When I started this class I was unfamiliar with the idea of
conceptual frameworks. At first, I thought about the frameworks my
deceased, ex-husband used to go on and on (and on and on) about. Java
frameworks. Coding. I knew that was not applicable here, but it
wasn’t until reading Reason and Rigor that everything suddenly clicked.
Then the idea of basing your thinking and research on the backs of those who
had gone before suddenly made sense. It’s much like the conversation I have
with students about citation, but in a bigger way. This is one of the
challenges of being a doctoral student at this stage in my life. I have
been living in academia, but not DOING academia for a long time. However, as
much as this is going to be uphill for me, I feel like I have a lot to offer
and a clearer eye than many who have been completely involved in their studies
from the beginning. For example, can I mention that as much as Gorichanaz
has to offer, every time I read his articles I feel like he is about to tell me
that he does CrossFit, eats vegan, and doesn’t watch television.
At the beginning of the class, I immediately gravitated to Chatman
and
Erdelez. The idea of the small world and the idea of serendipity suit
so much of what I see every day. The mere fact that my campus has no more
than 700 students on-ground makes it a prime candidate for examination as a
small world. And information encountering is part of what makes artists
artists. But the more I looked at these ideas, the more I realized I
needed something more encompassing. Both these ideas seemed too narrow.
Many of the ideas we talked about in class ended up feeling too narrow.
Everyday life information seeking didn’t work for me. I felt like the
emphasis on the gap in knowledge didn’t address what I was seeing in
action. Also, so many of the theories we have been looking at in the past
few weeks have to do with that gap. My research population has gaps (oh my, the
gaps) but they are all so individual.
What I have enjoyed is seeing all the pieces fit
together. The narrow theories comprise the larger and that seems to make
sense to me. I can use the narrow theories, life in the round, to look at
one element of my research: students in a small community. I can use a
larger theory to look at the bigger picture and see how that small world
affects students in a bigger way.
I have identified Wilson’s
theory as the most useful for me at this point. It includes all the smaller
pieces that can be examined in more depth but provides a flexibility that isn’t
inherent in narrower theories. I think the Community of Practice idea is
another framework entirely, but I’m including it has a narrower piece of the
puzzle. I think it speaks to the small world idea that resonated with me
from Chatman.
I have made myself a summer reading list to get through
Wenger’s Communities of Practice and read all the theories in Theories of
Information Behavior. I want to make sure I’m not missing something
obvious. I am so excited for the next steps and hope I do not disappoint
anyone. My kids make fun of me a bit because I want to tell them what I’m
studying and they just don’t care. The quarantine has been a little tough
on me. Zoom meetings are exhausting and you can only read so many hours
in a day. Writing has helped because I can imagine an audience. I
am thinking about information in ways I never have, and it is exciting. I
am so looking forward to Fall.
No comments:
Post a Comment