MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7155060859 · doi:10.59236/ijea15si2.3

“I Contain Multitudes”

2014· article· W7155060859 sur OpenAlexaff
Monica M. Prendergast

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational journal of education and the arts · 2014
Typearticle
Langue
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiquePosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Victoria
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNarrativeConfession (law)The artsMemoirBiographyEducational researchRevelationVisual arts educationPhilosophy of education

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

We believe that the best arts based research aims to make a difference in the world.(Barone & Eisner, 2012, p. 153). Revelation of self can be argued as one of the central concerns of art. Self-study has informed art making to some degree for as long as we can know. Aesthetic philosophers, art critics and artists themselves have recognized self-portraiture, autobiography, memoir and confession as legitimate and often potent topics for artistic exploration. With this history of art practice in mind, what problem can there be for an arts-based educational researcher who wishes to engage in self- study? Of course, the artworld is not equal to the world of educational research, the latter of which is charged with the overarching social and ethical responsibilities to critically understand the problems within and work toward the improvement of teaching and learning. The rise of narrative inquiry, autobiography and arts-based educational research has opened up welcome spaces for the lives of teachers to be viewed as valuable and illuminating topics of investigation. That said, arts-based educational researchers who do not make clear and consistent connections between their life stories and the potential improvement of the chronically impoverished (if not in some places wholly broken) public education system could be critically viewed as side-stepping or shirking their core social and ethical responsibilities Do I contradict myself?Very well then I contradict myself,(I am large, I contain multitudes.) from Song of Myself by Walt Whitman, Verse 51 [O]ne cannot reflect on self (radically or otherwise) without an accompanying reflection on the nature of the world in which one exists. And one’s reflection on both one’s self and one’s world cannot be one’s own alone: you and your version of your world must be public, recognizable enough to be negotiable in the “conversation of lives.” (Bruner, 1993, p. 43) This essay participates in the “conversation of lives” that makes up the small but active community of arts-based researchers in education. Donald Blumenfeld-Jones posed the overarching topic that was the catalyst for this set of related essays in the wake of his jurying of a number of dissertation studies for the Arts-Based Educational Research (ABER) Special Interest Group of the American Educational Research Association. I was co-chair of the dissertation award at this time, and Donald and I had some lengthy email dialogue around his growing concern that a number of the studies he was reading were self-studies that he saw as having little or no relation to the larger issues of education. The end result of that string of emails was Donald’s idea to propose an ABER panel on the topic of how autobiographical or autoethnographical arts-based work serves, or fails to serve, the mandate of educational research to strive toward the improvement of teaching and learning. My own research on poetic inquiry (Prendergast, 2007, 2009; Prendergast, Leggo & Sameshima, 2009) has shown me that self-study is undeniably a prominent, if not dominant, method in ABER praxis. To illustrate, almost 50% of the 182 peer-reviewed journal articles featuring poetry as part of their methodology I surveyed in 2006-2007 were coded as autobiographical or autoethnographical, at least in part (see Prendergast, 2009; Prendergast, Leggo & Sameshima, 2009). A 2012 survey update on the same topic shows a similar result (Clement & Prendergast, 2012). If this finding holds across other arts-based research approaches, then we can begin to ‘see’ ourselves as educational researchers who are deeply interested in and committed to arts-based forms of self-study. Yet the question arises: How does this interest in self-study serve, or fail to serve, the interests of the field of education and the mandate of educational research to work toward the improvement of teaching and learning? This essay consists of two sections followed by a brief conclusion. In Section One I consider the role of self-study—also called reflective practice, autobiography, autoethnography and life writing—in educational research in relation to how autobiography, memoir or self-portraiture plays a role in the artworld (Danto, 1964). I do this by placing a range of ABER practices on a continuum from more to less interested in self-study as a focus or component of a study. Section Two offers an autobiographical/autoethnographical poem I wrote as part of a previously published collaborative essay (Prendergast, Lymburner, Grauer, Irwin, Leggo & Gouzouasis, 2008). I am pulling the poem out of its prior context here to reflect on as an example of ABER self-study that might also be seen as doing the work of contributing to the betterment of understanding how education works…or fails to work. The conclusion invites readers to consider how a critical perspective on these issues may assist arts-based educational researchers in side-stepping charges that might potentially be directed at the ABER community of elitism, solipsism and navel-gazing from within a larger North American culture arguably addicted to confession, self-revelation, narcissism and voyeurism.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,762
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,352

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,024
Tête enseignante GPT0,369
Écart entre enseignants0,345 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational journal of education and the artsMême sujetPosthumanist Ethics and ActivismTravaux en français237 207