Week 2: Reading response

In one of my courses at Michigan I did a study about the Gerarld Ford Presidential Library. As part of the assignment, I was asked to observe members of the staff, specially how they interact with users at the reference room. Because the number of researchers visiting the library was so low (basically one or two daily), I decided to make my observations by becoming a researcher and experience the process users go through at the library. Without knowing, I was basically doing some sort of qualitative research, and this experience came regularly into my mind while reading the assigned chapters. As Gorman and Clayton states, qualitative research “is something that every information professional does instinctively almost every working day.” (Gorman and Clayton: p. 1)

Although qualitative research is rising as a strong methodology option, this does not means it is not out from strong criticism. One of the main arguments is from those who consider qualitative research as soft. Furthermore, some argue that while quantitative research reports reality, qualitative research can be affected by the researcher’s political values (Silverman: p. 35) However, these arguments doesn’t does not takes into consideration that also analysis of quantitative data is not free from different interpretations. Silverman presents as an example the skepticism of the general public on government statistics (Silverman: p. 38).

Taking the different arguments for or against qualitative research aside, I think that it is more important to analyze how both research methodologies can be mixed for a stronger research (see Silverman: p. 48). Gorman and Clayton explain that by combining both methodologies, “the researcher is able to address different aspects of the same research question, thereby extending the breadth of the project.” (Gorman and Clayton: p. 12) For example, most of the research done on digitization and digital preservation in archives has concentrated on surveys and statistics (quantitative methods). Because of these studies, archivists are aware of the challenges and issues we face on this area. However, there’s a gap on understanding how archives face these challenges in their institutions. How they apply the recommendations for digital preservation? How this affects the organizational culture of the archive and other responsibilities? Numbers can’t offer answers to these questions. Here is where qualitative research can be helpful.

Finally, I found very interesting Gherardi and Turner discussion about the importance of research communication, and specially about regular writing as a research skill. They state: “The goal of writing every day not only helps avoid writing blocks, but gives regular practice to the qualitative researcher in externalizing thoughts about the issues and evidence of the research in hand.” (Huberman and Miles, ed.: p. 94)