We can post the chapter you refer to on xmca papers for discussion if you
wish. Catherine.
Once again terminology arises to challenge us: sociocultural/action/chat
research methods to be added to
grounded research............ as Kevin noted yesterday.
Perhaps an internet course on comparison of methods, or perhaps
methodologies?
mike
On 1/14/07, Merja Helle <Merja.Helle@helsinki.fi> wrote:
>
> cathrene
>
> i certainly would be interested in your dissertation
>
> merja helle
>
> e-mail: merja.helle@helsinki.fi
>
> Quoting Cathrene Connery <ConneryC@cwu.EDU>:
>
> > Hi everyone:
> > My dissertation on the ontogenesis of emergent biliterates (2006)
> > integrated sociocultural and action research methods. During the course
> > of the writing,it became necessary to include an additional chapter on
> > the philosophical assumptions of the study for one of the committee
> > members to legitimize my approach. I'd be happy to forward the chapter
> > as an attachment to anyone who is interested. It certainly would make a
> > fun article for anyone who'd like to collaborate!
> > Cathrene
> > >>> Kevin Rocap <Kevin.Rocap@liu.edu> 1/12/2007 7:26 AM >>>
> > Dear Elaine,
> >
> > Hi! You pose some interesting things to consider. I can suggest what I
> >
> > think are a few clarifications (perhaps distinctions, perhaps not ;-)).
> >
> > (1) Action research involves the practitioner in researching
> > his/her/their own practices whether for ongoing improvement or for other
> >
> > social action/change. The CHAT framework has certainly been applied by
> > folks studying other people's actions, not necessarily their own.
> >
> > (2) While CHAT provides some theories of action, object, tool use,
> > interrelations, I'm not sure I'd characterize it as inherently
> > "activist" which I think is more in the hands of whomever is making use
> > of the CHAT framework.
> >
> > (3) A CHAT framework could certainly be used by practitioner-researchers
> >
> > within their own action research activity and might help them understand
> >
> > and/or comment upon diverse tools, objects/intents/purposes, contexts,
> > etc. of their own researched practice, imho.
> >
> > (4) Action Science referenced by Engestrom is very specfiic and does not
> >
> > layout the same range of variables for consideration (i.e., the various
> > points on the triangle in the case of CHAT). The primary focus from my
> > prior experience studying action science with Chris Argyris is that the
> > focus is on talk among actors in an organization and how that frames,
> > organizes, coordinates and provides a window into their commitments,
> > attitudes, and behaviors (whether Model I or Model II in the Argyris
> > typology). True their talk may have to, at key points, be
> > compared/contrasted with their non-verbal behaviors (yet without real
> > frameworks regarding ways to assess those behaviors per se), but verbal
> > behaviors were always the primary focus in my short experience (maybe
> > the presumption is that much of corporate behavior hinges on talk ;-)).
> >
> > My two cents.
> >
> > In Peace,
> > K.
> >
> >
> >
> > Elaine Mateus wrote:
> > > Dear All,
> > > There has been a recurrent issue among some of my brazilian peers
> > regarding differences and/or similarities between action-research and
> the
> > CHAT methodological framing. I'm also uncertain about this matter as I
> > read Kemmis, for example, saying that:
> > >
> > > In my view, critical or emancipatory action research is always
> > connected to social action: it always understands itself as a concrete
> > and practical expression of the aspiration to change the social (or
> > educational) world for the better through improving shared social
> > practices, our shared understandings of these social practices, and the
> > shared situations in which these practices are carried out. It is thus
> > always critical, in the sense that it is about relentlessly trying to
> > understand and improve the way things are in relation to how they could
> > be better. But it is also critical in the sense that it is activist: it
> > aims at creating a form of collaborative learning by doing (in which
> > groups of participants set out to learn from change in a process of
> > making changes, studying the process and consequences of these changes,
> > and trying again). It aims to help people understand themselves as the
> > agents, as well as the products, of history. In my view, action research
> > is also committed to spreading involvement and participation in the
> > research process. (Kemmis, 1993 http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v1n1.html)
> > >
> > > On the other hand, Engestrom and his colleagues in "The discursive
> > construction of collaborative care" (2003 :433), say that:
> > >
> > > For example, one might ask what is the difference between our work and
> > the 'action science' practiced by Chris Argyris and his colleagues
> > (Argyris & al., 1985). Action science is aimed at making practitioners
> > aware of the persistent and often harmful 'single-loop' mechanisms in
> > their talk and interaction. However, in action science literature, we
> > don't learn much about how the practitioners actually change their
> > practices, or what new tools and organizational structures they develop
> > and adopt.
> > >
> > > Can someone suggest further readings so that we can have a better
> > understanding on this issue?
> > > Thanks
> > > Elaine Mateus
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > xmca mailing list
> > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
> > M. Cathrene Connery, Ph.D.
> > Assistant Professor of Bilingual & TESL Education
> > Central Washington University
> > _______________________________________________
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
>
>
>
> **********************************************************
> Merja Helle
> Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research
> University of Helsinki
> Address: 00014 University of Helsinki
> Finland
> phone:+358 (0)50-4485 111
> email: merja.helle@helsinki.fi
>
> ************************************************************
> "You don't the know the facts before you know the fiction"
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 01 2007 - 10:11:32 PST