By contrast audio/video recordings entail a minimum technological knowledge and the use of apparatuses like microphones and/or cameras. Additionally and in many cases the audio/video recordings demand a whole team of specialized professionals, like cameramen and sound engineers as well as good prior preparation like the scenery arrangement or the installation of the equipment. So, field notes under the prism of a certain criterion– that of the equipment requirements - seems more advantageous than audio/video recordings.

Criterion A: Requirement of equipment and/or of specialized professionals
Field Notes Field notes require simple equipment — a pencil and some paper.	Audio/Video recordings The audio/video recordings require complicated equipment, technological knowledge and in some cases the contribution of expert professionals.

Furthermore, field notes is a flexible technique that allows the researcher to follow the action almost everywhere even outside the classroom –in corridors, in playgrounds etc. By contrast, the recordings with microphones and/or cameras have spatial restrictions, like the cables and the camera stabilizers, although alternative solutions can be found, like the portable audio/video recorders. So, the criterion of monitoring the activity in multiple places and situations makes the audio/video recordings, a rather demanding, expensive and inappropriate selection for a long lasting research.

Criterion B: Flexibility in monitoring the activity in multiple places/situations and for a long period of time.

Field-notes can be considered more functional and flexible, under the prism of the criterion B, since in many settings, like the early years setting (E891, DVD2), the participants may change several places during the day

Also, field notes give the option to the researcher to focus on a specific subject or at the behaviour of a single student as opposed to the microphones/cameras characteristics that record indiscriminately everything. For example, in the case of the early years setting a researcher could be hypothetically interested exclusively on the children’s cutting skills, therefore he could opt to write  short, concise and focused field-notes rather than opt for audio/video recording, which would additionally require time consuming transcriptions/watching. Hence, while a researcher keeps field notes can choose to filter what he sees and to jot down only what he considers as interesting.

Criterion C: Flexibility in focusing on a specific research question

Field notes give the opportunity to the researcher to filter the information simultaneously with the observation and to focus mostly on his research question, for example on the children cutting skills.

Whilst the person who keeps field notes may approach the action when and where it happens, however it can maintain a good level of discretion -quality that ensures the natural and spontaneous behaviour of the children. By contrast, cameras and microphones easy become noticeable by the participants, which then, will probably start to “perform” like actors and affect the authenticity of their behavior.

Criterion D: Naturalness and spontaneity of the behaviours

In the early years setting, the children don’t seem to bother from the camera recordings. By contrast, in the secondary school lesson, the students seem to pay attention to the camera and to try to correct their behavior.

Of course, the method of field notes apart from advantages and strengths, it has also weaknesses and flaws. So, since the researcher, can filter what to record and how to record it, field notes can be easily criticized as subjective and biased by the researcher’s personal judgment. And although, there are tricks that trying to improve the objectivity of field notes- like the separation of what was really happened from any personal interpretations in many cases field notes are nothing more than poorly written, personal comments. By contrast, audio/video recordings capture, maintain and present all the activity in an objective and indiscriminate way, and that makes them valuable material for other researcher too. But then again, the criterion of objectivity has been questioned by many researchers and characterized as an illusion or as purely ideal since the later analysis of the data cannot be value free in any way.

Criterion E: Objectivity and possible use by other researchers
Field notes can be criticized as subjective and difficult to be studied by other researchers.	Audio/video recordings, present more vividly what was really happened, and can be used as objective documents by other researchers too.

Although field notes, as it was commented in criterion A, is a method that does not require complicated equipment however it is quite difficult for the teacher to keep notes simultaneously while teaching. In many cases the teacher either will have to ask for the participation of an outside facilitator or he’ll have to compromise at rough notes which will then elaborate later. Moreover, field-notes always require the physical presence and attention of the researcher while microphones/cameras can record without the constant attention of him.

Criterion F: Flexibility in teaching and recording at the same time

It is difficult for the teacher/carer to keep notes while teaching, since he is constantly devoted to the lesson/children care.

Finally field notes don’t allow the teacher to record his own performance and by this to make a self-evaluation, unless he asks for an outside facilitator. By contrast, audio/video recordings not only can capture the performance of the teacher but can also give him the opportunity to observe/listen meticulously his own behaviour, words, movements and then to reflect on them.

Criterion G: Self Recording possibility

Using audio/video recordings the teacher can study later his own performance.

So, the selection of a particular recording method– either field notes or audio/video recordings definitely has not a straightforward answer and depends mostly on a number of criteria and parameters that each time the researcher sets. But even the criteria don’t remain stable and permanent during the research, and they may modified as the study goes on and inevitably the context, the people, even the researcher’s objectives and question may change.