Positionality is the process of reflecting on and acknowledging your self-identifications, experiences, and potential privileges which influence your teaching, occupational therapy practice role and research. A reflexive approach acknowledges this positionality. This awareness feeds back into how knowledge is produced, acknowledging one’s own positioning in the field of research in occupational therapy and occupational science and how this field is bounded by, and at times reproducing, systems of power.Focusing on research, throughout Occupational Therapy education students receive education on research methodologies and evidence-based practice in which they learn the theory and skills which enable them to conduct small-scale research during their studies and prepare them for possible roles as a researcher in future. The process of learning critical reflexivity regarding one’s own positionality is a critical part of any research training.This workshop will provide three examples, from three Modules within the European Master of Occupational Therapy, on how positionality is used in pedagogical activities. Following the presentation of these examples, groups will be led in a discussion on the participants’ own experiences with positionality in research education, and what educators need to be able to engage in this critical reflexive exercise with students.
MULTIFILE
Background: In the Netherlands, most of the academic curricula for teacher training in religious education (RE) focus on shortfalls of students, like a lack of knowledge about the plurality of worldviews and the diversity in interpretations of the Christian tradition. In our research project, the focus is not on the students, but on the university professors and lecturers who teach the subject of RE: professors and lecturers who train and educate students to teach RE. Aim: The main aim of the project was to gain a better insight into the inherent complexity of the professionalism of academics, that is, their own positionality in the plurality of the Roman Catholic traditions they adhere to in relation to their capabilities and commitment to the current curriculum – the ‘old’ one – and the new curriculum to be developed, in the context of the Dutch plural society. Setting: Respondents in this research were university professors and lecturers of the Teacher Training Institute of Tilburg University, located at Utrecht, the Netherlands. Methods: For this investigation, we used a research instrument based on the dialogical self theory and its self confrontation method for organisations to gain insight into professionals’ own and their colleagues’ positionality regarding teaching RE. Results: Preliminary results show that the self confrontation method for organisations has shown itself to be a challenging instrument to invite academics involved in the process of data construction and data analysis. Conclusion: Based on these results, we recommend to include the research population in a validation process to increase the sustainability of the results and to maximise engagement in the implementation phase of the new curriculum.
LINK
How is an academic philosopher, humanities researcher, or scientist with an interest in philosophy able to imagine, understand and reproduce a philosophical theory that’s highly abstract in a way, because the theory is a priory by nature and doesn’t use a lot of examples that relate to daily life? For example, Helmuth Plessner’s Die Stufendes Organischen und der Mensch(1928)? Talking from my own experience as a trained academic philosopher with a master’s degree and a PhD in philosophy of anthropology and technology (Müller 2009), it takes a lot of analytical training and many years of study to build a huge‘internal mental mind map’–looking like a gigantic spider’s web or grid with interrelated philosophical and other scientific concepts–that serves as a road map to compare ideas, deepen the understanding of formerly read texts and gain new perspectives on philosophy as a discipline and life in general. Working in academia, this way of reading texts, understanding theories, producing papers and a dissertation, worked very well for me for quite some time. Until I startedtoteachphilosophy myself as a PhD student. In university, students are used to lectures accompanied by PowerPoints with lots of slides packed full of theories, definitions, andquotes, and sometimes a few images are added. I liked doing ‘traditional knowledge transfer education’ during my lectures but enjoyed the work groups even better as Ilearned a lot myself from the discussions with my students. Although being the‘master’ in front of a class of‘students’ has its beautiful sides (standing in a long tradition ofteaching regarded as a craft, where knowledge is passed over like a‘guild system’), I preferred the ’democratic ways of the work group’ joining efforts together in gaining a better understanding of philosophical theories and the way they relate to history and the cultures we live in–and our own lives. I always had the feeling that teaching philosophy could be done in a different way. This made me think. Could I invent a set-ting where the traditional ways of knowledge transfer would intertwine with the spicy‘agree to disagree’ discussions and moments of synergy?
Climate change adaptation has influenced river management through an anticipatory governance paradigm. As such, futures and the power of knowing the future has become increasingly influential in water management. Yet, multiple future imaginaries co-exist, where some are more dominant that others. In this PhD research, I focus on deconstructing the future making process in climate change adaptation by asking ‘What river imaginaries exist and what future imaginaries dominate climate change adaptation in riverine infrastructure projects of the Meuse and Magdalena river?’. I firstly explore existing river imaginaries in a case study of the river Meuse. Secondly, I explore imaginaries as materialised in numerical models for the Meuse and Magdalena river. Thirdly, I explore the integration and negotiation of imaginaries in participatory modelling practices in the Magdalena river. Fourthly, I explore contesting and alternative imaginaries and look at how these are mobilised in climate change adaptation for the Magdalena and Meuse river. Multiple concepts stemming from Science and Technology Studies and Political Ecology will guide me to theorise the case study findings. Finally, I reflect on my own positionality in action-research which will be an iterative process of learning and unlearning while navigating between the natural and social sciences.
