Barriers to online critical discourse

Ok wow the amount of explanation that went into this is ridiculous. It becomes apparent that explaining what you did, how and why you did it is just as much if not more a part of research than the actual data collection and analysis. This includes recognizing any bias and limitations that your particular research method or decision making may have resulted in. I found the description of the recorded conversation analysis very informative. I found this method of analysis and explanation very convincing. the quoting of conversation both from the class and interviews seem to support their claims. The order too I think helped, by showing the conversation, presenting their analysis and then backing up their claim with personal interviews. This was especially effective in the assertion that criticism was viewed as an attack and the constraint of time in the class discussions. I think in general, although the authors assert that this is a case study and no generalizations should be drawn, that this article speaks to earlier readings in our class. The appropriate choice of CMC channel is immensely important. Clearly in my view the choice to use a computer conferencing forum was a poor choice if the intent was to facilitate higher order critical discourse. I think a more synchronous medium would have been much better suited, preferably one with voice chat. For the purposes of engaging in critical discourse getting as close to FtF as possible would have been more ideal. Then again I have no basis for my claim other than my personal experience and assumptions about communication methods. I think this article is very useful in terms of giving me a better idea of the relationship of research methods with goals and data analysis. I intend on using it as a reference for my own data analysis and presentation.