JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for PRACTITIONER-RESEARCHER Archives


PRACTITIONER-RESEARCHER Archives

PRACTITIONER-RESEARCHER Archives


PRACTITIONER-RESEARCHER@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PRACTITIONER-RESEARCHER Home

PRACTITIONER-RESEARCHER Home

PRACTITIONER-RESEARCHER  April 2010

PRACTITIONER-RESEARCHER April 2010

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Your AERA paper

From:

Joan Lucy Conolly <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Practitioner-Researcher <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 5 Apr 2010 11:20:47 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (86 lines)

Dear Jack

I am now reading the whole of your AERA paper again. And noting what it is specifically that I like about it. There is so much. I think that what is most important to me is that it carries a positive and affirming energy in so many ways.

I also like the fact that you express ways in which we take responsibility for what we do. On page 2, para 2, line 1, you identify the Academy as '(the global collection of Higher Education Institutions)'. I like that identification because I have become increasingly uncomfortable with the demands of the 'Academy' and find myself more comfortable with the notions of 'Scholarship'. When I reflect on this distinction, I can see that I am influenced by Boyer - "Scholarship Reconsidered", and also by the notion that, for me, 'Scholarship' is independent of any specific institution or groups of institutions. For me, 'Scholarship' is an institution of its own, without walls and all that that implies. Perhaps this is so because I am mindful of scholars who, following a time honoured tradition, still 'wander' carrying their - metaphorical or real - 'chairs' on their backs, and settle wherever there is an audience, and stay to converse for only as long as the audience is present. How else could they have 'educational influence'?  I like the spontaneity of the practice. I like its 'naturalness', its organic nature, its authenticity. And I ask myself "How can I use my educational influence to support and develop instances of spontaneous, organic and authentic scholarship in the academy?" Because if I could do that I would be very grateful. It would give me joy.

(When I reread this before sending, I am beginning to wonder if TEDTALKS is not a space for modern itinerant scholars to set down their 'chairs' for a bit? Ken Robinson. Adichie Chimamanda. Sugatra Mita. Mae Jemison. Margaret Wertheimer. Karen Armstrong. It certainly feels that way to me.)

On page 3, para 1, lines 3/4, you mention "the conceptual, methodological and practical challenges and opportunities inherent in understanding how and what people learn." When I think of what I have learned in respect of each of the "conceptual, methodological and practical" in my preoccupations with the Oral Tradition of knowledge, whether indigenous or otherwise (at which point I pause and ask myself "What and when is knowledge not indigenous?" and because that is a long and convoluted debate in and of itself, which is too long to accommodate here, I conclude that for the purposes of this comment, I will simply talk about the 'Oral Tradition' (OT) as distinct from the 'Literate Tradition' (LT).) (Whew!!) because it is precisely the "conceptual, methodological and practical challenges and opportunities inherent in understanding how and what people learn" through OT that is important. I think that this is important because there is so much in the way that we all learn, teach and assess that is essentially that of the OT. In fact, everything we learn, teach and assess has to go through the process of orality to reach its literate record and expression, given that orality is all those ways of conceiving, recording and expressing without scribal alphabetic writing. We all do these things all the time, and we do it all very well without really understanding what it is that we are doing, because it is innate. And I do mean 'we', because this is an anthropological capacity. So by viewing what we do in these processes from an OT perspective, with an OT lens, and with an OT world view, we have a better understanding of what it is that we are doing. When we understand then we will be able to answer the question "How do I improve my practice?" in new ways that might give us new insights. In addition to many other sources on this topic, I have been specifically influenced by Frederick Turner's writing ...
1986     Performed Being: Word Art as a Human Inheritance. Oral Tradition, 1/1: 66-109.

1991    Toward an Evolutionary Ontology of Beauty. Oral Tradition, 6/1 (1991): 126-129.

Turner, F and Poppel, E n.d.    The Neural Lyre: Poetic Meter, The Brain, And Time. http://www.joelorr.com/neural.htm

These insights have helped me to address the complexity of ecologies that I am faced with in an increasingly complex and challenging world.

Do I see these complexities being addressed in the research of individual action researchers? Indeed I do. In every living theories thesis, but also every meeting of SeStuTHE at DUT is a revelation - and we now have five two hour sessions weekly! I am hoping that the NMMU meeting in August will reveal some of this. I can see the positive difference that using Self-Study and Living Theories Methodologies has made to the 'appropriacy', 'authenticity' and 'personal authority' of the SeStuTHE researchers at DUT. I think of it like this, "When I find my own voice, I can speak. The more I speak with my own voice, the more value I can share." This motivation is not only cognitive, but also affective. And I am inclined to ask "How can the cognitive be separated from the affect? Or are they inseparably intertwined?" I think that they are. I am supported in this belief by the work, inter alia, of Candace Pert, the biophysicist who identified the existence and operation of neuropeptide transmitters as long ago as 1972. The account of her discovery, is accessibly recounted in "Molecules of Emotion" - A Great Read! The indications of inseparable 'cognitive-affective' learning are clear and unambiguous in the science of Candace Pert.

The distinction between 'education research' and 'educational research' is also a key factor in the enthusiasm at DUT for what we are doing in SeStuTHE. I like its inclusionality, but I also like the way that it makes a space for holistic processes that move naturally between cosmos and chaos on an ongoing basis in the ways identified and explained by Smuts in "Holism and Evolution" (1987). I find reassurance in the explanation that Smuts provides. I find that I can deal with the chaos more constructively when I know that the chaos is merely that part of the whole which allows change and growth and learning that will find its own order before once more growing through yet another chaotic phase, and so on.

I so like the distinction that you make between the "living approach" and the "linguistic approach" (page 6, para 1, line 1/2). Your words here remind me of Marcel Jousse when he says

"If a person's life could be summarized in a single sentence, and if I wanted to sum up my life as a scientific Traditionist, I would simply say: "I have been a resistance fighter against bookish and dead Philology".

The fact is that all the studies our young people undertake under the disconcerting term 'humanities', are based on fossilised, philological theories.

Linguistic methods are philological methods.

Exegetic methods are philological methods.

Psychiatric methods were philological methods - until the great Morlaâs."
(Anthropology of Geste and Rhythm, 2000:44)

When you talk about "why we do what we do" (page 7, para 2, line 3, I am reminded of the questions we routinely ask in SeStuTHE based on Brown's 7 questions in "About writing", a chapter in "Quality in Post Graduate Education" edited by Zuber Skerritt and Yoni Ryan. The seven questions are (my paraphrase as I do not have the source with me here.)

1. What did I do?
2. Why did I do it?
3. What happened?
4. What does this tell me about my practice?
5. What does this tell me about my theory?
6. How does my reader read this?
7. What remains unresolved?

I find that these questions, answered factually in bite-size pieces (50 word responses), address your question "How do I improve what I am doing?" with immediate and useful responses. We are able then to reflect critically on what we have written, which expands our understanding of what we are writing, and what we are writing about, which then enables us to write more fully and reflectively.

It is also Brown in "About writing" who says that writing in the first person ensures taking responsibility for what we write. I have found this profoundly true of myself. I find that if I cannot write in the first person, I stop. On reflection, I find invariably that I am not sufficiently sure of myself, and need 'to do more - acting - thinking - reading' until I can write in the first person with confidence. I also find this true of the writing   of my students whom I supervise.

In short, I find the process of observation and reflection on the self - in a scientific way - useful. "The true laboratory is the laboratory of the self. To instruct oneself is to develop oneself. Only the individual can know himself, whence today the ever-increasing awareness of the role of living memory and of its omnipresent adjuvant, rhythm." (Jousse, 2000:27)

When I can see what I am doing when I am learning - or not learning, then I am able to see more clearly what others are doing when they are learning - or not learning. This helps me address what I can do to improve. When I can feel and see and hear that I have a positive educational influence, I love what I do even more!

Once again, I really have enjoyed reading your AERA paper again, Jack. Thank you. The people who will be privileged to hear it at the conference are most fortunate.

Thank you for this opportunity to chat ..

Take care
Joan




-----Original Message-----
From: Practitioner-Researcher [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jack Whitehead
Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2010 2:28 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Your AERA paper

On 4 Apr 2010, at 13:18, Joan Lucy Conolly wrote:

> Dear Jack
>
> Here is the resend ... this is what Alan was referring to ...
>
> I hope that you get it this time.
> Joan

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Joan - got it.  I like the criteria for rigour - They will complement Richard Winter's six criteria - the more individuals (and validation groups) can focus on using these criteria the more they will help to enhance the qualities of validity and rigour in the self-study/action research accounts. I'm not too sure if Alan was meaning that the use of such criteria can be part of an unwitting support for an intransigent use of language.  I'll ask him.

Just about to have a Sunday roast dinner - Rebecca and Simon have come round and Rebecca is waiting, non too patiently for the arrival of her first offspring!

Love Jack.

"This e-mail is subject to our Disclaimer, to view click http://www.dut.ac.za"

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
November 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
October 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
November 2004
September 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager