Research and the Theoretical Field - Pauldowling.me

48
concerning the relations between software and gender relations in groupwork
from which we might move on to an experimental study. Of course, in the
context of a masters dissertation, there is unlikely to be the time or space (in
terms of wordcount) for two phases, but the subsequent research can always
be carried out later. In fact, Nicholson et al are not quite as atheoretical as I
have pretended, thus:
In addressing the above questions, we are operating under several assumptions
related to successful collaborative composing. We consider the ideal standard
for successful collaborative writing to involve participants who have a shared
goal or purpose for the activity, a mutually agreed upon strategy for regulating
turn-taking, and the skills for building upon and incorporating one another's
ideas. We also believe that successful collaborative partners share in a range of
social roles while interacting and composing and do not differ dramatically in
their relative status within the interaction, Finally, successful collaborations within
this specific context should result in a product where the majority of elements
(eg, text and illustrations) were jointly produced.
(Nicholson et al, 1998; p. 5)
But all of this remains quite loose.
So, there are traditions of research that exhibit strongly institutionalised
theoretical spaces, most particularly, the natural sciences. Here, insofar as
the ‘universe’ is ‘known’ in advance, we expect a predominance of
experimental research designs operationalising tightly framed research
questions. Alternatively, there are traditions of research that do not exhibit
such strong institutionalisation of theoretical spaces. Here, each new
empirical setting is more likely to be thought of as the relatively unknown,
untheorised. The extended fieldwork demanded by ethnography and thick
description may not be plausible in the context of a masters degree.
Nevertheless, exploratory research is perfectly viable and can be highly
productive. In the case of exploratory research, we do not want to formulate a
precisely worded research question in advance, indeed we cannot do so if we
do not have available the required theoretical terminology. Rather, we are
likely to begin our research with a far more loosely defined research question
or problem. Naturally, by the end of the research process, we hope to be in a
position to provide a conclusion that constitutes a more well-defined
theoretical space. Of course, there is a whole range of possibilities between
these extremes where there is a sufficient definition of the theoretical advance
to enable the formulation of a meaningful question—Douglas’s ‘cultural theory’
would be an example (though this is not to say that this is necessarily how
she herself proceeds). Here, we may introduce an element of experimental
design, for example, in choosing to explore two contexts that differ in one
important respect, but that are arguably similar otherwise. The reformulated
groupwork/gender/software question, for example, might be operationalised
by:
1. setting up two mixed gender groups that are as similar as we can make
them;
2. setting them tasks using two different kinds of software;
RESEARCH & THE THEORETICAL FIELD