John

a quick response whilst a have a few minutes.

1) the notion of 'incommensurability' wrt paradigms does not imply that we
cannot judge between paradigms. Otherwise we might still have people
seriously holding the phlogiston theory of combustion or the ptolemaic view
of the heavens. Lakatos sets out criteria for distinguishing between
'degenerative' and 'progressive' research programmes, and I argue (see
paper for SRHE 2002) that the practices/ emergent-identity perspective
meets with the criteria for a 'progressive' programme.

2) You assert that 'In one paper Len you desribe the new curriculum to be
"disease" that has to be "decontaminated".' I most certainly HAVE NOT. I
challenge anyone to show that I have ever written or said this. John, I do
feel that it is vital that we do not misrepresent what each other has said,
or else we cannot continue with intelligent debate.

3)  re. suspension of belief in SKATTY. If you are not prepared to do this,
then I don't see how there can be continuing discussion. This thread was
initiated by John Hilsdon (on 21st Nov) specifically wrt the practices/
emergent identity approach: "I wonder if other members have looked at Len's
work?  Do we understand him?  What might his ideas mean for what we do and
who we are?"

I am not *insisting* that you change your views, merely inviting you to
*suspend* judgement ie not enter and continue the debate having already
closed your mind to the possibility that the practices/ emergent-identity
approach may be a better basis for our (and your) work. I fully accept that
you are quite at liberty to continue belief in SKATTY, but hope that,
having entered the debate, you only do so after an open-minded and
considered examination of the argument and evidence.

You say, correctly, that I myself could suspend my belief in the practices/
emergent-identity approach. What you appear not to take into account is
that I have *moved* from acceptance of SKATTY because of the problems it
has, in theory and in practice. My development of the practices/
emergent-identity approach has taken place over a decade and half, and has
probably been gestating for much longer in my career of 27 years in the
'learning and skills' field. So I really can't understand your challenge to
me to resuspend my belief and re-enter the SKATTY fold. I trust that the
rack and thumbscrews are not on the agenda!

4) I do feel that the time has come for specific questions and challenges
to what I argue, based on correct reading of what I have written. It
doesn't help to accuse me of saying things I haven't said, or to suggest I
hold certain views without citing where I have expressed those views (all
that stuff about sacred/ profane, Foucault, etc). I am very happy to
explain my work, and to engage in collegial manner with people who wish to
consider how that work may have practical application in their own work.

Of course, I cannot force anyone to give open-minded reading and
consideration of my writings.

Len


----------------------------------
Dr Leonard Holmes
Director, Management Research Centre
London Metropolitan University
Holloway Road
London N7 8DB

email: [log in to unmask]
tel.: +44 (0)20 7133 3032
websites:
        www.re-skill.org.uk
        www.graduate-employability.org.uk
        www.odysseygroup.org.uk