Many interesting topics sprouting up on xmca
these days. I'll just pick up on one for now and
maybe get back to others after a short time away.
Re Mike to Kimberly on first-person perspectives
in accounts, as data and as interpretations.
First-person accounts vs. What?
I thought that Kimberly was mainly saying that
she did not want to falsify her own role and
positioning in reporting/analyzing accounts of
teaching using discourse analysis methods. She
was rejecting an approach that "distances" the
observer/analyst, and also seems to discount any
account of the researcher's _feelings_ in
relation to the events, data, analyses, etc. Mike
seemed to be suggesting that while a first-person
phenomenological and feeling-inclusive, situated
perspective is indeed useful and important, it
might be good to complement it with something else.
But I think we tend to take for granted just what
that alternative perspective is or should be,
because it has been so dominant in our scientific
and scholarly tradition. Do we have to "distance"
ourselves? do we have to discount or hide our own
feelings and their role? does that in some way
improve our analytical power? Or is it just that
these features have ideologically and
historically attached themselves to other aspects
of the analytical power of traditional scholarly
approaches, but are not part of what makes them useful?
The alternative to 1st person approaches is
presumably some sort of third-person,
externalized, "observer" perspective vs. a more
first-person, participant-actor perspective. But
we remain human observers, always still situated
in many ways, always still making meanings that
never lack a feeling dimension, even when we are
taking a less-involved, less-active role, sitting
back and watching, observing, and analyzing what
we see. I think that in both the 1st person
perspective and the 3d-person one situatedness
and feeling-richness remain as realities of our
work and remain as not just useful but necessary
elements of our "scholarliness".
My view is that our scholarliness requires
critical reflexivity, i.e. that we examine our
own doings-as-scholars: their motives, the
feelings we have as we do them, the connections
between meanings and feelings (in both
directions, if we imagine we can separate them),
how we benefit or not from them, how our view is
situated sociologically, culturally, and
politically -- and that we consider how all these
things influence every aspect of our scholarly
practice, including what we choose to study, how
we do it, what we conclude, and how we argue and present our work.
So I think that what Kimberly rejects ought to be
rejected BOTH in a more 1st person approach and
in a more 3rd person one (which I agree are complementary).
What is the nature of their complementarity, if
it is not about 3rd person research falsifying a
view-from-nowhere and deep-sixing the feeling
dimensions of our meaning-making? I think this is
an important question for scholarship today,
given the increasingly wide rejection of the
ideology of "objectivity", while we still agree
that 3rd and 1st together, semiotic
observer-analytic and phenomenological
participant-experiential approaches make a
powerful, and maybe a necessary combination.
What should we mean by, what should we do in the
name of ... trying to "set aside" emotional
responses for a time in thinking about an event?
given that we accept that we also want to NOT set
them aside, that we want to know why they arise
and how they operate as part of what we are
doing? What can we usefully mean by moving back
and forth between more engaged,
active-participant stances and less actively
involved observer stances? is this a qualitative
divide with epistemological implications? or is
it just a cline, with judgments about degrees of
participation depending on who in the event is
making them? (I may think I am just sitting back
and observing, but others in the event may still
be strongly influenced by my presence, and even
interpret my silence as an action, as an active intervention.)
Big issues, worth some thought and discussion.
JAY.
At 05:44 PM 8/14/2007, you wrote:
>Its interesting to see the AR-list cross over the XMCA list, and quite
>appropriate.
>What do you think the DISadvantages of first person accounts of phenomena
>claimed
>as data that warrant inferences to guide action might be, Kimberly? I tend
>to use one
>pov at some times, the other at others.
>
>mike
>
>On 8/14/07, Kimberly <mik88@verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> > I find discourse analysis very insightful as part of action research -
> > audio
> > taping group work sessions, class discussions, etc. then transcribing and
> > analyzing the talk. There is so much richness under the surface which
> > usually goes undetected in-the-moment of teaching. Discourse analysis
> > within an ethnographic study allows the researcher-practitioner to dig
> > deeper into more layers; to see things "big" as Maxine Greene would say.
> > Additionally, I prefer to write in first person. I do not wish "to
> > completely disassociate my feelings from the research" for who I am is
> > part
> > of the research. And that doesn't necessarily lead to a "softening" of
> > the
> > research. To try to deny self by "detaching" myself and writing in third
> > person seems misleading, possibly even deceptive. But then, I tend to
> > agree
> > with the teachings of Panofsky, Behar, Nash, Goodall, and others when it
> > comes to scholarly writing.
> >
> > K. Cotter-Lemus
> >
> >
> > On 8/14/07 3:39 PM, "jose david herazo" <jherazo4@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Thank you very much Ana for your comments. In our discussion of Action
> > > Research at my University we are trying to arrive to an agreement about
> > how
> > > our teacher-to-be students should hand in their final action research
> > > reports, which they do as part of their practicum. We have agreed that
> > this
> > > should be done as an ongoing narrative of self-reflection, improvement
> > and,
> > > hopefully, transformation. However, as we are just starting on this
> > arena,
> > > we would like to read examples of the way it could be done, and thus
> > enrich
> > > our discussion. I would be very grateful If you, or anyone else on this
> > > discussion could help us with that.
> > >
> > > Thanks again
> > >
> > > JOSÉ DAVID
> > >
> > >> From: "Ana Paula B. R. Cortez" <apbrcortez@yahoo.com.br>
> > >> Reply-To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >> Subject: Re: [xmca] Action Research: Generalisable learning
> > >> Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:13:55 -0300 (ART)
> > >>
> > >> Dear José-David,
> > >> I report findings as if the teacher of the study were a completely
> > >> different individual, but me. I use third person only ("the teacher",
> > "she
> > >> did this or that"...) to completely disassociate my feelings from the
> > >> research. I believe we tend to soften or simplify things when they're
> > about
> > >> ourselves and that's the richness of the action research, to give us
> > the
> > >> opportunity to look at ourselves as different subjects.
> > >> Hope you find it useful.
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Ana
> > >>
> > >> jose david herazo <jherazo4@hotmail.com> escreveu: All the reflections
> > >> about Action Research you have made have given me light
> > >> to improve my role as researcher. I have a question to ask,maybe one of
> > you
> > >> could give me still more light! In my work as an amateur action
> > researcher
> > >> I very often find it difficult to report action research findings, How
> > do
> > >> you usually report them?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks
> > >>
> > >> José-David
> > >>> From: "Ana Paula B. R. Cortez"
> > >>> Reply-To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
> > >>> To: mcole@weber.ucsd.edu, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
> > >>>
> > >>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Action Research: Generalisable learning
> > >>> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 22:02:48 -0300 (ART)
> > >>>
> > >>> Very interesting, indeed! I personally find this kind of research
> > >>> fascinating, not only because there's an opportunity to look at the
> > >> school
> > >>> environment being part of it, but also as "an outsider", from a
> > different
> > >>> perspective. I tend to analyse collected data as if the person
> > teaching
> > >>> those lessons were another one, but myself. It's a way of solving
> > >>> teaching-learning practice problems, reflecting upon approaches and
> > >>> methodologies and, above all, finding ways to transform realities. In
> > my
> > >>> opinion, it's a great chance of coming up with alternatives to
> > overcome
> > >>> social barriers (now quoting Kincheloe, 1993. A formação do professor
> > >> como
> > >>> compromisso político - mapeando o pós-moderno. Porto Alegre: Artes
> > >> Médicas
> > >>> - sorry, I only have the reference in Portuguese).
> > >>> Besides, I include students in the analysis as well: I show them
> > video
> > >>> taped classes for us to debate so that they also get to know a bit
> > about
> > >>> the theory and they can criticize what they see (isn't that our
> > intention
> > >>> to educate students to become critical citizens? So why not actively
> > >>> including them in the study?). In this way, the multiplicity of voices
> > >>> generating conflict and discussion enriches the analysis and expand
> > the
> > >>> activity itself. I mean, in my case, teaching EFL in a Brazilian
> > >> bilingual
> > >>> school, this is the ultimate opportunity to transform the language as
> > a
> > >>> tool for a result into a tool and result (as defined by Newman and
> > >> Holzman,
> > >>> 1993. Vygotsky - Revolutionary Scientist).
> > >>> Ana
> > >>>
> > >>> Mike Cole escreveu:
> > >>> This is an ongoing discussion the the action research list that
> > ought
> > >> to
> > >>> be
> > >>> of interest to several of us.
> > >>> mike
> > >>>
> > >>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > >>> From: Jack Whitehead
> > >>> Date: Aug 7, 2007 3:28 AM
> > >>> Subject: Re: [arlist-l] Generalisable learning
> > >>> To: Action research list
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> [ Converted to plain text. -- B. ]
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On 6 Aug 2007, at 23:35, David Tripp (by way of Bob Dick) wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> However, as the purpose of action research is improved practice,
> > >>> when- and where-ever improved practice is achieved and others get
> > >>> to know about it, they tend to try it too, and so the practice is
> > >>> generalised as it moves from "it happened once here" to "it
> > >>> happens, here, there and everywhere!" and that's so much more
> > >>> relevant and important in terms of the method than categorical
> > >>> generalisation of other kinds of research.
> > >>>
> > >>> I do like the idea that practice is generalised as it moves is the way
> > >>> David
> > >>> describes above. You can follow this kind of generalisation from
> > Chapter
> > >> 6
> > >>> Kevin Eames' narrative of his action research in one school from 1991:
> > >>>
> > >>> CHAPTER SIX - ACTION RESEARCH AS A FORM OF PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE IN A
> > >>> WHOLE-SCHOOL SETTING
> > >>>
> > >>> This chapter deals with another aspect of my practice as an action
> > >>> researcher, and moves beyond my own classroom to my work with
> > colleagues
> > >> at
> > >>> Wootton Bassett School. In contrast to the two preceding chapters, the
> > >>> focus
> > >>> has shifted back to my own practice, although at the time of writing,
> > in
> > >>> the
> > >>> autumn of 1991, I had been seconded to work with the advisory service
> > of
> > >>> Wiltshire LEA. The account I give here, therefore, is not concerned
> > with
> > >>> the
> > >>> current advisory work in which I was involved, but with events which
> > had
> > >>> taken place some time before.
> > >>>
> > >>> at:
> > >>>
> > >>> http://people.bath.ac.uk/edsajw/KEVINPHD/kechap6.pdf
> > >>>
> > >>> into Jacqueline Delong's action research between 1996-2002 into her
> > work
> > >> as
> > >>> a Superintendent of Schools in Ontario, generating a culture of
> > inquiry
> > >> in
> > >>> support of teacher action research in a whole school board in her
> > >> narrative
> > >>> of her"
> > >>>
> > >>> HOW CAN I IMPROVE MY PRACTICE AS A SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS AND
> > CREATE
> > >> MY
> > >>> OWN LIVING EDUCATIONAL THEORY?
> > >>>
> > >>> at
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> http://people.bath.ac.uk/edsajw/delong.shtml
> > >>>
> > >>> and into Moira Laidlaw's action research between 2000-2006 in China's
> > >>> Experimental Centre for Educational Action Research in Foreign
> > Language's
> > >>> Teachers, hosted by Ningxia Teachers University, at:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> http://people.bath.ac.uk/edsajw/moira.shtml
> > >>>
> > >>> When David describes ' the purpose of action research is improved
> > >>> practice',
> > >>> I'm not sure if knowledge-creation is included in what is meant by
> > >>> 'improved
> > >>> practice'. I tend to make a distinction between the questions I ask in
> > >>> researching to improve my educational influences with my students in
> > >>> questions such as, 'How do I improve my practice?' and the educational
> > >>> knowledge I generate as I explain my educational influences in my own
> > >>> learning, in the learning of others and in the learning of the social
> > >>> formations in which I live and work. I stress the importance in action
> > >>> research of both improving my practice and of enhancing the
> > educational
> > >>> knowledge-base through my contributions to educational theory. In my
> > >>> understandings of generalisability in action research I use the idea
> > that
> > >>> practice is generalised as it moves in the way David describes, I also
> > >> use
> > >>> an idea of generalisability when I see that ideas generated in one
> > >> context
> > >>> by an action research are being acknowledged as !
> > >>> of use in the narrative of another action research who is working and
> > >>> researching in a different context.
> > >>>
> > >>> Love Jack.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> arlist-l mailing list
> > >>> arlist-l@lists.scu.edu.au
> > >>> http://lists.scu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/arlist-l
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> xmca mailing list
> > >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Alertas do Yahoo! Mail em seu celular. Saiba mais.
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> xmca mailing list
> > >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>
> > >> _________________________________________________________________
> > >> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's
> > FREE!
> > >> http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> xmca mailing list
> > >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Flickr agora em português. Você clica, todo mundo vê. Saiba
> > mais.
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> xmca mailing list
> > >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
> > > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
>_______________________________________________
>xmca mailing list
>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Jay Lemke
Professor
University of Michigan
School of Education
610 East University
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Tel. 734-763-9276
Email. JayLemke@UMich.edu
Website. <http://www.umich.edu/~jaylemke%A0>www.umich.edu/~jaylemke
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Tue Aug 14 17:48 PDT 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Oct 08 2007 - 06:02:23 PDT