Methodological challenges in analysing an online debate: the
case of a planning application for a Gothic cathedral
Julia Gillen (Lancaster University), Rebecca Ferguson (Open University), Anna
Peachey (Eygus Ltd.) & Peter Twining (Open University).
Presentation to Literacy Research Discussion Group, 9 October 2012.
Over a 13 month period we were interacting with teenagers from the UK and the
USA in an innovative educational project centred on a virtual world, Schome Park.
Schome Park was a virtual island, set in the middle of a sunlit sea beyond which
none of its inhabitants could wander. Like all islands, it had a limited set of
resources and so the inhabitants had worked out a system of local governance for
allocating these. One day a newcomer, who had recently landed from the USA onto
this island, dominated by Brits, approached the planning permission committee.
Carefully observant of legal and procedural niceties, he set out his request, in
writing, as required. He wanted to build a Gothic cathedral. In many old-timers'
views, this was a bad idea, something that threatened the community's history and
ethos, perhaps to the core. A lively debate ensued, at times characterised by strong
conflict, at others by impressive skills at argumentation.
In this presentation we discuss the development of our methodologies in analysing
this debate, working in a team virtual literacy ethnography.
Figure 1 – original posting
Figure 2 – first response
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
References
Barton, D. (2007). Literacy: an introduction to the ecology of written language. 2nd edn.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Creese, A., Bhatt, A., Bhojani, N. & Martin, P. (2008). Fieldnotes in team
ethnography: researching complementary schools. Qualitative Research 8 (2) 223-242.
Ferguson, R. (2011) Meaningful learning and creativity in virtual worlds. Thinking
Skills and Creativity 6 (169-178).
Ferguson, R., Gillen, J., Peachey, A. & Twining, P. (forthcoming) The strength of
cohesive ties: Discursive construction of an online learning community. In M. Childs
& A. Peachey (eds) Understanding Learning in Virtual Worlds. Springer.
Gillen, J. (2009) Literacy practices in Schome Park: A virtual literacy ethnography.
Journal of Research in Reading 32 (1) 57-74.
Gillen, J., Ferguson, R., Peachey, A., & Twining, P. (2012) Seeking planning
permission to build a Gothic cathedral on a virtual island. In G. Merchant, J. Gillen, J.
Marsh & J. Davies (eds) Virtual literacies: Interactive spaces for children and young people.
pp. 190-207. New York: Routledge.
Gillen, J., & Merchant, G. (2012). From virtual histories to virtual literacies. In G.
Merchant, J. Gillen, J. Marsh & J. Davies (eds) Virtual literacies: interactive spaces for
children and young people. New York: Routledge.
Haraway, D. (1997).
Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium.Femaleman©_Meets_Oncomouse™: Feminism and
Technoscience. New York: Routledge.
Katzav, J & Reed, C.A. (2004). On Argumentation Schemes and the Natural
Classification of Arguments Argumentation 18 239-259.
Kress, G. (2007) Communication now and in the future. English 21: Qualifications
and Curriculum Authority.
McMillan, D. W. (1996). Sense of community. Journal of Community Psychology, 24(4),
315-325.
Norris, S. & Jones, R. (eds) (2005). Discourse in Action: introducing mediated discourse
analysis. New York: Routledge.
Scollon, R. (2001). Mediated discourse: The nexus of practice. London: Routledge.
Shweder, R. (1984). Preview: A colloquoy of culture theorists. In R. Shweder & R.
LeVine (eds.), Culture theory: Essays on mind, self, and emotion. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Twining, P. (2009). Exploring the educational potential of virtual worlds – some
reflections from the SPP. British Journal of Educational Technology 40 (3) 496-514.
Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: on writing ethnography. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.