Journal Entry #4 CI 8150 University of Minnesota: Theories of Growth and Change in Elementary Schooling

Reactions and notes from Dahlberg, Dahlberg, and Nystrom (2008). Reflective Lifeworld Research. Lund, Sweden.

Lifeworld Phenomenology

Dictionary Entries for this Post:

Lifeworld:  "When we refer to the human world as the lifeworld, we imply that as humans we are already in a world context, which among other meanings is a world of tradition, history, and culture.  This multi-faceted world is also a world of other humans" (56).

Lifeworld Research:  "... is characterized by an aspiration for sensitive openness, a concern for elucidation, and a purposeful leaving aside of expectations and assumptions so that the phenomenon and its meaning can show itself and, perhaps, surprise its researchers.  It is about shift from a natural attitude to a phenomenological scientific attitude" (96).

Openness:  " [Gadamer speaks of openness as] a wish to see, a wish to understand something in a new way" which, "points towards [openness] as a methodological principle" (111).

Bridling:  "'an attitude that enables one to hold on to the patient meanwhile' in which meanings come to be.  It is about welcoming a way of being open where the vent of understanding is "bridled" (124).

Bridling Thoughts:

I have to admit, this book was a bit above my experience with phenomenology, which I admit, it very limited.  However, I actually felt more connected to the text in this book, then the introductory text to Phenomenology I read by Van Manen (See Journal Entry #2).  I think this is due, in part, to the fact that my intrigue in the concept of the lifeworld, which looks at we humans as contextual beings.  This is interesting to me because of my background in Psychology, and its views of nurtured and conditioned perceptions based upon the environment one grows up in.  This environment can include the areas of tradition, history and culture, as also reflected in the text.  I also thought the concept of openness, as depicted in the text was a unique way of trying to alert us, as researchers, to our own conditioned perceptions, and to be able conduct true lifeworld research as described by the authors.  Conducting this type of research does not use openness as a methodology, but rather, as far as aI understand it, realigns our own thoughts and attitudes as researchers so that we can see the experience of the phenomenon in a way that was perhaps not apparent to us before.  We then can use bridling to draw connections and observations of what has been experienced or observed, when being open.

I also enjoyed Chapter 6 of this book that discussed "Lifeworld research as science, and how it would be good for the field if qualitative researchers would examine their own work from the "qualitative evidence perspective" (325).  What an interesting thought:  to complete a phenomenological study on a phenomenological study.  This concept in the text is referred to as Reflective Lifeworld Research.

To be honest, this all is a bit abstract and intellectual for me at this time, but I do know I am beginning to have a grasp on what I would consider some fundamentals of the phenomenological approach. I find the concept fascinating, and I look forward to learning more. 

Journal Entry #3 CI 8150 University of Minnesota: Theories of Growth and Change in Elementary Schooling

Reactions and notes from Vagle, M. (2011). Post-Intentional Phenomenology and the Egocentric Predicament in Qualitative Research. University of Georgia.

Exploring Post-Intentional Phenomenology

Dictionary Entries for this Post:

Post-Intentional Phenomenology:  "[A suggestion] that a post commitment such as

seeing knowledge as partial, situated, endlessly deferred, and circulating through

relations would be a most helpful way to re-conceive phenomenological research today" (3).

Egocentric Predicament:  "The egocentric predicament that Sokolowski refers to was born in Descartes’ assertion that the mind could be “removed” from the world—that consciousness and meaning could be encased in and of itself. Humans, then, were conscious only of their representations of the world" (5).

In-the-Box Signification:  “The very notion, ‘subjectivity,’ carries with it the in-the-box signification. And I [he] contend[s] that this signification cannot be escaped so long as the old vocabulary is used” (Ihde quoted by Vagle, 7).

Variation: "...the “essence” of any phenomenon has invariant and variant
structures that make that phenomenon what it is" (9).

Bridling Thoughts:

The most interesting item to me in both the reading and in our discussions is the fluidity and  variant meaning, if you will, about the term Post-Intentional (24).  Vagle states in his essay that, "I don’t see this image as simply a subtle shift from the “old” phenomenology. I think it provides a sound philosophical and theoretical ground for multiple perspectives to be brought to bear; for otherwise disparate theories to be put in conversation with one another; and for phenomenological meanings to begin to be taken up as situated (historied, gendered, cultured, raced, classed, sexed) glimpses of lived experiences rather than invariant structures of the essence of a given phenomenon" (10).

What I mean by fluidity, or variance, is my interpretation of what  Vagle is talking about here.  The post-intentional doesn't refer to a shift or change in theory per se,  but rather it is a multi-perspective lens by which other theories, seemingly in opposition to each other, can actually complement, inform or assist each other.  As a class mate, Colleen noted, it is looking at things that are "In-TENSIONal" (notes.11.13.12).  Please note that being in tension, isn't always a negative thing.  If previously egocentric phenomenological theories can produce productive tension by being intentional in what they are trying to examine (out of the box, instead of in), then the variations of any given phenomenon can be more fully explored, described, and analyzed in multiple ways other the manners they may have been previously situated (as listed above in the the Vagle quote).  Vagle goes on to say, "I suggested that phenomenology can be harnessed and then used to challenge boundaries because: a) it served a radical philosophy over a century ago and b) this radicalness can be amplified and then put into closer dialogue (Ahmed, 2006) with theories specifically designed for disruptive work" (11).

This is the core thought:  to be radical enough to push the theory of Phenomenology into places where it can become more adaptive and reflexive, and therefore more in-tune with true lived experiences.  Creating positive tensions should always be the goal of any critical analysis of a theory, philosophy, or methodology, so that such analyses can further the field of knowledge theoretically, and eventually the practice as well.

Journal Entry #2 CI 8150 University of Minnesota: Theories of Growth and Change in Elementary Schooling

Reactions and notes from Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Suny Press.

Exploring Hermeneutical Phenomenology

Dictionary Entries for this Post:

Hermeneutical Phenomenology:  "A human science that is interested in the human world as we find it in all its variegated aspects.  Unlike research approaches in other social sciences which may make use of experimental or artificially  created test situations, human sciences wishes to meet human beings- men, women, children-there where they are naturally engaged in their worlds.  In other words, phenomenological research finds its point of departure in the situation, which for purpose of analysis, description, and interpretation functions as an exemplary nodal point of meanings that are embedded in the situation" (18).

Research Method:  "The philosophical framework, the fundamental assumptions and characteristics of a human science perspective" (27).

Research Technique:  "The...variety of theoretical and practical procedures that one can invent or adopt in order to work out a certain research method" (28).

Research Procedure:  "Allows us to proceed, to go forward, and to get something accomplished" (28).

Bridling Thoughts:

The item I would like to discuss that perplexed me while reading was the difference between "description" and "interpretation" as it relates to Van Manen's concepts of Phenomenology (24).

I can certainly decipher the difference of definition, but I find it harder to do so when utilizing the technique of phenomenology, as I am still trying to wrap my head around its own definition.

It seems that in phenomenology, one wants to be able to provide a description of "lived experience" but which can provide data, but then interpret that data without making assumptions about our own perceptions of that lived experience of the others, might in fact, be.  How do we as researchers, utilize the descriptions for interpretative and even analytic purposes, when the heart of phenomenology stems from what others are experiencing, which is truly unique to them?  I found what my classmate Angel said in one of our discussions very intriguing.  She noted that she felt haughty when trying to interpret data, because she felt that, who was she to be determining what someone else's experience was?  I understand her thought lines.  It is paradoxical to me to interpret that which we have not lived through the description of what others have.  It then is indeed, up to the interpretation to bridge this gap.  The author says this: " Phenomenology is, on the one hand, description of lived experience, and on the other hand, description of meaning of the expressions of lived experience.  The two types of descriptions seem somewhat different in the sense that the first one is an immediate description of the lifeworld as lived (which I, Sara, understand) whereas the second one is an intermediate (or a mediated) description of the lifeworld as expressed in symbolic form (which I, Sara, do not quite understand)" (25).  He goes on, "When description is thus mediated by expression (for example: by blushing, talk , action, a work of art, a text) then  description seems to contain a stronger element of interpretation.  Actually it has been argued that all description is ultimately interpretation" (25). 

Ah!  There is the crux.  Perhaps I should focus less on what the difference of these actions are, and more on how they work together with the constructs of phenomenology and at different times and for different purposes..  Description and Interpretation are all part of the method, technique and procedures, and if I am understanding correctly, should be viewed as such. Interesting, to say the least!

Journal Entry #1 CI 8150 University of Minnesota: Theories of Growth and Change in Elementary Schooling

Reactions and notes from Vagle, M. D. (Principal Author and Editor) (2012)  Not a stage! A critical re-conception of young adolescent education. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, pgs 93-189.

Taking Some Contingent, Recursive Action

Dictionary Entries for this Post:

Traditional Perspective:  First promoted by G.S. Hall in 1904, this perspective is "grounded in a biologically driven discourse" (139)  which infers that attempts are made by educators to address all middle schoolers as in a like stage of aggression, overactivity, and in being deeply "at risk".

Critical Perspective:  A perspective that moves from the traditional perspective by looking at middle school youth from a "multi-faceted, contextualized view of adolescence" (139).

Both/And Perspective: A view that "addresses both the individual and the socio-structural dynamics at the local and national level, as they shape adolescents and their educative relations with other" (140).

Bridling Thoughts:

The first thing that was obvious to me was the fact that the Middle School was a governmentally created entity, that was based on theories of Developmentalism, in the most traditional sense, which was created to support the development of white males in the 20th century.   By  believing that there are unique and specialized characteristics attributed to this age, an entire branch of the American Educational system was created in the formation of Middle Schools.  The problem with this however, as mentioned, is that the developmental theories used to do this, only took into consideration young, white males, and discounted other contributing factors to development such as SES, race, gender and previous educational experiences.  To me, in the viewpoint of someone who taught in the classroom for 20 years, I can say definitively that no student is alike to the point that we coul determine a nationally recognized profile of where they are in their development, but more importantly, who they are and how they all, collectively, should be taught.

I have to admit however, that there do seem to be some things, that regardless of contextual influences of the political atmosphere, the community, the family, SES, or the classroom dynamics, that do appear to be common in all of their experiences, such as talkativeness, a need to move, and the developing of peer-relations.  However, I cannot support the ideas that the few things this age group has in common, on any level,  is enough to determine their entire educational experience which from the get go, was not developed for more than a small handful of the actual population it was forced upon.

Enora Brown's chapter, "Both/And/All of the Above" was the internal piece in this reading that carried the most meaning and identification for me. In my personal research and studies, I have been looking into individualized instruction and learning styles as well the theory of multiple intelligence.  All of these fit nicely into the idea that students, even middle schoolers, are individuals, with their own personal characteristics about them, influenced by a myriad of things in their contextual settings.  It baffles me, honestly, how this nation could have ever thought that a "one size fits all" method of education would have had any successful impact on the total population of students.  But Brown suggests that this was, perhaps, the plan to fuel a : " a microelectronic, global capitalist economy, neoliberal agenda and privatization of public education" (144).  She is adamant that there is a link between public policy and conceptualizations of youth.  With the descriptions laid out in this, and all the subsequent portions for this week, I can say  that I see the connection as well.

In conclusion, I have to say that until I entered my doctoral studies, I had for a long time considered how we were teaching our students, but I had never questioned where, what or why.  The readings for this week really solidified my need to ask all the questions.  It is part of developing my own critical theories of education and to explore the ideas of those with like and unlike minds.