Example Of A Learning Journal Analysis

Learning diary summary

Before starting the module ‘The Local and the Global: IR in Practice’, I had only a vague conception of what it might entail. It was unclear to me how IR could be put into ‘practice’, partly due to my prior perception of IR which had always seemed out of personal reach. Also, I had several reservations about what activities would be involved – for instance, I had little experience with the practical side of research, and was more comfortable with working independently rather than within a group. Yet looking back, while some parts were challenging, there were several aspects that I found interesting and helpful. Through critical analysis, it is clear that many of my initial views and perceptions – both of the topic and

The most prominent issues that influenced this process were avoiding bias and practicality. I was already aware that avoiding bias is a necessary part of producing work that is responsible and credible. Yet what I did not understand prior to this module was the difference between bias and subjectivity. Resultantly, I had been hesitant to let my opinions or emotions have too much of an influence on my work. Through the seminar exercises and discussions, I recognised that it is possible to subjective without being biased. Hammersley’s (2012) text built on this by explaining that while having assumptions cannot be avoided, I could avoid bias through accurately representing other perspectives. I applied this lesson to my project, choosing to base it on the experiences and perspectives of different groups of people. Accordingly, my group pursued an unbiased methodology – for example, through asking neutral questions in our survey. Further, I began to see that my own emotions and opinions about our topic could be useful in motivating my work as long as I maintained self-awareness, as suggested by Hammersley

One example of this was the reassessing of our initial method of interviews. Having decided to research the experiences of refugees in Brighton, we at first considered carrying out our own interviews with refugees in Brighton, feeling that this was the best way of representing them. But further into the project, we began to notice the various challenges that would arise from proceeding with this method. None of us had any prior experience of dealing with research ethics and trying to gain ethics clearance made clear issues such as sensitivity and privacy. As well as complicating the interviewing process, these would also make the wait for clearance longer. Alongside this, there were also the challenges of finding willing refugees, communicating with people who do not have English as their first language and getting the research done on time. Realising we needed to balance our approach with practicality, these difficulties forced us to reassess our methodology. Consequently, chose to represent refugee experiences through secondary resources – a more convenient approach. Initially, I saw having to change our methodology mid-project as frustrating and a waste of time. But the reading by Heather Johnson (2012) helped to change my outlook. Her mention of the need to assess and reassess her approach allowed me to see our changes to methodology as a productive learning process. Overall, it improved my attitude