Neilson’s ontology: social constructivism

1. Neilson’s ontology: social constructivism My reality is socially constructed and located: I see the world through a socio-historico-cultural lens and interpret it I identify myself and engage in the world through participation in social groups Discourse is the primary medium of participation—which for me includes a plural and embodied understanding of ‘language’ and ‘literacy’ This participation both enables and constrains me This is a critical perspective: there are injustices in the distribution of and access to resources and power----which research should aim to address

2. What is the aim of research? For me, there are 2 aims… “to employ a critical reflective and refractive lens to view the human condition and a form of reflexive agency that initiates action” (B. K. Alexander, 2005, p. 412)

3. What kind of research will allow me to… observe, record, and interpret teachers talking and thinking about issues of equity in their practice? establish a research relationship that minimizes the power difference between the participants and me, allows them to participate in data analysis, and provides them with some direct benefit? incorporate a variety of dialogic strategies to allow participants to engage in extra-linguistic modes of thinking and communicating?

4. Method: I will use a form of radical arts-based research as described by Susan Finley in the Sage Handbook ofQual.Rsch (3rd Ed), Chapter 26: “art, politics, pedagogy, and inquiry are brought together in performance” (p. 687) Question: What media of expression do teachers find most effective for analyzing and reflecting on their practices? Procedure: I will form a small study group of teachers. We will use various aesthetic media to think about and communicate our thoughts on these issues—media such as collage, cartooning, webbing, poetry, photography, or role-play. Afterwards, we will discuss the effectiveness of these approaches to reflection. Data: video footage of meetings; e-mails; my notes and journal reflections. Analysis: I will take a grounded theory approach (Charmaz, 2005) and attempt to let the data define categories which I can synthesize into new insights. I will invite the group to participate in this process at the 3rd or 4th meeting (or by e-mail) to the extent they are interested.

5. Questions & possible blind spots • What if I disagree with the group’s data interpretation? Or what if they can’t come to some level of agreement? • Am I trying to do too many things at once (and can’t do any of it any well)? • What if I don’t get enough data? Or I run out of time at some stage? • What if the group dynamics inhibit open participation? • Will I know how to handle it if the group veers off course? • What if group member don’t show up or want to quit? • I need to be careful not to… • Press my own agenda on the group during discussions, especially interpreting data • Take concepts for granted; be blind to assumptions about method or epistemology • Ignore or strain the interpretation of contradictions in the data

6. Key Texts… Alexander, B. K. (2005). Performance Ethnography: The reenacting and inciting of culture. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rded). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century: Applications for advancing social justice studies. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rded). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Finley, S. (2005). Arts-based inquiry: Performing revolutionary pedagogy. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rded). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Freebody, P. (2003). Qualitative Research in Education: Interaction and Practice. London: Sage. Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: communicative action and the public sphere. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rded). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Law, J. (2004) After Method: mess in social science research. London and New York: Routledge. Schwandt, T. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructionism. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nded). Thousand Oaks: Sage.