Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Sun, 4 Oct 1992 13:25:04 CDT
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         Yvonna Lincoln <E101YL@TAMVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Participatory Action Research

Dear Sherrie, Jim, and others interested in, or concerned about, the Participat
ory Action Research Course out of Deakin:

I think I have fewer problems than you all do, and would like, if I can, to add
 my two cents' worth to this discussion.  Actually, and I'm a little embarrasse
d to admit this, but I was absolutely fascinated by the possibility of such a c
ourse. I can't afford it, of course, since, as someone pointed out, there are v
ery few bundles of $2,000. sitting around in my billfold.  In fact, truth be to
ld, there are none!  But it strikes me, Sherrie (because you were the one who b
rought this up), that in fact, we do the "disembodied profs" and "disembodied s
tudents" routine all the time at virtually all our universities, when we offer
correspondence courses.  And the original purpose of correspondence courses was
 to make the expertise of faculty available -- in both a service and instructio
nal role -- to the homebound, to the disabled, to those who could make the long
distances to a state university campus.  This eventually extended the power of
the learning community to those who could not physically become a part of the c
ommunity.

The other reaction that I had to it was to say to myself that I had learned SO
much being a part of THIS network -- either "listening" to you all talk about i
ssues about which I knew little, or participating in the discussions, that I wo
ndered how much more I might learn if such e-mail exchanges were accomplished i
n a more formal and systematic way.  I have found the "community" aspects of th
is network to be exhilarating, and the learning aspects to be virtually mind-
boggling.  Most of what I know about qualitative research, I have taught myself
.  And all of what I know to buttress my arguments for naturalistic inquiry is
autodidactically acquired (and none of it systematically acquired).  So my lear
ning curve on this network has been exponential (or at least I feel that it has
).  And I ask myself, what could I understand if I had the chance to do somethi
ng systematically, for a change?

As a result, what I feel about the Deakin-McTaggart-Kemmis course is both quite
 positive and transferred, largely from my unbelievably productive experience o
f listening to you all on the qualitative research network.

I also, however, am rather given to pedagogical experimentation, and think the
IDEA of such a course is an unusual one, fraught no doubt with some problems, b
ut also potentially powerful in its ability to use electronic communications to
 link individuals at some distance in a systematic, directed way to achieve com
mon purposes.  So as an *experiment*, I think it is useful in and of itself, fo
r what it could tell us about the potential of such linkages.

Now, none of the previous 52 lines get me the money to take the course (as I wo
uld dearly wish to do).  But I do have somewhat stronger positive feelings abou
t the possibilities than you all do.  And if I'm way off base, probably need to
 be told so (and soon!).  But it does seem quite an exciting opportunity, in a
strange sort of way.  Have I totally missed the point here?

Yvonna Lincoln
Texas A & M University
E101YL@TAMVM1
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU