Campus session 2, Module 3

Here is a summary of yesterday's campus session held by Paula and Adesola.

To start of the session, Paula briefly spoke about the literature that we are in the process of collecting. She encouraged us all to create a 'digital file' in which we keep all our sources of literature under. An obvious suggestion, though all of us admitted to having not done this! She also explained that literature can be used from previous references we have come accross during the course ie. Schon. 

Things to do

• For week 7-It is not long until we need to send your advisor a 1 page description of our artefact. This can be blogged but also send directly to your advisor.  
• On week 9, send your advisor your Critical Review draft for feedback. 
• Continue to blog about conversations you  are having about your inquiry at work.
• Watch Peter Thomas' 'writing' youtube clip from libguides
• Say what your action plan is. This will help to remind you what you have left to do and what stage you are up to.

Today we spoke about the Critical Review and then the Professional Artefact.

Critical Review: 
Paula explained to us some of the contents the Critical Review should contain.
In order to show what you have shared with SIGS, you can report any  actual conversations via your blog and/or journal (aswell as any on LinkedIn, Facebook etc).

Explain if/how your writing skills have been improved from doing this course.

Be sure to explain how you interpret certain words. Others may understand a word in a different way. For example, what does the word success mean to you? Financial stability? Fame? Respect? Full time work?

The Critical Review is a piece of writing which explian the journey you have encountered during this course.

This is also true of the Professional Artefact.

Professional Artefact:
Adesola explained to us what the intention of the Professional Artefact is. Just like the Critical Review, the Artefact is there to demonstrate your journey throughout this course. Academics like to see a 'report' in written form, however, as we all come from an artistic background, a written report may not be suitable in your line of work. Your artefact should be formed as a suitable 'language'  that your industry will understand. For example, if you work as a dancer, your artefact might be a dance. Both the Critical Review and the Artefact must show the journey, not the the outcome.

        Critical Review       +        Professional Artefact

 (written form)                     (non written form)

=Two form of explaining 

My lightbulb moment!!

During the session, Paula went round each of us, asking us to explain to the group one of our findings. This exercise was very beneficial to me because I realised that I have been trying to 'prove' that my way of thinking is right rather than acutally carrying out an inquiry. I actually feel that a lightbulb has been switched on in my brain! Up until now, I have been steering the outcome of my inquiry in the way I want it to. Adesola actually said to me ' but that's not an inquiry'. I now realise that it is impossible to know the outcome of an inquiry before you have finished it. Maybe my inquiry will show that dance and drama is not important in mainstream education. Just because I think it is, my finding may show otherwise. I feel very enlightened by this simple realisation. I felt quite embarrassed that I had been so slow to pick up on this, but also reassured when it turned out that other members of the group have been doing the same thing. I will be making sure that my literature resources are not one sided and there is a possibility that my sources of data/interviewees may also have to be reassessed. This is something that I can then reflect upon and talk about in my Critical Review. Adesola also warned us not to try to get your findings/data from your own experiences. You will endoubtedly be biassed!