NOTE: Don't post your response until class time. Be prepared with notes from the three readings for today listed on the syllabus. We will discuss and post to the discussion board as part of class.
Overview: The Bhattacharya has addressed the concepts of "ethics" and "rigor" in scholarly qualitative research, particularly as it applies to educational research. As a class, you are more interested in what I would call public intellectualism--the kind of in-depth, research and writing that we see in the best news-reporting and feature writing. To that end, we have a series of readings that consider what ethics and rigor look like in the public domain. Two of the articles are discuss ethics and the third piece, American Hunger, is an example of long-form journalism of the sort that you all have expressed the most interest in writing. It should serve as both a way to talk about ethics and rigor and it should also serve as a way in, in class, to talk about ethics and rigor.
What to Post: Considering what you've learned about the research process in Bhattacharya so far, how does American Hunger hold up? In what ways does it feel like the qualitative research projects that she describes and explains? In what ways does it not? (Careful here--some of that is obvious, but not all of it). Is this a rigorous research project? Is it ethical? in what ways does the piece serve as an example of journalistic ethics and rigor in ways that explains the difference between public versus academy-based knowledge-making? Is it possible to say that there is a difference--in scope, methodology, and purpose--in the end?