Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Mon, 5 Oct 1992 17:54:13 +1000
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         rmct@DEAKIN.OZ.AU
Subject:      PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH

I am stunned at the passion my recent communication about the existence of an
action reseach course available from Australia generated.  For a community
interested in qualitative research methods, the remarakable extrapolations and
attributions made by some commentators were alarming given a few short words
outlining a proposal to offer a course.  I shall leave aside the more
unfortunate observations made and provide some further information which may
serve to put the anxious hearts of the moral police at rest.

1.	The fee of $US2000 for a 0.25 fractional enrolment does not generate
profit.  It is simply the fee level for full cost recovery generally required
of Australian institutions by the Australian government.  The cost of
PROVIDING a year of full time study in Australia is about $US8000.  This is
comparable with the costs of provision in the least expensive US institutions,
and is very much less expensive than major US private institutions.  Costs to
students in non-private institutions vary because the state in various ways
subsidises tuition so that students do not have to pay the full cost of their
education.

The Australian government takes the view that Australian taxpayers' money
should not be used to offset the costs of education for overseas students.
(Incidentally, the Australian government does fund several aid programs to
facilitate the education of overseas students from the Third World).  The
course is not 'revenue generating'in the sense that it seeks to make a profit.
It is 'revenue neutral' Q the money simply pays for two things (i) academic
salaries of the people who teach the course, write the materials,  and conduct
the research and publication which informs the course; and (ii) the costs of
running a university .. library, materials production, computers ....

2.	We KNOW that the fee structure precludes study by many students and
institutions with whom we would be delighted to work.  However, that does not
seem to us to be sufficient reason not to draw the attention of the
possibility to students who can afford it, or who might have access to support
funds to enable their participation.  For example, the combination of usual US
student fees and the 'hidden' state contribution would go close to paying the
fee we are committed to provided the state contribution could be prised out of
the students' home institution. The grounds would be that the home institution
would be 'buying in' tutition rather providing it.  This is a very complex
issue which begins to look like an inter-institutional arrangement when
dicussed in these terms, but it is a possibility.

3.	The theory and practice of 'distance education' (and 'open learning') is
alive and well.  Students complete undergraduate, masters and doctoral degrees
'at a distance' in the worlds' most reputable universities.  The so-called
'disembodied  professors' are also alive and well and in regular contact with
their students who, in general terms, have infinitely better access to the
material support for learning than most on-campus students have.  However,
distance education students everywhere welcome contact by whatever means
available with other students enrolled in the same or similar courses.  Hence,
we explore the possibilities created by email as a more reflexive
communication mode than print.  (In print we encourage students to write for
each other in a 'course journal', communicating with each other between the
far corners of Australia and occasionally overseas).

4.	The 'disembodied professors' are much less so than the authors of most
texts which are grist to the mill for both graduate and undergraduate students
everywhere.  The concern about an inability to learn from people you cannot
see is a curious one for email users.

5.	The concern that the course is not for credit is an aberration of
understanding.

6.	The curious claim that there is something wrong with the 'pedagogical
integrity' of the course cannot be addressed since it is not clear what the
objection is.  However, it is possible to say that (i) the course has been
completed by several hundred students, (ii) the course materials have sold in
thousands throughout the world, and (iii) its 'administration' has never been
a problem.  As for 'hucksterism' (or being akin to it), no-one has ever
accused of that before, but then, most people read our materials and otherwise
get to know us a little before they leap into judgment mode.

7.	One of the reasons that students, professionals and community workers
attached to institutions throughout the world can now use action research
methodology is BECAUSE of the materials published about its methodology Q in
part by faculty members of Deakin University.  This clearly is a worldwide
movement, but to submit a PhD using action research methodology and NOT to
have referred to Deakin work on action research would be to take a risk of
some note.

8.	One of the reasons we felt moved to offer the course more broadly than we
do is because we are concerned that graduate students trying to use action
research methodology are often not getting the advice they need in
institutions where faculty have little experience of the method and
methodology.  This not a fanciful and self-regarding whim on our part, it is
concrete experience when invited to advise on and examine theses.  The debate
about action research earlier this year moved me to offer some references to
QUAL-R participants individually which were than later circulated to the list.
The offer of the course extends that support.

9.	No network rules (or other ethics or principles) have been violated.

Having said all that I again draw the attention of potential students and
interested professors to the courses and the resources which underpin it.  We
cannot easily fix the cost-structures which contain our work, and even if we
wanted to we cannot work without salaries and infrastructure costs.  The
course is a good one, and if there is a way we can help people to find the
wherewithal to do it, please let us know.  If you simply want to buy the
course materials as several QUAL-R participants already have indicated, they
too can be provided on invoice.

Robin McTaggart
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU