[xmca] method/methodology

[christine schweighart <schweighartgate@hotmail.com>]

There is some interesting discussion of Argyris here after a presentation ofYryo Engestrom at the LSE

http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/informationSystems/newsAndEvents/2004events/Engestrom.htm

 After my earlier message on 'recoverability' - which is drawn from Checkland's work,  this paper expands upon its role between method in action and knowledge transferability in wider contexts .

Systemic Practice and Action Research, Vol. 11, No. 1, 1998
Action Research: Its Nature and Validity
Peter Checkland1,2 and Sue Holwell1
Received October 30, 1997 Abstract 
The process of knowledge acquisition which has the strongest truth claim is the
research process of natural science, based on testing hypotheses to destruction. But
the application of this process to phenomena beyond those for which it was developed,
namely, the natural regularities of the physical universe, is problematical. For research
into social phenomena there is increasing interest in "action research" in various
forms. In this process the researcher enters a real-world situation and aims both to
improve it and to acquire knowledge. This paper reviews the nature and validity of
action research, arguing that its claim to validity requires a recoverable research
process based upon a prior declaration of the epistemology in terms of which findings
which count as knowledge will be expressed.

 I can't seem to post to the list!! can you put this up for me?

Christine.


Michael's point about

 "There does seems to be a methodology, but not one that ties into proving or again even 

enhancing specific premises.  One of the things I liked about Chaiklin's article was his 

willingness to bring Chris Argyris into the discussion, because of his idea of double 

loop learning - you don't just learn from research, but you learn about your research 

while doing it."



ties back to your comment about methodology questioning theoretical premises. It also 

identifies an openess where contradictions can be explored to revise theory - in practice 

settings. Lewin 's work doesn't articulate such an approach with  no methodology to 

recover (useful or unhelpful) concept formation in study of method in use. In 

interventions Engestrom's has this potential, as does Checkland's soft systems 

methodology -  arising out of action-research intervention and further theoretical 

development upon the body of intervention work. In both approaches modelling has been 

found to be useful.



There is an interesting discussion of Argyris following a presentation by Yryo Engestrom 

at the LSE here:

http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/informationSystems/newsAndEvents/2004events/

Thanks Christine



----- Forwarded message from c.schweighart@bath.ac.uk -----

    Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 12:48:32 +0100

    From: Christine Schweighart <c.schweighart@bath.ac.uk>

Reply-To: Christine Schweighart <c.schweighart@bath.ac.uk>

 Subject: dialogic action (was Seth Chaiklin on LSV and Lewin)

      To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu





Hi,

  Thanks Mike,

  I agree that both are needed. Apparently the theme of Lewin/Vygotsky

came up in the ISCAR congress, however in the introduction to the SI

the authors suggest that AR research ( in this Lewin has been

identified as a root) is more open to consider C_H than vice versa -

which to the authors suggests more rigorous 'method'.

In the selected article the last 60 years of AR, since Lewin,  are not

reviewed and so it is difficult to see which 'contemporary positions'

in AR are being supposed to potentially benefit from the comparison of

LSV/Lewin in the selected article.



The entire issue of  concepts which underpin understandings of

'method,'methodology' , 'framework' has been a significant theme in AR

- the introduction orients to this but then expresses a preference for

'method' without being sensitive to these developments in relation to

intervention. The theoretical discussion in the selected paper also

elides  'methodology' discussion, which is where the questioning of

'local action improvement/ social practice knowledge distinctions have

moved forward.

  Thanks, Christine.



"


 		 	   		  __________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca