i am confused. I am already in the midst of reconstructing my chapters when I suddenly feel that maybe i should not reconstruct it and just let it be!! haiyaaa....
ok. pendapat uols amat dialu alukan!
in the first version, i divided my chapters (ni i citer pasal findings saja ye) according to the methods I utilised. My content analysis was conducted to mainly discuss about the notion of cultural imperialism through television text in times of modernity.
My focus group discussion pula is to find out how they construct meanings from what they watch. So I divided this chapter into a few sub topics which actually shows the flow in which how they construct meanings, with relations to their cultural identity.
So, tiba-tiba last week terbaca thesis orang lain and terus cuak kan??? LOL.
So, in the second version, I thought that I should chop the chapters up and mish mash everything to indicate the things i want to emphasise on. But, now, masa tengah buat ni, I find that it does not make sense!! hmm...or am i not making sense?
Sebab, if ikut my first version, I will discuss balik the findings from both methods in my concluding chapter. So, dalam conclusion ni nanti, i akan spell out the answer to my research question and also bagitahu what are my contributions.
Kalau ikut new version, konon-konon each chapter will cerita terus contribution ittew tapi bila i tulis tu, rasa macam tak best je. Macam tak de flow je rasa tau.
So, what will you do if you were in my shoes? Stick with the old version? Or go for the new one??
1 comment:
Tp tula,pening kn nak construct chapter..i hantar kat sv dia blh bg komen yg sgt sentappp...ternangis jap..tp tula,kdg xtahu camne yg ok..which way is the best..cam kat mesia kn mesia,page byk bolehl tulis mcm2..ni nk kena point tertentu but really difficult..i pun ada masalah sama,bila explain keje in oral diorg fahm...tulis sekali, nanges.
Post a Comment