Well, hard to believe it’s week 5!! Hopefully you are well into everything, possibly getting acquainted with the feeling of ‘not knowing’, which comes before that light-bulb moment as things click into place. I think the biggest thing to check at this point is that you are ‘in it’. That is you have done the things you set yourself to do and if you have not just get on and do them as best you can – get messy.
Module ones are trying out different kinds of reflection tools, writing different journals. And going further than the handbooks by looking at books in the library by theorists that have interested them from the Reader.
Module twos are really looking deeply at the ethical questions that their experiences, and professional environment raise – maybe asking uncomfortable questions of themselves or looking at things differently.
Module Threes are coming to the end of data collection and starting to try to find meaning in all the pieces of the research.
Emergence: it’s a messy, wonderful time! And then it’s Spring the perfect illustration of growth as dainty buds move stones and dirt in order to push themselves into the sun and flower. You might be pushing some stones too.
A word about books: (still thinking about literature for all modules)
Below is a really interesting TED talk. It is about the way Google, Hulu etc… find things ‘you would be interested in’. That is the mathematical patterns that computers run in order for listings to be produced. When you Google things for instance. Now how do things pop-up when there is so much out there… its not magic.
Watch the video, which is a word of warning about the trust we place in these patterns. It is clear that it can not be ‘fair’ because how does anyone decide what should be first etc. So as something goes viral it can be ‘real’ be what it appears to be or it can be something else – marketing. How do you check its authenticity?? It is why the internet is problematic as your only source of information gathering. There is an in crowd.
Books that have been published go through extended checking because they are out there and people can question them. Authors have to cited other authors to show where things have come from. Now I am not saying that this is not exactly the same situation of in crowd. There is an in crowd in the literature too. Judith Butler who writes about women’s profile in the crowd and Cornel West who writes about the non- caucasian’s profile in the crowd. The point is that the bias in the book has been better documented than the bias in the internet. The books have been going on for thousands of years and the internet is new to us. So ideas from cross across a range of sources seems to be most useful. I highly recommend you look at published works as much as the internet.
What do you think?