Cheers for that Rewt. I think what I'll do is just spam everything in a word document, then remove irrelevant information, then construct proper sentences and paragraphs.

Well you clearly don't have time to actually correct the methodological flaw, so my temptation would be to include a paragraph in either the methods section or the 'limitations of study' section highlighting the conceptual ambiguity or lack of validity. Just be honest about it. So:

During the process of research it was discovered that ... . This is problematic in as much as ... . The consequences of this problem, then, is that ... . It could be hypothesised that, should the concepts be more valid, the results could ... . In future, this problem could be resolved by: i) ... ii) ...

So make sure you state the problem, what influences it could have your research and results, and perhaps even how you would correct it if you were to do it again. The key thing is clarity. We all make mistakes. Just be clear about what those are, what the effect on your research is, and how you would avoid it in the future.

Hey guys,

Just wondering if anyone had a source for a text that offered insights into how to construct a solid research methods chapter, particularly for qualitative social science research.

For clarity, I know what my method and approach is, but am struggling to piece it together (as a chapter) in a manner that is concise but still provides a solid overview of what I am doing and why.

Any would be most welcome.

It really depends on what your goals are and how much you care about student evaluations. Bewildered is probably right but personally, I do not respond to such emails positively. I instruct said student that the information was covered in session and is contained within the compulsory reading. Ergo, they should already be familiar with it. To be additionally salty, I always end with 'good luck with the exam'.

I have had several complaints about my feedback (which I have been told is exceptionally blunt) but so far the department has shielded me from anything negative. From those who actually attend, though, my feedback is really positive (so probably offsets the negative comments).

It really depends on you, what you want, and how responsive you are to student feedback. Unfortunately, student feedback is a strong currency now a days. Further, you indicate that your department, 'the powers above', would not be happy with my approach - so bewildered is probably right. Perhaps speak to module coordinators and department heads?

Hey guys,

For my research, I will be working with a number of non-English languages (including some I do not personally understand). In these circumstances is it better, do you think, to limit my sample size to only those languages I understand OR to employ translation services and include a relevant disclaimer in my research concerning translation?

Any assistance would be welcome (links to articles or texts that address this would be most welcome).

I'm in the same position in that the components of my research each have a small core of about thirty articles, although that does mean I have about 100 core articles...

I have never used software for referencing or source management, so I'm sightly hesitant to start now but I'll have a look.

You should always be blunt and honest with your supervisor. Your supervisor cannot help you if s/he doesn't understand or know about the problems you are having. You should strive to develop an open and honest relationship with your supervisor.

Not sure if it is a waste of time, but I could turn the papers I read into a single page cheat sheet. Heading, author, main arguments, location of evidence, etc

So, here's a conundrum for you and I'm sure we've all been there.

We do reading. We make notes. We underline and highlight. We add some linkages to other work. We then do this for other articles and books. Months later we come back to this article and completely forget what is in it, what it's about, and much of the content.

How do you avoid this?

What methodology is it?

I'm in a similar boat. No one in my department really knows the methodology I'm using, although my supervisor has a superficial understanding. I'm going to a summer school, two week intensive course, to learn.

So here is a question for you guys.

You are writing a section of your PhD. You have read about forty or fifty articles that directly relate to that section and that you wish to reference in that section. How do you keep a track of it all?

Do you write condescended half page cheat cheats, memorise everything, leave post-it notes everywhere? How do you keep track of everything you have read so you don't forget to include articles and data?