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.
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.
Comments
Post a Comment