(9) Rorty's "interesting philosophy"

Praxis-oriented research in whatever guise (as research, reflection, inquiry, exploration, experimentation) involves a shift beyond the forms of research that seek objectivity from the researcher. This is points to a celebration of forms of research that locate researchers in a subjective spaces where they are deeply implicated in the actions and theories that are the focus of research. My thesis argues that these forms of research require a different vocabulary from more objective forms of inquiry.

This scrambling for recognition and space to grow does not reject the value of other forms of research which seek objective forms of knowledge. However there is competition for power in the forms of funding and status - so the waters are murky - there is political resistance to fresh forms of research.

To further complicate matters, the tools of investigation (quantitative and qualitative methods of data gathering and analysis) are important tools in subjective forms of research.

So, I guess from this that my thesis is about describing things in new ways so that new ways of thinking are fostered.

The method I foster is described by Richard Rorty (an American pragmatist) who suggest that new ways of thinking happen when you "describe lots and lots of things in new ways, until you have created a pattern of linguistic behaviour which will tempt the rising generation to adopt it, thereby causing them to look for appropriate new forms of non-linguistic behaviour, for example, the adoption of new scientific equipment or new social institutions." Exhibit 1.2.1 is from my thesis.

----------------
Exhibit 1.2.1 Rorty’s “interesting philosophy”
----------------
On the view of philosophy which I am offering, philosophers should not be asked for arguments against, for example, the correspondence theory of truth or the idea of the “intrinsic nature of reality.” The trouble with arguments against the use of a familiar and time-honoured vocabulary is that they are expected to be phrased in that very vocabulary. … Interesting philosophy is rarely an examination of the pros and cons of a thesis. Usually it is, implicitly or explicitly, a contest between an entrenched vocabulary which has become a nuisance and a half-formed new vocabulary which vaguely offers new things.

The latter “method” of philosophy is the same as the “method” of utopian politics or revolutionary science (as opposed to parliamentary politics or normal science). The method is to describe lots and lots of things in new ways, until you have created a pattern of linguistic behaviour which will tempt the rising generation to adopt it, thereby causing them to look for appropriate new forms of non-linguistic behaviour, for example, the adoption of new scientific equipment or new social institutions. This sort of philosophy does not work piece by piece, analysing concept after concept, or testing thesis after thesis. Rather it works holistically and pragmatically. It says things like “try thinking of it this way” - or more specifically, “try to ignore the apparently futile traditional questions by substituting the following new and possibly interesting questions.” (Rorty, 1989: 8-9, italics added)
----------------

I wonder how the method Rorty describes (which is a philosophical approach) sits alongside my use of method in the earlier paragraph (quant and qual methods of gathering and analysing data) ...

(8) "Techie" and other key labels

These are the main labels I am using or plan to use as labels for postings. I will also use specific labels for postings that deal with particular issues (these will usually be defined in my glossary wiki rather than here).

• Techie - I have already defined it as refering to both e-technical stuff and things to do with the conventions I am using in this blog.
  
• Thesis - this refers both to (a) my PhD thesis as it was published in 2003 and (b) the ideas that flow into and from the work of the thesis. I see the thesis as a living document (oral, mental, and text - as in within this blog). The thesis is the backbone (the spine, the warp, the magnet) that provides continuity, focus and tempts me to return to discussing the ideas around the central themes of collective praxis, teacher education, complexity, pragmatism and practice. .
  
• Personal - even though the thesis is philosophic, academic, professional, I cannot separate it from the personal because I see the world and my ideas holistically. I am my ideas and my ideas are personal as well as collective. I am not going to use this space to be wildly personal but my person and my networks are part of my being.
  
• Conversations - some entries will be parts of ongoing conversations with one or more other people.
  
• Links - some entries will simply introduce other spaces.
  

(7) Praxis-based research and teacher inquiry into praxis

Here is a short-term, instrumental distinction between these two terms and the way I will use them (and it might change - but then all ideas might change).

Praxis-based research

• the researcher is a practitioner (a professional within the area of practice, in this case, teaching)
• the researcher understands praxis as being a blend of practice and theory (action and word in Freire's terms) with a focus on social justice / social good

AND

• the researcher publishes or shares the emerging findings with her/his peers so that conversations are ongoing and pragmatic (seeking to understand consequences of actions) and the researcher seeks critique (rather than simply acclamation) of praxis (actions and theorising).

Teacher inquiry into praxis (This is identical to the above except for the red words)

• the teacher is a practitioner (a professional within the area of practice, in this case, teaching)
• the teacher understands praxis as being a blend of practice and theory (action and word in Freire's terms) with a focus on social justice / social good

AND

• the teacher may (or may not) publish or share the emerging findings with her/his peers so that conversations are ongoing and pragmatic (seeking to understand consequences of actions) and the researcher seeks critique (rather than simply acclamation) of praxis (actions and theorising).

The consequences of these definitions are to do with who can call themselves researchers and who might publish in refereed journals. The consequences are to do with ...

1. Teachers in higher education being able to see themselves as researchers and see that there is research value in investigating their own praxis. (Currently this insight is not well understood among some teacher educators who did not previously see themselves as researchers yet they had been engaged in praxis-based inquiry (i.e. teacher inquiry into praxis). In order to publish they do not need to engage in new forms of work in order to gather data - they are already engaged in the investigation - the challenge is to publish their understandings, their learning as they grapple with current educational issues, and their approaches and ways of exploring/researching their ideas.
2. Teachers in areas other than higher education being able to see the potential for moving into higher education because they are engaged, not only in teaching within their sectors, but also that researching in their specialism is natural for them - they might see themselves as praxis-based researchers who do debate their own learning through research with their peers and with their colleagues in the tertiary sector (as part of gaining higher quals or being involved in research projects such as TLRI or ECE COI)
   
3. Teachers in areas other than higher education being able to generate knowledge, directly, about teaching in their areas without becoming involved directly in higher education - i.e. to publish in refereed journals.
   

So, whether these things are called inquiry or research, I am keen to foster the notion that teachers are able to explore the impact of their own teaching in ways that foster their thinking about the social impact of their ways of working - and I am keen to foster ways of enhancing this kind of collaborative conversation - something that encourages all professional practice to be under the scrutiny of collective self-study.

(6) Dictionaries: complexity and pragmatism

What is the meaning of a word? Any word? Take, for example, the word "research."

In order to find the meaning of a word one needs to explore how the word is used. This is, after all, how dictionaries* come to be created - the authors identify how a word is used in lots and lots of cases ... and then define the it using similar words.

Complexity thinking helps us to understand the process by which words gather their meaning, socially: as people talk and write and live, words are used naturally. Gradually, over time, fresh connotations arise, fresh words emerge to describe fresh experiences and artifacts. Dictionaries constantly need to be updated and new words added. Words, then, are constantly "rubbing shoulders" with other words as they are used, naturally, socially - patterns of use and meaning emerge and are constantly being adjusted or adapted. This process of constant adjustment and adapted fits the conditions for emergence (lots of similar interacting objects, no external control, yet patterns emerge) within self-organising systems. Emergence and self-organisation are notions that help us understand complexity thinking.

This means that, in order to understand the meaning of the word "research" we need to recognise that the meanings we hear around us are not necessarily emerging from the same contexts or settings. The way a school geography teacher uses the word when she asks children to research agriculture in China (do geography teachers still ask things like that?) is very different from the way the word is used within a university where staff have dual roles related to research and teaching. We all have different understandings of terms; our discussions about meanings are part of the emergence of fresh understandings, and fresh definitions of the words.

I use the term "pragmatic thinking" to refer to philosophical thinking (is there any other kind, I wonder, wryly to myself) that calls on American pragmatism. The word "pragmatic" is used differently in common language when we refer to "making a pragmatic decision," meaning that the decision is not ideal, but that allows us to carry on with other urgent matters. (Is that a fair description of common use?). I think of this as short-term pragmatism - long-term pragmatism is much more considered, political, and reflective about the possible consequences of one's actions. (Rorty uses a different pair of words to make a similar distinction.)

"Pragmatic thinking" reminds me that we learn from experience - that knowledge is constructed by observing what happens (a) naturally when we simply watch things and (b) when we intervene or act, or do something (when we act, or explore, or experiment) and notice or watch what happens. Science grows in that way: science tests out its theories (a) by observing the natural world and (b) by obseving and investigating the consequences of its interventions.

Pragmatic thinking reminds me that the ideas that guide what we do (our beliefs and assumptions) have an impact on our actions (what we say and do), and that our actions have an impact on our future and the future of those people and things around us. Our ideas are shaped by the conversations we take part in, and our beliefs are related to the cultures in which we live and that all use of language is, in part, impacting on our beliefs and language, and therefore on the future of the world. Admittedly, the impact of any action is, arguably miniscule - so tiny that it has no impact at all ... but in toto ... the impact of our collective actions can be and is very great - our collective actions could be though of as our cultural context - we live within the pattern of what it is, culturally, okay to do and be. (Incidentally, at catastropic moments the impact of an individual action can be massive, permanent, and far-reaching - and we may not be aware of it.)

Why is this relevant to understandings of the meanings of words like research or inquiry or investigation? Partly it is because understandings of pragmatism remind me of the political implications of making particular selections of words. The word research is loaded in the current climate where PBRF and the need for university academic staff to publish is giving it a particular status, and where I am promoting "practice-based research" as a means whereby teachers are able to both focus on their own practice and generate new knowledge that has social value. Or, in the case of school and ECE teachers what are the likely long-term consequences of referring to this as "practice-based inquiry"?

I guess that, when I am discussing the meaning of terms with friends (as I do with you, Takahe), I am thinking about the future, political consequences of particular uses. At least,that is what I am doing in the case of words that seem to me to have powerful influences on the understandings of people I work with in my teaching and research. Playing with meanings and defending some interpretations is, therefore, a part of a political debate that is part of my thesis as a whole.

---------------------------------

* NSOED (the New Shorter Oxford Dictionary of the English Language) is an important book for me (or rather, it is an important pair of books). I enjoy reading the different ways words have been used in publications. My thesis talks about dictionaries and encyclopedia, and reminds me/us that they are all written by people (people with expertise, admittedly) and that other people may have different understandings, or have had different experiences of how any particular word is used.

(5) Organising a blog - emerging knowledge and "techie" stuff

The way this blog will be organised is emerging slowly, and will continue to emerge. This is an example of how new knowledge is created - it emerges as a result of exploring and wondering, watching what is happening and researching (investigating) how other blogs work and what kinds of things I think are worthy of the effort of being typed up.

Within this blog I am using "techie" as a term that refers to technical stuff (to do with e-spaces, sites etc. as well as the technical workings of both software and hardware). But I am also extending the term to describe the conventions I am developing for working within this site. I want to identify about half a dozen (seven at most) labels, one of which will be attached to each blog entry (I could add more and different labels but each entry will have one of the key labels. This is because, in the past when I have experimented with using blogs I have kept generating labels (or tags) so that they got out of hand.

This rule will place some requirement to classify around what topics I talk about without constraining me. It is an example of a liberating constraint (a notion from complexity thinking - it is the idea that certain constraints can actually foster creativity).

Glee - I've found out how to add pages to a wiki

Yahoo - what a name! I have found I can add one-pagers and other formatted documents to a wiki space so am delighted to be able to rationalise my thinking around what spaces I actually need to do the job of linking all my thesis related material together.

My next step is to find out how I link from here into urls. The expected link is not apparent. This is, by the way, a temporary post - I will delete it all when I put in a posting about the structure of my network of spaces. Here is Takahe's blog