I want to get across the point that the boys are individuals and labels, statements and pigeon holing can be a blunt instrument and wrong as well as right but that individually they fail to give an overall representation and picture of the boys. The boys mood swings, environments, circumstances, happenings, who they are with and even the weather can make them act differently and there is never black and white only shades of grey. By looking at a multitude of opinions from those closest to or who spend the most time with them you will get an overall view. I remember Shaun Camp showing us early on in our first research module the 6 blind men and an elephant illustration. Each explored a different part of the elephant and came back saying it was like a snake, it was spear-like or like a tree trunk. All were of course right to a degree but it was not until they all got together and all of their thoughts heard that a truer more well rounded picture of an elephant could be realised. I see my potential commentators as all helping to provide insight into the boys and overall we will get a fuller picture of them.
In the first test it was just the boys themselves, parents and psychologists. In the second it was all there of these again with the added addition of teachers. These were early plans but I feel they need re-considering and mention made as to what I feel they will bring to the project.
The aim of the piece was to find people who knew the boys, spent time with and around them for a while and could provide insight into the boys personality, traits and to see if birth order really does impact upon these and to what degree. A long list at the start was put together to consider who might provide such insight.
- Parents
- Teachers
- Aunts and Uncles
- Grandparents
- Friends
- Clubs and hobbies coaches
- Neighbours
- Close family friends
I held discussions (mini interviews) with all of these about the project and the boys and got their immediate thoughts analyse what each of them could bring to the project and if they could earn their keep. Lots of them gave similar points such as "Isaac like to be in charge", "Jacob is cheeky" and "Noah is a right little performer". All of this was useful but the scale of including them all in the project would be too huge.
What I did then was to try and enforce more of a selection criteria based on who really knows them to make informed decisions..
- Who spends a lot of time with the boys.
- Who knows them really well.
- Who knows the boys under different situations. Work, rest and play.
The two above were chosen simply on the basis of the criteria and the being the people who spent the most time with the boys, knew them well and could comment on them in work, rest or play. Close friends was a really close call as they could provide real insight into the side of the boys the other contributors. However getting permissions and working with extra kids (working with my own 3 was hard enough) was a step too far.
A compromise was to consider getting the boys to comment not just on themselves but each other. They are already commenting on themselves and how their personality traits BUT I thought they could also comment on each other as obviously they know each other really well. This would add even further insight not only as to how they are viewed by their peers but it would also give insight into their group dynamic and relationships, roles and identity in this pecking order.
No comments:
Post a Comment