Protected: Feedback Wilma literature review article

Published on: 30/09/2012

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Protected: Checked the last leads of the literature found

Published on: 28/08/2012

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Protected: Notes for intro dissertation

Published on: 06/05/2012

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Stedelijk burgerschap volgens Andre van Es:

Categories: Reflections
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: 24/04/2012

Stedelijk burgerschap volgens Andre van Es:

Hoffelijkheid heet Civilty van filosoof Ross

Die drie concepten worden gesteund door de rechtstaat en volgens mij nog de andere steunberen uit her krantenknipsel van …

In Amsterdam twee dingen belangrijk: urbanisatie en ondernemerschap:

1 Urbanisatie
Urban mgt
Zorg welzijn

2 Ondernemerscgap

Die twee dingen verbinden: toverwoord: innovatie. Snap ik niet helemaal.

Stuk van Frank Furedi over tolerantie. Dat is gerelateerd aan hoffelijkheid.

Andrew Ross on Scholarly Reporting:

Begon allemaal met marijke, mila, michiel en ik. Toen sandra., victor em kitty en ben. Daarna liesbet en joke, daarna susanne, gabriel, ian stiwart, …

Cb: ties between people (cohesion)
and the value of these ties (capital).
Person efficacy and communityeffeicacy.

Focus in network analysis:

Participation sec delivers ties. But networked individuLism also delivers ties.

Personal development, community development, community memory, cultural citizenship

Protected: Points Liesbet 02-04-2012

Published on: 02/04/2012

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

ECSWR March 23-24

Categories: Methods, Must, Reflections
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: 27/03/2012

Went to the European Conference on Social Work Research (see abstract book here).

Made some notes for my PhD-project (I’ll put the relation to my other work in the Master Social Work somewhere else):

  1. From the talk of Sue White:
    1. Weick says something about ‘organizational culture as a source for high reliability’ in a 1987 article in Culture Management Review. How is reliability defined, here? Is that a concept also applicable to a neighborhood community?
    2. “Fish don’t know they are in the water”. In other words: we all have defensive routines in a context to keep things non-discussable, and we don’t realize that. The stuff that is (far) below water level of the cultural ice berg.
  2. From the talk of Andreas Walter:
    1. The matrix with the micro-meso-macro was interesting to maybe use in my literature review as a means to order my concepts.
    2. Also the principle of “normalization of life course narrative” might be something to look at. I have to remember that it is from the caregiver perspective. First wait until I an answer on my mail for his presentation.
  3. From the talk from Jean-Michel Bronvin and Stephan Dahmen:
    1. The capability approach as a model to assess EBP’s, acountability and a normative tool for social work. Might be a theory to use in my research. I have an example in my sources that I can check later on.
    2. This makes me think again of the character of many theoretical concepts within the domain of social work (and thus the ECSWR-conference): often they are related to an intervention that has to solve a certain problem; not to prevent a possible problem or, in other words, grab a chance….
  4. From Matthias Otten’s talk:
    1. On the congruence of three dimensions when it comes to intercultural communication research: alignment of concept of culture, methods and views on significance.
      1. Being culture-doing culture,
      2. emic methods-etic methods and
      3. research als predictor- research als signifier.
      4. See this article.
  5. From the workshop of Ute Karl and Ulla Peters:
    1. (Institutional) conversational analysis
      1. How are things said?
      2. What is the function of what is said?
      3. Why this utterance?
      4. What is the orientation?
      5. What are the different layers of context? (geographical, interactional, institutional, intentional, etc.)
      6. What is the context of knowledge production?
    2. Documentary analysis
      1. The hermeneutic stence.
      2. Document sense with cultural worlds and frames located in social practices.
      3. Problem solving in interaction (sinngenetisch) and/or in society (soziogenetisch).
      4. Happens in conjunctive experiences.
      5. See for example this text and these books by Scott.
  6. From the workshop of Ian Shawn, which is all about ‘narrative research’:
    1. Thematic analysis:
      1. More themes in one narrative.
      2. Text can contain different meanings and idea’s.
      3. These with-case-themes can be compared across different cases.
      4. It is about what is being said.
    2. Narrative analysis:
      1. One narrative seen as a whole.
      2. That must be a message then?
      3. Can be used to compare cases as a whole.
      4. Is about how it is said
    3. With the last bit I don’t agree completely. I would say that different themes can be introduced in the narrative in order the build up the story as a whole. Maybe we can say something like: how the teller talks about the themes, connects them, tells us the narrative as a whole. So the ‘what question’ can be asked on different levels and the how frames or enriches these meanings.
    4. I have to check the literature on narrative analysis when I am ready for it. See also the literature on Ian’s slides.
  7. So there are the following analyses I have been introduced to:
    1. Discourse, narrative, thematic, conversational, documentary.
    2. Questions like the following can be asked, but I have to find out more about these different analyses.
      1. What is said?
      2. How is it said?
      3. What are the themes?
      4. What is meant?
      5. What is the message/ plot?
      6. What are the assumptions?
      7. What is the intention?
      8. What are the different kind of contexts?

Summary meeting Judith March 5th

Categories: Log, to do
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: 14/03/2012

See the input for this meeting here in this post.

  1. Talked about my invitation-text for the meeting with new media teachers. Most important change is that I ask them for help and I don’t offer help.
  2. With respect to my concepts code tree:
    1. This is going ok; keep in mind to distinguish what I think and what others think.
    2. There are two connections possible to develop from:
      1. Something which is well known/described already and can be brought further.
      2. Something which is not described and can be brought further.
    3. I remarked that it can also be both (see also this post):
      1. Neighborhood storytelling is described and researched rigorously with respect to the real life part of it, but not with respect to the on-line part (new media or social media) of it.
      2. Social media is described rigorously, but not with respect to local story websites.
      3. So these two lines fall under the definition of something well known, but they cross each other in an unknown area.
      4. Interestingly in social media most users are also participants (Facebook) and one can infer that in new media (Wikipedia) most users are consumers, according to the definitions I found on Wikipedia (see this post).
  3. The main explicit and implicit questions for my article are in my working document. Also the aims that I have with it for my PhD-project.
  4. It is a bit tricky to both add information to my working document and on my blog (and in my outline), maybe I should just use my blog and consider it to be my working document. The chronology and titles become more important then, so I will start to put comprehensive titles and dates in the title field of the posts, in order to have a good overview from the index of the printed Feedfabrik-pdfs.
  5. I should remember that there are a view ways to look at this phenomenon: that can be the paragraphs in my article/ chapter.

To do:

  1. Finalize invitation; send to Judith for check.
  2. Start organizing the meeting; invite people informally.
  3. Discuss with Elke and Judith what to do about the co-promotorship.
  4. Go on with the literature!
  5. Share refworks with Judith.

Input meeting Judith March 5th

Categories: Log, to do
Tags: No Tags
Comments: 1 Comment
Published on: 04/03/2012

Below the things I have done the last three weeks:

  1. Wrote a summary of the last meeting with Judith with ‘to do’s’. Most of them are touched upon below.
  2. Meeting new media teachers:
    1. Meeting of new media teachers: made a short text that can introduce the meeting, also made a list of invitees.
  3. Wrt first article:
    1. Had a look with Warnar at the hierarchical clustering method in SPSS for my first article. Executed some tests, but have to look further whether this is worthwile.
    2. I still have to make a plan about the changes in the approach and scope that I have to make to the first article.
  4. With respect to theoretical framework (second article / chapter):
    1. Continued my working document getting the core argumentations out of the list of articles (not to be discussed completely! Parts of it are referred to below).
    2. Enlarged the list of relevant articles by these steps.
    3. The text belonging to the remarks below can be found here in this post:
      1. Came to some idea’s of the levels of claims on which reference is made to concepts and theories, grounded in either theorizing, empirical findings or intuition.
      2. Came to a first feeling – based on the close reading summaries – of where the niche is in the existing literature.
      3. Came to a possible model to analyze the literature with systematically, which is further discussed here in this post (point 7).
    4. Made a second version of the outline for the second article. Here is the first and old description of the next article/ chapter.
  5. With respect to the notes about what social problem, question or task on-line collections of local memories might be an answer for, I made these posts for this work in progress.
  6. Haven’t started a diary yet more then the reflections that can be found in this category. But they are not private.
  7. Had a quick look at social media analytics. Registered at the IBM conference but didn’t get a confirmation. Have to look at the powerpoint I received.

More thoughts on relation2practice or problems

Tags: No Tags
Comments: 1 Comment
Published on: 04/03/2012
  1. Yesterday I scanned through a peace about ‘Maatschappelijke kosten en batenanalyse’: the publication:Werken aan maatschappelijk rendement (which is a bit more rigorously than ‘social return on investment’) and I think it would be interesting if we could build one for the Memory of East. I won’t be working on that, but I think that the present emerging focus from the literature review will certainly deliver part of the evidence for such and analysis.
  2. Another thing that pops up in my mind regularly (trough the reading/browsing of Dutch publications: e.g. Civil society – tussen oud en nieuw (2009) from Marc Hoijtink), is the question of how much and in which state I should dive into Dutch – and thus local – discourses that are related to my research (e.g. Duijvendak and others about belonging, Hurenkamp and others about ‘lichte gemeenschappen’). Right now it feels best that I pick up relevant Dutch discourses once I have an stronger idea about my theoretical framework (the ‘focus’ I mention in point 1).
  3. The stuff that I put in my last post about ‘social problems which could be tackled through local story telling initiatives’ is divided in relevant groups:
    1. Editors/ board.
    2. Group of core participants (story collectors and  story writers).
    3. Wider group of participants (commentators and readers).
    4. The community in the neighborhood as a whole.
  4. Another way the categorize problems/solutions is based on human centered science disciplines connected by emergence (o.a. Durkheim and Wallace & Wolfe, described in ‘De dialectische kam’, Nick Naber):
    1. Biology (the physiological human being).
    2. Psychology (the internal human being: the brain).
    3. Social psychology (interactions between humans: behavior).
    4. Sociology (a collective of human beings: society).
  5. The concepts that are used in my articles are on the last four levels (age being one of the concepts used on the first level). The methods Nick explains about how to structure concepts and theories in discipline-levels vertically and relate them horizontally based on mutual influence might deliver an interesting map of the bigger chains of concepts/theories.
  6. There is something interesting with the assignment of ‘social problems which could be tackled through local story telling initiatives’:
    1. Many of the idea’s I have around these initiatives have to do with preventing possible ‘problems’ (e.g. ‘the loss of collective memory’) or seizing an opportunity  instead of solving problems.
    2. I believe the earlier mentioned SROI-text also incorporates possible preventions in its model, but I am nut sure.
  7. What could be the added value of new media (see below) in the context of local storytelling initiatives?
    1. Interestingly enough most articles use the broader – and older – term new media instead of the more narrow – and newer – term social media (see below).
    2. “Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia, is an example [of new media], combining Internet accessible digital text, images and video with web-links, creative participation of contributors, interactive feedback of users and formation of a participant community of editors and donors for the benefit of non-community readers. Facebook is an example of the social media model, in which most users are also participants.”
    3. “The honeycomb framework defines how social media services focus on some or all of seven functional building blocks (identity, conversations, sharing, presence, relationships, reputation, and groups).”
    4. Looking at these descriptions – that I have to ground literature later – it seems to me that new media includes the creative and creation-tool side of the digital age (the psychology-level). Social media excludes this and is more focused on the levels of social psychology and sociology-levels.
    5. In addition to point 7-1 above: the articles claim stuff related to different kind of concepts and theories based on empirical evidence mostly from the part in the process which is observable  in real life situations (the reminiscence of …, the making of…, the operating of …, collective watching of …, ) through participative observations or focus groups. If we consider literature about local storytelling initiatives without new media as traditional, then the literature does contributes mostly positive evidence embedded in these real life situations where new media plays a role. Claims about the social side of the new media (online aspects of conversations, sharing, relationships, reputations, etc.) are made but hardly grounded in empirical evidence, simply because most online collections of local stories are not interactive and the content of the stories is too much steered by professionals (Burgess, 2006).

Some notes wrt review

Categories: Reflections
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: 21/02/2012

Some notes

See the questions of Flyvbjerg wrt phronesis

Check Alexander Maas en marian Florie EUR

Elaborated and restricted code – Burnsteen (via Martin)

Geen liefde kunnen geven verhardt. Liefde geven maakt ‘een vlek’.

Misschien Didactiek van de liefde even bekijken.

«page 1 of 7


Welcome , today is Saturday, 23/06/2018