Writing in a course can seem detached from life beyond the classroom -- we may write something to fulfill an instructor's requirements, receive a grade, and never think about it again. However, ENGL 1007 is designed for you to write in real rhetorical situations: to reach an audience for an intended purpose.
Because this process -- finding questions, purposes, and audiences that are relevant and meaningful to you -- is something that you can develop, it is important to review carefully the assignment expectations of this course. They aren't simply "essays" that you can write on auto-pilot, but are multimodal compositions that demand care in your design and construction.
Below is a resource for interpreting assignments from the UNC Chapel Hill Writing Center. They provide detailed strategies for understanding what instructors (and other readers!) are expecting with your texts, but we'll highlight their two fundamentals:
Conducting an interview may not seem like research -- but it is! Often referred to as a kind of "primary" research, interviews are commonly used in a wide variety of academic and popular writing that would benefit from a particular person's perspective.
Despite being common, interviews are challenging to conduct effectively, particularly without practice. Careful preparation and developing a sense of purpose in communicating with your interviewees will help set you up for success. See some of the resources provided below for more detailed information and suggestions.
There are also important ethical concerns whenever one is working directly with others (often referred to in this context as "human subjects of research"). It is necessary to receive informed consent from your interviewees -- that is, they know they are being interviewed and why, and they understand their rights. There are different expectations here in different contexts -- reach out to your instructor with any additional questions.
While your interviews are literally conversations, it is important to keep in mind that, to paraphrase the ACRL's Framework for Information Literacy, we should understand scholarship as a conversation and research as an inquiry.
Making sense of your group of interviews will depend upon your ability to see connections, shared themes or keywords, and divergences or differences of experience. These may jump out at you right away as you review your transcripts, but they may also be subtle or challenging to work with.
One strategy that can be useful here is the use of a graphic organizer or other concept map. Visualization tools can help you compare and contrast the different perspectives encountered. There's no one right organizer to use -- your choice should be informed by your material and your approach to it. See below for some examples.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
| Details and Exceptions