Dear all
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Sarah Teasley <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> Dear Keith,
>
> I enjoyed reading your post. Unfortunately, I can’t agree with some of
> your hypotheses. I'm not a junior researcher. I do understand the
> rhetorical modes, and I don’t take offence with them. What I do take
> offence with is a mode of interlocution that requires extensive time to
> defend positions that may be a minor point of the argument, and a mode of
> interlocution that suggests the author being addressed may not speak from a
> valid position.
>
> Sometimes I’d like to suggest different ways of viewing the question or
> different relevant materials or methods. But I often simply don’t have the
> time to respond to the same extent as some other list members - perhaps
> because I’m a mid-career researcher who already has publishing commitments,
> teaching, supervisions and mentoring and administration, in addition to
> caring responsibilities. The current thread about the history of design
> research and marketing research is a good example of this. As a social
> historian who works on design, manufacturing and industry, I’ve lots to
> say, but simply don’t have the time to formulate the points I’d like to
> make - and am also scared that someone might attack my points in a way that
> I don’t have the time to respond to, as I’d like.
>
> So we might consider how the list is experienced by participants like
> myself - I don’t think I’m alone in this - who appreciate the list’s
> scholarly explorations and contribute in the small ways we can, but don’t
> have the time for the kind of rhetorical engagement that the list also
> endorses. It could be that the list simply continues with both modes
> running.
>
> But I can say that from my perspective, it would be a more welcoming place
> if opinions are challenged in a way that encourages dialogue, rather than
> demanding defensiveness and arguments.
>
> With respect and best wishes,
>
> Sarah
>
> Dr. Sarah Teasley
> Head of Programme
> V&A/RCA History of Design
> School of Humanities
>
> Royal College of Art
> Kensington Gore, London
> SW7 2EU
> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> +44 (0)20 7590 4481
> www.rca.ac.uk <http://www.rca.ac.uk/>
> twitter.com/sarah_teasley <http://twitter.com/sarah_teasley>
>
> Applications are currently open for V&A/RCA MA History of Design and for
> our MPhil/PhD degrees. For further information please see
> http://www.rca.ac.uk/schools/school-of-humanities/hod/ <
> http://www.rca.ac.uk/schools/school-of-humanities/hod/>
>
>
> > On 2 Feb 2017, at 01:05, Keith Russell <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Clive,
> >
> > Welcome.
> > As someone who knows the origins of this list, it is important to listen
> > to your insights.
> >
> > As you know:
> > The Ohio conference was the foundation experience that allowed this PhD
> > Design group to emerge.
> > Sufficient senior researchers were concerned enough about the development
> > of junior researchers that this group was established.
> > That concern about the development of research through researchers has
> > been the entire point of engaging with this list.
> >
> > It has often been pointed out, over the years, and again recently (on and
> > off-list), that very little time is directly spent on this key business.
> > Some students post request for information to help them with their
> > literature review.
> > Some use the list to organise resources - collect published PhDs and MAs
> -
> > point to archives etc.
> > Some argue through key points in their developing work (this doesn¹t
> > happen very often).
> > Some put up lists of upcoming conferences and CFPs.
> > Some advocate for radical alternative approaches.
> >
> > Senior researchers generously respond to these postings as best they are
> > able.
> > Some senior researchers give access to significant research methods
> > materials.
> > Some senior researchers engage with off-list mentoring which can help PhD
> > candidates get passed the blind spots of their supervisors.
> >
> > Some senior researchers also engage in extensive back and forth arguments
> > with each other.
> > How to best approach these on-line disputations and contestations?
> > Many aspects of the disputations and contestations fall into rhetorical
> > modes that some junior researchers are not familiar with.
> > Some junior researchers take offence at certain rhetorical modes and see
> > these modes as indicative of power and age and gender and colour.
> >
> > When I listen to the list, I listen to all the voices on the list.
> > As a co-owner it is not my privilege to hear some and not others.
> >
> > So, I listen to your despair. You write:
> >
> > "Frankly, in its most conventional modes, 'design research' is of little
> > interest, either to thought or practice, and far less so than some here
> > seem to imagine.²
> >
> > I must insist that a conventional sense of purpose and interest is a
> basic
> > requirement of a list-owner.
> >
> > Should we contest these ideas in public as an exemplar for junior
> > researchers?
> > Would it be indicative of blind power for a co-owner to ask you to
> > elaborate for the sake of this community?
> > If a senior researcher, such as yourself, is seriously in despair that
> > design research, in its conventional modes, is of ³little interest,
> either
> > to thought or practice² why is there a PhD Design list at all, we might
> > ask and discuss?
> >
> > The list, as I understand it, supports conventions while encouraging
> > alternative ways of going.
> > This is a pretty standard understanding of institutions that receive
> > government support.
> > I am paid by the Australian government to spend my days doing this stuff.
> > Is this list too conventional?
> > Are alternative approaches marginalised on this list?
> > It should surprise no-one that dominant modes will dominate conventional
> > organisations and cultural groups.
> > Intersectionality was pointed to recently on the list.
> > This approach arose historically, as I understand it, out of white
> > feminists denying other women.
> > That is, it was a non-conventional approach to a group of
> non-conventional
> > academics.
> > Now it is a conventional way of looking at gender.
> >
> > So, if this list is conventional in offering junior researchers exposure
> > to a range of conventional understandings of knowledge -
> > I would see this is a requirement, not as a deficit.
> >
> > Looking forward to your reply
> >
> > keith
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2/2/17, 1:36 am, "PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD
> > studies and related research in Design on behalf of Clive Dilnot"
> > <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> on behalf
> of [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> >
> >> Some who have defensively posted here appear to have the
> >> implicit notion that they are the keepers of the sacred flame of
> >> ³research.² This is nonsense, both personally and intellectually. The
> >> truth
> >> is that while ³design research² has globally made great institutional
> >> strides since the 1980s (as represented by the number of PhDs and the
> >> like)
> >> intellectually and especially in terms of the models majorly
> represented
> >> on this list - it has made almost no real advance. Frankly, in its most
> >> conventional modes, "design research" is of little interest, either to
> >> thought or practice, and far less so than some here seem to imagine.
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask] <mailto:
> [log in to unmask]>>
> > Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> > Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design <
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design>
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|