Dissertation Grant: Critical Algorithmic Literacy

Since this grant was awarded I have completed much of the proposed work. I conducted interviews and collected online discourse materials. I analyzed these data and reported results in a dissertation document. I, further, presented, explained, and successfully defended this work for my dissertation committee. Unfortunatelyue to COVID-19, it was not possible to complete some of the planned and proposed activities related this project, which has left a substantial balance of funds. I would, therefore, like to subaward the remaining grant funds to myself at Arizona State University (ASU), where I will be a postdoctoral scholar and where I will continue my work on this project.
In the next yearpandemic conditions permittingI will present the findings of this project to scholars in my field at conferences and other in-person meetings. As a result of COVID-19, I was largely unable to share my work with or seek feedback from a broader audience at in-person meetings, as some events were cancelled or postponed. In the next year, I will disseminate findings at conferences, workshops, and similar venues, and solicit feedback from other experts for further developing the work. Sharing and discussing the work with a global audience of scholars will help inform additional work on the project, as well as evolve the analyses.
In addition to disseminating findings, I will also secure a book contract and revise my dissertation for publication. For this, I will need to further hone my findings. Originally, I planned and proposed to conduct some interviews in person and requested funds for travel associated with field research. However, as a result of COVID-19, I needed to change course and conducted all interviews online. Thus, I intend to make use of the remaining funds allocated for field research for conducting additional, so-called member checking interviews. Member checking is a validity procedure used in qualitative research to gauge how well a researchers account of a phenomenon fits with participants understanding and experience of it, as well as how credible the account is to participants.