Monday 22 July, 2015
My original plan with
the learning diary was to type it up and put it on my blog. Perhaps I’ll do that too, but I started
writing it by hand in a notebook, and I’ve found the fact that I’m too lazy to
“undo” (with an eraser) anything beyond a few spelling mistakes may actually be
a benefit in this case. When I type, I
re-process what I’m going to say and go back to change it to match what I’m
currently thinking, rather than what I thought at the time. I’ve already done this several times with
this paragraph.
When I write by hand,
however, I don’t erase my previous jottings when I think better of them, I just
cross them out and make a note to skip down to the point where I’ve recast what
I’m doing. This means my previous
mistakes are still there to be read – and we all know how much information
about the learning process can be gleaned from mistakes.
So, theoretically, I’m
going to try to keep the learning diary going as a hand-written thing and type
up my reflections on the process (this “metadiary”) to go online. My original idea was to have the whole thing
go online – just to really push the “Open Access” side of things. Forget being able to access and use whatever
papers I may or may not produce as a result of this project – my raw data will
be available for other researchers, if they know where to look. And, heck, let’s face it – I’m hardly the
best person to analyse what’s happening here, am I? I’ll do my best, but I think the best thing I
can do is let other people play too.
I’ll probably scan the
hand-written notes at a later time and put them up somewhere. I’m hesitant to type them up at this point,
as I’m already double dipping in the diary idea by writing this reflection on
the diary writing process. Typing up the
notes will just be compounding the observer’s paradox even further, and I’m
pretty sure I’m already at a point where the data is highly compromised by the
design.
Just to give myself a
decent skeleton to work with for the learning diary, I’ve given myself a series
of questions to answer after each session.
I’m also quite deliberately not answering them immediately afterwards,
but a day or so later. This is because
I’m trying to avoid tiring myself out so that I can put more effort into
it. After reading a passage of text with
a dictionary to help me with every third word (for some sentences, much more
than that) I’m not ready to do something with a high cognitive load. If I wrote in the diary immediately, I’d
probably do a very poor job of it.
On the same track, I’m
also making sure the questions I ask myself aren’t too onerous. I want to eliminate possible excuses for
avoiding the dairy in the future.
The questions are as
follows:
·
What did
you read?
·
How many
words did you need to consult?
·
What’s the
story so far?
·
Note two
things you had to look up again
·
Note two
new things that caught your eye
·
Have you
learnt anything since last time which explained something you read or reread?
·
Are there
any outside influences which may be affecting your perceptions or understanding?
·
Choose a
sentence and dissect it.
I can see a number of
“issues” arising from this project. For
one thing, my learning diary is part exploratory and part reflective. That may be really useful for learning, but it’s
probably going to be a nightmare for analysis.
For another, this metadiary is likely to be having a strong influence on
what I remember/notice/process, so the double diary thing is also going to make
analysis terribly awkward.
Oh, well, these things
can always be discussed in the Discussion section. Isn’t that what every paper ends with –
telling the readers what the major issues with the paper where and why we “need
more research” to confirm any findings?
So far I haven’t
actually reflected on my learning diary entries. Well, there’s only one so far, and I wrote it
over a couple of days, and to write it I went back over the pages I’d already
read a second time, so I’m actually reading each section more often than I
thought I would originally – I’m repeating it for the preparation for reading
the next section, and I’m repeating it for the journal.
However, I have
noticed that the number of words I had to consult for the first passage I read
practically halved the second time. I
also noticed that I had completely forgotten about postpositions and about the
fact that particular prepositions and postpositions go with particular
cases. It was only when I started to
dissect my sentence of choice and consulted Tuldava (my grammar text book) that
I remembered this. Having remembered it,
I began noticing it in other instances throughout the text.
So far, I think both
the repeated readings and the diary are helping me process some vocabulary and
syntax that I would previously have skimmed over and forgotten.