Welcoming Dialogue- Positioning students
as stakeholders in the research interview.
Ms Fiona Trapani and Dr Christine Redman
Overview of presentation
IntroductionWhy and how a researcher can utilise a PMMM* as
a “Welcome dialogue” opportunity
Theoretical frame - meaning making
Outline of Method- relationship dynamic
Elsa case study- example of relationship building
Conclusion- Welcoming Dialogue- as a Method
*PMMM: Personal Meaning Making Map (Falk et al 1997)
Introduction – (why and how)
Problem, ideas and aims
• PhD Research - Important to me
• Why should the students in my sample care? -The
need to honour stakeholders
• Shared data, Shared story, Shared ownership conjointly constructed narrative around learning through
“passion projects”.
• Ethics- Pairs of students, time, consent
• Building relationships -visiting researcher- becomes an
insider perspective.
PhD is exploring students’ perceptions of their learning in creative & contemporary
contexts? (Passion Project- student inquiry)
Start with a picture…
Methodological frame- Roberts’ (1996) triangle
Literature- underpinning methodology
• Agency (Giddens, 1993)
– ‘Me’ as researcher
– Students as stakeholders – sharing their
experiences and ideas around learning.
• Identity (Linehan & McCarthy 2000)
– Initial perception of ‘Adult’ and ‘child’
– Shift focus to empower child.
• Rights and Duties (Redman & Rodrigues, 2008)
– Ethics- Clearly outlines ‘non-negotiable
– Researcher as ‘supportive outsider’
Literature- underpinning methodology
• Story lines and positioning theory (Harre &
Van Langenhove, 1996)
– Conversation as narrative- dialogical
construction of meaning- “Do and Say”
• Cover, Secret and Sacred stories
(Clandinin and Connelly, 1996)
– Building relationships to generate data that
gives more than a cover story.
Methodology- creating a safe place
• Exploring student’s perception of learning in
‘passion project’.
• 2 Interviews- PMMM* focused, student directed
a) Discussion and drawing PMMM (Falk et al, 1997),
with reflection on PMMM.
b) 2 or more weeks later: Semi-Structured
Interview, reflecting on PMMM.
c) Students choose Pseudonym
d) Students have ‘right of reply’ to examine and
edit the transcripts.
*PMMM: Personal Meaning Making Map (Falk et al 1997)
So what? Student perspective
• Data indicates that students enact their agency to
show aspects of their identity.
• I made 2 additional visits to her school, at Elsa’s
request, as she wanted to share her next pieces
of work with me.
• Identity- PMMM clear student control, and
identification that I am a supportive adult.
• Rights and duties- recognised, respected and
developed.
So what?- researcher perspective
• The research interview is seeking to
develop a dialogical relationship in a short
time frame.
• “Welcoming Dialogue” encompasses:
– Agency of researcher and student to co-author
storylines.
– Identity of researcher and student; be prepared
to shift to share data, story and ownership.
– Rights and Duties may shift- don’t fear this
‘unknown’ -be mindful of ethics (Rachael’s caution yesterday).
Methodological frame- Roberts’ (1996) triangle
Conjointly
constructed interview
– Agency, Identity
and Rights and
Duties = strong
narrative and story
developed for further
analysis
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1996). Professional Knowledge Landscapes:
Teacher Stories, Stories of Teachers, Schools Stories, Stories of Schools.
Educational Researcher, 25(3), 24–30.
Falk, J. H., Moussouri, T., & Coulson, D. (1997). The effect of Visotors’ agendas on
Museum Learning. Curator, 41(2), 107–120.
Giddens, A. (1993). New Rules of Sociological Method (2nd ed.). Stanford,
California: Polity Press/Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Harre, R., & van Langenhove, L. (1999). Positioning Theory: moral contexts of
intentional action. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Linehan, C., & McCarthy, J. (2000). Positioning in Practice: Understanding
Participation in the Social World. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 30(4),
435–453. doi:10.1111/1468-5914.00139
Redman, C., & Rodrigues, S. (2008). Researching the relationships in the
Technologies of Self : Habitus and Capacities “Oughtness” influences discursive
practices. In AARE 2008 International Education Research Conference, Brisbane,
Australia. (pp. 1–10).
Roberts, D. A. (1996). Dialogue Epistemic Authority for Teacher Knowledge : The
Potential Role of Teacher Communities- A Response to Robert Orton *, 26(4), 417–
431.