Frameworks

In the PM discussion group on Sunday we talked about positivism and non-positivism 

in terms of proof: in the sense that Module One AOLs has an element of proving your knowledge because the knowledge is present in the practical doing of your professional practice but not articulated into the larger field of practice. Articulating this is you’re your AOLs are attempting to do.

Proof in terms of the theoretical framework (positivist / non-positivist you are starting to create in Module Two to create your inquiry framework.

Proof in terms of how you make your data and ideas more meaningful than just a 'proof' of something you already know. 

For me ‘proof’ is not something that I adhere to. Rather I see things in terms of better understanding relationships between things. The relationship between your experiences, other’s experiences (‘The Literature’), your actions and your growth is the ‘living proof’ of the knowledge you are writing about in the AOLs.  The discussion was really good and people risked putting ideas out there to see what other people felt (and in saying them maybe better understand what they thought themselves) –

 '"it made sense in side my head" said Pooh' 

We came to the point where we pointed out that the course is in a theoretical framework - one that allows for multiple realities. It is not just anything goes it is based on Pragmatism and Phenomenology.

You must be aware of:

• Your own frameworks
• Being the framework of the course
• Where you accept, and do not accept, that framework - but still achieve the outcomes of the Modules.

Here is some more about this from a forth coming chapter Helen and I wrote about our theoretical frameworks. It is not complete but an example of how a framework pervades across your whole concept of Self and meaning behind your actions and understanding of how other people and things are in relation to you in the world. – You have a framework too, at this MA level we are asking you to be aware of it and consider how much of it is assumptions or general popular belief you have inherited without thinking / feeling about it. And how much of it is crafted over time and experience as your movement practice is

‘British born our mother-tongue is English but we feel the language itself does not communicate the cultural understanding of the world we have grown up in.

As dance scholar-artists, our sense of ‘reality’ is in the transformation, transaction, interaction demonstrated by movement. Understanding the world through dance, we do not have a perception of stillness/fixedness since heartbeat rhythmically creates constant movement within us. Life is within and between the heartbeat, the breath: dance is within and between these rhythms. Our interest in the in-betweeness of things, (rather than seeking to pin down static identities) finds meaning in movement: meaning in the transitions between, in and through…. For Adesola dance exemplifies this interconnectedness. The artist is both the dancer (perceiver) and the dance (perceived) as such dancers are engaged across and through the reflective process of responding with mind-full bodies in order to dance. Dance is both what the dancer is doing and what they are being. As we consider Dewey, however, his very concepts of ‘interaction’ and ‘transaction’ force us to acknowledge that he must have been shaped by experiences he was having in the community and natural world around him. Dewey’s wider community consisted of a range of pragmatists such as Native Americans - Black Elk[1], African Americans - Du Bois, and women such as Charlotte Perkins Gilman (Pratt, 2002; Sullivan, 2001). We feel it is these influences of African, Indigenous and female perspectives that resound in Dewey’s work that resonate with us.

Dewey (Adesola) and Heidegger (Helen) are established within the Western canon and are therefore useful because they offer methods for articulating the ‘embodied’ within Western frames…’

 What do you feel?

Adesola

Black, E., & Neihardt, J. G. (1932). Black Elk speaks. New York,: W. Morrow & company.

Pratt, S. L. (2002). Native pragmatism : rethinking the roots of American philosophy. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Sullivan, S. (2001). Living across and through skins : transactional bodies, pragmatism and feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

---

[1] Dewey was alive 1859 to 1952, Black Elk 1863 to 1950 (Black & Neihardt, 1932)  Peirce lived 1839 to 1914, William Frederick “Buffalo Bill” Cody was born in 1846 and died 1917

Methodology - Sunday Discussions

Sunday discussions went well – in the morning we talked about a range of topics converging on methodology – how we go about things. How we notice significant things - things at sparkle in our memory or imagination when we consider an idea. The conversation suggested that this was about ‘narrowing down’ ideas to better manage them. In other words not to be overwhelmed by the on-going growth or wonder of finding out more but to follow the trails of the things that compel you and inspire you as a starting point of finding out more.

We talked about the use of confidence to keep you moving forward and not second guessing yourself. Then we linked the points we were making in the conversation to positivist and non-positivist methodological approaches. We noted that a non-positivist approach is really the design model the course calls for. It does not involve certainly as a guiling principle so the uncertainty of the wealth of ideas people were experiencing (the feel of sometimes being lost) could be seen as part of the terrain of this kind of research approach. It is not about fixed facts it is about a process or journey to asking deep questions.

So maybe some of this is about shifting our perception of what research is and what it can do. We talked about it being like layers, or watercolour paints that bleed into each other rather than about finding out an answer to a fixed question.  It became clear reflection and reflectivity are key. Also how the past shapes our present perceptions of education and research.

We talked then about how a change of mind is not isolated to the mind but a shift in approach to everything because everything is connected. Research is about being sensitive to how even the smallest shift in experience reverberates across our understanding of everything.    

People in the conversation and who are posting on it also are:

Parimala

Raymond

Alice

Jo

Helen

In the afternoon we talked about objectivity, artistic v academic, learning through dancing. This conversation included talking about the low value dance has in some peoples hierarchy of learning. “wow you can do a degree in dance – I’ve heard you can do a degree in anything nower days.!!’ This returned us in many ways to the positivist non-postivist of the morning. The value of dance, or the academic-ness of the arts etc… are measured differently depending on what model for understanding what the world is you use (ontology). And what model for understanding what knowledge you use (epistemology). Whatever your area of scholarship you first need to have a theoretical framework (a sense of where you stand ontologically and/or epistemologically) this is because you do not want to spend all your time justifying what you are doing in some models your work will not be valuable. You want to know the framework you are working in order to make sure you keep moving forward and challenge yourself meaningfully. This awareness of where you stand is important because otherwise you are fighting the personal fight of your own study against gigantic models for research that have nothing to do with what you are doing. In other words, you cannot spend your time persuading yourself you are academic after a history of not feeling academic – you may very well not be in the terms you are setting out.  But you can shift what your perception of academic is to better understand the learning you have done. Then the question is not ‘artistic or academic?’ ‘It is artistic academia how and where do I fit in?’  Then you can spend you time finding the theory and thinking and frameworks that make sense for your embodied approach to the world.

We talked abit about the blog post on Theory, theoretical frameworks and ethics (see below posts) . It only has one comment please comment there too.

The pm discussion was with:

Davis

Michelle

Emma

Maite

Please have a look at each other’s posts on the two discussions, comment there and here.

Helen and I reminded you the Dancing and writing  Professional Practice Summer Intensive is fun and inspiring and helpful  and open for  registration now. See post below.

Adesola