I'm at a loss as to what to make of this conference strand. Well, not entirely. Here are a few thoughts:
Why do research methods have to be "innovatory"? Wouldn't it be good if people learned how to use the standard tool kit properly before they thought about innovation? Let's have evidence of ability to walk before we move on to running.
Why does the session on "Innovation in qualitative and quantitative methods" have no papers on quantitative methods? Didn't anyone care enough to change the title?
And the prize for the most confused title goes to:
"Actor
Network Theory: An Assemblage of Perceptions, Understandings, and
Critiques of this ‘Sensibility’ and How its Relatively Unpopular
Conceptual Framework Will Help to Unravel the ‘Power Flow’ Among School
Leaders in School Networks".
Well, at least there seems to be a worthwhile paper by the good Professor Chandola from Manchester. As for the rest...
And think on it, it's our taxes, directly or indirectly that go to pay for this stuff. Perhaps somebody on the organizing committee has a roguish sense of humour though. The last paper of the day has the title: "Talking Rubbish".
Say after me: "I'm mad as Hell and I'm not going to take this any more!"
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment