I"m giving the attached talk next week. Though not couched in chat terms,
it may fit with Phil's remarks, or raise related issues. Peter
At 06:47 PM 11/12/2003 +0700, you wrote:
>At 15:26 11/11/03 +0000, Eugene wrote:
>
>>our approach is on odds with mainstream institutional demands judging
>>quality of our work based on individualistic authorship…. I feel that
>>behind authorship of articles that I contribute is a broad academic
>>community (or even communities).
>>
>>
>Eugene,
>I have just finished writing a paper for my coursework that focuses on
>this. One of my conclusions, following Wardekker, W. L., (2000) "Criteria
>for the Quality of Inquiry", Mind, Culture and Activity, 7(4)was that too
>much emphasis is placed by institutions on the product of research rather
>than the process of change that it engenders in all those involved. The
>great benefit that I gained from writing the paper was developing an
>understanding of CHAT (or whatever we call it) research vis-a-vis how
>learning processes experienced in a research study enhance a person's
>(researcher's, participant's, report reader, etc) culturally-held meaning
>systems. I am not sure how much of Wardekker's and others' work I
>appropriated, but I am left viewing CHAT research (in education) as a
>platform for change and learning, and as a means of understanding the
>relationship between change and learning to actions. I'd love to learn
>more about intervention research now!
>
>The value of XMCA in this respect is extreme if one's work is to have
>generative power for future practice. That is a little more relevant than
>positioning yourself as the all-knowing author who has something for the
>community to generalise across time and space. I was particularly drawn to
>Wardekker's following quote:
> [The product of research should be conceived as]an understanding of the
> change processes in a specific situation that may or may not have
> implications for other situations. Knowledge is a mediational means for
> focusing our attention on specific aspects of a practice (Wardekker,
> 2000, p. 269).
>These thoughts may not be new fodder for many in this community, but I
>have certainly experienced some epiphanies over the last couple of weeks!
>
>Phil
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 01 2003 - 01:00:11 PST