Re: [xmca] Point of view in writing

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Cole" <lchcmike@gmail.com>
To: "Sonja Baumer" <sbaumer@gmail.com>
Cc: "Marc Davis" <marcd@yahoo-inc.com>; "eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity"
<xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 3:31 PM
Subject: Re: [xmca] Point of view in writing

> Its a great topic, Sonja--
>
> There is an interesting first person pov film, lady in the lake, which is
> not all that sucessful, but an interesting thought experiment.
> And lighter than Husserl
> :-)
> mike
>
> On 8/17/07, Sonja Baumer <sbaumer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I apologize for just bumping into this discussion without reading all
> > previous posts. together with marc davis i am writing a paper on "point
of
> > view" in online videos and especially on youtube.
> > our paper brings together both literary and film theories of POV in a
> > dialogue with phenomenology. i realize that film theory can be
extremely
> > valuable resources for this discussion, especially since many
qualitative
> > researchers nowadays collect ethnographic video data.
> > any interest for pursuing that line of discussion?
> > sonja baumer
> >
> > On 8/16/07, Paul Dillon <phd_crit_think@yahoo.com > wrote:
> > >
> > > Kimberly, Mike,
> > >
> > > Although Husserl seems to have fbeen relegated to the dumpster of
> > > collective memory, a lot of his work was concerned with describing
the
> > > "subjective" (noetic) state of mind correlated with the experience of
any
> > > "objective" (noematic). I always found him hard to read except for
the
> > > work on "internal time consciousness" but there are some studies that
really
> > > illustrate this method, the titles and authors of which seem to have
fallen
> > > into the dumpster of my own memory. But the phenomenologists in
general
> > > have a lot to offer on the problem of providing a good description of
the
> > > situation of the observer vis a vis what s/he observed
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > > Mike Cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Kim
> > > I think all methods have pitfalls. I was trying, unsuccessfully it
turns
> > > out, to articulate
> > > a pitfall I personally encountered.
> > >
> > > If this is of future interests, why not check out Cultural Psych and
see
> > > what you do and don't
> > > like about that way of wrting about the subjects there addressed and
> > > send
> > > along something
> > > to read of yours. Perhaps we can ground things more effectively that
> > > way.
> > >
> > > mike
> > >
> > > On 8/16/07, Kimberly wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Mike,
> > > >
> > > > I'm a little confused by your response. It almost sounds as if you
are
> > > > saying a third person approach doesn't have the same "potential
> > > pitfalls"
> > > > that you mentioned. My understanding is that data collection must be
> > > > systematic, thorough, and well-organized no matter what the writing
> > > > approach
> > > > used. Fieldnotes, personal notes, transcriptions, triangulation
> > > through
> > > > correspondence, public notices, student work/journals, interviews,
> > > etc.
> > > > are
> > > > the empirical bases for the interpretation of the data. First person
> > > > doesn't necessarily mean just a retrospective account or memoir. I
> > > think
> > > > it
> > > > can be just as systematic, rigorous, "objective," and
> > > empirically-based as
> > > > any third person approach. Writing in first person, however, puts
the
> > > > inevitable subjectivity of the author up front on the table. I
think,
> > > > too,
> > > > the personal voice (at least in education) may help to bridge the
gap
> > > > between researcher and practitioner.
> > > >
> > > > Kim
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 8/16/07 11:36 AM, "Mike Cole" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Kimberly (and Paul) (and)
> > > > >
> > > > > I started this with a new header because the previous notes were
> > > > carrying
> > > > > very long string of prior notes in them. Something to
> > > > > do with problems Bruce wrote about yesterday I think.
> > > > >
> > > > > If there is disagreement about the disutilities of writing in
pseudo
> > > > third
> > > > > person, as if objective, fashion grovelling on our bellies,
> > > handcuffed,
> > > > > etc, in order to publish someone will have to defend such forms of
> > > > behavior.
> > > > >
> > > > > My own view is the the method of explication should fit the
subject
> > > > matter
> > > > > being discussed. You can get a feel for how I mix the two genres
> > > > > in Cultural Psychology.
> > > > >
> > > > > In so far as I am using method of long term participant
observation,
> > > > which
> > > > > is one approach I use to some of the topics I work on, I find that
a
> > >
> > > > > potential pitfall of the first person approach arises if one fails
> > > to
> > > > create
> > > > > systematic fieldnotes of one's activities, interpretations,
guesses
> > > > about
> > > > > what going on, etc. from the beginning of the research up to the
> > > point
> > > > where
> > > > > one is writing the account. This hit me most forcefully when
> > > > > trying to account for three years of work creating and trying to
> > > sustain
> > > > > afterschool activities at four sites here near UCSD. At the end of
> > > the
> > > > > period I wrote up an account of what I thought had occurred. I
> > > believed
> > > > it.
> > > > > Then I listened to audiotapes of discussions I had had with key
> > > > > players three years earlier during which we planned what we would
be
> > >
> > > > doing
> > > > > and what we thought had to be done to make the work
> > > > > successful. I was stunned in listening to the tapes, to learn how
> > > much
> > > > my
> > > > > retrospective account had selectively forgotten lots of events,
> > > > > lots of pointers (had I been able to interpret them properly) to
> > > > upcomping
> > > > > problems and changes.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, when using first person approaches, its nice to have lots of
> > > bits of
> > > > > "objectified" materials, including one's own fieldnotes and notes
> > > > > to colleagues (email is great in this respect) as a materialized
> > > record
> > > > of
> > > > > what you USED to think, or what you USED to believe was important,
> > > etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > And, in addition, including information that does not arise from
> > > sources
> > > > you
> > > > > helped to create is also useful as a way of triangulating and
> > > > > being self critical.
> > > > >
> > > > > mike
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone
who
> > > knows.
> > > Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
>

GRU:
Servicio de correo UCLV.

__________________________________________________________________
Servicio de Correos del Grupo de Redes. UCLV
- Universidad 2008 del 11 al 15 de febrero del 2008.
Palacio de Convenciones. La Habana. Cuba. http: //www.universidad2008.cu
- II Taller internacional -Vitualización en la Educación Superior-, del 11 al 15 de febrero de 2008
Palacio de Convenciones. La Habana, Cuba. http://virtual-es.uclv.edu.cu
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Fri Aug 24 16:11 PDT 2007