User talk:Special-educator2020/sandbox

Maria tahnk you so much for your feedback. I really appreciate it. TeresaTeresa Varriale Gonzalez 04:22, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Impressive Contribution
This new page is impressive and well researched. This is an important addition, especially when linked to Qualitative research.

I believe the article should start with the title in bold followed by a definition. That could segue into how interviewing children is a specialization of qualitative interviews. You provide a great definition qualitative interviews.

The historical background section is interesting and informative. The last line (“Tay-Lim and Lim warn researchers that although children can participate in research, child-friendly and appropriate strategies are essential when conducting research[3].”) leaves me wondering if people were advocating for parental consent as well? The last section “Current Practices” in general reads too much like a literature review rather than an encyclopedia of information.

Ethical Concerns Are those five strategies suggested in the New Zealand study now widely used? The paragraph on power dynamics is great.

I’m wondering about disclosure. Important points are made in the paragraph, but I thought disclosure was about sharing protected, sensitive and confidential information with others (like the public) rather than between the researcher and child.

Best Practices The second paragraph is an example of what I mean about the literature review comment above. I’d suggest a rewrite that presents the information and includes citations without mentioning individual researchers and studies, such as: Researchers should provide non-verbal feedback to children during interviews, such as nodding or raising eyebrows to indicate interest, but researchers disagree about the use of affirmations. Some would argue that affirmations might cause children to limit their responses to what may be deemed interesting[2]. In contrast, others claim that affirmations and encouragement from researchers are known to elicit the richest data[4]. More research is necessary in this area to determine best practice and the impacts of encouragement.

Toward the end of the last paragraph, I’m wondering for what reasons the previous research suggested avoiding why questions….

Visual Data Again, I’d remove the references to “the literature.”  Also, I think it should be in the present tense: “Visual data includes photo elicitation, co-created visual data, and child-created visual data[5][6][9].” (Also this indicates that these are examples not an exhaustive list of kinds of visual data. Co-created visual data with children could be very interesting!

The second paragraph begins: “Photo elicitation interviews (PEI) refer to a practice utilized by Canadian researchers asking children to take photographs of their daily activities and discuss these photos in their interview[5].” This makes it seem like photo-elicitation was invented by these Canadian researchers. I’d also suggest to maintain the present tense throughout.Krm107 (talk) 02:49, 5 April 2020 (UTC)