Methodology Review

In this entry, we are going to evaluate the methodology followed to improve next time.

The topic chosen interested us because of the relationship between the emigration during that period and now. The two narrators provided us enough information, although they went off topic several times. We could have also interviewed an emigrant due to political reasons.

To define the interview outline, we found great background readings. They contained numbers and statistics from different European countries. Our list of topics could be improved by reading more about the causes, situation in the new country, etc. 

Manuel in front of one of the factories where he worked in Brussels

It was a bit complicated to interview the narrators because they live in Seville. But Cristina travelled to see her grandparents and carried out the interview.

It took a long time because one of the narrators was going off the topics. For that, we must have redirected the questions faster or even have interviewed in other situation. Although we were able to record the interview effectively, it was hard to transcribe it because both of the narrators were talking at the same time; they went on and on… In order to improve this, we would use a program. However, we looked for some but they couldn’t transcribe it properly.

Felisa & Manuel  (narrators)

The distribution of the work was unequal because the results obtained were shared and discussed by just two members of the group at a time, never the whole group. So, we should organize better the tasks and try to stay all.