While I have never worked with copyright, I have always had a healthy respect for the copyright laws and their intent, though at a conceptual rather than detailed level.  It was beneficial to listen to Melanie discuss copyright, what she has seen students do and how to avoid the same issues.  I appreciated that Melanie started with the statement that she is a librarian who has experience with copyright, but is not a lawyer so her presentation cannot be taken from a legal standpoint.  To me, this added to her credibility in this presentation, given that copyright is based in using information appropriately.

Where do I start with what I learned from Melanie?!  She made the copyright laws sound clear, and I suspect they become more so as one works with them.  I appreciate process, and copyright has clear-cut laws and rules about what is acceptable and what is not.  If there is ambiguity, it is best to ask permission; one cannot go wrong following that path.  This follows from Melanie’s statement that it is best to believe that everything is protected and apply the correct process to ensure publications are used correctly (personal communication, June 13, 2016).

Melanie talked about the Berne Convention and I was surprised to learn about the Law of the Land.  Before listening to this presentation, I would have thought that the law where the work was published would be the law in effect, not the law where the user is located.  As I listened to Melanie explain it, I realized why is made sense.  It would be challenging to know the laws of the country where work was published; therefore, following them could be close to impossible.  By adhering to local legislation, individuals can much more easily ensure they are followed.

A few messages that really stood out were how copyright applies, how publications are used, and who owns the information.  For example, the company one works for is often the owner the work; participants own their stories, but the writer owns the summaries of those stories, and it is not ideas that are copyrighted, but how they are said (personal communication, June 13, 2016).

As the presentation concluded, I felt more comfortable in the world of copyright.  I know that when it comes time for me to use copyrighted information or copyright my own work, I will need to become more familiar with the details, and I now know that I can turn to a librarian for help.

Reference

Wrobel, M. (2016). A Guide to Copyright [Audio recording]. Retrieved from https://moodle.royalroads.ca/moodle/mod/page/view.php?id=347413

One statement that stood out for me from Dr. Veletsianos’ was in regards to ethics allowing certain behaviour while the research is being conducted and then there is a change making that same behaviour unethical.  He addresses this by saying that it is best to be current with the best practices in ethics and attempt to do a bit better than the guidelines state (personal communication, August 16, 2019).  This stood out for me because an important part of research is to do no harm.  As researchers, we cannot rely purely on today’s standards, we need to be able to think ahead to ensure we are doing no harm to those involved in our study.  This idea flowed nicely into Dr. Veletsianos’ discussion on biases.  He pointed out that a benefit of working with a research team is that each person can help bring awareness to biases within the team.  Biases will always be present, but it is important to be aware of them so they do not affect the participants or the research (personal communication, August 16, 2019).  This made me think of how I can be mindful of my biases allowing me to have practices in place to not have them affect my work and help others do the same.  I believe this is always be an ongoing process since biases change over time.

Reference

Veletsianos, G. (2019). Questions about Research for George Veletsiano [Audio recording]. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yzG3Sqo0wImXN0tUf9dcjXODISiSYt9gH8_gJnMC_hY/edit

A good research question is the base on which a research paper stands.  If the question is not good enough, the paper will be weak and not be able to prove or disprove the theory.  Here are some points on how to make a good research:

• Make it clear so you and your audience knows the topic
• Make it focused so you know what information you are looking for
• Make it concise so that you do not end up questioning the question as you go
• Make it complex enough that it requires research to find the answer.
• Make it arguable so there is discussion possible on the topic

Reference

The Writing Center. (2019). How to Write a Research Question. Retrieved from https://writingcenter.gmu.edu/guides/how-to-write-a-research-question