Hi Duncan,

What is the wiki url? How do I access it?

Cheers

George

2008/4/28 Duncan Fuller <[log in to unmask]>:
>
>
>
>
> Hello everyone
>
> Final call for changes/adaptations/developments/before I start tinkering
> again…
>
> D
>
>
>
> From: Participatory Video Network Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Duncan Fuller
>  Sent: 10 March 2008 12:32
>  To: [log in to unmask]
>  Subject: Re: Network statement on PV in research
>
>
>
> Hello everyone
>
> The network statement rides again.  When the 'closing conference' of the
> PV-NET group was convened in Milton Keynes a few weeks ago it was noted that
> no-one had attempted to wiki the network statement material I had uploaded.
> It was suggested that the material represented a step too far away from any
> semblance of collective wiki-sense-making so I agreed to combine it with a
> number of relevant exercises that were undertaken at the conference on
> similar themes, and repost.
>
> This has now been done.  At the conference we explored such issues as
> definitions surrounding PV (and PV in research, and research!), the current
> state of PV, its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, barriers
> to PV work and solutions, and visions of the future.  I have now mashed
> comments made in relation to these in with the previous comments.  Hopefully
> this will make it easier to begin framing a cork-declaration-style network
> statement, currently titled 'The Walton Hall Declaration on PV' (I believe).
> I have attached all the files from these exercises so you can see the raw
> materials too.
>
> Have a go.  If no-one does over the next week or so, I'll take it to the
> next stage.
>
> Good luck!!!
>
> Dxx
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Participatory Video Network Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Duncan Fuller
>  Sent: 30 January 2008 15:53
>  To: [log in to unmask]
>  Subject: Re: Network statement on PV in research
>
>
>
> Hi everyone
>
> A brief reminder re the 'call' for your thoughts on a network statement on
> PV in research – see below and the attached.  Its been suggested that you
> send in your own individual thoughts (deadline = the end of this month…!!)
> which I will then collate into sections.  We'll then put all of that onto
> some form of Wiki on the PV-Net website for everyone to tinker with.
> However, its intended that this tinkering is relatively small-scale, so send
> your wholesale thoughts and comments in NOW!!
>
> Cheers ears.
>
> Duncan
>
>
>
> From: Participatory Video Network Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Duncan Fuller
>  Sent: 07 January 2008 14:59
>  To: [log in to unmask]
>  Subject: Re: Network statement on PV in research
>
>
>
> Hi everyone
>
> Happy New Year!  At a meeting before xmas held to discuss the various
> trainings undertaken so far I 'volunteered' to take on the development of
> the network statement on (the development of) 'PV in research' that we all
> might feel comfortable signing up to, and which might stand as a statement
> of intent etc in years to come.  So please reacquaint yourselves with
> Chris's plea below, the text and style of the Cork declaration that might
> provide an interesting format to follow in building up such a statement, and
> have a look at the responses that came in following Chris's original email
> (at the bottom of this one).  Then, let me know (either on this list, or
> privately) what you think in response to the following questions:
>
> § What is 'PV'?  What's your definition?  What is 'PV in research'?  Is
> there any difference?  What are the main things to do with PV, and PV in
> research that you think are their key defining features?    What is PV for
> in research?  What can it add? What wider issues of importance currently
> 'surround' PV in research?  What's the politics of PV in research?
>
> § What is 'research'?  What's your definition?  What are the main things to
> do with research that you think is its key defining features?
>
> § Where are you/we 'at' with PV?  What is the current status of PV?  What's
> the current context surrounding PV?  What does it offer? What sets it apart
> from other approaches?
>
> § What are the main issues facing the further development of PV in research?
> What are the major threats and opportunities facing PV in research?  Where
> do we want PV in research to go?  How do we get to where we want to be with
> PV? What needs to happen to support the development of PV in research in the
> UK and beyond?
>
> Cheers for now
>
> Duncan
>
>  ________________________________
>
>
> From: Participatory Video Network Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris High
>  Sent: 29 November 2007 13:25
>  To: [log in to unmask]
>  Subject: Network statement on PV in research
>
>
>
> We'll discuss this at a meeting next month, but I found a copy of the Cork
> Declaration on rural development today, and thought I'd get the ball
> rolling.
>
>  One of the main outputs of the network will be a statement on what PV is
> and what it's for in research.  The idea is to have something we can all
> sign up to, and that will then be there to refer to in research in project
> bids, giving some weight to PV as a research method.  It should also make a
> good discussion about ethics etc.
>
>  The attached document was what gave me the idea, and has been an important
> thing in rural development policy and practice in Europe since it was
> published.  I'm not proposing we copy the style too closely, because it
> seems far too Brussels for my taste, but I'm posting it to give an idea.
>
>  So the question is:  What would we like to have in our statement in an
> ideal world?
>
>  Chris
>
> [Duncan Fuller]
>
>
>
> In an 'ideal world' all research would be undertaken for the common good and
> the enhancement of social justice, emancipation, to make a difference etc
> etc – as such, and my starter for ten, is that such a statement should be
> clear about the need for PV to be seen in the wider context of action, not
> just extraction (of someone elses information… as 'research').
>
> …ideally PV should be the tool used in participatory learning and action
> processes to build capacity and confidence and be used to promote engagement
> by disadvantaged people in communication, dialogue and negotiation -
> horizontally but also vertically with more powerful groups. It is a useful
> tool because it overcomes communication barriers where there are high levels
> of illiteracy and is powerful because it shows the visual context to those
> who may not be so familiar – and perhaps can open the eyes of those who are
> familiar with this context because it shows it to them in a different light
> – so it can challenge entrenched beliefs.  I think that as with any
> participatory process there are risks and challenges, and that the quality
> of facilitation is crucial but can be variable.   Documentary video making
> is separate from PV, but often confused with it…in the latter it is
> important that ordinary people have the chance to use this tool in their own
> research – they should set the research agenda and should control the
> copyright to any video produced during the research process.  Also such
> research processes should be inclusive, but also aware of the differences
> that exist in any 'community' and so efforts should be made to support the
> voices of those who are the least vocal and have the least power.
>
>
>
> At the root of participatory approaches in development research is the idea
> that your questions are always tentative and partial and the only chance to
> make them more complete and meaningful is through openly and humbly engage
> with the people concerned. Such a 'participation' is not an ethical addition
> but a methodological necessity. In my view, this is a key point.
>
>
>
> Historically, participatory perspectives have placed a great emphasis on the
> ethical dimension. I don't think such emphasis is necessary nor helpful. It
> certainly hasn't stopped the spreading of tokenistic uses of participation
> in mainstream development. Indeed, the opposite is true: all tokenistic
> 'participatory' components in otherwise centralised or donor-driven
> programmes are there precisely to seek (and, in our non-ideal world, usually
> find) ethical legitimation.
>
>
>
> All this emphasis on ethics has (accidentally?) driven the attention away
> from the more fundamentally challenging idea that 'participation' (humbling
> and openly engage with the people concerned) is in most development contexts
> a strictly methodological necessity.
>
>
>
> When you don't know what you don't know, how can you ask questions? If you
> expect most of what is crucial in your research to be beyond the horizon of
> your world view and your theoretical models — as you should when working in
> development —how can you still grasp what you can't see and can't
> understand? How can you build into your approach the expectation that you
> are going to be surprised? Certain methods (e.g. PV) can help to deal with
> these issues — although not with all issues —better than others (e.g.
> questionnaires).
>
>
>
> This doesn't mean that the ethical issue should be dismissed. Simply, ethics
> is not to be dealt with at the level of methology, but much earlier on.
> There might be ethically sensitive researchers and research programmes but
> there are no ethical methodologies, and we certainly should keep away from
> such a trap.
>
>
>
>
>  --
>  This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous
>  content by the NorMAN MailScanner Service and is believed
>  to be clean.
>
>  The NorMAN MailScanner Service is operated by Information
>  Systems and Services, Newcastle University.
>  --
>  This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous
>  content by the NorMAN MailScanner Service and is believed
>  to be clean.
>
>  The NorMAN MailScanner Service is operated by Information
>  Systems and Services, Newcastle University.
>
>
>  --
>  This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous
>  content by the NorMAN MailScanner Service and is believed
>  to be clean.
>
>  The NorMAN MailScanner Service is operated by Information
>  Systems and Services, Newcastle University.
>
>
>  --
>  This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous
>  content by the NorMAN MailScanner Service and is believed
>  to be clean.
>
>  The NorMAN MailScanner Service is operated by Information
>  Systems and Services, Newcastle University.