Some  lessons  we  are  learning  about  the  

dynamics    of  the  cross-­‐‑cu7ing  themes  

when universities work with communities

•  Ethics is not viewed as an a priori set of rules which come from a particular system and used to guide action

•  But rather enacted in situations based on what the person poses as relevant in the moment as she brings forth a world of significance.

Dynamics  of  ethics

•  We approach the ethical dynamics in terms of the cross-cutting themes pragmatically and progressively

•  And by doing so use a postiori justification as a stepping-stone for continued learning

•  ( c.f. Varela, 1992/1999, Ethical Know How, p. 32).

•  With this approach to ethics we take the opportunity to reflect on the (potential) implications of our actions, our work, and our relationships.

•  We could reflect on our actions at many levels: o  the model, o  the execution of any particular activity within the

model, o  the utterances of any actor within any of the

activities, o and so on.

Ethics •  The patterns of behaviours and the norms that

emerge within the micro-culture of the project.

•  The academic and personal consequences for individual teachers, leaders, policy makers, academics, young scholars.

•  The content and quality of the work that arises within the collective engagement.

Ethics •  The patterns of behaviours and the norms that

emerge within the micro-culture of the project. e.g. phased activity model

•  The academic and personal consequences for individual teachers, leaders, policy makers, academics, young scholars.

•  The content and quality of the work that arises within the collective engagement.

Phased  activity  model •  Meet people and identify common ground •  Take opportunity to learn something from people in

context •  Share what we learn with people in the context •  Co-create a plan for activity with people in the

context •  Execute plan •  Reflect on plan and executed plan with people in

the context •  Create a plan with people in the context

Ethics •  The patterns of behaviours and the norms that

emerge within the micro-culture of the project.

•  The academic and personal consequences for individual teachers, leaders, policy makers, academics, young scholars.

e.g. after teacher workshops

•  The content and quality of the work that arises within the collective engagement.

As for me, I have been failing to use some of the strategies because we had in the workshop the education officer and ward education coordinator and not inspectors.   But the reality is that when inspectors come to school, they want to go with time in such a way that they want us to have covered a certain portion of a syllabus by a certain specified time frame. Thus, since the focus is to go with time to cover the syllabus, once we use participatory strategies that we have learnt in the workshop, it means the speed to cover the syllabus is reduced. That is why we once asked that when we have the workshop, there should be an inspector to witness,  Important for us to interact with inspectors. (Symposium II)

Lessons  from  our  work  (project)  for  our  (university)  work

•  Patterns of interacting are brought into the present via our embodied histories (aboriginal ways of knowing) and offer an initial shape to the work but this is modified in the enactment of the work because of the diversity of actors, activities, and learnings.

•  Space is needed to discuss and consider implications of the aspects of the work. But we recognize that in a research project we are not able to address all of the implications that surface let alone those that do not.

Power  dynamics In all four dimensions of the partnership work, i.e. partnership development, knowledge mobilization, building relationship with the community and capacity development the dynamics of power played out differently with productive and not so productive tensions.

February 15 14

Power   •  Voice in decision making •  Perceptions of status •  Ability to influence the decision making and

agenda of the partnership

February 15 15

Changing  locus  of  power    in  partnership

•  Canadian partners o principal applicant (s) o access to funding o agenda setting

•  Local partners o Custodians of local knowledge o  Understanding of the context o Gate keepers Forging relationships with the community

February 15 16

Knowledge  mobilization    –  voice  status

Knowledge mobilization as a continuous process co-creation and dissemination of knowledge through out the course of the project- project meeting, symposia, workshops, conferences and the more traditional publication.

February 15 17

Knowledge  mobilization  –  voice  status

•  Tensions in the status of academic knowledge and the epistemology of the classroom o  A quest for academic knowledge- o  Integrating academic knowledge with local wisdom-e.g. ‘Participatory

approaches and use of manipulatives in learning’ o  Multiple languages in the partnership collective and privileging some

over the other

February 15 18

Contd: “Lack of teaching and learning materials is another challenge in using teaching aids, because lack of books, Manila paper and ball pens can cause difficulties for a teacher to prepare teaching aids. “ “Generally, all the methods are good; however, take long process to teach the students within 40 minutes.” (Kilolo workshops 2013)

February 15 19

Capacity  development Training and development

o  Who provides capacity development? Who identifies the needs? e.g. grounded and bottom up approaches through learning communities,

o  field based nature of programs

Negotiating expectations o  Related to practice e.g. supply of materials for teaching, creating a

position of ‘grateful recipients’

February 15 20

Reciprocity  •  The term reciprocity comes from the Latin word

reciprocus, “going back and forth” (retro-procus): giving and receiving (Bruni et al., 2008, p.1).

•  “A man [sic] ought to be a friend to his friend and repay gift with gift. People should meet smiles with smiles and lies with treachery” (Falk & Fischbacher, 2000, p.2).

•  Reciprocity evokes obligations to others on the basis of past behavior (Gouldner, 1960 in Diekman, 2004, p.489).

•  Not logically equivalent to the notion of equal give and take. Reciprocity can be heteromorphic (tit-for-tat) or homomorphomic (tat-for-tat). It can also be negative or positive (p. 489).

Reciprocity  

•  Reciprocity is important in partnership building, knowledge mobilization, relationship building and capacity building

Reciprocity  1.  Nature of the partnership

o  Universities, non-governmental organizations, government.

o  Senior and emerging scholars, university and government researchers, tutors and junior instructors.

Each party had a role to play which was reciprocated by other parties to play their role.

Reciprocity  2.  Procedures followed to access the

communities o  Respect to administrative structures o  Request for research permits - from the Commission for

Science and Technology (COSTECH), Regional Education Officers (REOs), District Education Officers (DEOs), Ward Education Coordinators (WEO), Head teachers,

o  Request for consent of Teachers and Community members.

Respect we provided to was reciprocated by positive response and sometimes voluntary gifts to some of us.

Reciprocity  3. Nature of the communities we worked

with o  Education officers, head teachers, teachers, community

members

Reciprocity  We have been organizing symposiums. During symposium we presented our pieces of work the presentations stirred up participants to speak out which enriched our understanding on the presented issues and knowledge about how universities can work with communities

Reciprocity  The reports will focus very specifically on the findings. We do this because we wish to provide you with information to which you can respond and contribute to our goal of imagining how universities can work with governments (Symposium notes,2012)

Reciprocity  There was great cooperation from facilitators and there were no problems; But one thing that I found to be very interesting was the way the workshop participants participated in various topics that were discussing about. For example, we were posing a lot of issues to them some of them were complex but still they showed to be interested when they found that they were positive contributions to their presentations (Transcription from 2013 symposium)

Reciprocity  Labda sasa niulize hii tafiti majibu yake yanakuwa yanarudi au ukienda huko kwa ajili ya wewe huko chuoni nawe ukapate maksi au … Let me ask you will there be any feedback to us from what you are doing (Kijogoo, 01/21/2014) Mimi ninapoulizwa hivi ninapata faida gani? What do I get from being involved in answering your questions? (Severina, 01/18/2014)

Discussion  (10  minutes) •  In small groups discuss key issues or questions that

emerged for you from the presentation of the dynamics.

•  Please add to your notes from the cross-cutting themes and be prepared to share comments and questions from all of your small group discussions.