Talk:Introduction
Please leave your comments on this page. You need to be logged in to leave comments.
Once you are logged in, simply click the '+' button on the talk page menu (between edit and history: {{#icon: Edit Plus History.png|Leave a comment||https://oer.opendeved.net/index.php?title=Talk:RECOUP/Introduction&action=edit§ion=new}}, and leave your comment. Please make sure you enter a title, and the text of your comment.
At the end of your comment, please sign your contribution: You can do this by typing four ~ in a row (i.e. '~~~') or by using the 'signature button' 
in the edit menu.
Add section on "What this manual is not?"
Roger, do we need a small addition which states "what this manual is not?". Just getting concerned about the whole philosophical, epistemological deabtes etc - N
Arathi-- what are your impressions about the manual? Does the manual come across as too dumbed down version of what qual. R should be (this is my biggest fear, hence asking you to comment as the third eye)? -Nidhi 18:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Reponse from Roger
I agree that we need to say a bit more about what it is not -- to cover ourselves from critical comment by those who will accuse us of ducking the big philosophical issues (which we do). I don't believe we are too dumbed down: we must keep our target audience and purposes in mind, and they don't need unnecessary complexity (tho' we can always change our minds if that's the feedback we get).
We need also to put in somewhere that the ideal size for these workshops is 10-16 participants, I think.
Also we could do something with the feedback from some of the early workshops: what people really liked (to reinforce the point about the benefits of interactive styles of teaching, for example) Roger 16:12, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Response from Arathi
N&R: I think the greatest value of this manual is suggesting interactive ways of learning about qual res..., particularly in contexts where didactic instruction and quantitative research approaches are predominant. The kinds of interactive/exploratory sessions you have designed may already encourage certain epistemological shifts, and perhaps even debate, even though issues of epistemology are not explicitly 'taught'. I think this is much more useful for now, but as Roger states, we can keep this open for change with feedback. You have stated at the start that this manual requires facilitators to modify/add/extent to material, which acknowledges that this presents just a framework... thus i don't see it as 'dumbed down'. I think the 'how to use the manual' section could be modified to convey this more clearly, and also what the manual 'is not', in order to avoid straight out criticism. Arathi 16:41, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Comment by Myjanjua moved to Help talk:Contents. --Bjoern 17:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Need to insert reference for citations
Should the citation I prepared earlier go into section 4 (when we ask users to cite the source)? And should the citation also appear on the Home Page? And can it be made the running footer on the PDF version of the manual, in place of the current acknowledgement list?
Citing this manual
What I propose is: Please cite as Nidhi Singal & Roger Jeffery. 2008. Qualitative Research Skills Workshop: A Facilitator's Reference Manual (http://manual.recoup.educ.cam.ac.uk), Cambridge: RECOUP (Research Consortium on Educational Outcomes and Poverty). -- how do I do this in such a way that it does not automatically create a link to the manual again?
potential addition
under hopes and fears, we could flag up the need to acknowledge the good qualitative research coming out of the south, and say how we try to include refs at the end of each session to illustrate this. Additional suggestions very welcome from participants, to build up the resource. Also flag up the use of boxed reflections from the recoup project on the fieldwork. --Arathi 17:00, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Singal, N., and Jeffery, R. (2008). Qualitative Research Skills Workshop: A Facilitator's Reference Manual, http://oer.educ.cam.ac.uk/wiki/RECOUP, Cambridge: RECOUP (Research Consortium on Educational Outcomes and Poverty, http://recoup.educ.cam.ac.uk/). CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. (original page)
