The problem with interviews

We've discussed in class that you influence the research, and you are biased as a researcher, but if you're telling about that bias, then you've done what's expected. Interviewing is no different. From how we select our participants to the questions we ask, Potter and Hepburn (2012)discuss that we're not telling enough either to the participants or in the responses we get when we transcribe the interview. What resonates with me is the transcription of the interview. Although I've never seen the Jeffersonian method of transcription, I could understand the most part how it gave the reader the space between words, the stress of the word, and the rising (or lowering) of pitch. I wasn't taught how to transcribe, but what I do try to do is put every pause, every utterance from me (as an 'um hmmm') and what the participant is doing physically at the time. When I do interview someone,I agree that things could be easily misconstrued if not written down thoroughly, so I have an audio recording, but at the same time, I will time stamp and write the things I see the interviewee doing, such as wringing their hands, looking away from my direct gaze, nervously playing with hair, etc. Those notes are along side of me when I transcribe. I also have a stake and interest with my interviewees and often have an "oh-prefaced agreement" (Potter and Hepburn, 2012), which may allow more participation from my interviewee. So far, I've only interviewed teachers and principals, and since I was a teacher for a long time, I am not only sympathetic but empathetic to a fellow teacher if I'm asking them questions about their work. I appreciate what Potter and Hepburn say, but I am concerned about being able to do each and every thing that is discussed in my own research at this point. I wonder how researchers that have been in the field and have far greater experience than I feel about this piece. As far as the project, I'm reading my second book, this one by LeCompte and Schensul as part of the "Ethnographer's Toolkit". I am appreciating this work. In class, I had asked how do you know which "person" to follow, and we said that you read and find out what you like, and pick one. I then equated it to choosing a paint color, which sounded quite vapid to everyone, I'm sure. I should have qualified that statement with how important paint color is to me, and I am currently painting various rooms in my house. I agonize over color choice, much as I have been agonizing which methodologist in ethnography to follow. I am finding that what I'm reading is similar (much like two shades of paint within the same color)and I can't make a decision just yet. With paint, the sample colors stay taped to the wall, next to one another for weeks (sometimes months) until I just pick one. What's great is that once the paint is on the wall, I am happy with it, and I don't focus on the one not chosen. I am guessing that this is the same experience I will have when aligning myself with a methodologist in ethnography.