Foxes appear in the folklore (both past and present) of nearly
every culture that has come into contact with them. The roles of these mythical foxes are often
both nebulous and multidimensional.
Among the many roles the fox has been cast are the loyal protector, the
intelligent strategist, the elusive seductress, the judge and jury, the
murderous monster, the shape-shifter, and the mischievous thief. It is not unusual to find the fox as both the
object of great fear and admiration. The
origin of the nine tail fox is of some controversy. The nine-tailed fox appears in mythologies
originating from many Asian countries including China, Korea, India, and Japan.
Perhaps the best known are the Japanese fox spirits or Kitsune. Living in some cases for hundreds of years,
they grow up to nine tails as they age and become wiser and more powerful. These mythical foxes are depicted as benevolent,
mischievous, or even malicious.
Similarly, research is perhaps one of the most nebulous concepts of
our time. Research is often honored as
respectable and creditable, but is also met with skepticism and distain. Viewed by some as a product of elitism,
research can be viewed as out of touch and inflicted upon people. However, research is often considered the
primary product of intellectual pursuit and is cherished by many as the source
of modern knowledge and innovation. On
one hand, research can provide us a statistical description that is both
accurate and that fails to represent any individual member of the population in
question. On the other, research can
examine a small population so intensely that it is difficult to know the potential
relevance of this knowledge beyond the immediate population that was studied.
The range of quality in research, the research intent and biases, and
the biases of those who distribute and utilize the results of research, create
a setting where research is not value neutral.
The ethical dilemmas that surround research are complex, and are often
based on very subjective interpretation of the associated risks and benefits. This, in combination with past ethical transgressions,
has led some people to recognize that there is a dark side to research that evokes
fear and mistrust. I would argue that a
large portion of this mistrust results from how research is distributed outside
of the research institutions that create them. Often, practitioners and the
public at large do not have access to the publications that result from research.
Even when they do, the language, depth,
and methodologies utilized render the research inaccessible by the average
reader. This is not to insinuate that
the average reader is not intelligent enough to understand research, only that
they rarely have the resources (time, motivation, and specialized knowledge) to
do so. Instead they rely on other mediators,
who unfortunately often carry a heavily bias, to select and interrupt research
for them. The quality of this process
varies greatly and in some cases it can be more reflective of the motivation of
the mediator then the research. Just as
importantly, there are huge bodies of quality research that are never
distributed outside of the research institutions that conduct them.
Researchers struggle with limited access to practitioners and a
sometimes outdated or an abstract understanding of the relevant problems. They too are influenced by available resources
(access to sites, funding for their studies, and time). While some researchers may be arrogant or reckless,
I believe most are daunted by the potential impact of their research. This apprehension leads them to be cautious
about sharing their work outside of the research and academic institutions
where they are comfortable. There does
appear a very real desire among researchers for their research to make an
impact outside of the research institutions they are serving. However, like their counterparts (the
practitioners) researchers too often lack the resources needed to distribute
their findings (time, funding, knowledge and accesses to mechanisms, etc.). Additionally, rarely are reward mechanisms
supportive of the efforts of either practitioners or researchers to bridge this
divide.
My intent with this blog is not to change the nature of the fox. Instead, I am hoping that those of us audacious
enough to face the nebulous nature of research can build a network that will provide
us the tools and collaborations necessary to be effective stewards of our
work. The purpose of this blog is to
build a space where researchers, practitioners, and those impacted by online
learning in community colleges can learn about research that is relevant to
their work, share ideas for future research, and where we can network and learn
from each other.
No comments:
Post a Comment