 |
 |
Dear all, It seems to me that the subjective/objective debate might be running out of steam. Before it does, I'd like to outline my position as I currently see it: The search for objectivity is not a blind alley. Although we can't be 'totally objective' (any more than we can be 'totally tall') we can be more, or less, objective. Being more objective implies putting a greater distance between myself and the thing that I am relating to and can be achieved by such processes as 'blind double marking'. Although greater objectivity can have a negative impact (e.g. when it involves a loss of compassion) in some social situations (as when we are marking student assignments), being more objective results in being more impartial. In such situations greater objectivity can have a positive impact. However, I am not at all clear about how this relates to practitioner research or, indeed, any research. Any thoughts? Best wishes, Tim