Re: Education and Learning Virtual Networking Stream for ALARA's 8th World Congress
Hello Marie and everyone
I also rejoiced in Inoue’s PowerPoint and saw the powerful connections across our different approaches – and – see in Brian’s observation that AR has the capacity to embrace very different world views and with them personal/political/professional motivations. I believe the sense of commonality that you describe here comes from the systemic attributes of our field which work across and into a great variety (perhaps any) field, discipline or context – but that these systemic or generic characteristics can be translated into the specifics of narrative, person and context so that they can also create a great variety of approaches and outcomes.
My experience of this has been abandoning models of AR such as the linear plan, do, observe, reflect cycles and adopting a principle-basis of inquiry practice. What I found was that the principles enable any epistemology to be taken into an inquiry strategy while also maintaining characteristics of the practice. This is very liberating when working across say organisational cultures and into consumer networks within the same inquiry strategy.
I found Heron and Reasons’ Collaborative Inquiry principles to be perhaps the most powerful of these. Such an approach enables participants to invent how they go about their inquiry to suit their cultural and value basis (self determination), while also being challenged by and learning their way into the characteristics of AR.
If I may say – a balance between unity and diversity is essential for a healthy strategy and field – maintaining the capacity to grow and challenge our own convictions while also adding to the depth of understanding about them as say the Inoue slides do...
In friendship
Susan
On 24/05/10 12:58 AM, "Marie Huxtable" <[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Hi,
I have just returned from the AR conference in Zagreb and I am beginning to reflect on what I have learned and the practical implications. I am wondering whether as I do so I can build on what Jack has offered in response to Brian’s posting 18th May 2010 where Brian stated:
‘There are several different approaches to PAR, AR., ways of seeking to improve professional practice, or to work with others to address agreed issues...... as the literature or a BERA or CARN conference illustrate..
There are different motivations for our work.’
During the Zagreb conference Tim Cain (Univ. Southampton, UK), Alan Markowitz (College of St. Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA), Jack Whitehead (Liverpool Hope Univ.) and Branko Bogna (Faculty of Philosophy in Osijek, Croatia) shared their approaches to AR interactively with teachers and other educators developing their research. Sanja Milovic, Ninocka Truck-Biljan, and Dubravka Kovacevic from the Education and Teacher Training Agency, Croatia, presented their research on AR as a tool for professional development and the creation of learning communities and networks. I was also very fortunate in being able to attend a small workshop by Sanja Mandaric, a teacher from Djakova , ‘The importance of values for teachers as action researchers’, which has given me a great deal to think about. I hope Sanja will produce her account of her work as I think it will inspire and challenge others as it has me.
What was of interest to me was the degree of congruence between what on the surface appeared very different approaches. Reading the power point of Noriyuki Inoue (Univ. San Diego, USA) that Jack has made available on http://www.actionresearch.net/writings/jack/jwprposting190510.htm and in particular the two slides:
Practice-linked Cultural Concepts from Japanese culture
•思い (omoi)
–Integrated form in thinking, feeling and passion that serve as driving force of an individual or a group
•場 (Ba)
–Communicative space for deepening understanding and building consensus characterized by bounded instability
•反省 (Hansei)
–Reflection on one’s moral obligation and duty
•絆 (Kizuna)
–Enduring bond built among colleagues, friends, and family
•匠 (Takumi)
Sophisticated skill built on advanced wisdom and experiences
East Asian Epistemology
–Different from linear, deductive and confrontational way of knowing
–Assumption of complexity and dynamic understanding of reality
–Self as a part of the social, cultural, and physical context
–Reflection and compassion
I am struck by the resonance between what he says and those speaking in Croatia. I disagree with Brian where he asserts, ‘There are different motivations for our work’. I believe I share a motivation with the educators I met. We came from a dozen different countries but seem united in a passionate motivation for improving our educational theory and practice with the intention of making a life-enhancing difference to the learning of self, others and the social formations in which we live and work, and ultimately to the educational experience of children and young people. There was a common understanding that engaging in ‘action research’ is emotionally and intellectually challenging, ‘messy’ and life changing for the researcher. The incongruence between the approaches provoked a creative, critical engagement with presenters and audience as I sought to integrate what I also learned from creating and offering a workshop on ‘children and young people as action researchers.’
On 15th May 2010 Brian posted rhetorical questions:
‘Is it not also important to subject Inclusionality to rigorous analysis or experiential testing as a way of thinking?
Is not important to uncover the presuppositions, the world-view lying underneath these ideas and to ask questions of their claims?’
In response I would agree it is important on both accounts but not just to talk in the abstract; I would contest that educators need to show and account for their educational influence in learning. Over the next few weeks I will try to create an account, building on what I have learned from preparing and offering the workshop on ‘children and young people as researchers’, which explains my practice. I will post it on my website for anyone who will help me test the validity of my claim to know what I am doing and to be making an educational difference in learning, and offers a response to Brian’s questions:
- What is your rigorous analysis and experiential testing of your way of thinking which underpins your efforts to improve what you do?
- What are your presuppositions, the world-view lying underneath your ideas and the questions you ask of your claims?
And mine:
- What is your educational explanation for your educational influence, in your own learning, the learning of others and the social formations in which you live and work, as you hold yourself to account for your practice?
I hope that others might also be willing to make their accounts public and in doing so make a life-enhancing difference to the learning of self, others and the social formations in which we live and work, and ultimately improve the educational experience of more children and young people.
Enjoy a smile and pass it on
Marie
From: Jack Whitehead <[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
Sent: Wed, 19 May, 2010 5:24:57
Subject: Re: Education and Learning Virtual Networking Stream for ALARA's 8th World Congress
To emphasise the importance of the points Brian posted yesterday I've posted some reflections from last week's 7th Annual Action Research Conference in San Diego, USA, and this week's Action Research workshop in Zagreb, Croatia at:
http://www.actionresearch.net/writings/jack/jwprposting190510.htm
The reflections include a welcome to Prof. Norijuki Inoue from the University of San Diego whose presentation to the 7th Annual Conference emphasised the importance of infusing non-western epistemology into action research. Nori was supported by Prof. Satoshi Suzuki the Director of Japan's Association for Action Research. The reflections include details of the url to Nori's powerpoint presentation. The reflections also report on the first Collaborative Action Research Network (CARN) study day in North America, with a 4:50 minute video-clip of Lonnie's introduction.
I'm finding most inspiring the range of different motivations in the unique constellations of values that distinguished the diverse contributors to both the San Diego and Zagreb AR Conferences. Yesterday I participated in one discussion group of 6 of the 55 participants, with individuals from Estonia, Latvia, Romania, Croatia, Czech Republic and the UK ! We all communicated our individual action research accounts from our diverse historical and cultural contexts and our unique constellations of values. Here's hoping that the reflections communicate something of our influence in extending the global influence of our AR conversations. Tim did a great job in extending the audience's understanding of AR. Marie and Branko are presenting tomorrow at the AR conference in Zagreb.
Love Jack.
On 18 May 2010, at 16:14, Brian wakeman wrote:
Dear All,
There are just two comments I wish to contribute before signing off this thread:
There are several different approaches to PAR, AR., ways of seeking to improve professional practice, or to work with others to address agreed issues...... as the literature or a BERA or CARN conference illustrate..
There are different motivations for our work.
I hope there is space for us all.
Brian
