Groups, cooperatives, collaboratives, swarms...and the ongoing dissertation proposal...
The question, I should point out (again) wasn't originally mine - I just took an interest in it. Rebecca H. had originally asked this question of our MobiMOOC team back in 2011/2012 - but we all went (sort of) our separate ways and we just hadn't explored it in depth at the time; and this seemed like a good question for dissertation research (and I found it interesting, so it checked off that internal motivation box), and there were enough people in Rhizos collaborating in groups that made for a viable case study.
Now, one of my stumbling blocks has been terminology. I started off calling what we did (in our various groups) a 'collaboration'. But, collaboration has certain specific connotations. Was it really collaboration? Or did I just see what we did (and what others did, for groups I wasn't part of) as collaboration? Is a "swarm" different from collaboration? Or is it a specific type of collaboration? It should also be noted that not all work was 'swarmed'. Part way through this gargantuan proposal I started replacing collaboration with group work, which seems more value neutral than collaboration, this way as part of the research I can see how different people perceived the joint-effort we/they accomplished as somewhere on the 'working together' spectrum. Is there a word that is value neutral (or mostly value neutral) that rolls off the tongue that means "3 or more people working together on a common goal"?
But I still have a little trouble with the term "group work". For me it harkens back to school days where teachers put us in groups to do something together that wasn't always of interest to the learner, and people were placed in a situation where they had to work together but it was just awkward (my experiences in the rhizo work didn't feel awkward). Is the term "team work" more appropriate? Is it more value neutral? A team may be more self forming...maybe...but it also reminds me of the artificial aspects of corporate 'teams' where work gets done (I think), but there really isn't much camaraderie. In my experience there was camaraderie in the collaborations I was in...at least from my own observations.
That said, this bring me to the next stumbling block. How did I see this thing/action/project/collective that had/have? Do I address my own views about the collaborations Ive been part of in the introductory chapter to my proposal/dissertation? Or do I save it for my data collection section (self-interviews and journaling) as some research methods books suggest? Or, is there a good mid-point where I can address potential biases by discussing it a bit (but how much is enough?) and then saving the rest for the data collection portion?
When the researcher is part of the researched it makes things a little muddy. Things that are 'clear' in my head aren't necessarily things that are transmitted as 'clear' to the eventual audience of my doctoral work. I think part of the problem is that my direct experience really colors my perceptions (as I expected it would), but also that the question "why did we do this?" is intentionally broad. Would it be helpful to narrow it down to a specific aspect of our work together? And, if yes, what specific aspect would be of most interest to this community I am researching (and am a member of)? Loads of questions...
OK, that's all the reflecting for now. What do others think?
Marginalia:
† Although, with the mindset of "the community is the curriculum", one could argue that such group work was part of the curriculum. Cormier! you evil genius! 😈
Comments