Recording data

Recording data | Robert Salter | March 15th, 2000

I was just writing a letter to Fiona and realized that I am really interested to know what modules people are recording data for, by recording I mean with video or audio equipment. I have recorded data for MET, IIC, CSD, and MAP.

Best,

Rob

Re: Recording data | Andrew Packett | March 20th, 2000

Rob, in answer to your query, I am recording data for IIC and LT. In both cases, the data is pretty accessible as it is generated by the students themselves; in IIC, interviews carried out by Journalism students as part of an assessed project, and in LT, 'peer-group discussions' which students take part in for their oral assessment. The IIC stuff is also for the dissertation (we hope), so I'm supplementing that with professional profile interviews recorded off the radio, and my own interviews with the students afterwards as they reflect on the interview as speech event, etc.

I've also been doing a lot of in-class recordings, mainly peer-group discussions. Showed the data to colleagues. They were mostly bemused. 'Navel gazing' was a common response! Had anything similar?

One recent book (too recent to make the IIC list) I've found useful is 'Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide' by Paul ten Have (1999, London; Sage,). Very much as the title suggests. Anyone else come across it?

Best

Andrew Packett
Coimbra, Portugal

Re: ten Have CA book | Keith Richards | March 20th, 2000

Hi,

Just picking up on Andrew's point, the ten Have will be in the new Study Companion. As he says, it's a very practical guide and I think it makes an excellent companion to the Hutchby & Wooffitt, which is more of a cover-to-cover read. There are also details in the ten Have of how to link to his CA website - which includes probably the best CA bibliography in the world. If you're into CA, this book is definitely one to have on the shelf.

Cheers

Keith

Re: recording data | Robert Salter | March 22nd, 2000

I had a lot of trouble transcribing data for my assignments. It just takes a long time, and even then with all the noises the recorder picks up it is a mess. I have micro-cassette recorder. If anybody knows a good alternative...

Now that I have been on the course for a couple years I think that emailing the subject specialist is easier. For most of the first year I would feel quite nervous about asking questions and wanted to make certain that my questions weren't silly.

Any similar experiences?

Rob

Re: Recording data | Jonathan Clifton | March 22nd, 2000

Recording data:

So far I've used recorded data for MET, LEX, IIC.

To cut down on the workload of transcriptions I usually go through the recordings once and mark any areas of interest to me. Then whittle this down as I progress with an assignment and do a very rough transcription of the more interesting parts. And finally only do a more detailed transcription if I am sure that I am going to use it. This way I avoid transcribing large amounts of data that are never used.

Clarity of recordings:

Yes, I also have problems with clarity of recordings. I am lucky though in that I teach a lot of one to one and very small groups. One to one recordings tend to eliminate most of the problems of background noise. So, I've got round the problem of bad recordings of large groups by sidestepping this issue but I recognize this option is not always available to everyone nor is it desirable for all assignments.

Best wishes to all

Jonathan
France

Re: Recording | Keith Richards | March 23rd, 2000

Hi,

I sympathize with Rob when it comes to transcribing: it's difficult enough at the best of times, but doubly frustrating when you have to deal with a poor quality recording. Here are some thoughts:

1 Always go for the very best recorder and mike that you can. Even an excellent recorder can be ruined by the use of a cheap mike, and sometimes the quality of a poor recorder can be improved by the use of a reasonable quality mike rather than a cheap internal mike. If your institution has a Coomber with recording facilities, consider using this: in my experience they're excellent recorders.

2 Try a dummy run. Changing the position of the mike or perhaps rearranging the furniture slightly (if this is feasible in terms of the effects it might have on the interaction - changing a familiar set-up, for example, can be disastrous) can pay dividends.

3 When you're transcribing, don't get too hooked up on the problems - sometimes a short break and a return to the tape to listen to what you've transcribed will clear up a lot of problems. Last Friday I had a clear run except for one word that sounded like "owls", so I worked on it for a bit but got nowhere. At that point I decided that a break would be a good idea, so I made myself a coffee and thought about other things. When I returned to the tape, I heard "animals" very clearly, although from the way it was mumbled quickly I could see why I'd got stuck on "owls".

4 If you can, use two tape recorders. I find that transcribing using my "best" one produces a good first draft, and that most of the problems are cleared up by using a cheaper player that has a tinnier sound - it's just different.

5 Transcribing machines are quicker (much quicker when you get used to them), but they usually cost £200+ and the quality of the playback isn't particularly good. I've transcribed hundreds of pages using one, but nowadays I generally prefer working for just a couple of hours at a time with a reasonable tape recorder and fairly good earphones - slower and more leisurely.

6 You can get computer programs for transcription which some people find a great help. I've read long discussions of this on lists and confess to having a sophisticated program for analyzing sounds (fine if you want to time pauses to microseconds, though frankly I don't see the point), but so far I just like the older methods. It's a bit like the fun some people get out of getting under an old car and having at its engine with a monkey wrench and a few spanners. I'd rather enjoy the experience itself.

Hope that helps.

Cheers

Keith

Re: Recording | Robert Salter | March 25th, 2000

Jonathan,

What are you recording with? I have a lot of difficulty with one on one recording as I try not to make the recording device obvious. Although I do have permission I just don't like to make the recording device a centrepiece.

Best,

Rob

Re: Recording | Jonathan Clifton | March 26th, 2000

I am using a cheap and nasty recorder as provided by the school to take with me into lessons for use with listening exercises. It has a built in mike. As I say I do a lot of 1 to 1s so I can get away with poor recording equipment - though I may try Keith's idea of using a mike. When I have tried to record larger groups I have got very poor and almost unusable recordings. I find this recorder doesn't intimidate the students as it is often on the desk for listening activities and is thus part of the classroom scenery.

Best wishes to all

Jonathan Clifton

France

Re: Recording | James Hobbs | March 27th, 2000

Recently there have been quite a few postings about making recordings. My first attempt at making a recording for the FND ended in miserable failure when I discovered that my microphone had a range of about 30 cm. I was on the verge of splashing out on some new equipment when I remembered my home video camera. I tried using this with the lens cap covered (the students didn't want to be filmed) and the results were perfect - crystal clear sound, with none of the hiss that you get with all but the best tape recorders. Having the counter in minutes and seconds also made it easy to find and transcribe the relevant part of the recording.

For anybody who has a video camera (which obviously isn't everybody), you'll probably find that the mic is much better than the one on your tape recorder. If you cover the lens cap, though, remember to set the focus to 'manual'. I forgot to do this the first time, and got a recording of the incessant buzz of the autofocus going haywire!

James Hobbs
Morioka, Japan