SOCIOLOGY 476 Interviewing Methods Graduate Seminar Spring 2014 Wednesdays, 11am-­‐1:50pm Locy 301 Professor Celeste Watkins-­‐Hayes (c-­‐watkins@northwestern.edu) Crowe Hall, Rm 5-­‐113; Phone: 847-­‐491-­‐4805 Office Hours: Wednesdays 8:45-­‐10:45am. Please book at http://www.meetme.so/celestewatkins-­‐hayes COURSE DESCRIPTION: In this course, students will develop the necessary skills to conceptualize, plan, and execute interview-­‐based research projects. We will cover topics such as fine-­‐tuning a research idea, formulating research questions, designing a rigorous research plan, navigating the IRB process, recruiting respondents, creating the interview guide, conducting interviews, and analyzing and writing up data. We will also consider reflexivity, ethics, and the complexities of interviewing various populations. Students at all levels of the graduate student process are welcome, as course participants will be organized into work groups based on their project’s current stage. Each week, participants will spend the first portion of the allotted time discussing course readings and receiving practical instruction from the professor on some aspect of the research process. During the last hour of the class each week, students will gather in their work groups to discuss current concerns and ideas arising from their individual interview-­‐
based research projects. THE WEEKLY SCHEDULE 11am-­‐12:40pm – Discussion of assigned readings and instruction on aspects of field work 12:40-­‐12:45pm – Break 12:45-­‐1:50pm – Meet with peer groups * First-­‐year sociology graduate students will be dismissed at 12:40 to attend the Introduction to Sociology course lecture and will meet with their peer groups from 2-­‐3pm on Wednesdays in Locy 301. REQUIRED READING: Robert S. Weiss. 1995. Learning from Strangers: The Art and Method of Qualitative Interview
Studies
COURSE REQUIREMENTS: Active attendance and participation: 20% Midterm assignment: 25% Peer review memos on midterm assignment: 15% Final assignment utilizing interview data: 40% 1 Active attendance and participation: Students are required to read all assigned readings and attend each session prepared to discuss the materials in an analytical and critical manner. In our discussions, our first order of business will be to ensure that we understand the arguments being presented, answer questions of fact about the topics, and digest the authors’ terms and definitions. Then we will move into an evaluative phase of discussion in which we will both appreciate and criticize the works we have read. Finally, we will consider the practical lessons offered by the readings for our own research projects. Attendance and participation (including in your working groups) will account for 20% of the course grade. Midterm Assignment: Students will select Track A or B for the midterm assignment, depending on the current status of the research project. The midterm assignment will be due on April 30 by 11pm CST (via email to the instructor, cc’ing yourself to confirm receipt with the attachment intact). It will account for 25% of the course grade. Track A -­‐ Research Proposal: Write a research proposal outlining the rationale and plan for an interview-­‐based research study that you will conduct. The proposal must be no longer than 10 double-­‐spaced, double-­‐sided pages (including references) using an 11-­‐12pt Times New Roman font. There must also be an 11th page with a project budget, outlining the expected costs and a brief justification for the expenses. The proposal should reflect the caliber of a proposal that you would submit as part of a fellowship or grant application. The proposal should include an abstract, statement of the problem, research questions, specific aims of the study, conceptual framework, rationale for using interview data as a component of the study, discussion of participant recruitment strategy, eligibility requirements and selection goals, interview guide, and the plan for the protection of human subjects. Throughout the proposal, students should draw upon at least three course readings to support the arguments and plans presented. This assignment is recommended for students working on proposals for the second-­‐year paper or the dissertation. Track B – First Half of Research Paper: Write the first half of an interview-­‐based research paper. The 10-­‐15 pages that you submit should be structured like the beginning of a traditional article with an introduction/statement of the problem and research questions, a brief literature review, a conceptual discussion, and a well-­‐
articulated methods section. On the last page, outline where the paper is headed by submitting an outline of the data and analysis section, sketching out the 3 key analytical points that you want to make to advance your argument. Focusing on the front half of the paper will allow you to fine-­‐tune your thinking to ensure that every element of the paper is moving the reader toward the data that you will present in the final version. Throughout the proposal, students should draw upon at least three course readings to support the arguments and plans presented. This assignment is recommended for students working on the second year paper or a conference paper. Peer review memos on midterm assignments: Reviewing and evaluating research proposals and papers will be an ongoing part of your work as scholars. It is also helpful for 2 your work to see how others are pitching and presenting their projects. Each student will be asked to review the Midterm Assignment of two classmates and draft a one-­‐page “blind” memo on each proposal/paper (single-­‐sided, single-­‐spaced) evaluating the quality, clarity, feasibility, and creativity of the project and how the author presented it. These memos will account for 15% of the course grade and are due on May 14 by 11pm CST (via email to the instructor, cc’ing yourself to confirm receipt with the attachment intact). Final Assignment: Students will return to Track A or B for the final assignment. The final assignment will be due on Wednesday, June 11 by 11pm CST and will account for 40% of the course grade. Please submit the paper via email to c-­‐
watkins@northwestern.edu and cc yourself to ensure delivery with the attachment intact. Track A – Revised research proposal: At the end of the course, you will have three additional resources to bring to your second-­‐year paper or dissertation proposal. First, you have received feedback from the instructor and two classmates outlining potential areas of improvement. Second, you have interviewed 2 individuals who are either members of the population that you wish to study or have significant insight into this group. Third, you have had an opportunity to think systematically about your plan for data analysis and write-­‐up. Therefore, you will revise your midterm research proposal using those resources. Some of the best research proposals incorporate pilot interview data in order to demonstrate (a) the feasibility of executing the project, (b) the important findings that the work is just beginning to reveal, (c) the necessary places to go next in the research, and (d) the researcher’s skills in collecting and analyzing interview-­‐based data. Find a way to leverage the received feedback, pilot interview data, and your thinking about data analysis to create an even stronger research proposal. Again, your proposal should incorporate at least three course readings to advance your case. Track B – Completed research paper: Having reached the end of the course, you now have three additional resources to bring to your second-­‐year or conference paper. First, you have received feedback from the instructor and two classmates outlining potential areas of improvement in this paper. Second, you have collected more interview data. Third, you have spent time thinking systematically about how to conduct your analysis and present your findings. Therefore, you will complete your midterm research paper using these resources. Revise the front end of the paper as you see fit, and then add the data and analysis, discussion, and conclusion sections of the paper. Again, your paper should incorporate at least three course readings to advance your case. Key Questions: How many people do I have to interview for the assignments? There is not a requirement on the number of respondents or interviews. You should use your best judgment to determine these numbers, given your goals and the time constraints of the quarter system (you can always expand the project when the course is completed). For those in Track A, it is recommended that you conduct two interviews in the course of the quarter to advance 3 your research proposals. For those in Track B, you likely already have several interviews conducted coming into the course. It is recommended that you conduct additional interviews during the course, if feasible, to develop your interviewing skills and gather richer data under the direction of the instructor. This will likely help to improve your final paper. What citation style should I use for my assignments? Assignments should follow the citation and formatting guidelines of your discipline. How can I get the most out of this course? While course readings will be helpful, you will likely learn the most by practicing your developing techniques and talking frequently about your project with the instructor and your colleagues. Office hours, the opening class discussion, and the working groups are all designed to do this. Rather than waiting until the midterm and final assignments are due to work extensively on your projects, work on them throughout the quarter, using the working groups as places to workshop research questions, data collection plans, interview guides, data analysis plans, etc. COURSE OUTLINE PART 1: Introduction – Conceptualizing a Sensible Research Project Week 1: April 2 – What do you want to understand and why? Identifying your research topic and specific aims Week 2: April 9 – What will be your scientific contribution? Finding your opportunity in the literature, fine-­‐tuning your research questions, and pondering your conceptual framework • Weiss, Learning from Strangers, Chapter 1, “Introduction.” • Maxwell, Joseph, “Conceptual Framework: What Do You Think Is Going On?” and “Research Questions: What do You Want to Understand?” Chapters 3 & 4 in Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. On Blackboard
•
•
•
4 Recommended. Johnson, “In-Depth Interviewing” In Handbook for interviewing research
edited by Gubrium and Holstein.
Recommended: Seidman, Irving. “A Structure for In-Depth Phenomenological
Interviewing.” In Interviewing as Qualitative Research.
Recommended: Goodwin, Jeff and Ruth Horowitz. 2002. “Introduction: The
Methodological Strengths and Dilemmas of Qualitative Sociology.” Qualitative
Sociology 25: 33-47.
Week 3: April 16 –How will you answer your research questions? Designing your research plan, setting up your research operation, and recruiting your participants • Weiss, Learning from Strangers, Chapter 2, “Respondents: Choosing Them and
Recruiting Them.” • Maxwell, Joseph, “Research Proposals: Presenting and Justifying a Qualitative Study,” in Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. On Blackboard. • Rubin, Herbert and Irene Herbert. 2005. “Designing for Quality.” Pp. 59-70 in
Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (second edition) by Herbert Rubin and
Irene Rubin. California: Sage. On Blackboard.
• Biernacki, Patrick and Dan Waldorf. 1981. “Snowball Sampling: Problems and
Techniques in Chain Referral.” Sociological Methods and Research 10(2): 141-163. On
Blackboard.
•
•
Recommended: Watters, John and Patrick Biernacki. 1989. “Targeted Sampling: Options
for the Study of Hidden Populations.” Social Problems 36 (4): 416-430
Recommended: Seidman, Irving. “Proposing Research: From Mind to Paper to Action”
and “Establishing Access to, Making Contact with, and Selecting Participants.” In
Interviewing as Qualitative Research.
PART 2 -­‐ In the Field Week 4: April 23 – What will you ask your respondents? The interview guide and the craft of interviewing (Part 1: Co-­‐creating an informative conversation) • Weiss, Learning from Strangers, Chapter 3, “Preparation for Interviewing” and Chapter
4, “Interviewing.” • Rubin, Herbert and Irene Herbert. 2005. “Designing Main Questions and Probes.” Pp.
152-72 in Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (second edition). California:
Sage. On Blackboard
• Rubin, Herbert and Irene Herbert. 2005. “Preparing Follow Up Questions.” Pp. 152-72 in
Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (second edition). California: Sage. On
Blackboard
• Hermanowicz, J.C. (2002) “The Great Interview: 25 Strategies for Studying People in
Bed,” Qualitative Sociology 25(4): 479-499. On Blackboard
• Seidman, Irving. “Technique Isn’t Everything, But It is a Lot.” In Interviewing as
Qualitative Research. On Blackboard.
Week 5: April 30 – How will you protect your respondents and conduct ethical research? 5 Visit from representative from IRB Research proposals due by 11pm tonight • Weiss, Learning from Strangers, Chapter 5, “Issues in Interviewing.” • Rubin, Herbert and Irene Herbert. 2005. “Conversational Partnerships.” Pp. 71-94 in
Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (second edition). California: Sage. On
Blackboard. Week 6: May 7 – How will you gather the data that you need? The craft of interviewing (Part 2: Interviewing diverse populations) • Young, Alford. 2004. “Experiencing in Ethnographic Interviewing about Race.” Pp. 187202 in Researching Race and Racism, edited by M. Blumer and J. Solomos. New York:
Routledge. On Blackboard.
• Reuben A. Buford May, “When the Methodological Shoe is on the Other Foot: African American Interviewer and White Interviewees.” Qualitative Sociology. January 2014. On Blackboard • Ostrander, Susan A. 1993. “Surely You’re Not In This Just to Be Helpful: Access,
Rapport, and Interviews in Three Studies of Elites.” Journal of Contemporary
Ethnography 22:7-27. On Blackboard.
•
Recommended: Handbook of Interview Research, edited by Gubrium and Holstein o Schwalbe and Wolkomir -“Interviewing Men” o Reinharz and Chase - “Interviewing Women” o Kong, Mahoney, and Plummer -­‐ “Queering the Interview” o Odendahl and Shaw -­‐ “Interviewing Elites” Track A Students: In consultation with the instructor and your work groups, plan and execute two pilot interviews over the next month to advance your research project. Week 7: May 14 – What should you do after the interview? Data organization, analytic memos, transcription, and respondent relations Peer review memos due • Lofland, John et al. 2006. “Data Logging in Intensive Interviewing: Guide and WriteUps.” Pp. 99-117 in Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and
Analysis by John Lofland et al. California: Thompson. On Blackboard
• McLellan, E., K. MacQueen and J. Neidig (2003) “Beyond the Qualitative Interview:
Data Preparation and Transcription,” Field Methods 15(1): 63-84. On Blackboard
PART 3 – Reporting the Results 6 Week 8: May 21 – How will you analyze your data? Coding, condensation, and interpretation • Weiss, Learning from Strangers, Chapter 6, “Analysis of Data.” • Selected essays from The Handbook of Interview Research, edited by Gubrium and
Holstein. On Blackboard.
o Kathy Charmaz - “Qualitative Interviewing and Grounded Theory Analysis”
o Catherine Kohler Riessman - “Analysis of Personal Narratives”
o Richard Candida Smith - “Analytic Strategies for Oral History Interviews”
o Barbara Czarniawska - “Narratives, Interviews, and Organizations”
•
•
•
Recommended: Rubin, Herbert and Irene Herbert. 2005. “Data Analysis in the
Responsive Interviewing Model,” in Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data
(second edition). California: Sage
Recommended: Kristin Luker. “Data Reduction and Analysis” in Salsa dancing into the
social sciences.
Recommended: Kvale and Brinkmann, Chapters 11-14 in InterViews: Learning the Craft
of Qualitative Research Interviews.
Week 9: May 28 – How will you tell a coherent, compelling, and analytically astute story? Writing the paper/chapter using interview data • Weiss, Learning from Strangers, Chapter 7, “Writing the Report.” • Watkins-­‐Hayes, Celeste, LaShawnDa Pittman, and Jean Beaman. 2012. “‘Dying From’ to ‘Living With’: Framing Institutions and the Coping Processes of African American Women Living with HIV/AIDS.” Social Science and Medicine 74 (2012): 2028-­‐2036. • Recommended: Kvale and Brinkmann, “Reporting Interview Knowledge.” In InterViews:
Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviews. Ch 16.
• Recommended: Gubrium, J.F. and J.A. Holstein (1998) “Narrative Practice and the
Coherence of Personal Stories,” The Sociological Quarterly 39(1): 163-187.
Week 10: June 4 – How might you be wrong? Key debates on validity in the research process • Maxwell, Joseph, “Validity: How Might You be Wrong?” Chapter 6 in Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. On Blackboard
• Small, Mario Luis. 2009. “‘How many cases do I need?’ On science and the logic of case
selection in field-based research.” Ethnography 10(1): 5-38. On Blackboard.
• Colin Jerolmack and Shamus Khan, “Talk is Cheap: Ethnography and the Attitudinal
Fallacy,” Sociological Methods and Research. On Blackboard.
7 •
•
•
•
•
Review responses to Jerolmack and Khan by Karen Cerulo, Paul DiMaggio, Stephen
Vaisey, and Douglas Maynard. On Blackboard.
Colin Jerolmack and Shamus Khan, “Toward an Understanding of the Relationship
between Accounts and Action” Sociological Methods and Research. On Blackboard.
Recommended: Review the online discussion at:
http://orgtheory.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/should-sociologists-stop-interviewingpeople/
Recommended: “Methodological Pluralism and the Possibilities and Limits of
Interviewing,” by Michèle Lamont and Ann Swidler.
Recommended: Atkinson and Coffey, “Revisiting the Relationship between Participation
Observation and Interviewing,” in Handbook of Interview Research edited by Gubrium
and Holstein.
FINAL PAPER DUE: Wednesday, June 11 by 11pm CST. 8