[xmca] Re: method/methodology

[mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>]

Martin's suggestion for looking at Participatory Action Research seems
highly relevant to coming to grips with the parts of Seth's summary table
where neither theorist/methodologist have anything to say, so they get a
zero. It gets at the question of whose teleology is being implemented, whose
interests served. It keeps the necessary critical social/self consciousness
always present.

but it does not resolve the issue what people are communicating when they
use the term theory.

off to follow the links.
mike

On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:

> > 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.
> >
> One of the developments of AR, of course, has been in the direction of
> Participatory Action Research. I attach a short article by one of the
> central Latin American figures in this work, Orlando Fals Borda, on the
> importance of thinking systematically and locally, and of recognizing the
> cultural frameworks within which scientific research is conducted. It was
> published in the first issue of the journal Action Research (2003).
>
> Martin
>
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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