HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 16:28:46 -0400
Reply-To:     aa248@yfn.ysu.edu
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         Nicholas Sturm <aa248@YFN.YSU.EDU>
Subject:      RE: hermeneutics

>
>Tom writes:
>
>  >..I can't remember the title.
>
> ...  (which most Unix systems should have),

  I'm always a little amused by that "should" -- I should have a billion
dollars (in my humble wishes).  Just having a Unix system hardly gives
one access to telnet, does it?

  We have something that covers a little of the Library of Congress, but
I have the impression it's a lot less than that "library" would suggest.

I doubt anyone will tell me if it is the same as dracom.  They try to keep
us from knowing too much about telnet (
for whatever reason).

...
>telnet  dracom

That I'll have to put in my references.


--
  * aa248@yfn.ysu.edu *
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 09:25:51 CDT
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         EN01000 <EN01@SIUEMUS.BITNET>
Subject:      update on MWERA

It's Clella Fouts, and I know where she is.  We've been playing telephone
tag.  Thanks for the information about Olga.
Forgot to tell you that in the hol hotel on Maui, there were cages of large
tropical birds and parrot perches.  They all whistled . . . something
extremely close to the family whistle, especially the first two notes
of it.  My head jerked around continually looking for you or the kids.
Very very very sticky here today.  Barb was glorying last night in
being on her way to a place where they have long spring and fall
instead of some wine s winter and instant summer.  I didn't remind
her that those seasons were often spring slush and fall drizzle, but
if I had she wouldn't have minded, since she hates the heat.
Me too.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Thu, 23 Jul 1992 10:53:00 CDT
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         Gary Shank <P30GDS1@NIU.BITNET>
Subject:      electronic journals...

You know, one of my most imprtant scholarly sources lately is the
advent of the electronic journal.  There are some really fine ones
out there that relate to our interests, including Postmodern Culture
and Psycholoquy (sp?).  Here's my dangerous musing -- isnt it time
for an electronic journal of qualitative research?
Comments?      gary shank
From: SED91LN@BUACCA.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Subject: Re: Qualitative-Quantitative
Date: 24 Jul 92 17:37:16 GMT
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

Michael Fischer writes:
>There is a bit of confusion in my mind about what people are referring
>to when they use these terms; is the object, subject or both
>qualitative (quantitative)? Or is the information relating to the
>object, subject or both qualitative (quantitative)?

Perhaps the terms qualitative and quantitative were originally adopte
and should be used to refer NOT to the type of data collected (numbers,
categories, frequencies,...) but to the assumptions underlying the
research itself: qualitative presumes a relatively open mind with an
aim to understanding some area from the perspective of those intimately
involved in it (of which ethnography is one species of endeavor); quantitative
presumes a relatively precise hypothesis about some area and proceeds
with an aim to confirming this hypothesis (or at least rejecting the null
hypothesis). If this is the case, then the TYPE OF DATA, however one
might want to call it, will follow from the area to be studied and
the epistemological underpinning of the effort. There is nothing in
principle that precludes the same data from being collected by a
researcher engaged in a qualitative or a quantitative research effort,
although this is usually not the case.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-To: iugate::"QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 11:17:38 EST
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         "Tom Schwandt, 5-0278" <SCHWAND@UCS.INDIANA.EDU>
Subject:      RE: hermeneutics

Re: S. Reynolds request on hermeneutics:  try Joseph Bleicher's overview
(can't recall the title off hand) and then get ready for some fun
reading Gadamer, Dilthey, Betti, Hirsch.   Also there's a nice little
intro to the topic in the reader edited by Dallmayr and McCarty (again, I
can't remember the title, sorry).  T.Schwandt
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 07:49:59 +1000
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         "Kathy Watson" <kwatson@METZ.UNE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      mailing list
Comments: To: qualrs-l@uga.cc.uga.edu

Could you please put me on your mailing list.
Thank you.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"QUALRS-L@UGA"
Original_cc:  MALEC
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Thu, 23 Jul 1992 14:23:00 EDT
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         "Michael A. Malec x4131" <MALEC@BCVMS.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: MWERA warning

As a very recent past editor of the JOURNAL OF SPORT AND SOCIAL ISSUES, I'd
like to suggest that she consider sending it to JSSI.  (I'm assuming that
you think the paper is publishable.)  She should s end four copies to:
        Lawrence A. Wenner
        Editor, JSSI
        Sports & Fitness Management Program
        University of San Fransisco, UC 519
        San Fransisco, CA 94117-1080

If you think the paper is not yet ready for publication, but might be ready
for presentation at a professional society meeting, I suggest that she
consider the November meetings of the North American Society for Sport
Sociology, to be held in Toledo, OH.  I suggest that she send an ABSTRACT
of the paper to three people:

Mary Duquin
Dept. of Phys. Ed.
U. of Pittsburgh
161 Trees Hall
Pittsburgh PA 15261

Mary is the "Program Chair" for the meetings.  Since it is past the
deadline for submissions, Mary might have some sense of whethter this paper
can be "squeezed in" somewhere.

Laurel Davis
1266 Hubbard Ave
St. Paul, MN 55104

Laurel is the Organizer of a session on "Sport and the Politics of Racial
Relations"


Ann Bolin
Box 2115
Elon College
Elon, NC 27244

Ann is organizing a session on "A Road Less Travelled:  Ethnographic
Possibilities"

Good luck!
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 07:52:15 EDT
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         Anita Pomerantz <ANITA@TEMPLEVM.BITNET>
Subject:      re: tutorial piece on qualitative research

On Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:01:45 EDT <SED91LN@BUACCA> said:
>                                   It would address questions such as:
>What are the basic assumptions underlying qualitative research? What is
>it that distinguishes qualitative research from quantitative research?
>Why is it that we don't find terms/concepts like reliability, general-
>izability, validity and the like in qualitative research, or at least
>not used as they are in quantitative research.

Bruce, I am wildly enthusiastic about your writing a tutorial; there is
a strong need. Because I've perceived the same need, B.J.Fehr and I are
organizing a reading group at Temple in which we're taking up (1) what
are the assumptive bases of ethnomethodology/conversation analysis,
(2) how does conversation analysis relate to other discourse analytic
approaches, and (3) what do we do with such concepts as validity,
reliability, and representativeness.
    The need for this group, in part, comes out of what happens
during preliminary examinations. Students are confronted with
questions from people who don't share their methodological commitments.
It's been quite tough on some of our qualitative students.

In the tutorial that you're writing, I hope you will address a question
I sometimes put to our students: on what bases does one decide that a
report of qualitative research (specify the type of research) is credible
(adequately represents what it purports to represent)?
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
|  Anita Pomerantz                    |                               |
|  Rhetoric & Communication (265-65)  | E-mail/CREN:  ANITA@TEMPLEVM  |
|  Temple University                  | Telephone:    215-787-1883    |
|  Philadelphia, PA 19122             |                               |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:28:00 CDT
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         "tk0jut1@mvs.cso.niu.edu jim thomas" <TK0JUT1@NIU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: back to critical theory !!!

Tom Schwandt writes:

 >Yes, making sense of things involves labeling, sorting,
 >classifying, catgeorizing, comparing, etc. But the cash value of
 >an exercise in sorting types of inquirers seems limited.
 >[Perhaps someone should attempt a metasort--a sort of the sorts
 >(of a sort as it were)]. There are more important things to "vex
 >ourselves" about than this. Like trying to read Habermas'
 >contribution to the dialogue of what we are about when we
 >inquire, or Jim Thomas' views on same for that matter.

Tom raised a good point. The value of typologies depends on how we use
them. My own confusion results from uncertainty about what we do next
if we can decide that critical ethnographers (for example) are or are
not radical humanists, structuralists, or whatever.

It might help to make clearer the distinction between critical
scholarship and critical theory. "Critical thinking" is a form of
critique and a type of subversion of commonly-accepted concepts and
images about our world. Critical theory is a Marxian-derived theory of
capitalist society and the material and symbolic relationships between
power, control, and social existence. Critical theorists' who focus on
culture and communication are especially relevant for qualitative
research. It is possible (and most common) for scholars to be critical
without being, or even drawing from, critical theory.

At its most general, conventional ethnography refers to the tradition
of cultural description and analysis that displays meanings by
interpreting meanings. Critical ethnography refers to the reflective
process of choosing between conceptual alternatives and making
value-laden judgments of meaning and method to challenge research,
policy, and other forms of human activity.  Ethnography derived from
critical theory attempts to locate these meanings within unique
characteristics of capitalist social formation.  Conventional
ethnography describes "what is;" critical ethnography asks "what could
be?"

In my own view, "critical ethnography" is as "hard" and as
"scientific" as any other science, and we need not be defensive about
our paradigm for alleged "softness" or "subjectivity." Hope this isn't
too simplistic a summary.

Although reflexive methodological discussions must be continuously
rigorously pursued, sometimes there is a danger in re-inventing the
wheel by ignoring key exemplars and their epigones. Seems that, for
those with an empirical bent, there are substantial theoretical and
empirical models out there from which to draw for critical inquiry of
all kinds.

Jim
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <diana@u-shizuoka-ken.ac.jp>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 17:36:26 JST
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         "Diana B. Putman" <diana@U-SHIZUOKA-KEN.AC.JP>
Subject:      Re: journals

Could you please provide a little information about Journal of Contemporary
Ethnography?  I am looking for places to publish my ethnographic research
about Japanese women.  Thanks in advance.  Diana Putman
---  diana@u-shizuoka-ken.ac.jp.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 07:48:59 +1000
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         "Kathy Watson" <kwatson@METZ.UNE.EDU.AU>
Comments: To: qualrs-l@uga.cc.uga.edu

list
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 15:30:24 -0700
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         Bruce Jones <bjones@WEBER.UCSD.EDU>
Subject:      Dots and other little things
Comments: To: QUALRS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu

>
>From: Nicholas Sturm <aa248@YFN.YSU.EDU>
>Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 16:28:46 -0400
>Subject:      RE: hermeneutics
>
>...
>>telnet  dracom
>
>That I'll have to put in my references.

That should read dra.com
                    ^

It'll work better that way :-)

bj

p.s. anyone know who "dra" is?  and why is the connection to the
Library of Congress a commercial site and not "gov"?

-
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 14:20:05 EDT
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         SED91LN@BUACCA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Qualitative/quantitative social science

I think the  use of computer discussion fails to distinguish between
using software to perform computation tasks (which may well be in the
interest of bona fide qualitative research) and using it to perform
search, data manipulation, comparison, and similar tasks which one might
have previously done using cards, notes, or memory. I think most of the
software being discussed can be used for both and, like most tools, can
be misused and/or misunderstood. Hope this helps to clarify the
discussion. Bruce Fraser
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <JGOETZ@UGA>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:46:19 EDT
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         jude <JGOETZ@UGA.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Help Request

On Wed, 29 Jul 1992 12:47:00 PDT Peter Coughlan said:

>Judith:  I don't know how this discussion is set up, but I'm wondering if
>there isn't a way to collect information about software for Qual. analysis
>and put it in a file that everyone could access.  It seems that a request
>for info. comes across once every few weeks, and that if we had the info.
>stored, newcomers could be told just to get that file.
>
>Peter Coughlan
>UCLA Applied Linguistics
>
Yes, there is a way to do that.  What we need is someone to review the
QUALRS-L logs, excerpt the appropriate material, and send it to me.  For
the time being, I can store it on my hard disk for uploading on request.
For the long term, if subscribers wanted to collect files on
various topics, we could probably get some space on my college's local
minicomputer for storage and retrieval. jude

*************************************************************
* Judith Preissle-Goetz                                     *
* Professor of Anthropology and Education                   *
* Social Science Education              Voice: 404-542-6489 *
* Tucker Hall                             Fax: 404-542-3282 *
* University of Georgia                  BITNET: JGOETZ@UGA *
* Athens, GA  30602         Internet: jgoetz@uga.cc.uga.edu *
*************************************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 10:15:11 -0700
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was
              bstoner@MILTON.U.WASHINGTON.EDU
From:         Bradley Stoner <bstoner@U.WASHINGTON.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Qualitative/quantitative social science
Comments: To: "Qualitative Research for the Human Sciences"
              <QUALRS-L%UGA.BITNET@uwavm.u.washington.edu>
Comments: cc: Multiple recipients of list QUALRS-L
              <QUALRS-L%UGA.BITNET@uwavm.u.washington.edu>

Kudos to Bruce Jones for bringing up an important topic of essential
concern to qualitative social science, that is, to what extent does
unabashedly qualitative research need to be made amenable to statistical
analysis and quantitative manipulations?  This seems to be a major bone of
contention among social scientists in general, with roots in the clash
between "hard" sociology and "soft" anthropology.  I too agree that
certain aspects of social relations are interactive, interpretive, and
meaning-centered, all characteristics which are eminently fascinating but
perhaps less appropriate for reductionistic categorization and statistical
processing.  Fortunately there is still a school of anthropologists and
other social scientists who are sensitive to the possibility that such a
quantitative approach could in fact lead, in its most extreme, to an overt
and inappropriate reification of social constructs.
	I think that subscribers to this network are sympathetic to the goals
and aims of qualitative research in general, but I do see a tendency
toward making qualitative studies more statistical.  Perhaps this is due in
part to a sense that quantification adds a "scientific" flavor which
makes such research more acceptable to co-workers in the natural and
biomedical sciences, and perhaps such an orientation serves to
enhance a proposal's fundability from government and private sources.
While there isn't much money these days for "soft" social science, I would
hope that the value of interpretation, understanding, and meaning are not
lost in the quest to quantify, quantify, quantify.  Any thoughts from
other researchers will be greatly appreciated!

						-Bradley Stoner
					 	 Anthropology/Medicine
						 Univ. of Washington
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: University of Kentucky
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 20:52:38 EDT
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         Bill Stilwell <CPD247@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      no mail

One bounce does it all.

SET QUALRS-L NO MAIL

William Stilwell, Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology,
College of Education, UK, 40506-0017, 606-257-3395 (O).
"Play the game, fairly"         "Control.  Push the ball"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: QUALRS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu
X-VMS-To: IN%"QUALRS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:31:00 MST
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         JIMANDE@CC.UTAH.EDU
Subject:      Re: back to critical theory !!!
Comments: To: QUALRS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu

Please excuse a few unfocused remarks on the efforts of parsing discourse
communities.  Seems to me that we are exploring the basic identity problem
of self and other.  From what community do we do the classifying?  What
political and economic return is there in the essentializing (or simply
labeling) discursive communities which are apparently other than our own?
does identity make them safe--no better than us?  Are we holding to
some Arcimedean point from which we can speak the name of others?  Are we
seeking some sense of truth in the semiotic realm or just doing what
academics do?

I worry about catagorization being a method of control.  (Foucault is a
structuralist andwe don't do structuralism).   What else is it a method
of?  Personally, I don't believe a label is ever innocent.

It seems like the work of "What is ______?" questions is the effort to
contain an on-going set of improvisational discursive practices within
a community of more or less claimed membership.  If I write to this
list am I a qualitative researcher?

As I said unfocused.

Jim Anderson
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ethics-l
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 09:02:40 EDT
From:         Brad Baxter <BBAXTER@UGA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: GEnie adopts censorship

On Wed, 29 Jul 1992 08:13:47 EDT Charles Elliott said:
>Did this list somehow become a political action list rather than
>an ethics list ? The GEnie matter is interesting, but I am a bit put off
>by finding it here...Charles Elliott
>
The GEnie posting seemed entirely appropriate to me.  A discussion of
ethics in computing ought to expect to hear about computing practices
that some deem unethical.

Brad Baxter
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"ETHICS-L@UGA"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ethics-l
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 23:29:00 EDT
From:         JOE TRANCE <JTRANCE@SNYESCVA.BITNET>
Subject:      Ethics of Computer Use in Medicine

   I am writing to ask if it ethical for computer programs to be used
in the diagnosis and determining the treatment of medically ill people.

   The first question is in regards to whether a program can determine
(with any degree of certainty) the probability of healing, or the
inevitability of death. In the case of a patient that has been
diagnosed with cancer. There are programs that can "statistically"
calculate this patient's chances of survival, based upon the patient's
symptoms and personal statistics (weight, height, smoker, etc.). If the
computer program results in a "dismal" prognosis, should the doctor
share these results with the patient based on the computer's analysis
alone? Should he/she not say anything? Is it the doctor's responsibility
to balance the results of this program with "human" factors; such as, the
ability of the patient to follow a remedial course of action, and their
"will" to live?

The second question involves programs that are designed to diagnose
and suggest treatments by answering a series of questions. There is
a commercial program through the phone service which does this. The
person calls the service and answers a series of questions through
pushing certain buttons on their touch-tone phone to represent the
desired response. When the questioning is complete the machine tells
you what your ailment is "MOST LIKELY" to be. The machine then goes
on to describe the appropriate remedy. At the end it states that if the
condition persists please consult your physician. Can this program
really evaluate someone condition based upon that persons evaluation
of the symptoms? Doesn't the complexity of our english language leave
a
wide area for misunderstanding terms? Such as "a severe rash"...that will
mean one thing to the patient and it could mean something else to the
computer. Aren't these programs leaving to much to chance? Like what your
family history of illness has been, the numerous allergies that could
apply, and sometimes as simple as what was the last thing you ate. I
am concern about the value of these commercial programs to the patient.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ethics-l
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 07:56:41 EDT
From:         Charles Elliott <CEE@CORNELLC.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Ethics of Computer Use in Medicine

Well, Williams has just about said it all. What a careful and well-
reasoned insight. One could only add that we hope physicians would not only
be informed of the 'fallibility' of computer controls, programs, etc., but
taught at some point in their education (not training) how programs work
and that programs would come equipped with a discussion of their limits.
Bravo Williams !
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU