Print

Print


Dear all,
 
This generation of knowledge and understanding is a tricky issue, isn't
it?
 
I suppose many practitioners embark on projects because they want to
change something. i.e. the principal aim is not the generation of
knowledge and understanding as such; rather, it is a practical change
that they desire.
 
For instance I might ask, 'how can I improve my teaching?' rather than,
'how can I improve my understanding of how to improve my teaching?'
 
Now, you might argue that answers to the first question imply answers to
the second - that I cannot improve my teaching without also improving my
understanding of my teaching. 
 
However, when I collect evidence, it will relate primarily to
improvement of my teaching, rather than my understanding. And, if you
read my account, I might have less difficulty persuading you of the
improvements to my teaching - you will encounter 'before, during and
after' types of evidence for this. I might have greater difficulty
persuading you of improvements to my understanding because, unless I can
describe some clear 'Eureka' moments, you might say that I had the
necessary understanding already, I merely applied my understanding to
the situation of the project. (You might further argue that the 'Eureka'
moments were evidence that I had understood something that other people
already knew, not that I had generated new knowledge or understanding.)
 
So production of knowledge and understanding might be a concomitant of a
participatory project, not its primary aim.
 
What do you think?
 
Best wishes,
 
 
 
Tim
 

________________________________

From: BERA Practitioner-Researcher
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brian
wakeman
Sent: 28 February 2008 12:14
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: AA Thread 1 07-08 Raising issues, asking questions, and
making networking available for practiti


Of Collaborative Studies, Hatch (2002, p33) writes:  " it is possible to
do research in collaboration with practitioners but not with the
specific intent of changing the the practices of research participants. 
 
Why not?
 
I've had colleagues from HE working with me in school to help me improve
practice. They came at my invitation as skilled facilitators, members of
the TIQL Project based at Cambridge.
 
Now later in life I'm invited into classrooms to assist colleagues
develop understanding and improve practice.
 
 
"Collaborative research here refers to work that is distinguished from
action research because its principal aims are the generation of
knowledge and understanding. "
 
Another statement that may be challenged.........? 
 
Can't action research have  principal aims of generating understanding
and knowledge, and another of improving the quality of learning and
teaching ?
 
I heard John Elliott lament at one BERA that ........many AR projects
were not generating new knowledge...........but  they are capable of
raising hypotheses about how practice might be improved. Many projects
involving collaboration do both , don't they?
 
What do colleagues think?
 
Brian
 




----- Original Message ----
From: Barra Hallissey <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, 28 February, 2008 10:57:18 AM
Subject: Re: AA Thread 1 07-08 Raising issues, asking questions, and
making networking available for practiti



Of Collaborative Studies, Hatch (2002, p33) writes:  " it is possible to
do research in collaboration with practitioners but not with the
specific intent of changing the the practices of research participants.
Collaborative research here refers to work that is distinguished from
action research because its principal aims are the generation of
knowledge and understanding.  It is assumed in collaborative qualitative
research that it is valuable to bring both the insider and outsider
perspectives to the analysis of phenomena under investigation.  It is
also considered desireable to include research participants as full
partners in the research process, thus addressing concerns that
researchers sometimes "use" the individuals they are studying, taking
more than they are giving in the research bargain.
 
I wonder what others in this Special Interest Group make of Hatch's
view.  I would particularly like to know what Jack (Whitehead) makes of
it.  Jack of course is free not to respond to issues raised on this
listing such as this, but he did he invite debate in the first instance
by suggesting this theme and I consider it a poor show to then stay
silent ... or perhaps I am mistaken.
 
Pro bono
Barra Hallissey

Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
<https://www.searchcharades.com/>