Dear Phil and everybody-
I definitely share your filling of a collective enterprise. Today I observed
little kids, toddlers, building something with sand on a playground near a
local library. It reminds me my academic work. I also take something from
other scholars do something with it and let others to change it in their own
turn. Like in the case of little toddlers, what I do with work of others is
informed but what others do. Like toddlers, we argue with each other and
even fight for resources. :-)
I'm not sure even that "appropriation" metaphor (another property metaphor)
can work here at all. Kids passing their sand building one to another do not
appropriate much (except sand in their clothes :-)).
What do you think?
Eugene
_____
From: Phil Chappell [mailto:phil_chappell@access.inet.co.th]
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 6:47 AM
To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
Subject: Re: Multidisciplinary perspectives
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