Mon, 4 Jul 2005 16:06
From: Peter Mellett <esspem@BATH.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Start of the Review Process

Dear All

Picking up where I left off last week i.e. . . . I have been perusing
postings as they have been made over the past few weeks and must admit to
noting that the exchanges have created within me a steadily growing sense of
tension as I endeavour to hold on to the original stated theme of the
e-seminar.

In an attempt to respond to that tension and to see if the process of review
can be moved forward, I propose to go ‘back to basics’ and to undertake an
action enquiry under Jack's usual sequential headings:

1. What is my concern?
I am concerned that this e-seminar will not be able by means of an act of
corporate effort to come to a conclusion that identifies a clear response to
the question: ‘The nature of educational theories: what counts as evidence
of educational influences in learning?’

2. Why am I concerned?
At the moment I see the archive (which embodies the interests of its
contributors) taking on the appearance of the expanding Universe after the
Big Bang – I see galaxies forming which have their own internal threads and
consistencies but I cannot discern a sense of common purpose within the
whole. I feel that our expanding Universe must now start to contract - or
else it will dissipate itself to no purpose.

3. What do I think I can do about it?
Carrying out a review of the archive will not respond to or resolve my
concern. That review is for each group that inhabits each galaxy to carry
out. I shall review a piece of published work -

“An infant/primary Action Research module” by Kathryn Yeaman

- that is regarded as being a
good-quality action research enquiry. In that enterprise I shall attempt to
develop and use standards of judgement that are based on:

* having respect for evidence
* identifying the nature of evidence
* invoking the logic of question and answer
* maintaining an aesthetically engaged and appreciative response
* an awareness of taste
* an awareness of thymos

These standards are discussed more fully elsewhere and the original
document from which they came (BERA Review 2000) may be viewed via this link.

Needless to say, if you have a concern for this e-seminar that matches mine,
as expressed in 1 and 2 above, then I hope you also subscribe to my
assertion from an earlier posting which was stated as: “. . . Thus I am convinced that, by addressing within
dialogue the concerns of another, my own concerns become explicated and
resolved.” I am hoping that, if others (or just one other) will join me in
dialogue in this enterprise, then a process may be identified which will
help others to review their own galaxy and thus contribute to meeting the
stated aims of this e-seminar.

I shall leave until tomorrow the completion of the final parts of Jack’s AR
cycle plan i.e.

4. What kind of 'evidence' can I collect to help me make some judgements
about what is happening?
5. How do I plan to collect such evidence?
6. How shall I check that my judgement about what has happened is reasonably
fair and accurate ?

- Peter