03/04/2012 by lizit.

Occasionally on this journey towards a doctorate there have been moments when I have suddenly understood something or a penny has dropped. They haven’t necessarily been big things, but nevertheless meaningful. Today I had one of those moments when reading a post on the PhD2Published blog. At the bottom of the post, there were five simple - and in some ways obvious - points about writing at this level, both for the thesis and for any other publication. It was the last one that caught my attention and imagination. Effectively it asked, what was the problem I was claiming to solve.

For months I have been struggling with the whole notion of what is it that I am doing that I can claim to be adding to knowledge. I have heard the metaphors of a grain of sand and seen the images of a tiny pimple on the sphere of knowledge, but I have found it difficult to identify, let alone articulate what I am doing. I have been so conscious of so much of my work just saying what is already known, I have not been able to see what I am doing, even though it is implicit in my methodology and in so much of what I have done over the past three and a half years.

This morning it dawned on me. It doesn’t actually matter that others have explored some of the problems of the special needs system - they have tended to work from specific perspectives. It doesn’t matter that there is a fair bit of work written on inter-agency working and partnership. In fact, it’s great that work is out there, together with studies of the experiences of parents of children with special needs and the various analyses of policy in this area. They are all parts of the jigsaw which helps to explain why the special needs system is dysfunctional.

What I am doing, in taking a systems perspective, is trying to look at the whole picture. Sure, some pieces will still be missing, but rather than looking at the jigsaw pieces in isolation, I am trying to look at how they connect. Rather than trying to solve a problem, I am trying to offer a perspective on the multi-causality of the problem. Essentially, I am taking a problem area, which has been dissected and carefully examined in bits, and looking at it holistically and recognising the multi-dimensional nature of the problem and the interconnectivity of the parts.

So, instead of being concerned about the fact that I don’t seem to be saying anything new, I can now recognise I am saying something different and fresh simply because I am looking at the whole system rather than one little bit of it. Recognising that is making me think both about what I have already written and what I am currently writing. I have a sense of knowing what I am trying to do now!

Remind me how positive I am this morning next time you catch me about to throw my rattle out of my pram in despair that I’ll never get to the endpoint of this journey!

Posted in thesis, motivation, reflections | Print | 4 Comments »

07/03/2012 by lizit.

The past three months have been the most difficult of my doctoral journey so far. I did start to write a blog post a few weeks back, but was not really able to express what I wanted or needed to say. I am now in a better place and able to reflect on the experience and look ahead.

In the draft post written at the end of January/beginning of February, I said:

I’ve been pondering whether or not to blog the ups and downs of the last few weeks and have decided that now is as good a time as any to do so. If I had been writing just before Christmas, what I would have written would have been very different. I was at a very low point and seriously questioning whether it was worth continuing with my DPhil. I have turned a corner, but am still feeling very fragile and doubting whether I can actually complete the journey, but I am able to look at things more rationally.

Anybody following this blog would know that up until the end of November, I was in a good place with my work. I felt that I knew what I was trying to do and I was doing it. I had set myself some fairly demanding writing targets and was achieving them. I had restructured the way I was presenting my work in a way that made sense to me and I was generally pretty happy with the way things were progressing. So what went wrong? And why is it coming together now?

What went wrong?

Around the end of November, beginning of December, three things happened, each of which contributed to me becoming very depressed about my work - and very angry that I might not be able to do what I had set out to do.

Firstly, my supervisors cast doubts on the way I had re-organised my work. I was not following a conventional thesis format and this was likely to cause problems when it came to the thesis being examined. I considered I had strong reasons for wanting to structure my work in the way I was doing and that my theoretical stance was not understood. I had a sense of being required to write something that was not going to be ‘my thesis’ in order to comply with convention, whether or not convention made sense in the context of what I wanted to say.

Secondly, I got ill. OK, it was only flu-like cold, but as I am asthmatic, it went to my chest and I spent a couple of weeks feeling really grotty and took about a month to begin to feel well again. Truth is, I was probably mildly depressed as a result of being definitely under the weather and feeling totally stressed out about my thesis.

Thirdly, I got comments on the writing I had been doing during the previous weeks. Although I could see the rationale behind some of the comments, others I felt much less happy about as they were encouraging me to put more weight on some parts of my work than others in a way that made no sense to me.

What happened to resolve the dilemma and put me back on track?

Firstly, I realised that I was not powerless but had choices. I could choose to walk away completely, or to present my work other than in a thesis. I have learned a great deal over the past three and a half years and I could choose whether to complete my planned journey or head off in a different direction.

Secondly, I had supportive friends. Not friends that tried to comfort me, but friends who listened to my tale of woe, accepted my account and gave me space to be angry, frustrated and depressed, only offering advice once I was in a place to hear. Those folk know who they are, but they are found in #phdchat on Twitter and amongst colleagues at University of Sussex.

Thirdly, although my supervisors were not happy with what I wanted to do, they had confidence that I could complete my DPhil and one in particular took the time to explore why things had gone so radically wrong. This gave me a sense of being understood and provided a platform for negotiation and agreement on a way forward based on an honest appraisal of the potential risks.

What are the outcomes of this process?

Perhaps the most important thing to come out of the past three months is a very real sense that I own my work. I owned it back in November, but now I simultaneously have both more invested in it and less. That may seem odd, but I have accepted that what I am doing does not follow conventions and that may not meet the approval of examiners. That is OK and my decision and if it means I do not get to wear a floppy hat at the end of the process, that is fine. At the same time, I do believe in what I am doing, and do regard not only the content but the approach I have taken as valuable. If it is not valued by formal academic measures, that does not make it less worthwhile, but it places more responsibility on me to find ways of disseminating my work.

Secondly, there is a change in my relationship with my supervisors. From my perspective, there is a new honesty in our exchanges, perhaps because we have locked horns, and found a way forward. When I get to the end of the journey, I will be interested on getting their thoughts on this perception.

Thirdly, I think my writing is improving. I am more self-critical, in a positive sense, and more aware of the need to ensure the rationale for my approach and argument is transparent, even if it sometimes means labouring the point. Because my approach has been challenged, I have read more, understood more and am more confident.

Where now?

Get the thesis written!

Posted in personal rant, peer support, thesis, writing, experience, ownership, reflections, empowerment, learning | Print | 4 Comments »

25/07/2011 by lizit.

I am an insider in my research domain.

Reading an article recommended by a colleague on insider research (Hellawell, 2006) raises the possibility of there being different dimensions to insider research, and that my position might vary in different aspects of my research and in relation to different participants.

My research focuses on the Special Educational Needs (SEN) system and uses the lens of the experiences of parents and practitioners involved with children and young people with diagnoses of Aspergers or high functioning autism (HFA).

I am an insider in that I have a son with Aspergers and I have had involvement  with the SEN system in negotiating to get his needs met. I am also an insider as I have an ongoing relationship with other parents who have children on the autism spectrum, or who are going through the diagnostic process. I share a lot in common with other parents both in terms of understanding and navigating the SEN system and in terms of coping with the effect of having a child with Aspergers on daily living and dealing with the many and varied effects on family life and on me personally as a mother.

However, I am also interested in the perspectives of practitioners in the domain. In a sense, I am a practitioner as I facilitate a support group, but my experience in that role is very different from those practitioners who are responsible for diagnosing the condition, recommending interventions or providing support. At the same time, I have nearly 20 years experience of working in social care organisations, so I have experience of making decisions and recommendations that affect the lives of other. Although I may be seen as an ‘outsider’ by the practitioners I interview in professional terms, I do have some understanding of the pressures and influences they work under, and that does influence my approach.

There is also the question of the extent to which both practitioners and parents form a community of practice within the domain. Although this is not the focus of my research, it is clear that there is much shared knowledge and language between people coming from different places in the domain.

A useful article in enabling me to see that doing insider researcher is more complex than simply questions of making assumptions about common understanding or giving access that might not otherwise be so readily available.

Hellawell, D. 2006. Inside–Out: Analysis of the Insider–Outsider Concept as a Heuristic Device to Develop Reflexivity in Students Doing Qualitative Research. Teaching in Higher Education, 11, 483-494.

Posted in community of practice, Aspergers/HFA, methodology, reflections | Print | No Comments »

28/06/2011 by lizit.

Time spent over the last couple of days reviewing my thesis outline, plus a supervision session and reading a couple of Inger Mewburn’s thesiswhisperer blog posts (PhD Grief and 5 ways to kill your darlings) has got me thinking.

It must be a couple of years now since my supervisor suggested I draft an abstract for my thesis, written as though it was done and dusted and I had achieved what I wanted to achieve. Having a tendency to do as I’m told, I followed the advice and I found it a useful exercise, not only in enabling me to sort out my focus, but also as a document which I could review and revise as my ideas developed. While reviewing my thesis outline over the past couple of days, I realised that I needed to revise the abstract yet again. Having done so, I then looked back over the last year and realised that ideas which were central to the abstract a few months ago, are no longer there, but other ideas which either were not present, or were peripheral are taking centre stage. I am seriously beginning to wonder if rather than me owning my thesis, whether it actually has somehow acquired a life of its own.

In some ways, this follows on from my previous blog where I responded to Jeffrey Keefer’s question about there being no space for communities of practice in my research. It can only be 3 months ago that I was arguing that communities of practice were central to my research and my thesis. Where has all that thinking and work gone? It is clear my thesis is rejecting it as part of itself - I’m sure it wasn’t my decision to put that whole chunk on one side.

Not only does my thesis seem to have decided that things that are meaningful to me have no place in it, but it also seems to have replaced them with things which are more theoretically complex, though possibly ultimately more interesting. And I’m sure it has done this without any assistance on my part!

What I have realised is that the areas that getting chopped are not being chopped because they are not of interest, or are not important, but because they are not central to my research question. They are currently in suspended animation, waiting to be revived and acquire their own lives. The areas that remain and are taking over, are not triffids, but are emerging as I allow myself to look into some of the deeper reaches of the iceberg. They are challenging because they are forcing me to think in ways that don’t come naturally to me. I’m a pragmatist and problem-solver - what am I doing getting caught up in theoretical concepts and philosophy? Come to think of it, why on earth am I doing a DPhil - no let’s not go there today!

I think perhaps it is time for me to take thesis in hand and threaten it with the pruning sheers if it doesn’t stop growing and developing interesting side shoots. Hang it all surely I should be in charge of my thesis and not vice versa!

Posted in experience, personal rant, empowerment, reflections, ownership, learning | Print | 1 Comment »

25/06/2011 by lizit.

When I set up this blog, it was to support my DPhil studies. I knew that the process I was engaging with would be a journey. What I didn’t know was what the nature of the journey would turn out to be, but I knew the destination I had in mind was what my husband refers to as a “Big D”. I still have some way to go - all being well, I will submit my thesis towards the middle of next academic year - but a tweet has led me to reflect a little on the journey so far, with its various twists and turns. Rather than being a reflective essay, this had turned into more a narrative description of the this happened, then this, but so be it.

Jeffrey Keefer simply asked: “No CoP space in your research? Wonder why that may be the case….” Given that at one point, I had expected CoP, or communities of practice to be fairly centre stage, I also wondered why.

The seeds of my DPhil journey were almost certainly planted over a period of time and without my conscious awareness. If I think back about 6 years, my focus was probably on retirement preparation. Apart from a small tutoring contract with the Open University, I had given up my paid employment to sort out appropriate support for my son’s special educational needs. I was not really thinking of returning to work in any real sense, when the OU advertised consultancy posts with the Information, Advice and Guidance team of the Sussex Learning Network. Although I hadn’t worked directly in that area, I had relevant experience and the pay was attractive, so I put in an application and somewhat to my surprise was appointed. A few months later, consultancies also became available on the Sussex Learning Network e-learning team, and it was suggested I apply. This was a difficult decision, as it would mean moving to a situation of being in virtually full-time employment, but I grasped the nettle and again was appointed.

Becoming an elearning consultant was a turning point. Whereas, I was content to stay with the technology I had learned over the previous ten years, I was now introduced to the world of blogs and wikis and 3-D virtual worlds and social media more generally and found myself relating to people who were engaged in research in this area and had colleagues who were talking of doctoral study. I gently encouraged them, got involved in various projects, but was very clear that a research degree was not for me - it was for younger people. I got further OU contracts involving me in various research projects and found I was enjoying myself. In particular, I was enjoying being able to use skills from years ago, which I had considered I would never have the opportunity to use other than in voluntary capacities, but which I was using and which were being recognised by colleagues - perhaps retirement, endless cups of tea and making lace was not my only potential destination.

I still don’t really know how it happened! One of the areas I began to work in through the elearning consultancy was 3-D virtual worlds. I initiated a project with a colleague at the University of Sussex and one day found myself asking her whether there might be a doctorate in the work we were doing. At that point, my doctoral journey started as she responded positively to my query and a few months later, I found myself a registered student with the intention of doing some comparative work around learning in 3-D virtual environments and learning in the physical world. I can honestly say that doing a PhD was never part of my life plan, and was very surprised to find myself in that place, and although I am now very comfortable with what I am doing, I am still more than a little surprised to find how good the fit is.

Despite best intentions, the planned research didn’t quite work out, but my focus at the end of my first year as a research student was still firmly on learning in 3-D worlds. I was beginning to explore aspects of informal learning and the development of a sense of community. This fitted very much with my experience as a community development worker nearly forty years ago and an ongoing interest in how communities form and develop and how people learn in community. As the research design developed, it was clearly moving well beyond the bounds of Informatics, and my supervisor invited a colleague in the Sociology faculty to a consultation to assist in enabling me to determine the way forward. That meeting proved another turning point. Essentially, the message I took away was that the ideas I was exploring were interesting, but I was looking at a broad area and such work was best undertaken through the narrow lens of a domain I knew well.

Following that meeting, I rapidly re-scoped my research objectives. 3-D virtual worlds were no longer an appropriate domain, for what I wanted to explore as there was an area I knew far better, was much closer to my heart and where the ideas I was interested in were far more relevant. The focus of my research shifted to learning amongst professionals and other carers in the autistic spectrum domain. The central issue focused on learning and why it was that the learning of some professionals was privileged over that of parents and other carers. Policy in this area emphasised partnership, but the system was acknowledged to be adversarial. Was there any evidence of a community of practice embracing professionals from different disciplines? Why were parents included or excluded from this CoP?

So, to return to Jeffrey’s question, my research at that point did have CoP as a central theme.

However, as I began to interview people and to think about the theoretical context, and to refine further my research question, I was forced to accept that no matter how interesting CoPs were, there was a more fundamental question, which was why was the SEN system so adversarial anyway. Rather than looking for examples of co-operative practice, and there are many, it seemed that much of what I read and much of what participants told me used militaristic language to describe relationships within the system. Somewhat surprisingly, I could find little in the literature by way of explanation for why this might be the case. There appeared to be tacit acceptance that the system was adversarial. Even the Green Paper on SEN published 3 months ago, presents the adversarial nature of the system as a reason for change, but does not offer any suggestions as to how the proposed changes will alter this.

So thus far, my journey as taken me from positioning myself outside academic research, to tentative first steps in exploring learning in 3-D virtual worlds, to debates about the nature of learning and informal learning, to communities of practice, to why the SEN system is broke. On the way, I have learned about theories I had never heard of before, I have begun to understand things I would previously dismissed, I have questioned myself and my presuppositions, and I have begun to understand the relevance of theory to practical situations and the interplay of research and policy development. I have met and engaged with lots of interesting people and have begun to realise that what I have to say is probably no less worthy that what anybody else has to contribute to various debates.

Communities of practice are central to my thinking, and being part of a community of practice supports my research, but I have somewhat reluctantly had to accept that communities of practice, at this point in time, are not central to my research interests.

The journey continues.

Posted in community of practice, voice, lace, research ideas, reflections, learning | Print | 3 Comments »

24/04/2011 by lizit.

Following on from the Identity memo 1, I want to explore another area which is important to my research and which also has a long root in my life, namely my interest in disability and related areas.

I suppose my first conscious interest in disability was in 1966, when as a 16 year old I went on a working holiday to a Leonard Cheshire Home and met people who had quite severe impairments for the first time. At the time, I can remember being impressed by the ethos of the establishment - the concept of family and not referring to disabled people as residents or patients. It made enough of an impression on me, that I returned the following year and began to look at possible career options that might involve working with disabled people.

However, my awareness of health and illness goes much further back than that. Before her marriage, my mother had been a nurse and she retained an active interest in her profession, acting as secretary to the local branch of the Royal College of Nursing. She had done both mental and general nurse training, but her interest was in mental health and she would speak of her experiences and about how difficult it had been to enter her chosen profession - she encountered a lot of opposition from her family because of the low status nurses were perceived as having in the early 1930s when she commenced her training.

I would guess that my mother’s stories had quite a lot to do with me choosing to join the Junior Red Cross and undertake basic training in first aid, home nursing and child care.

I can’t claim that I thought much about disability again until about 1980 when I was working for a local authority as voluntary organisations liaison officer. I was involved in the planning of our response to 1981 - International Year of Disabled People - which led to two specific projects - developing an access guide for the borough together with the head OT and involvement in establishing a local disability association. I also got involved in setting up a parent support group. At a personal level, the spin off from this was taking a postgraduate Masters degree and doing a research project on local disability associations and the implications of them being run by and for disabled people or by able-bodied for disabled. This linked to the thinking of the Wolfenden Report on the future of voluntary organisations and the role of intermediary bodies and to the changes within the disability movement more generally that recognised that disability was not an obstacle to being able to run organisations, engage in social and political action, etc. I can remember being shocked by some of the attitudes I heard expressed by people then responsible for the voluntary/charity organisations and also being impressed by what I saw disabled people doing.

My next career move was to leading a multi-disciplinary social services team with a focus on disability and older people. As described in identity memo 1, a key element of my work there was enabling our ‘clients’ to have as much control as possible over the services made available to them.

Moves followed into voluntary organisation management and motherhood. It was as my son began to develop that disability became a much more personal concern. It was very clear that my son was exhibiting different behaviour from other children of his age, and though I put some of this down to the effect of living in Germany and being between cultures, concern was also expressed by the Kindergarten he attended. I was subjected to a very difficult discussion with the Kindergarten staff when I was effectively told that it was probable my son would never live independently and would probably not be able to attend a normal school. To say this was done clumsily and without warning is an understatement. The fact that the conversation took place in German made it all the more difficult - was I really understanding what I was being told.

Following initial assessments with a German paediatrician, we learned we were returning to the UK. My hope was that my son’s behaviour would settle once he no longer had to cope with two languages and different cultural expectations. The reality was that very soon his school were making referrals to the school nurse and we ended up with CAMHS and the start of the long journey to finding out what lay behind my son’s differences and getting appropriate support for him. That journey also led me, together with others, to set up a parent support group and convinced me that it was essential for parents to be adequately informed and supported so that they could obtain the support their children not only needed, but had a right to.

I could unpick those personal experiences a great deal more - the attitudes of the different professionals I encountered, the lack of knowledge some professionals had of the support infrastructures, the journey to getting a statement for a very able and intelligent child who just was not coping in school, the encounters with mental health services and the failures of services to address needs appropriately. Elsewhere I have documented the roller coaster of emotions I experienced and the details of that journey.

Now I am able to step back a little. My son is now an adult and is doing very well. But I am still actively involved in parent support groups and my personal experiences are very much the driver for my research. Sometimes I feel I am too close to what I am researching and too influenced by my own experience. At other times, I recognise that even when going through the worst of times with my son, I was operating both as parent and professional and maintaining a level of professionalism and objectivity which I did not feel.

A further aspect of disability is now impinging on my life and consciousness. My own health and fitness has deteriorated, to some extent because of my failure to care for myself appropriately, and I am having to recognise there are things I cannot do that I might want to do, but my energy levels are inadequate.

So throughout my life, I haven’t been very distant from issues of health, illness, mental health, disability, and SEN.

Posted in parenting, SEN, biography, empowerment, reflections | Print | No Comments »

04/04/2011 by lizit.

Having read Martin Eve’s and Jennifer Jones’s blogs outlining where they are at the planned halfway stage of their PhDs, it struck me a progress check might be in order.

In theory, I’m now two and a half years into my DPhil journey, except the journey hasn’t been that straightforward. In October 2008, the plan was to do work around Second Life/Virtual Worlds and education. That continued to be the primary focus until the following May, when I had to rethink things somewhat as the initial plans had fallen through for reasons beyond my control. Initially, it was just a tweak, in that the focus stayed with virtual worlds/Second Life but instead of looking at formal learning, I began to look at informal learning and community building. That was a real option, until November 2009.

In November 2009, as I started exploring a different methodological approach, it became appropriate to look for some additional consultation on the way ahead. That consultation session proved a dramatic turning point, and although the previous 14 months was not completely irrelevant, my research moved away from virtual worlds to being located ‘in a domain that I knew well’. In some ways, that is the true start date of my DPhil, and one of the things I have had to do over the past few months is stop trying to incorporate stuff that is no longer relevant in my thesis - it’s not wasted, just not relevant to the subject in hand.

There is a sense of loss over changing direction and letting go of things. Two years ago I considered myself, and was considered by others, part of the virtual world research committee. I had co-authored a journal article and a book chapter and presented at several conferences and knew many of the people active in that research community. Sometimes, I think I was a fool not to stay with what I was doing, but most of the time, I know it was the only real option as I am involved and passionate about what I am now doing.

What have I achieved in since changing direction. If it is measured in terms of external outputs, very little so far, but then I have moved into a new discipline and it has taken time to get a sense of the academic and theoretical landscape that I now inhabit and to begin to form links with others working in the same area. I wouldn’t say I have a network that emulates that which I had previously, but I am getting there. I am also starting to feel more comfortable with the language and culture of the social sciences - somewhat different from informatics where I was previously located.

On the other hand, I have defined my research questions, gathered a lot of data, sorted out my theoretical frameworks and analysis methodology, written a thesis outline and can see how the completed work might look. The current task is to construct a complete first draft of my thesis, while continuing to collect and analyse data. What I do need to give serious thought to is how to get my head above the parapet in terms of conferences and publishing - but maybe some of that can wait for the moment.

So in brief, I’ve made a beginning, achieved a successful U-turn and am now proceeding in an orderly fashion towards my destination, needing to decide whether to take the scenic route, or whether to stick to the motorway and then turn off to explore the countryside.

Posted in reflections | Print | 1 Comment »

08/12/2010 by lizit.

At about the same time as posting yesterday’s blog, I put a status update on Facebook which read:

I think I am getting my head around a couple of ‘ologies’ and understanding how they are relevant to my research - eeeek! am I turning into some kind of academic - help!!!

As sometimes happens with status updates, but somewhat to my surprise, this update has opened up an interesting dialogue and has helped me understand something of my resistance to using some forms of language. It has also had the effect of clarifying that there are contexts where it is right and proper to use more complex language if one is to be properly understood.

My starting position is that the language which we speak and write is primarily a communication tool. If what we speak and write cannot be understood by the intended audience, then we might as well not have spoken or written. This could imply that the only form of communication which I find acceptable is using the simplest language possible and avoiding all technical or specialist terms. Just counting up the number of 5-syllable words I use shows this is not the case. However, I do have a tendency to prefer not to use specialist language as far as possible. This is partly because I am not particularly interested in language as such. It is also because I have found myself in situations where I have felt excluded from discussion because of my lack of affinity with the language being used. Even if I understood some of what had been said, I was completely unable to respond in any meaningful way. Rather than making me want to understand and use the language, my response was to accept that I was not bright enough for such exchanges and to make no attempt to engage in them. Fortunately, in another setting, I did learn I was not as dim as I thought and achieved a fulfilling career, but I never really came to terms with the language issue and have at times set myself up as anti-intellectual.

The Facebook discussion has opened up the reality that whereas my tendency is to use plain English whenever possible, there are others who relish acquiring and using more complex language:

I love the way that we can express complex ideas concisely - and then stepping stone from one complex idea to another with relative ease.

When I express the view:

I agree reading academic papers should require some work on the part of the reader, but most of that work should be in understanding and applying the ideas being presented and discussed rather than in understanding the language used to present those ideas.

Others would say:

when we are talking to peers in a research community surely we need to agree that we can throw ologies around and assume that we will be understood, or that people have the nouce to find out what we mean. We are invested in educating ourselves surely, so doesn’t understanding require some effort on the part of the reader here?

There is a sense of agreeing to disagree, but there is also an awareness that when we speak or write, we are not only communicating to others, but we are meeting our own needs in many and varied ways. I will no doubt be taking more risks with language in safe situations, but I would be fascinated to know how comfortable, or otherwise, others feel with academic ‘jargon’.

Posted in writing, reflections | Print | No Comments »

14/11/2010 by lizit.

I’ve noticed over the last few months I’ve been blogging a lot less than I did when I first started this blog. Back then, I would often post two or three times a week, but now a few weeks can go between postings. I don’t think the purpose of the blog has changed.  It is still about exploring ideas related to my DPhil research. What has changed is the blog has become more visible. Rather than just a few close friends and associates being aware of its existence, what I write is now fed into an RSS feed and is available to a much wider audience.

What are the implications for me of going public? I think I am more guarded about what I put into the public arena. I am aware that I may be writing for an audience rather than essentially for myself. This means, I am less willing to post about ideas that are very undeveloped - sometimes not even embryonic. Possibly too, I am less willing to post ideas that may actually be novel. Is that a fear of  being laughed at or thinking some of my ideas may be interesting enough for somebody else to want to use and develop them before I’ve thought them through myself?I think too, I am more careful about how I write. My blogs have tended to be written on the fly without drafting and re-drafting, but now I think a bit more about the words I use and the way I frame what I say. The implication is that blogging takes more time and effort and becomes less easy.

Does it matter that I am blogging less? Yes, for me it does! It means I am not using the opportunity to play with ideas and concepts and make mistakes for fear of what an unknown readership might think.

The solution. If I can, forget the audience and allow myself to blog about the ideas I am playing with and the things I am trying to make sense of.

Having said that, it would be great to have some comments sometimes on what I write, if only to let me know there are people out there reading this or to confirm I am actually alone in the metaverse!

Posted in blog, reflections | Print | No Comments »

16/10/2010 by lizit.

For a whole series of reasons, some personal, some environmental, some miscellaneous, I have been finding it very difficult to get myself focused enough to do any constructive work. I can understand why I am feeling as I am, but have been finding it difficult to do anything very much about it.

Yesterday I met a colleague for coffee. Turned out that for various reasons she was also feeling fairly disengaged.

Recipe for disaster and mutual descent into depression? Well no, it actually was an extremely positive meeting. Perhaps because we were able to be honest about how we we feeling, we were able to help each other to see it wasn’t just us being middle-aged and pathetic, but our feelings were valid - and what was more, we could do something positive that might even be helpful to others.

We all know from the books and from experience that the DPhil journey is a lonely one, but yesterday reminded me that I am not on my own. There are other people around with similar doubts and anxieties and we can not only support each other but we can be creative and revitalised by sharing and exploring.

Today is a new day with new ideas, new opportunities and loads to think about and do!

Posted in empowerment, reflections | Print | No Comments »