Does research have to occupy separate spaces from that which we occupy on a
day to day basis? or is it something that is a part of continual learning
and development? (and thus not always recognised as research) Jane
-----Original Message-----
From: A.D.M.Rayner [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 17 June 2005 16:48
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: How do we know? Harriet's beginning of a paper. . .
Dear Harriet,
Maybe you miss my point. Belief in the need for solidity is the problem.
Love and respect
Alan
----- Original Message -----
From: Harriet Meek <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 17 June 2005 15:11
Subject: Re: How do we know? Harriet's beginning of a paper. . .
> Hi,
>
> Yes. I am never sure we reach the point of being solid. But I am
> particularly anxious about this paper because of the nature of its
> evidence. I am sure we will get into this in the next section of
> the discussion.
>
> This paper developed, as many written by practitioners do, out of some
> observations made in the course of my ordinary work. I didn't consider
> it RESEARCH for a very long time. Yet I think what I noticed and the
> PROCESS I followed to explore my observations is very valid as research
> and in fact points out a sort of model for practitioner research which
> can be very useful, potentially even important. But questions like
> "What is valid evidence? ' become important with such processes. And
> what is to be done about human subjects review processes when one
> doesn't realize one has done a piece of research until afterwards?
>
> Harriet
>
|