 |
 |
Hi all, I've been watching the debate with interest. A couple of observations. Just read a book called People Styles at work, by Robert and Dot Bolton - outlining a method of observing behaviour in order to relate better. Basically following David W Merrills research in the 1960s. Working in a commercial environment myself I am well used to the demand for instant results, to maintain competitiveness. There is nothing wrong with this view in itself, its immensely practical. There are also legitimate views around making solid decisions based on a thorough examination of the facts, the affects decisions have on people, or on yourself. Often peoples values can be similar but how they relate or express themselves is different and this can lead to confusion. What seems to be at issue is not so much the values of research, but the desire for ideas that are transferable and will give results - as Edward states: "What drew me to BERA-Practitioner-Research was the possibility of learning what other 'practitioners' were doing in other fields to advance competencies in training skills." There is no evident conflict in values here with the idea or practice of living educational theory, perhaps the question could be re-phrased as - what practical guidance can people point to in their own research that is transferrable, or useful to others, that could be shared through this list? It does not have to be a nomothetic, over-arching theory, just some ideas that are transferrable, and can be tried in practice. For my part the outcome I found most useful in my own research is, it is possible to learn how to use open source software, Apache Web Server, MySQL and PHP to be able to use it in practice, but its almost impossible for an individual to learn it alone, and the interventions of others is crucial. The logic in most programming languages is similar, just the syntax is different, so its worthwhile learning some programming, even if just to relate better to people at work. There is a lot of theorising about research, which is very important, but is there a way of grounding this in practical terms to improve our own practice - how can we help each other out in improving our practice? Thanks, Darragh >-- Original Message -- >Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:44:45 +1000 >Reply-To: BERA Practitioner-Researcher <[log in to unmask]> >From: Susan Goff <[log in to unmask]> >Subject: Re: Evaluating the quality of the educational knowledge we are producing >To: [log in to unmask] > > >I think the point is that we need visionaries that are born of practical >experience - the gap between the two is not linear, or reflective of fear, >but essential - a poetic expression of our dreaming and potential without >which we have no future. > > >On 25/6/07 3:53 AM, "David Wilson" <[log in to unmask]> >wrote: > >> Well said, Ed. A dose of common sense. I've worked in education all my >> life, latterly in the field of special educational needs (SEN). When I >read >> academic literature about educational inclusion, I often find myself >> immersed in either abstruse discourse of a very abstract nature or in a >> rose-tinted perspective on the perfectability of man. I'm happy to be a >> functionary, a doer, not a visionary indulging in esoteric ideas or >> language. I just want to make the system work better for the disadvantaged >> learners that I teach every day. Matching interventions to individual needs >> is my bread and butter. My action research is about concrete case studies >> in problem-solving with practical outcomes, not navel-gazing. >> >> David Wilson