(Online) Identity in Postmodernity

I am starting to be a little restless with my blog byline recently; perhaps it no longer fits me or I have outgrown it. The wonderful thing about websites is that they can grow and develop with us.

My current one is:

Research and Practice in Postmodern Learning

This combines my educational research focus with my need to integrate my learning with practice, coupled with a worldview that is increasingly postmodern. Now, almost a year into my doctoral studies, with my professional practice filled with project management, teaching, conferences, and publishing; it may be time for a change.

I want something that will integrate my degree focus, E-Research and Technology Enhanced Learning, into this, while still allowing for my academic interests in qualitative research designs, autoethnography and narrative inquiry, and transformative learning as an experience in critical identity formation. Having recently been influenced by the term postmodernity in the text Identity in Question, I am considering:

(Online) Identity in Postmodernity

This feels right to me; what do you think?

Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge

One of my tutors at Lancaster University recommended I read some of the work of Ray Land, a graduate of my department who does work with Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge. Seems this may be similar to Mezirow’s Transformative Learning theory.

Will have to investigate more, as there may be some nice impact with my autoethnographic inquiry I am preparing.

Research Ideas Redux; Feedback, Anybody?

I am gathering ideas for my next research paper that I have to write in the next month and a half for my doctoral program, and have come up with these ideas after trying to flesh out the initial ones I discussed.

These are the four ideas I am floating; I hope to have something narrowed down by the end of the week so I can start to work on the design. As a recurring theme in my work, these are all within the area of autoethnographic methodology / writing or processing one’s experience in autobiographic / life history methods:

  1. Interview some people who engage in autoethnographic research (cf. Ellis) to see what role, if any, communities of practice play in their lives in this research.
  2. Engaging in narrative inquiry (cf. Clandinin and Connelly) to explore how people engaged in autoethnographic research engage in publicly defining or frame their own identities (cf. Goffman? Bedford and Snow?).
  3. Explore how these researchers navigate their own professional identities through using this contested methodology.
  4. Try to understand if autoethnographic inquiry led to any transformative learning (cf. Mezirow), or if perhaps a transformative experience led to autoethnography (Freire?).

Lightbulb

Any thoughts are most appreciated.

Next Research Project Ideas

This is my first foray into sharing my doctoral journey, specifically through my decision to share my 5-10 minutes a day of writing about my process and thinking as per my program’s recommendations in our current module (and which I discussed here and here). I hope that reflecting aloud may be helpful for others who are considering this for themselves—either as a model for what can be done, or as a suggestion for what to avoid (the challenges or the process of sharing here itself).

I have to begin thinking about my research ideas for this module, which is entitled Development of Professional Practice. I really like this concept, and think it is more than fitting that I am developing this practice, and exploring it in my own life, here, where my colleagues (both current and future) can join me on the journey.

As I am beginning to formulate my ideas for this mini-project (around 3800 words, +/- 10%), I am going to consider some of the concepts that interest me, as I think some brainstorming is in order:

  • identity and learning
  • autoethnographic inquiry (both as a researcher and as studied in others who engage in this)
  • exploring various personal identities, and the transition from one to another
  • transformative learning
  • reflective practice related to constructivist / critical frameworks
  • individual identity development and self-definition within communities of practice
  • juggling of identities as a process of personal learning

Will have to play around with these, and see what feedback my cohort offers.

Are Transformation and Power Shifts All of Nothing Events?

Jacqlyn S. Triscari is presenting this session. Her answer to the session title is simply, no! The purpose of her qualitative research study is about the role of power and shifts in power that occur in an organization during an organizational transformation. How is the transformation process intertwined with shifts in power, and issues in and around power? She spoke about organizational change as the main framework, and then organizational development (OD, which is a policy and procedure way of managing change that comes from senior management) and organizational transformation (OT, which addresses issue of culture and people).

She addresses issues of critical reflection and altering values / assumptions / beliefs. She used a case study, which was a non-profit that provides services for people with developmental disabilities. With her case study,  she interviewed senior management, documents monthly newsletters as DVDs where senior management spoke, interviews with workers, and focus groups.

Her theoretical framework was Critical Organizational Theory with a Postmodern Lens. She did a spin on mainstream organizational theory (Abel, 2005), which is generally around maintaining the status quo. She then added critical theory, specifically critical management studies and critical HRD (cf. Alvesson & Wilmott, 1992). Jacqlyn did a nice job explaining these critical organizational theories and how they merge into transformative theories. Critical Organizational Theory and its view of power assumes power from society spills  over to organizations, diversity is seen broadly and includes many organizational factors, some people have more voice than others, and power is repressive and a negative entity. Postmodernism includes multiple views, perspectives, and voices that are encouraged, deconstruction is used as a teaching, learning, and questioning tool, context is crucial, no preferred ways of thinking, and solutions (even temporary ones) are sought. Needless to say, based on my blog’s subtitle, this is something I am really interested in. Postmodern organizational theory posits power that exists, though it is not good or evil, and this is based on the work of Foucault.

I asked a question about how deconstruction was done within the organizations; she will come back to this and respond later.

There is a lot of research on (planned) change (OD change), but less on organizational transformation with its issues of power.

She used a Spiral of Analysis (cf. Cepeda & Martin, 2005)—she did an analysis and then brought the findings to more people in the organization to test them out. This process reminds me of the PDSA (Plan – Do – Study – Act) cycle in the performance improvement literature.

One of the fundamental things that she learned from the workers within the organization—they followed what management told them to do (policies), unless they knew they were wrong. This was in part linked to the CEO’s initial tea and cookie session, when the CEO told the workers that sometimes you stand alone when you are right. The CEO gave a list of values, and asked the employees to accept the one(s) they thought were right and agreed with.

She was then asked at the end to reflect on what she learned and how she has changed (reminds me of my Lancaster paper I submitted last week and am now revising). One of  the items is that maybe power does not follow organizational lines. There is more than one “reality” to any event. In this way, everybody can be right.

A person in the audience recommended a Sage text by Dvora Yanow – Conducting Interpretive Policy Analysis, that may be useful for this style of research.