day four: data collection, discussions

Today we visited Chiang Mai University (CMU), where we planned to get the most work done – our surveys, interviews and focus group discussions! (convenience sampling :P)

On the previous days where we conducted street interviews and surveys, we came to realise that university students normally choose to major in a subject area which they are passionate about. Thereafter, most of their attention and interest is invested in that area. It is seldom that they venture into other areas. For example, we interviewed a student who majors in Pharmacy, and he mentioned that he does not know much about social issues since he was not interested in them. This was something common with the other students we spoke to.

In the morning, we attended a lecture given by a Political Science Professor and also had a short speech from the Dean of Political Science CMU. What both of them brought up was the context and history of Chiang Mai. They also mentioned what Chiang Mai hopes to become, a hub of all things in Northern Thailand. This point struck me as it was so similar to Singapore’s context.

Though Chiang Mai may be much older than Singapore, we have progressed at a much faster speed than they have. As mentioned by Prof Patrick, this is what cultural lag is. In simple terms, Chiang Mai is probably at the stage Singapore was at about 8 years ago. They are only just starting to welcome technological advancements in communication technology (3G data, smart phones, social media etc) in the last 3 to 4 years. Although the context between the two places are quite different, I guess the end goal is similar, that both cities want to establish a reputation/name in their respective regions. This will not only boost and develop their economy but also bring them to a higher level of development.

Similarly, as the dean mentioned, there are many things that each city can learn from each other, with reference to Chiang Mai and Singapore. It was a really insightful and intriguing talk by the Professor and Dean.

Listening to the professor share about pertinent issues such as globalisation and the economy, made things that seemed far-fetched at first become more tangible to me. Bringing it back to the Singapore context, globalisation hit Singapore quite a while back. As a nineteen year old, I grew up experiencing the effects of globalisation, without knowing what the situation was like in the past. To be able to hear about and see the transition for myself was really interesting and eye-opening. Thus I gained a deeper understanding of some of the issues and tensions Singapore might have faced in the past,

Thanks to the buddy attached to our group, she managed to arrange for a group of her friends to attend our focus group discussion that afternoon. I was really amazed at how well they could speak English. They were so fluent and so confident while they spoke that really made me want to be like them. (I have so much to learn.) A few of them actually had experiences studying overseas, which I did not expect. Their ability to converse in English so while also made them seem a lot more vocal than those who we interviewed on the streets.

At the same time, this trip also reminded me of what I have learnt before; there are many things that we are unable to find out from online which require us to go on the ground to understanding and experience it for ourselves. This is not just applicable to this TOPS trip, but also to many other research projects. The learning point is the same, though the context where I experienced it previously was different.

Although not being able to find what we want online might be the result of our lack of skill in maneuvering online search engines and journal websites, but there could also be a lacking of information in that area based on context of the research. There may be a lot of research done on the general research area, but more often than not, studies are conducted in US or UK. There are some studies conducted in Asia but with each country/city, there are different contexts and factors which would affect the results. Thus, being able to get on the ground to find out for ourselves might be better than online sources. Yet this brings up another problem with our ‘intervention’ as each person would come back with slightly altered views of what they have experienced, resulting in less objective and accurate information. Well, I guess there is a certain level of balance where we have to compromise in order to achieve what we want for our research.

After doing all the work, Fye brought us to this pond/valley/reservoir thing in CMU campus. It was so pretty. Plus we made it right in time for sunset 🙂