The page is here
http://distributedresearch.net/wiki/index.php/Four_dichotomies

with the discussion added right next to it
http://distributedresearch.net/wiki/index.php/Talk:Four_dichotomies

If you do manage to find a computer with sound, please note that there are still only two podcasts available to date, production of the remaining podcasts 3 and 4 having been delayed a little.

Thanks again

The methodological approach was easier to grasp when explained orally than in reading / diagramming and without this I would have found it very difficult to follow the spinning plates table.

The use of dichotomies is an interesting data collection technique, but what is the purpose of this tool? Was it informed by literature as well as your experience?

Purposes I can think of:

- to identify degree of agreement of the success of the online COP?

- to identify groups who differed in their view about the community?

- to identify variations in the perception of each of the aspects of community you have identified as being important?

- to compare different communities?

Thanks for this.

Sorry it’s taken me so long to visit your exhibition. I don’t know that I can contribute much in the way of useful comments.

On following your link, I found it quite disconcerting to be met with a front page which was totally blank apart from an index down the right hand side. Eventually I found the exhibition by scrolling right down, but there was all this wasted space before you got to it - was that intentional?

I could sympathise with your spinning plates analogy. I found with my AR inquiry I was so busy keeping all the different discussion forums going, facilitating them, summarising the learning etc, that the reflection and writing up the research started to get neglected.

I wanted to do the dichotomies exercise and add some comments but couldn’t work out how to do this. Has it now closed or did I need to log on or something?

I think your research is really interesting, but I found your website very confusing. I think that, unless you are a whizz kid with technology, you’re not going to find it easy to find your way around and will probably miss out on a lot.

I would be interested to know if you think my AR project comes under the definition of DAR. I will forward it to you and if you can find the time to give me any feedback, I would very much appreciate that.

Thanks,

Julie Leek

It seems a bit odd having to scroll back up and hit “front page” instead of at the bottom. Another UV researchers method (don’t want to name names publicly but happy to let you know who’s if you haven’t aleady viewed it and guessed) for navigating an online exhibition that worked really well for me was to have options for forward to/ back to /learn more about.

Spinning plates - saying that ‘the reflection had to give way to pressing need’ - is that saying that you didn’t follow a true AR cycle or that you just reflected on all past events when the time arose, be it after 1,2 or10 events/cycles? Fair enough as long as you don’t claim each action to be a cycle when it was just an action; can it be called a cycle if there was no reflection?

Ok just went to the diagram that explained it in a clearer way for me, as long as I assume that each cycle included reflection, and that after the small cycles 1 & 2, each c3, c4 etc is a cycle and that they are all parts of bigger cycles, I prefer the title of phase 1 and 2 for the bigger cycles.

It seems a really good diagram for mapping what were complex cycles/events in your research process, well done for getting it down in a clear way.

Noticed that in the tabular list the reflection column is only completed re: 3 cycles? How is that possible if they are true cycles? Sorry mentioned this already haven’t I? I’m assumimg that each c is a cycle, perhaps it isn’t if you didn;t reflect, it is just an action/event?

The four dichtomies, very interesting and made me think but spent a couple of minutes trying to work out how to mark the scale (very basic IT skills sorry :-)) then went back to the front page and saw the bold on the word you so assume that it is just to get us to think about it, not to give any feedback to you?

Overall Andy, although my feedback seems like I am really confused, it is only really with the cycle and reflection part of your research; the exhibtion as a whole was very clear to me, and much easier to follow with a guided path, rather than just being a wide collection of “things” that can be viewed randomly without any guidance as to order. Unfortunatley I am working on my laptop so don’t have access to sound to hear your podcasts, so can’t comment on them, but I don’t feel that I needed them to get the gist of your research; there was clear info in the text.(Although at your pilot exhibition they were my favourite part,so I do feel like I have missed out in some way!)

Hope this is useful to you in some way or another, I am happy to explain my feedback to you if it is not clear or you have any specific question you would like to ask. I really enjoyed it, thanks for inviting me,

Salena

Well I quite lost myself as I got engrossed in your exhibition, I was fascinated by your “journey.” I planned to stay for about 20 mins and nearly an hour later I’ve got here! DAR makes so much sense. How do your podcasts get counted in your overall word count - Podast one seemed long, easy to listen to but I got worried about the number of spoken words. Is what you say assessed and words counted? I found it frustrating that the flow kept stopping and buffering, I am on broadband but, heck, that was distracting! Wondered why I couldn’t access Podast 4 then on another page found “Open soon.” All in all a brave and innovative exhibition. I felt “relaxed” when I read and listened, that must say something for your presentation method, perhaps it was the calm voice with which you present your podcasts, may I say in such a laid back manner.

I have to say the mention of cider reminded me of lazy summer days “back home” so not only has your exhibition ignited an interest in your topic, DAR, but it has also kindled a desire for a long cold glass of cider!! I’ll probably have to wait until July when I’m next home!!

Good luck with this.

I have added a link to your fascinating blog plus a link within your wiki (reflection) and hope this meets with your approval?

The site introduced below may be of interest to you and your visitors? If so - a mention would be greatly appreciated.

‘h2cm’ (a personal initiative) publicises a health and social care model with universal potential.

Originally created in the UK by Brian E Hodges -

Hodges’ Health Career - Care Domains - Model [h2cm]

http://www.p-jones.demon.co.uk/

- can help map health, social care and other issues, problems AND solutions. The model takes a situated and multi-contextual view across four knowledge domains:

* Interpersonal;

* Sociological;

* Empirical;

* Political.

Our links pages cover each care (knowledge) domain e.g. Sociological:

http://www.p-jones.demon.co.uk/links3.htm

- the link is under ‘Qualitative Research / Methods / Software’.

Many thanks for your time and best wishes with DARNet.

Yours sincerely,

Peter Jones

Clinical Specialist: NHS Care Records Service Project / Informatics

Bolton,

Lancashire,

UK

Quite out of my comfort zone. (You read a sentence twice and think what does that mean? The answer: what you want it to. )

Their Ch 6: Survey (small) > post tentative results > open to wider audience > commence dialogue. Actually may try this with a small project here. I wonder if this is something like DAR. Once I can find a clearr statement of it. Hate these pure text based editors with no hyperlinks, bold or font buttons. Oh well. Really am gone now for 24 hours minumum. Car. Airport. Plane. Car. Will then reach paradise for a few days. CU. - Derek (And Hi John S by the way, fancy meeting you here . . .)

With the all pages content.

I’ve found here. (Like, John, not sure where to post) Is this the only forum?

Found the exhibition, but could not see the way back here afterwards, the exhibition seems to be content only, no tagging, no intereaction (I like content and intereaction to be close - my preference. For busy people, there will be a lot of overhead in figuring out where things are and keeping up with things.

What I feel like is a whole empty fairground to be joining in with, but people haven’t arrived yet, and or else they are so thinly spread I cannot find anyone, and I’m looking for something I recognise for a corperate event (like a threaded discussion) but I cannot find one. Probably looking in the wrong place. Clicked on 10 pages and still lost. But I will not give up.

I an recovering from minor surgery and travel today to where internet is not easy to get. Oh well, such is life. I will be back later. - Derek

I will quote more of Jean McNiff and some comments at the wiki.

I am writing from a non-academic posiition. First, I applaud you for making so much of the process transparent to us. It feels like I’ve gone on the journey with you. My favorite parts have been the information your first Exhibition. I especially appreciated the way you documented it to show the AR (DAR) cycle (which, as a member of AREOL 23, I now understand is a key point of the process). I think I would like to see more of that in yoru current cycle(s). The Spinning Plates table is marvelous. I will likely borrow that idea for a project or two of my own.

Not sure if this is what you’re after, but it’s what came to my mind.

I was just looking around to try to find a place to put this suggestion — but I ran out of time.

It seems to me that your research agenda would be more meaningful if there were some place or way to specify the boundaries. Saying something like, “Here’s the kinds of communities or social settings or technologies that have been considered in formulating our ideas about X, Y and Z.” That could be a movable boundary, but it would help focus the effort. Something like:

http://social.itp.nyu.edu/shirky/wiki/?n=Main.ListOfSitesAndApplications