The Professor's Notes

2 Minute Photoshop Tricks

Today is my day to post an update that isn’t very controversial, opinionated, or the like.

If you have Photoshop, the link above will take you to a blog (and its related podcast) that has a series of photoshop tips that are, quite simply, COOL.

Check it out!

The Prof

Occasional pieces in AR — Introduction

I was sent a link to this page by one of my students currently conducting research. I have many on-going discussions about qualitative vs quantitative research, and my student thought this discussion was something in which I might have an interest. Obviously–I do!

First, let me say, I find it interesting that we even have a struggle between “quant” and “qual” or between “hard sciences” and the “soft sciences.” It certainly strikes me as arrogance that one group of academics feel they can claim to be “true researchers” and thus limit the contributions of others through a claim of “lack of rigor.” I have for years argued that different disciplines have different types of rigor. The rigor a chemist requires is different from that of an electrical engineer. The rigor required to conduct solid research in History is different from that of Hebrew Literature. In the words of Rodney King “Can’t we all just get along?”

Now, moving on to the website referenced: This posits another interested direction for research–that of activist. Creswell, in his text on “Research Design” refers to for different “Knowledge Claims” that we have for research, and argues that we fit in one of 4 categories. One of those categories includes “Activist.” Of course, this makes the hair on the back of many necks stand straight up. How can one be “objective” if one has as one’s goal effecting change?

The need to effect change forms an explicit assumption of one’s research. Perhaps the greatest difference here is that the assumption is explicit, and often embedded in the “problem statement.” For instance, consider this problem statement/research question: “Heroin use remains a significant killer on the streets of major cities. This research seeks to identify the many ways people die from heroin use and propose policies that would reduce the number of deaths of our fellow citizens.”

Not very objective–or is it? Certainly it is “activist” in it’s role. Embedded in this statement is an assumption (hopefuly supported in a lit review) that heroin is a killer. Also embedded is that the “solution” must involve government intervention, since it seeks “policies” to effect change.

My question for you all, dear students, is this: Can one be objective, and be an activist researcher (or an “action researcher?”)

Please, feel free to share your comments and ideas on this.

The Professors

Fossil Fuels Set to Become Relics, Says Research Group – Yahoo! News

Well, an interesting story, and one that certainly has captured my imagination.

While I have not been one normally to plead the “green” case, I have also been quite interested in ways to capture the power of nature to provide the resources that enable me to enjoy the “finer things technology offers.”

I have a lake house in the East Coast of the US, and have always thought it would be nice to shed dependence on heating oil and electricity providers.

Here is my vision. Since I have a well, and fairly steady wind, I am wanting a combination of wind and fuel cell technology. I would like the windmill to provide the basic electric power for the house, and also to provide the electricity to tear the hydrogen atoms off the oxygen atom in the water from my well. Of course, I would want to store the hydrogen as a reserve for electricity generation when the wind dies down, and perhaps even for heat.

My challenge? None of this come cheaply yet.

So homework for the class: if any of you have plans for such a set up, or know of people that would be willing to set me up as a test case (trust me–I will advertise heavily how well it works!) let me know. I am always willing to be a guinea pig!

the Prof