Received this from Ann Doyle. Thanks Ann!
The Fifth International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry (QI2009) is now taking submissions online. The theme of the 2009 Congress is "Advancing Human Rights Through Qualitative Research."
The 2009 Congress will offer scholars the opportunity to form coalitions and engage in debate and dialogue on on how qualitative research can be used to bridge gaps in cultural and linguistic understandings. Delegates will address such topics as academic freedom, researcher safety, indigenous human rights, human rights violations, ethical codes, torture, political violence, social justice, racial, ethnic and gender and environmental disparities in education, welfare and healthcare, truth and reconciliation commissions, justice as healing. Delegates will consider the meaning of ethics, evidence, advocacy and social justice under a humane human rights agenda.
Sessions will take up such topics as: the politics of evidence; alternatives to evidence-based models; mixed-methods; public policy discourse; social justice; human subject research; indigenous research ethics; decolonizing inquiry; standpoint epistemologies. Contributors are invited to experiment with new methodologies, and new presentational formats (drama, performance, poetry, autoethnography, fiction). Such work will offer guidelines and exemplars showing how qualitative research can be used in the human rights and policy-making arenas.
To submit a paper or poster abstract or a panel, please visit the website below:
www.icqi.org
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Starting a Taxonomy of Engagement Factors
I have had a couple of offline discussions about what factors we might think about when we think about engaged KO (eKO). I've also had one comment posted. From these sources I've started a list below (still incomplete). Do these resonate with anyone?
1. Implementation by groups previously without KO (in some contexts this is a big deal, but still need particulars on how we show evidence that this is *positive* change)
2. Division of labour statistics - how work in government and universities is divided (is theoretical at this point, requires data or argument to be seen as evidence in my opinion)
3. Infrastructure decisions based on KO - can airports run ontologies based on a particular set of methods and not others? (ongoing discussion in ontology engineering I've been told)
4. Economic latitude - saving money through KO so that it can be spent elsewhere (some work has been done on this I think)
5. The stuff of human flourishing - what KO does to allow for human flourishing... (very vague)
1. Implementation by groups previously without KO (in some contexts this is a big deal, but still need particulars on how we show evidence that this is *positive* change)
2. Division of labour statistics - how work in government and universities is divided (is theoretical at this point, requires data or argument to be seen as evidence in my opinion)
3. Infrastructure decisions based on KO - can airports run ontologies based on a particular set of methods and not others? (ongoing discussion in ontology engineering I've been told)
4. Economic latitude - saving money through KO so that it can be spent elsewhere (some work has been done on this I think)
5. The stuff of human flourishing - what KO does to allow for human flourishing... (very vague)
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Positive Social Change?
What is a positive effect in this context - in KO? What is a positive social change?
Is it an intervention that increases the potential for human flourishing? And is there, in this vein, a discrete list of actions that can be identified as factors that contribute to human flourishing? Or is the concept of human flourishing as vague as the concept of positive social change?
Could it be that positive effect is not about human flourishing as much as it is about economics? That we can define all positive effects of KO to the reduction in cost in time and/or money? This is positive because it would leave room for spending time and/or money on other things, rather than on information organization, and its consequent benefits.
There are other ways to look at this, yes? What are they? Aren't lists of "good things" controversial precisely because their inventory is not discrete and that such an assemblage can be read in a pejorative or paternalistic way?
Even with this trouble, it seems that we'll need to define what a positive effect is in order to prove whether KO research brings it into being.
Thoughts?
Is it an intervention that increases the potential for human flourishing? And is there, in this vein, a discrete list of actions that can be identified as factors that contribute to human flourishing? Or is the concept of human flourishing as vague as the concept of positive social change?
Could it be that positive effect is not about human flourishing as much as it is about economics? That we can define all positive effects of KO to the reduction in cost in time and/or money? This is positive because it would leave room for spending time and/or money on other things, rather than on information organization, and its consequent benefits.
There are other ways to look at this, yes? What are they? Aren't lists of "good things" controversial precisely because their inventory is not discrete and that such an assemblage can be read in a pejorative or paternalistic way?
Even with this trouble, it seems that we'll need to define what a positive effect is in order to prove whether KO research brings it into being.
Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
