Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10034/206912
Title:
Commodification in practitioner research
Authors:
Wall, Tony
Abstract:
Action research can be described as a family of approaches and methodologies rather than a well-defined, particular form of enquiry. One strand of ‘relations’ within that family is first-person action research (FPAR), sometimes referred to as self-inquiry or self-study. A growing literature on ‘quality’ in this form of research indicates the need to be questioning and critical – and there are various tools and techniques available to do that such as cycles and models of reflection. These tools have been criticized for not being emancipatory, or actually reinforcing powerful ideological forces at work. This paper offers additional theoretical apparatus which enables the practitioner to glimpse into the possibility of ideological forces as play, and the choices that may become available once these forces become known. The theoretical ideas are drawn from psychoanalysis (Freud, Lacan and Zizek), in a form of psychoanalytical FPAR, in the particular style of Tony Brown and colleagues in the UK. Within psychoanalysis, the notions of the Imaginary, Symbolic and the Real create a situation whereby we can identify with *commodified* versions of things (not ‘real’ versions), which ‘miss the mark’, but which nonetheless create a view of the world and how we should act in it. Data from a particular case is offered from cutting-edge practitioner research whereby academics are working with commercial organisations. The case provides a living example of how the theoretical apparatus can helps explain some of the professional struggles and tensions of the academic, and bring supposed ideological forces into some level of awareness. Using the ideas, the paper demonstrates how the academic variously identifies with and understands his practice – caught between a desire to be a ‘client-oriented academic’ whilst governed by a drive to be a guardian of quality assurance. The approach is questioned and critiqued, with a view to create new approaches and ideas. We will: - provide data examples for 'live' interpretation, questioning and challenge - offer challenging questions throughout - ask for ideas and feedback throughout - be provoking, reflective and collegial
Affiliation:
University of Chester
Citation:
Unpublished conference presentation given at the International CARN Conference in Vienna, Austria, 4-6 November 2011
Issue Date:
Nov-2011
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10034/206912
Additional Links:
http://ius.uni-klu.ac.at/carn
Type:
Meetings and Proceedings
Language:
en
Description:
This conference paper is available at http://chester.academia.edu/cwrstony/Papers/1303983/Commodification_in_Practitioner_Research
Appears in Collections:
Centre for Work Related Studies

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorWall, Tonyen
dc.date.accessioned2012-02-01T08:27:50Z-
dc.date.available2012-02-01T08:27:50Z-
dc.date.issued2011-11-
dc.identifier.citationUnpublished conference presentation given at the International CARN Conference in Vienna, Austria, 4-6 November 2011en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10034/206912-
dc.descriptionThis conference paper is available at http://chester.academia.edu/cwrstony/Papers/1303983/Commodification_in_Practitioner_Researchen
dc.description.abstractAction research can be described as a family of approaches and methodologies rather than a well-defined, particular form of enquiry. One strand of ‘relations’ within that family is first-person action research (FPAR), sometimes referred to as self-inquiry or self-study. A growing literature on ‘quality’ in this form of research indicates the need to be questioning and critical – and there are various tools and techniques available to do that such as cycles and models of reflection. These tools have been criticized for not being emancipatory, or actually reinforcing powerful ideological forces at work. This paper offers additional theoretical apparatus which enables the practitioner to glimpse into the possibility of ideological forces as play, and the choices that may become available once these forces become known. The theoretical ideas are drawn from psychoanalysis (Freud, Lacan and Zizek), in a form of psychoanalytical FPAR, in the particular style of Tony Brown and colleagues in the UK. Within psychoanalysis, the notions of the Imaginary, Symbolic and the Real create a situation whereby we can identify with *commodified* versions of things (not ‘real’ versions), which ‘miss the mark’, but which nonetheless create a view of the world and how we should act in it. Data from a particular case is offered from cutting-edge practitioner research whereby academics are working with commercial organisations. The case provides a living example of how the theoretical apparatus can helps explain some of the professional struggles and tensions of the academic, and bring supposed ideological forces into some level of awareness. Using the ideas, the paper demonstrates how the academic variously identifies with and understands his practice – caught between a desire to be a ‘client-oriented academic’ whilst governed by a drive to be a guardian of quality assurance. The approach is questioned and critiqued, with a view to create new approaches and ideas. We will: - provide data examples for 'live' interpretation, questioning and challenge - offer challenging questions throughout - ask for ideas and feedback throughout - be provoking, reflective and collegialen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.relation.urlhttp://ius.uni-klu.ac.at/carnen
dc.subjectwork based learningen
dc.subjectpractitioner enquiryen
dc.titleCommodification in practitioner researchen
dc.typeMeetings and Proceedingsen
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Chesteren
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Creative Commons
All Items in ChesterRep are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.