Year Two. Already.

July 2024

Bloody hell, that came around quickly! I’ve just enrolled on my second year, and in doing so, have had a chance to reflect on what I’ve achieved this year. My immediate (and wholly) emotional reaction was to panic because it’s obvious that I haven’t done enough, I’ve just been dicking about, playing video games, and tinkering around the edges of any proper study, and already a year has passed. What do I have to show for it? 

Emotional responses such as this aren't always useful, so I have decided to sit down and really think about what I have achieved over the first year of my study. As it turns out, I've made more progress that I thought. 

I now know what my philosophy / epistemology / ontology / methodologies / other big words are. I ‘sort of knew’, but I now understand what these things are, why I am aligned to them, and how they link to my research. That makes me feel like I’m starting to make sense of everything.

I have read and made *copious notes on three books: Grounded Theory by Melanie Birks and Jane Mills, Critical Constructivist Grounded Theory by Heidi Levitt, and Constructing Grounded Theory by Kathy Charmaz. In doing this, I have taught myself the basics of constructivist grounded theory methods, and have moved from having no idea what I’m doing methodologically, to feeling able enough to take the plunge and practice what I’ve learned. I know what in vivo codes are! I know the difference between extant and grey literature! I understand initial coding, focused coding and advanced /theoretical coding, and have a handle on how and why these are carried out. I know terms like 'theoretical saturation' and 'constant comparative analysis' and I feel equipped and confident enough to have a go at them!

As a result of this growing understanding, I have developed my initial 'Call for Participants' survey, tested it with guinea pigs, rejigged it, tested it again, and at the time of writing, I’m about to carry out my first two (pilot) semi-structured interviews based upon these guinea pigs’ responses. 

I wrote a 5,000-word document for my 6-month review, which is required so the university can see whether my academic writing ability is up to standard. At the risk of sounding like an arse, not only did my first supervisor think it was (and I quote) ‘brilliant’, it can also be repurposed later on down the line as a starting point for the first chunk of my literature review. 

Memos! I’ve been making loads of memos without realising it! Memos are the foundation of my research methodology, and I’ve been generating them all year without even realising it. Look at what I’m writing now! It’s a memo! (Possibly.)

I've spoken at a couple of conferences, read papers by the bucketload, and right now, I'm reading The Psychology of Video Games by Celia Hodent. It looks at things like benefits and drawbacks of gaming (but is non-partisan and does not scream 'games are bad!' on every second page, which is refreshing). It also looks at things like gaming and flow, educational development, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, and the effects of reward and punishment in games, so links rather nicely to the concept of what can trigger both positive and negative unintended consequences. And, if I'm being totally honest, it's just nice to read something that isn't about constructivist grounded theory.

To finish up, I've attended several online and in-person workshops, kept all my meeting and CPD documents up to date, made sure I have a supervision meeting every month, and played Starfield a lot. Which is research. 😉

In a year I've moved from knowing nothing to being able to start interviewing participants and analysing the transcripts. I know enough to know that I don't know much (if that makes sense), but that's ok! A PhD is an apprenticeship in research, so not getting it right first time or all the time is fine. I'm excited to start, and to see what I discover. Roll on year two!