[Phenomenology] Journal #1

1. Dictionary:

(1) Bridling:
     According to Dahlberg (2006), bridling is "a process in which researcher takes an open stance, scrutinizes his or her involvement with the phenomenon, and continually reflects upon how meaning 'come to be' in the research act" (Vogle, 2009, p.586). "Bridling means an open and alert attitude of activity waiting for the phenomenon to show up and display itself within the relationship with the researcher as a hunter of meaning (emphasis added, Dahlberg, 2008, p. 130). Comparing to the word "bracketing" which frequently used in other literature of phenomenology, "bridling has a more positive tone... as it aims to direct the energy into the open and respectful attitude that allows the phenomenon to present itself" (Dahlberg, 2008, p. 130). For me, bridling is an action art toward the meaning during phenomenological investigation. The researchers need to always stay alert, and carefully control the route to the direction they want to be.

(2) Intentionality:
      "Intentionality refers to the relationship between a person and the object or events of his/her experience, or more simply, one's directed awareness of an object or event" (Dahlberg, 2008, p. 47). "[I]ntentionality marks the in-between spaces between subjects and the world and is that which links us, as humans, with the world we experience. In phenomenological research, the researcher is always, already in an intentional relationship with the phenomenon under investigation... therefore, the researcher can never decide to invoke intentionality nor escape it" (Vogle, 2009, p.586). The intentionality in not about one's "purpose"to do anything, instead, it reveals the linkages that how one aware of his/her surrounding objects or events.   


2. Bridling: 


"Why K-12 teachers don't use technology when they are teaching?"


    As a former K-12 teacher and a Ph.D students in learning technology, I always curious about this particular phenomenon.  First of all, we need to understand their motivation of not using technology while they are teaching. My assumption is, the phenomenon "don't use" could be derived from two reasons: 1) They don't want to use; and 2) They are afraid to use. The don't want to/ afraid to theme drives me to investigate more about the hidden meaning under this phenomenon.


Based on my pre-understanding, there are some barriers that prohibit teachers integrate technology in their classroom. It may include: time, belief, access, professional development, and culture. Among these barriers, I think "teachers belief" may be one of the reason for teachers' reluctant to use technology that falls in the don't want to theme. Then I ask myself "What kinds of belief that may influence teachers' attitude," after searching for the literature and my observation, I found out that this belief could be categorize into "their pedagogical belief" and "their belief in technology." If teachers hold their beliefs that  technology is not beneficial for teaching and learning, they may "don't want to" use technology during their teaching. Similarly, if teachers don't believe technology itself, or even more, "hate" the technology, they may "don't want to" use technology in their classroom. People's belief system is complicated, my pre-understanding tell me that it may related to people prior experience. Therefore, to understand how teachers' former experiences of using technology and their belief may help me know more about the meaning in this phenomenon.


With the fast growing of technology today. Some teachers don't use technology in the classroom is not because they don't believe technology itself or the potential of technology can enhance teaching and leaning, they just "afraid to use" technology in the classroom. I'm wondering about why this phenomenon is prevalent in the K-12 school even though some schools has the newest technology device (i.e., iPad, Smartboard). This "afraid to use" phenomenon can be due to the reasons that 1) they don't know how to use, and 2) they are afraid of the failure when they use. The "don't know how to use" could be related to their lacking of technological-pedagogical knowledge. The "afraid of the failure when they use" show some problems related to self-confident. These two conditions may be related to institutional supports and teacher's professional development.

[Phenomenology] Phenomenological Inquiry

This summer I will take a course about phenomenology as a theoretical and methodological framework. I'm really exited about it. Here I would like to take some note of my reading for preparing this class.


The following information are extracted from Phenomenology Online:

Phenomenological Inquiry

--> may be explored and studied in terms of the following topical domains: orientations, sources of meaning, methodology, methods, writing, and practice.


Orientations:

1. Transcendental phenomenology: 先驗現象學, Hussel, Eugen Fink, Tymieniecka, and Van Breda.
2. Existential phenomenology: 存在現象學, Heidegger, Sartre, de Beauvoir, Merleau-Ponty.
3. Hermeneutical phenomenology: 詮釋現象學, Heidegger, Gadamer, and Ricoeur.
4. Linguistical phenomenology: 語言現象學, Blanchot, Derrida and Foucault.
5. Ethical phenomenology: 道德（倫理）現象學, Scheler, Levinas
6. Phenomenology of practice: the employment of phenomenological method in applied or professional contexts such as clinical psychology, medicine, education or pedagogy, nursing, counselling, and also to the use of phenomenological method in contexts of practical concerns of everyday living.

Source of Meaning: 意義來源

Phenomenological inquiry draws on many types and sources of meaning. These sources lie not only within the disciplinary boundaries of the social sciences but also in other human domains such as the arts, the humanities, everyday life experiences, language and, of course, in phenomenological studies.


Methodology: (Philosophical methods, or general attitude)

• Reductio (the reduction): 存而不論 The bracketing (放入括弧） or suspension of our everday “natural attitude”.
• Vocatio (the vocative dimension): The intent of writing is to produce textual portrayals that resonate the kinds of meanings that we seem to recognize in prereflective experience. The vocative dimension expresses this concern with language.

Methods: (Procedure methods or activities)

• Empirical methods: explore the range and varieties of prereflective experiential material that is appropriate for the phenomenon under study
• Reflective methods: aim to interpret the aspects of meaning or meaningfulness that are asociated with this phenomenon.

Writing: 

• Writing has already begun, so to speak, when one has managed to enter the space of the text, the textorium. The space of the text is what we create in writing but it is also in some sense already there.
• Phenomenological writing is the very act of making contact with the things of our world.
• Phenomenological inquiry-writing is based on the idea that no text is ever perfect, no interpretation is ever complete, no explication of meaning is ever final, no insight is beyond challenge.

Epistemology of Practice:

1. Knowledge as text: the phenomenological text differs in the manner that meaning is embedded in the text.
2. Knowledge as understanding: Phenomenology is the active and reflective participation in meaning.
3. Knowledge as being: Phenomenology does not provide us with “information” in the usual sense of the term. Instead, the practical significance of phenomenological knowledge is formative in nature: It enhances our perceptiveness, it contributes to our sense of tact in human relations, and it provides us with pathic forms of understanding that are embodied, situational, relational and enactive.