This article addresses the notion of ‘making it’ as an early-career academic in physical education and sport pedagogy. In it, we draw on the tradition of material semiotics to reflect on our shared journeys from doctoral student to beginning scholar and beyond. By attuning ourselves to the relationality, materiality and precariousness of our experiences, we offer an answer to the question of what it takes to ‘make it’ as an early-career academic by advocating the practice of ‘making do’ or ‘doctoring.’ We develop this argument, first, by describing the narrative methods we used to conduct our inquiry and by explaining the material-semiotic ideas we used to explore the stories it generated. Then, we tell tales of our transitions from higher degree research student to early-career academic, focusing specifically on our ongoing, collective efforts to make do. In our discussion, we explore these narratives and attend to three features of our actions and activities as early-career academics; namely semiotic relationality, material heterogeneity and the precarious processes of heterogeneous engineering through which we sought to make a career in our field. We conclude by encouraging beginning scholars in physical education and sport pedagogy to become sensitive to these aspects of their own agency, and to experiment, experience and tinker together in ways that are attentive, inventive, caring and persistent. 相似文献
Of issue in this paper are the ways in which different forms of narrative may be of value in undertaking research in potentially thorny situations. The project that inspired this paper saw 30 Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy (PESP) Early Career Academics (ECAs) from more than 20 universities across Australasia, North America and Europe, provide narrative accounts of their ongoing academic experiences. From these stories, three letters seeking advice and guidance from leaders in the field were constructed. Following further feedback from the ECAs, the 3 letters were sent to 11 professors in the PESP field with a request to respond, also in letter form. The composite letters and the professorial responses were then the subject of a symposium at an international PESP conference. While the larger project engages with questions of being and becoming an academic in the neoliberal university, this paper is primarily concerned with methodological issues, including our steps and missteps with narrative, inquiry and the field. More specifically, the focus is on narrative as both the method and phenomena of study. As such, we consider issues associated with using dialogue as data, the provocation of participants, as well as both the presentation and representation of data and the relative power of the participants. In doing so, we critically engage with issues of anonymity (or lack thereof), the practice of ‘researching up’ and finally reach the conclusion that the careful approach to data generation, treatment and presentation necessitated by this project, should be a more regular feature of all qualitative inquiry. 相似文献
Purpose: This study discusses the process of co-constructing a prototype pedagogical model for working with youth from socially vulnerable backgrounds.
Participants and settings: This six-month activist research project was conducted in a soccer program in a socially vulnerable area of Brazil in 2013. The study included 17 youths, 4 coaches, a pedagogic coordinator and a social worker. An expert in student-centered pedagogy and inquiry-based activism assisted as a debriefer helping in the progressive data analysis and the planning of the work sessions.
Data collection/analysis: Multiple sources of data were collected, including 38 field journal/observation and audio records of: 18 youth work sessions, 16 coaches’ work sessions, 3 combined coaches and youth work sessions, and 37 meetings between the researcher and the expert.
Findings: The process of co-construction of this prototype pedagogical model was divided into three phases. The first phase involved the youth and coaches identifying barriers to sport opportunities in their community. In the second phase, the youth, coaches and researchers imagined alternative possibilities to the barriers identified. In the final phase, we worked collaboratively to create realistic opportunities for the youth to begin to negotiate some of the barriers they identified. In this phase, the coaches and youth designed an action plan to implement (involving a Leadership Program) aimed at addressing the youths’ needs in the sport program. Five critical elements of a prototype pedagogical model were co-created through the first two processes and four learning aspirations emerged in the last phase of the project.
Implications: We suggest an activist approach of co-creating a pedagogical model of sport for working with youth from socially vulnerable backgrounds is beneficial. That is, creating opportunities for youth to learn to name, critique and negotiate barriers to their engagement in sport in order to create empowering possibilities. 相似文献