Annual Review: My Challenge

Good: Dissemination
Bad: Clarity

That’s the long and short of it.  I’m doing well, we think, but my lack of clarity about my research aim at this stage is still very worrying.  For us all.

Teaching research methods means I am doubly aware of what a horrific state my research is in.  How can I have a full data set and no hypothesis?  What about hunches? What would be the shape of my thesis?

[Intro]
[Literature]
Magical gap which somehow forms:
  [Methodology]
  [Exp 1]
  [Exp 2]
[Conclusions]

Is this the time to re-read all of phd comics to find where I am in the process?

Review which papers have shaped my thinking?

Write an abstract for my research?

Sketch out thesis shape?

Clearly I need to plan for a conference paper which will capture the story of analysis.  I need to break down the next year of analysis; without a testable hypothesis I will need to consider my approach carefully. Analyse a part of the data, or analyse the full data set on a partial axis or theme?  What would such themes be?  Do they entail having already done a partial analysis?  I need to break this down.  If someone wanted to replicate my approach what instructions might I leave?

Ugh.

The following faux-abstract is the sticking point:

“Are agile processes reflected in their social aspect?  A study of developers’ stories in a company applying agile software development practices.  Through their narratives we consider:

• Do agile practices shape stories?
• Do these stories show communication of reflection, willingness to change, other core values?
• How do we interpret programmer narratives?
• Etc.”