The papers this week shared a lot of material with my Info and Reference Module, e.g. how do you answer a complex research question? I found the methodology of evidence based research to be very interesting.
The concept of practitioner researchers as outlined in Watson-Boone (2000) struck a chord with me. I like the idea of constantly refining and improving you own professional abilities, even more so if you discover methods that will be of benefit to your field as a whole. As far as I’m concerned the motivation behind the project is not as important, I strongly approve of those who carry out practitioner based research just to satisfy their own curiosity. I know working in a field where it would be easier for me to learn anything I felt like was one of the reasons I chose this course.
Brophy (2007) also resonated with me. I respond well to Instructional Dialogue where a character in a story speaks so knowledgeably about a topic is almost as if you are secretly instructed in a subject. I find the idea of using evidence based practice as a staring point for using the power of stories to aid professional practice to be fascinating. It grants an extra layer of connection to the subject if it can be associated with a personal experience.
Eldredge (2006) gives an example of the use of a narrative method of writing a paper and describes how a research methodology can emerge from evidence based research. The aspects of this paper I enjoyed were the conformation that science is a process, a method of thinking as opposed to the collection of facts. I have a science background so I appreciate when this distinction is made. I also appreciated the clear outlining of the different aspects of answering a research question.