Search

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Educational Action Research on 2021-02-01, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/09650792.2021.1886960. Deposited by shareyourpaper.org and openaccessbutton.org. We've taken reasonable steps to ensure this content doesn't violate copyright. However, if you think it does you can request a takedown by emailing help@openaccessbutton.org.

Humour, when engaged in the classroom, tends to be used as a means to hook youth into the ‘real’ material of school, when officially sanctioned at all. Humour can be dangerous, not-the-least in its...

In this paper, I invite you into some considerations of what autoethnography might do in research, what it might teach us as researchers. In doing so, I return to an autoethnographic study I engaged in a few years ago which was contoured through the question: How do teachers experience student voice pedagogies? In that study, I experienced autoethnography as a creative methodology that allowed me to go back to two experiences I had with youth, or student voice projects. The paper embodies a return to the autoethnographic study of my doctoral research, which itself was a return to the previously experienced student voice projects; a return that is being propelled by my new position as a professor, supervising students in the mappings of their research landscapes. Returning, thus, becomes a central motif that invites dwelling in the simultaneity of pastpresentfuture – wherein the present is the folding in of the past and the future through attuning to embodied ways of knowing, sensing, being, and doing -- disrupting colonial epistemological legacies of progress and linearity found in conventional and taken-for-granted research practices. I ask, what does it mean to go back, in efforts oriented towards a future (such as social justice)? What might it mean to conceptualize time differently within our research, teaching, and learning? I argue that autoethnography, when engaged through an active nomadism, opens space for learning about our research practices, ourselves as researchers and pedagogues, as well as deeper understandings of our research topics.

There is a global trend toward improving programs and student experiences in higher education through curriculum review and mapping of degree programs. This paper describes an action research approach to program improvement for a course-based MEd degree. The driver for continual program improvement came from actions and recommendations that arose from an institutionally mandated, year-long, faculty led curriculum review of professional graduate programs in education. Study findings reveal instructors’ perceptions about how they enacted the recommendations for program improvement, including (1) developing a visual conceptualization of the program; (2) improved connections between the courses; (3) articulation of coherence in goals and expectations for students and instructors; (4) an increased focus on action research; (5) increased ethics support and scaffolding for students; and (6) the fostering of communities of practice. Study findings highlight strengths of the current program and course designs, action items, and research needed for continual program improvement., Il existe une tendance mondiale à améliorer les programmes d’études supérieures ainsi que l’expérience des étudiants par la révision et l’articulation des programmes. Nous décrivons une approche recherche-action pour améliorer un programme de cours de maîtrise en éducation. Une révision des programmes d’éducation au niveau supérieur imposée par l’institution et menée par des membres de la faculté a engendré des actions et recommandations vers l’amélioration des programmes. Les résultats montrent les perceptions des chargés de cours en ce qui concerne la manière dont ils ont réalisé ces recommandations. Parmi celles-ci, (1) développer une conceptualisation visuelle du programme; (2) améliorer les connexions entre les cours; (3) clarifier les buts et les attentes des étudiants et professeurs; (4) élargir le focus sur la recherche-action; (5) offrir aux étudiants l’échafaudage et plus de soutien pour l’éthique; et (6) encourager des communautés de pratique. Les résultats de l’étude soulignent les forces du programme actuel et des configurations de cours, et des suggestions pour action et recherche qui seraient nécessaires pour continuer à améliorer le programme.