Pragmatist ontology

Whilst I'm starting to feel that epistemology, conceptual framework, and other technical terms are starting to make sense, offering to do a small input to Ed D colleagues has put me into a bit of a spin about ontology or more specifically , what pragmatist ontology might be.

Ontology is concerned with ‘what is’- the structure of reality – and  informs the theoretical perspective of the researcher. For example,  that digital technologies are here to stay, are fast moving, that youth workers are informal educators, that digital technologies are being used as educational tools and that the two concepts are compatible. 

Dewey's ontology centres on experience, something that is constantly changing as we interact with the world.

"Because every experience is constituted by interaction between “subject”
and “object,” between a self and its world, it is not itself either merely physical
nor merely mental, no matter how much one factor or the other predominates.
. . . [experiences] are the products of discrimination, and hence can be understood only as we take into account the total normal experience in which both inner and outer factors are so incorporated that each has lost its special character. In an experience, things and events belonging to the world, physical and social, are transformed through the human context they enter, while the live creature is changed and developed through its intercourse with thingspreviously external to it. "(Dewey, 1981:251)

Dewey’s ontology  is 'transactional' (Clandinin, D & Rosiek, J.  2006:39) because it looks at the interaction between the subject and the environment in order to look at how the dynamics change and  “makes possible a new way of dealing with them, and thus eventually creates a new kind of experienced objects, not more real than those which preceded but more significant, and less overwhelming andoppressive” (Dewey, 1981: 175) . Here it can be said that knowledge, that 'which is' comes from our experiences and that these must be revisited in order to affirm our thoughts. This is where reflection plays its part, revisiting through reflection, processing that learning through experience, leads to knowledge creation. 

Have I got my head around it? Perhaps - feels ok...

 Clandinin, D &  Rosiek, J. 2006. Mapping a Landscape of Narrative Inquiry Borderland Spaces and Tensions. http://www.american-philosophy.org/events/documents/SIAP_2009_Clandinin_Proof-Ch2.pdf  accessed 20.11.2011

Dewey, J. (1981). The later works, 1925–1953: Vol. 10. Art as experience (J. A. Boydston, Ed.).
Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Thank God for that....!!

I've been caught by structure rather than creativity and have now found what I need to liberate my thoughts!

Within a pragmatic approach, the researcher does not have to start out by identifying set methods which are followed through systematically. Pragmatism allows for ‘the truth’ to be determined by what emerge as the best methods at the time, thus avoiding conflicts for the researcher about what they intend to do and what actually happens.

This is backed up by my experience of finding the ‘’right’’ methods, methodology and approach throughout this assignment . Whilst it was necessary for me to start out with a framework based on methods that I felt comfortable with and that I thought would work, my original thoughts were to use concept mapping as a mucn more dominant part of the process, the analysis of which being supported by some form of discourse analysis. However, the more I researched these methods, particularly having carried out my research, the more I realised that the concept mapping process could not be a primary focus, nor could what I discovered be analysed through discourse analysis in a way that would produce the meaning that I was trying to find. This journey eventually led me to the CHAT framework and pragmatism via social constructionism and constructivism. This also support the concept of ‘agency’ which surfaces in much of the discourse about CHAT, that of my ability to choose and act upon issues, both structural and theoretical within my  field of research. 

Wish I could say that Vygotsky's 'double stimulation' technique was in my master plan originally, but hey, I can now say that this is what I've done! And it is pragmatism that allows me to focus on 'what works' rather than sticking to what would have been a  flawed and 'dishonest' process perhaps..