# Meeting with Hawra, Leonie and Ingolf (meeting 2) on 28/11/2019

## Previous action points

* Leonie shares PhD starter pack - Done
* Hawra - next meeting giving us an overview of the trends and observations from the literature review conducted so far - see below

## Agenda

* Type of review being used
* Findings
* Next steps
* Courses (done and future)

#### Research method being used

Systematic review of all the literature, starting with keywords on T&F online, and then looking at the studies that had done – loading them onto Zotero, adding the tags and making notes on each one on Word, as well as adding them onto an Excel sheet to see what had been done and identify any gaps.

#### Topics/keywords showing up:

* Parents/educators awareness (even when gov intervened, tech changes quickly)
* prevention education
* pastoral care in education
* student-centred aproach
* Also gender-based: males consider peer support to be a female activity, and choose to not take part.

* Most work derived from T&F has been on student perspectives.
* Questions I am asking:
* Am I looking at it from:
* a gender perspective?
* Government and policy and its effects?
* Psychological?
* Computing solutions?

##### Notes

* Digital bystanders
* Perspectives of students towards:
* Cyberbullying - what it covers
* Parents and teachers making a difference
* Teachers: won't do anything
* Parents: will take away priveleges

* The current gap is that..?
* Get targeted work clear on paper, to have a clear idea of what the gaps are.
* Get the overview - the core papers, and core universities, look at the systematic reviews of what has been done
* Pick the topic that would inspire you (give you a level of satisfaction).
* Main topic: what has been done to make a difference to students.
* Collecting data -
* Some kind of ethical authority

##### Issues

* I'm still not sure what my main questions are, to know if what I am reading will serve my research.
* Not sure how much progress I have made or what my Lit Review structure will look like.
* I may need a 7-10 day's time meeting to touch base (even if it's with one supervisor - just to feel like I'm on track, and for any guidance or advice.)

##### Advice received
* Ethics
* When working with other countries: some kind of ethical authority in the country to be able to be accepted for UCL.
* Justification: Why are you choosing certain countries - there has to be a good reason (derived from literature) and rationale as to why you’re doing it.
* For example, nothing has been done in such and such country and therefore it would be a useful thing to look at.

* Parallel between UK and Iraq and how many CS students are coming out of it.

* Read literature in their language. You can communicate this in a language that others can't understand/don't have access to, because you’re using your cultural and language understanding, and translating it for academia.

* Every time we meet - you have to have something written - next session to have 1500 words down (either as paragraphs or as structured bullet points) to communicate where the current ideas lie - deadline: **Monday 9th December**.

* Reverse skeleton essay - find it in the PhD pack that Leonie sent, learn about it and use it to guide your writing at this stage.

* Shane's meeting on Monday **2nd December**: Iterate on the exact PhD is going to be, what the motivations are behind it, and where it is headed - to discuss it in the meeting.

* Important thoughts:
* WHAT IS MY RESEARCH QUESTION AND WHAT IS IT I NEED TO DO?
* Relation or perception?

* Relation is (for example the effects of bullying on mental health, so it will be quantitative).
* Perception is (for example teachers perspectives on cyberbullying), so it will be qualititaive not quantitative.

* What is it that you want to achieve - when you know that, then you know exactly what you need to do (quants or qualitative).

* Write down now what your aims and objectives are, and THEN you go to the literature.

* When you provide the bullet points in your writing, ensure that your aims and outcomes are measurable: explaining what you want to do, why, how, and what you're looking for in your final results/conclusions.