Dear Living Theorists,
I am attaching my article Where I Stand in all humility and with delight in the privilege of sharing this with you.Â I'm looking forward to your views,
Dear Jane, a warm hello from a cool Japan.Â I have the great privilege to be your second reviewer and as I have to spend the next four days in hospital, I will have plenty of time to focus on your work. I have to say that I am so looking forward to reading it with the attention it deserves.
Speak again soon, love and respect, Jekan
Hiya! Greetings to you. I hope youâ€™re well. Itâ€™s ludicrously cold here on the east coast, but I am dressed up to the hilt in thick cardigans and woollen trousers, so I will probably survive!
I am going to take points as they arise in the reading through of your submission. First I will make evaluative comments and then I will just go through a few technical details with you before giving my recommendations. I hope that is an appropriate response for you. If you need more from me about my comments, please just respond here at the site.
It is unique in my life to read the abstract of a paper and feel like shouting with pleasure! Yes, this is it! An abstract with questions too. That's not usual, but it is compelling. I was trying to ask myself why this combination should please me so much and then I realised it's because it's a living abstract, so much in the vein of what we are doing at EJOLTS. So I started with a real sense of optimism, pleasure, intrigue and delight.
I like the way you've started too, with a discussion - and it feels like that - of why creativity is important. This seems to be very much a talking-point at the moment in the UK, as of course I believe it should be anywhere. The quotation from Abbs is particularly telling. I do remember myself having reluctant pupils and after getting over the egotism of feeling negative about such pupils, I realised that I had to help the student see why enthusiasm about something was inevitable! I think this beginning helps me to understand your context as a living document.
After a lucid beginning you write this:
This paper will aim to make its own contribution to the debate, by exploring what being creative has meant for me in practice, which very clearly shows the differentiation you are making between theorised practice and praxis. I love it!
I wonder if you need to provide some kind of overview of the first video in case there are readers who don't have access to it and/or fare not on broadband etc.. In my own paper ( http://ejolts.net/drupal/node/76 ) I did this in footnotes. Also see the advice about the use of footnotes at: http://ejolts.net/drupal/files/Submission_Guidelines2.pdf which will give you an idea of how suitable additions might be in footnotes, or whether you need something more substantial.
When you write this on p.4: As an educator in further and higher education settings, my efforts to bring these opportunities into classrooms for my learners were marginalised or subversive to the expectations of my role I wonder whether it might be an idea to give us some evidence for this, or at least references that might enable us to validate this for ourselves if we wanted to. Making a claim without providing an evidential basis might weaken your argument.
You have such an appealing writing-style. As I read through the paper I come across such a lucidity of style. It's no wonder you're a writer as well as educator. The two really do need to go together sometimes, I feel, and here I can visualise, feel the narrative working its magic. I am so enjoying this experience, Jane.
You write (p. 4 again)
I am aware of being driven by core values which have been honed, tested and made explicit through engagement with its challenges I feel the need for more corroboration, as these standards of judgement, which essentially I think the following ideas comprise, are the ways in which you can test the validity of your work in education, and so on. I certainly don't disbelieve you, because the quality of your writing has a moral energy that resonates inside me as a reader and I have to believe you. I'm not talking about rhetoric and I want you and others who read this, to be clear. I think your writing does for me what Barack Obama's does (Obama, 2008). I read his The Audacity of Hope about a year ago and because of its power, its dynamic sense of the purposes of human existence, I knew I was in the presence of someone who believes what he writes and seeks to demonstrate these values in his own life. Rhetoric, to me, is something that spins me along for a little while perhaps, but it's not deep because there's no real substance there: it's just show. Your writing, I sense, as with Obama's, is the life-force you are describing as wishing to see in your life more fully. However, this synthesis requires, in an article for EJOLTS, also an analytical dimension which reviews itself. Your words are like Ben Okri's in The Famished Road. And I am NOT trying to limit that aspect. Oh, please don't think that: I've spent years trying to encourage it, in fact. But I sense that the paper would be strengthened by an appeal to rigour here. In other words, I want to know more about your professional life.
In relaying your requirements for educational validity, when you write: and to be inclusional again, I feel that this is not be problematised. 'Inclusional' is a concept that the Bath action research group and others that work with it, will be familiar with. However, as it's the first time in your paper I think you need to give a brief description of what this means in context.
I do like very much the way you ask questions, Jane. For example: Does creativity do something, or is it merely decorative and luxurious? I find myself asking myself where I stand in relation to what you're writing and then, as if I am listening to Bach, you make something cohere inside: To share this with the world is an artistic imperativeâ€¦ Absolutely! And it resonates like Bach for me in the sense that reading your words begins a series of associations in my mind and feelings and spiritual awareness. And then as you continue with your meanings, I find myself being aware of my brain becoming 'taut', crystalised, suddenly filled with light. As I say, Obama's writing and speaking always do this. Likewise Okri and reading Dr. Martin Luther King's speeches. I'm not overwhelming you with flattery AT ALL. I am attempting to reveal the effect of your writing on me as a reader. And I feel cleansed by the way you write. I can't think of more language to describe it. One more! What I have as inert insight is brought to the light of day and examined by what you write. In a sense I understand anew Collingwood's saying about we can take nothing from what we read but what we bring to it (Collingwood, 2002). I am actively engaged in the reading process. I understand something of the complex processes that lead to this, but to experience it at this level is a great privilege and pleasure. In relaying your demands of yourself up to page nine, I am moved and almost entirely compelled by your arguments.
p.10. Your diary notes are harrowing and give a stark insight into inspiration, which comes from such diverse sources, but perhaps most of all from paradox, conflict, dialectics.
As I read on, I find myself unable to respond analytically at all, and that's great! These passages are, to my mind, what Jack calls, 'beyond criticism'. How can one judge this kind of experience - I mean as an outsider? How much can I as a reader, as an editor of EJOLTS, grapple ethically with this writing? You've got me asking questions now.
Your diary entry on page 14 had me almost in tears and it's not just because what you write is moving, it's the way you write it. Like Okri you take metaphor and build it on metaphor until we are in this surreal realm that is, for those moments, more real than our own known universes. And writing like that turns me inside out and I feel myself rooted to the spot by your precision and scope. This isn't like any other academic paper I have ever read, and it is all the more moving and meaningful for me that it is. By this I mean that I believe you are stretching what it means for an academic journal to push the boundaries of our expectations and parameters. This is a groundbreaking article in my opinion. It's got to see the light of day.
On page 17 you write:
Â· What are the strategies and processes which have worked (or failed to work) for me as a writer, and are these generalisable or teachable? Another fascinating question. I wonder about this too. I wonder whether we can only set up a conducive environment for learning, rather than 'teach' much at all, but I will read on to see what you make of this.
And by the way I love the idea of a monogamous attachment to a violin: p. 19. I feel rather like that with the piano.
This process of showing us how these language-elicitations work is fascinating. And I just love the studentsâ€™ responses. They are so rich and dynamic in their use of language. I was just about to suggest that some of this process might be left in an appendix and then realised that of course, it all needs to be part of the main text. And itâ€™s followed so helpfully with the examples. This part of the text is also very powerful and rigorous. I like the integration of examples, studentsâ€™ voices, pictures and so on. It helps me to gain a real insight into the creative process itself. Wonderful!
On p. 23 you write: In effect, as I have created this space for myself, I have been able to expand it so more and more are able to share it with me and this completely concurs with my own experience. I donâ€™t mean that my experience is a necessary validation of your own, but I think you are saying something that many people could share (not generalisable in that traditional sense but in Basseyâ€™s (1998) terms, â€relatableâ€™ â€“ and I think an allusion to this idea in the beginning about generalisability in a relatable sense might strengthen this concept, as it is one of the overarching ideas you are putting forward, to my mind).
p.25. You write: Knowledge transformation reveals itself when the â€knowledgeâ€™ or skill communicated between educator and learner, is actually transformed by the learner and becomes something new. I do like this. It seems absolutely an apposite conclusion to what you have written.
On page 25/26 I am intrigued by what you mean by a collective quantum of understanding. I know that the word quantum is added as an adjective to many different spheres these days â€“ even in advertising washing up capsules! However, I would like to know what you mean by it precisely. Artistically, empathically, I believe through reading your paper that I sense what you mean. However, I am not sure that the meaning will be held in common and in a sense thatâ€™s what I would imagine you are aiming to do â€“ if I have understood you properly â€“ and PLEASE feel free to write and discuss this or any other point with me. I may be the first reviewer, so-called, of your paper, but I am also biased and restricted in my understanding of anyone elseâ€™s world and happily acknowledge it in the hope that you will expand my understanding.
I do feel itâ€™s important to use a â€terminologyâ€™ that others easily share. That doesnâ€™t mean people should not work at reading and understand your paper and the work and actions and practices of others, but those meanings should not to my mind obscure what you are saying. I recognise the deep and poetic resonance in your words, butâ€¦
Thereâ€™s a whole world in your comment: This is no therapeutic, comfortable space. I remember so many times in my doctoral years with Jack, when I felt the process he was facilitating as therapeutic â€“ and not very comfortable at times â€“ thanks Jack! â€“ but he would say, I believe Iâ€™m right in saying this, that his aim was not therapeutic at all, but educational and that meant I could find therapy in it if I so chose or felt or recognised, but I could not impute those motives to Jack. I was taking from the process what I needed at the time. It was Jackâ€™s ability to hold open a space â€“ a particular genius that all great educators, to my mind, have. And it is what you are talking about here, I believe. This space is educational, it is creative. The processes of education and creativity can indeed be therapeutic â€“ to which diverse groups of individuals could attest (Sacks, 2007). However, the motives, if Iâ€™ve understood you correctly, are educational and creative and that these processes intertwined become something almost numinous. Iâ€™m extrapolating my own insights from your writing, which help me to understand where I stand. To have such clear motives, to understand such motives fully are the stuff and responsibility of educators, to my mind, and your paper leads me through your beautiful creative spirit and shows me something of how it influences others in the world. There is an authenticity (Kincheloe, 1991) to this living theory that I find beautiful because of its aesthetic purity. In my own thesis (Laidlaw, 1996) I tried to get close to my own sense of what it meant to elucidate the aesthetic aspects of my own educational development. As I read your paper I see someone very comfortable with her own creativity and ways of facilitating it in others. It isnâ€™t simply a living theory, this is a celebration and I feel like joining in!
For me there is something a little abrupt about the ending to your paper. It seems to stop. And I cannot access the url. It seems incomplete. The process of your doctoral study needs more contextualisation, I believe, certainly if this is a point at which you have chosen to â€interruptâ€™ your living theory for the time being. Would it be possible for you to give the reader a little more access to this conclusion? It has, I can already see, a poetic truth, but perhaps it also needs a more concrete one in places!
Technical Details. After such a beautiful paper it could be seen as crass to interrupt the flow with some nitty-gritty points. I understand that compared with the artistic and creative and educational significance of your paper, the following details may seem nit-picking. However, I believe that there are points at which the technical issues intrude into the flow of the reading and therefore, I think they need attention. Iâ€™ll go through them as I find them in the paper, but I would be grateful if you could give the document alluded to earlier a read through at: http://ejolts.net/drupal/files/Submission_Guidelines2.pdf as this will help us to standardise our published papers. Standardisation, as Jean McNiff and Branko Bognar have helped me to see, raises the communicability and the professionality of our journal and thatâ€™s really worth doing. In addition to the earlier point, please have a look at our first issue papers. These have been standardised in terms of the technical aspects as fully as (humanly!) possible.
Could you take a look at the following points for your resubmission?
Page 3, you write (in black): Indeed, creativity (here, introduce the quotation with a comma and donâ€™t indent it because itâ€™s only 36 words!)
is essential, not only for science, but for the whole of life.
If you get stuck in a mechanical repetitious order, then you will
degenerate. That is one of the problems that has grounded every
civilisation. (Bohm, 1998, p.16) (The full-stop will come after the bracket and the single quotation mark come before the bracket.)
In fact this spacing between the work and so on, seems fairly consistently incorrect throughout. Could you go through and ensure that the bibliographical punctuation is consistent with the first issueâ€™s paper and the guidelines? Thanks. As I look through the bibliography there are many places without any punctuation at all. Look at: paper_template.dot for clarification. It has a really helpful set of examples.
If in the revising of your paper you would like to me to do an interim checking through of the technical details again I am happy to do this.
O.K., enough! If I go on much longer it will detract from the real force and passion and beauty in your paper. ALL these comments are intended to be constructive and not destructive in any way. I would welcome feedback from you not only on the content of this review but also on the inner messages that you are receiving from this that might not have been my conscious intention. I wish to improve the quality of my reviewing abilities such as they are. In other words, do you feel this to be a supportive and constructive review? How might I have fulfilled my reviewing capacities more fully? I donâ€™t ask this either to exploit the situation for my own educational development (although thatâ€™s certainly an aim), but I believe this might lead us both to a better understanding of your paper and its capacities.
Final Comments: I feel passionately about this paper, Jane. It speaks to me with a sense of numinosity, of truth which I do not know how to analyse or explain. I simply know that your paper is important. It appeals most significantly to my sense of aesthetics, which I also see as having ways of enhancing our responsibilities towards the world in which we live and towards ourselves as sentient beings. I wonder whether the idea at the beginning of the paper about the nature of inclusion in what you are doing, could also, perhaps, if this seems appropriate to you, be linked to Raynerâ€™s idea of inclusionality (see below for reference). There seems to me to be something about the way in which you write, and see and feel and touch and think and evaluate and experience and synthesise and delight in your world that strikes me as redolent of the insights Rayner is exploring with the Bath group and also his own writing at http://people.bath.ac.uk/bssadmr/inclusionality/ I assure you that I do not wish to foist on you such insights and dimensions that may not be fitting. I have far too much respect for your writing. However, I think it might be worth you having a look to see whether the organic and fluid nature of his insights about community, groups, individuals, might resonate with you. If they donâ€™t, fine. Itâ€™s absolutely not a condition in my review for publication. I think it might enhance, thatâ€™s all.
My thanks for such an inspiring submission and one that enhances my own understanding of education and creativity and the links between them. And I simply LOVE the way you write!
Definitely publish with some revisions and a technical tidy-up.
Bassey, M. (1998). Enhancing teaching through research. Professional Development Today, 1(2), 39-46. (A shortened version was published in Research Intelligence, July 1997.)
Collingwood, R.G. (2002). An Essay on Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Farren, M. (2008). Creating an educational space. EJOLTS, 1(1), 50-68.
Kincheloe, J. (1991). Teachers as Researchers: Qualitative Inquiry as a Path to Empowerment. New York: Falmer Press.
Laidlaw, M. (1996). How can I create my own living educational theory as I account to you for my own educational development?â€™ (Doctoral dissertation, Bath, 1996.) Last retrieved November 28, 2008, from http://www.actionresearch.net/moira2.shtml
Laidlaw, M. (2008). In Pursuit of Counterpoint: an Educational Journey. EJOLTS, 1(1), 69-102.
Obama, B. (2008). The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream. New York: Canongate Books.
Okri, B. (1993). The Famished Road. New York: Anchor Books.
Rayner, A. (n.d.). Essays and Talks on Inclusionality. [Web Page]. Retrieved December 2, 2008 from http://people.bath.ac.uk/bssadmr/inclusionality/
Sacks, O. (2007). Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain. London: Vintage Books.
[MJ5] need another dot there
I hope that all is well with you! Here in Nairobi today we are on public holiday! I have managed to put together my ideas after reading and ejoying your article. I paste them here. I hope they may be helpful and I look forward to reading your response!
The paper is very interesting and enjoyable to read. Well worth publishing in EJOLTS. I would suggest that it be worked on further to avoid the impression of being bits of a PhD thesis put together for publication in an academic journal.
I will bring up some suggestions that could perhaps be useful. I recognise, however, that I am not so familiar with the methodology used and that my perspective on the paper is influenced by my own training and background. Hence, I may at times have â€śmissedâ€ť points or ideas that would be evident to other readers of EJOLTS.
The questions are clear and most are answered in the paper, although I am not sure that the question â€śwhy creativity has been a driving force...throughout these roles and since childhoodâ€ť has been answered!
I find that the section that comes after the key words repeats, partially, the ideas in the section that comes before the key words. I would suggest that these two sections could be combined into one, omitting the repetitions (window into practice and the ending of the paper) i.e. the explanation regarding the development of your living theory could come directly into the initial paragraph. The key words would then come at the end of the abstract, which is the common practice I think.
- use of the word â€śdilemmaâ€ť (di = two alternatives): you use it referring to the variety of ideas about creativity, yet there are more than two!!!
- Why do you refer to yourself at times as â€śteacher-educator and writerâ€ť and at other times as educator, a poet and novelist, and a team leaderâ€ť? The fact that you are a team leader could be included from the first line as it is different to the other two roles you mention and is therefore significant and should not be added as an extra afterwards (in my opinion!!).
- A lot of use of â€śitâ€ť to refer to creativity in the first paragraph which makes it hard to follow the meaning (I had to keep going back to see what â€śitâ€ť was!! Perhaps this is just my own personal problem!!).
- The meaning of the term â€śteacher educatorâ€ť was not clear to me; perhaps you could find a more forceful and significant term to express this role!
- â€śamongst current debates about creativityâ€ť: I think that usually one speaks of â€ścurrent debateâ€ť in a particular field in more general terms... e.g. â€śWhere do I stand in the current debate on /about creativityâ€ť?
- Before your five points you speak of them as â€śquestionsâ€ť, yet afterwards you speak of them as â€śaimsâ€ť. I think that â€śquestionsâ€ť and â€śaimsâ€ť are two different things, unless you write out something that explicitly converts the â€śquestionsâ€ť into the â€śaimsâ€ť of your study. Or you could bring the two ideas together like this: â€śI aim to answer these questions by offering...â€ť.
- Metaphor for // metaphor of (?)
I think this section is clear and gives the necessary context for your study.
- Use of the colon (??) e.g. p. 2: â€śquestion of: why is â€creativityâ€™ important:â€ť
- Abbs quote: â€śno transformation, no education!â€ť I feel that it is very important to understand this! Education is about transforming people or helping them to transform themselves because, no matter how hard you try, if they donâ€™t want to change, they wonâ€™t!!!
- Creative Partnerships quote on â€ścapacity to imagine the world differentlyâ€ť: reminds me of J.R. Tolkienâ€™s â€śtheoryâ€ť of fantasy which is found in his work â€śOn Faeryâ€ť. You may like to read it if you have not already done so. I found it very interesting when I was working on this during my undergraduate degree.
- Repetitions of: â€śI have been concerned...â€ť could be avoided.
- â€ś...concerned for the student experienceâ€ť // â€ś...concerned about the student...â€ť (??).
- â€ś...but am concerned that its practice...â€ť: in English I think we always use the personal pronoun â€śIâ€ť before the verb â€śto beâ€ť, but perhaps I am mistaken (??).
- Regarding the last paragraph of this section: I feel that it could be re-written as there are a number of things which are not clear:
o Use of the word â€śreplicatedâ€ť (repeat): I think that this word does not transmit what you want to say. In creative writing you had experiences that you did not find (?) in your â€śeducational opportunitiesâ€ť (this term also sounds a bit strange to me...sorry!)
o Efforts to bring â€śthese opportunities into classroomsâ€ť: which opportunities? The educational ones or the â€śexperiences of excitement...â€ť?
o â€śI strongly believed that one could and did inform the otherâ€ť. Explain what you mean a bit more to bring out the richness of the idea!!!!
o Give one or two specific examples of how your efforts were marginalised, considered subversive to your role..... Prove it to me!!!
At the start of this section you bring in the idea of â€ścreative spaceâ€ť as a concept that should be familiar to the reader but you hadnâ€™t introduced it at all when speaking in the previous section about what you were doing in the classroom so we donâ€™t know what you mean by the term!
â€śThese challenges...â€ť: which challenges are you referring to here???
â€ś...through engagement with its challengesâ€ť: which challenges?? Those of educator? Those you had when trying to create space???
Regarding your values and beliefs, I would say in general terms that you donâ€™t quite explain where they come from or how you developed them (as promised in the abstract). Also, I find it confusing that you explain the first value (wellbeing) without any numbered points, and then you start numbering the ideas/points in a continuous manner when dealing with all the following values. I didnâ€™t know if I was dealing with different values, sub-values, related values, etc. The meaning of the subtitles for the values, along with the numbering is not clear!
Value of â€śconnectionâ€ť: I didnâ€™t understand what this value is about. Connection of what? Connections in general???
5) I know that in English we say â€śtalking to the otherâ€ť (Magonet, 2003), but I find the â€śtoâ€ť somewhat like talking â€śatâ€ť someone. I prefer to say talking â€świthâ€ť... perhaps it is not correct in grammatical terms but I find it more â€śinclusiveâ€ť shall we say??!!
I find that the emphasis is somewhat on empathy understood in an â€śexternalâ€ť manner. I understand empathy as identifying myself with another person in their own situation (getting into their shoes), in order to understand them where they are at and to learn from them there. Perhaps I misunderstand the text and the slight difference is merely a question of the terminology used to express the concepts...
I think that the style and the use of vocabulary could be revised to make the text richer and more precise e.g. â€śI am continually learning from others as to whether it is being achievedâ€ť (sounds a bit poor!); â€ś...we fulfil this,...â€ť / â€śachieve thisâ€ť (??)
Authenticity: review the construction of the sentences and some of the terms e.g. I wonder about the use of â€śrepair and resolutionâ€ť in the context in which it is used...
Repetition of â€śthemselvesâ€ť.
â€śtwo disintegrated kinds of writingâ€ť: which two kinds? Would they be â€śdifferentiatedâ€ť or â€śdisintegratedâ€ť? Perhaps explain what you mean by such a strong statement!
Etymology of â€ścreative/creativityâ€ť: I would say that â€śto make is the capacity of â€śliving beingsâ€ť rather than â€śthe life principleâ€ť... because it makes the sentence easier to understand and it sounds more powerful in your context (I think!). In general the meaning of the explanation of â€śto makeâ€ť is not very clear, due to the sentence construction.
Cf. Points above on â€ścore debatesâ€ť and â€śdilemmasâ€ť.
The summary of positions regarding â€ścreativityâ€ť is interesting and well done! The explanation of the last point reminded me of a book by Pearl Buck which I read recently called â€śThis Proud Heartâ€ť about a lady who is a sculptor. Very beautiful!
The whole section on creative writing is very interesting and well written. I would suggest that you try to publish the diary notes as they are because I find them very powerful and expressive!
â€śBelorus â€“ or what was once Lithuaniaâ€ť: perhaps you could be more precise = â€śwhat was once part of Lithuaniaâ€ť
â€śDo you know if there is any record of or memorial to them?â€ť
â€śThe experience felt powerfully that I had...â€ť: perhaps this is a case of poetic license but it sounded a bit strange to my ears!
p. 13: First line = â€śHere I had everything I needed: as Conrad said....â€ť another case of use of the colon which I am not sure about...
p. 13: the name of â€śLauraâ€ť is brought in suddenly and I had to look back and forth to work out who she may be... (perhaps I am a bit slow! Sorry!)
Section on teaching as a writer:
I felt that you need to give more information about your professional context and what you were trying to do in class before you started training teachers, so that we can understand more clearly what you explain in the first section of this paragraph.
These are some of the questions I asked myself:
- Teacher training programmes: in what field?
- â€śnot enough to evolve ideas...â€ť: ideas about what?
- What is the context of this invitation to speak?
- What are you teaching them about?
- â€śI replicated the process..â€ť: which process?
- â€śFrom these eventsâ€ť: which events???
I fully agree with the points about the usefulness and value of text creation for learning a language but I am not clear about which aspect of English teaching you are referring to in this section: English as a foreign language; text appreciation; why is it appropriate to use text creation to teach English as a foreign language?
â€ś.. a number of guisesâ€ť: would it be better to say â€śin a number of contextsâ€ť?
I found the description of the process that you use to help your students create text and learn the language very interesting, but I am not sure if this is what you are actually trying to do in class. All of a sudden, on p. 22, you speak of â€śstudents responding to creative spaceâ€ť; then you give references to generating poems, student writing, story building, etc. And you speak of how you find that being congruent with your own practice and beliefs has made it possible to communicate with more and more people. But I am now confused about what you are teaching and what you are trying to do in the classroom! What are you communicating about with all these people? Again, here I want to say that perhaps the difficulty in following the logic is within myself, but I feel that you may need to be more explicit here about your aims or objectives in your teaching and training sessions.
Finally, the descriptions about your creative writing experience and your teaching experiences are beautiful but I donâ€™t quite see how they come together. How did your understanding of your experience as a novelist influence the development of your creative method for teaching English language? Or perhaps I have missed the point about what you were trying to do in class? I would love if you could clarify this for me!!!
This last section is very important as here you are bringing out your contribution to knowledge! I think that your ideas would come across more forcefully if you distinguished clearly, perhaps with two subsections, between your personal understanding of the concept of creativity based on your experience and your theory of learning as a creative process.
A few comments on the aspects of creativity:
Research/information as the stimulus...: for me, â€informationâ€™ implies simple facts or data, whereas a term like â€knowledgeâ€™ would express the understandings that you have acquired through research. I think that what stimulates creativity, at least partially, are ideas (concepts that have been understood), rather than simple facts or data...
- â€śtransformational nature of informationâ€ť: does this mean that information transforms the creative process or that information is transformed when used as material for creation?
- How does the issue of research/information come into the classroom processes you use?
The creative process as the embracing of paradox: is paradox â€śthe possibility of holding several truths simultaneouslyâ€ť??? I think it implies â€ścontradictionâ€ť/â€ťabsurdityâ€ť or â€ś apparently contradictoryâ€ť ideas.
Creative process as capable of // a possibility for personal development (?). How would this aspect link up with the classroom?
A few points on the theory of learning:
Knowledge transformation: I understand what you are saying. However, I am not clear about what knowledge or skill (communicated between educator and learner) you are referring to?
- Is it the knowledge of how to create a text (using the process you describe earlier: praise song/metaphors, etc)? In this case, it is not clear how you developed this through reflection on your own creative writing. All you are transmitting here is how to write, which does transform the student as he learns the process and uses it.
- Is it the knowledge / skill about how to convert â€lived storyâ€™ into â€created storyâ€™? In this case, your concept of creativity is even deeper because it implies taking something pre-existing (knowledge, life experience, etc) and converting or transforming it into something new, original and therefore, UNIQUE!!! In this case the student can learn much more than a simple process and he/she can be transformed more deeply in discovering that his/her creative capacity makes him/her human and so, they come to discover who they are as persons, human beings, in much greater depth!!! Sorry if I am going overboard! This is my philosophical anthropology vein coming out!!!
- I would be interested in understanding better what knowledge or skill you are referring to here!
- Regarding â€creativityâ€™ as â€creoâ€™ â€“ â€to makeâ€™: I think you could say that, by creating something you are not just â€makingâ€™ something (like a cake, although cakes are very important!), even if it is new. Precisely because you are making something new and unique I think you could say you are â€śbringing (something) into existenceâ€ť! This sounds much more powerful and somehow expresses in a more radical manner what creativity involves (this is just my opinion of course!).
- Could you give some examples of transformation in your students (evidence)?
It seems to me that you dedicate little â€śspaceâ€ť to explaining the issue of creative space and yet it is an important part of your work. Perhaps you could develop this idea further.
I also think you would need to draft a clear conclusion for the paper and then add the explanation of the story as part of the epilogue itself.
The story is lovely, simple and yet deeply meaningful, by the way!!!
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to read your paper!
Dear Jane, I attach my review in word 2003 format which you should beable to see the comments as a reviwed paper in word.
I liked what I readÂ but was confused in places.Â the format has to conform to the journal guide lines and some work is needed to change the paper into a paper as it reads like a section of a thesis. I recommend that that it is published after addressing these issues.
Thank you for giving me the pleasure of reading your work.
Love and respect, Je Kan
Dear Jane, I read your paper when I was in hospital.Â I have to say that I enjoyed the narrative sections. There are some points that I feel we should look at together in order for me to check your meaning. How would you like me to proceed? I usually edit-review a paper in word and use the reviewing elements of word 2007 to add comments. Would that work for you?Â I had some issues with formatting but they have been removed now as text no longer needs to conform to APA 5. Only the references have to do that. Â I would suggest that you take a look at the text lay out suggested by the journal and adjust the text style accordingly.
As I read the paper I was drawn into the account but felt a sense of conflict with the narrative and the academic style. My main concern is that you are writing for an international journal and need to write for your audience. In place the paper reads like an assignment or thesis extract. This detracts from the flow of your narrative which is like an unfolding poem wearing its magic in the webs of time and space. I found the concept so exciting and my mind moved off to the teachings of the Bushmen of South Africa, where they believe that every ancestor is in the DNA and can be contacted and the experiences and lives of those whom live before can be brought into the present.
On a point of style, may I respectfully suggest that you do not need 4-5 references for a short piece of text? References in articles writing should only be used to give support to a point or issue. Reviewers are looking for page numbers and relevance of references to the flow of the text and argument. As a student such practices are often carried out to get as many references in the text as possible, commonly known as sand bagging..smile. Your scholarship and penmanship need no such devices.
Do let me know how you want to proceed
Love and respect,
I have to thank each of you for the detailed attention and care. This was one of the most rigorous readings I have ever had, and sometimes overwhelming being read from three different perspectives. The experience has also been a humbling journey: at some points I resisted what you were saying, then returned to the same point and understood you were right â€“ I was indeed unclear, or confusing, or over-referencing, or being woolly. Yet I was strongly driven and able to take courage by the fact that I believed my deeper message was understood by each of you.
I hope to have taken account of each of your points, and there are none which I have not tried to respond to in my revision. I have changed more and more as I have moved deeper into the reasons for your comments and empathised with them - after all, this is the very value I claim to live by.
One or two small problems arose which I think will be easy to resolve. One is that I somehow deleted my photograph in error when I was working in and around it. I am hoping we can salvage this and paste it in from my submitted original. Another is that just a few of the paragraphs resisted indentation and a few obstinate lines appeared in the biblio. I was also not totally sure about some of the spacing suggestions, but am hoping enough of the changes have been implemented to make this an easier final editing task.
Attached to this account of my responses is the (or a) revised version of the article. I realise this might be only one of its versions along a long journey!
With thanks to each of you,
1) I wonder if you need to provide some kind of overview of the first video in case there are readers who donâ€™t have access to it
I agree with this point and of course need to clarify why I am embedding these media extracts. You suggest I might include something in the footnotes, but now incorporating Je Kanâ€™s views, I have included my account in the body of the essay. I think some of the messages are important to convey so I have extracted and explained these on p. 4
2) When you write this on p.4: As an educator in further and higher education settings, my efforts to bring these opportunities into classrooms for my learners were marginalised or subversive to the expectations of my role I wonder whether it might be an idea to give us some evidence for this, or at least references that might enable us to validate this for ourselves if we wanted to. Making a claim without providing an evidential basis might weaken your argument.
Yes, I entirely agree. The truth is, I have so much to say about being marginalized that I preferred first time round to say nothing about it at all! But I have encapsulated some of the key examples on page 5, and saved a few more examples until later in the paper.
3) I am aware of being driven by core values which have been honed, tested and made explicit through engagement with its challenges I feel the need for more corroboration, as these standards of judgement, which essentially I think the following ideas comprise, are the ways in which you can test the validity of your work in education
Yes, again I agree. To address this I have again gone along with my tendency to be a storyteller, and told the story of critical incidents which did indeed hone, test and make explicit my values (p. 6 and 7). I have tried to show that these are just two of very many, but they offer examples of the complexities of negotiating other and many cultures and learning about oneself on the journey. I hope in doing this I have addressed your two points in the same paragraph:
An analytical dimension which reviews itself
I want to know more about your professional life.
4) In relaying your requirements for educational validity, when you write: and to be inclusional again, I feel that this is not be problematised. 'Inclusiona' is a concept that the Bath action research group and others that work with it, will be familiar with. However, as it's the first time in your paper I think you need to give a brief description of what this means in context.
I donâ€™t intend here to invoke Rayner definitions of inclusionality hereâ€“ but am using the word very much in a simple vernacular way. I think it would be a distraction from my main point if I were to open this up. To avoid any resonances here that would require or suggest the whole field of inquiry into inclusionality, I would rather simply use another word. So I have changed this on p. 8. However, I have brought inclusionaityl into my discussion under empathy where I think it belongs and can be given an appropriate, though brief, space.
5) On page 25/26 I am intrigued by what you mean by a collective quantum of understanding. I know that the word quantum is added as an adjective to many different spheres these days â€“ even in advertising washing up capsules! However, I would like to know what you mean by it precisely.
Yes, I agree. This is an interesting case of â€killing your darlingsâ€™ in which poets tell one another to take out their very favourite image because it probably doesnâ€™t work! I was rather attached to this description, but tried it out with other readers and they too didnâ€™t understand what I meant. So, conceding your point, I have made the change on p. 28 and hope this works now.
6) For me there is something a little abrupt about the ending to your paper. It seems to stop. And I cannot access the url. It seems incomplete. The process of your doctoral study needs more contextualisation, I believe, certainly if this is a point at which you have chosen to â€interruptâ€™ your living theory for the time being. Would it be possible for you to give the reader a little more access to this conclusion.
Yes, again I agree, and of course this ending is even more meaningless if the url doesnâ€™t work. So I have added a section on pp. 29/30 explaining the context and what I learnt from it, and added the whole story as epilogue so there will be no need to access the url. In fact, there is no interruption but simply an ongoing journey- for example, creative space is an idea that has emerged since the PhD and only by reflecting back on it. I have made a change then to the final sentence to suggest the ongoing nature of it.
1) I find that the section that comes after the key words repeats, partially, the ideas in the section that comes before the key words. I would suggest that these two sections could be combined into one.
I am not sure about this as the sections before and after the key words have very different roles. The first is an abstract so offers an overview of the whole paper. The second is the introduction so echoes some of the introductory phrases of the abstract. I think any changes here might either conflate the different roles of these two sections, or disconnect abstract and paper in a way I have worked hard to avoid! Respectfully, then, Iâ€™d like to leave abstract and opening sections as they stand.
2) Terms used: dilemma, teacher-educator, team leader, debate, questions, aims.
I have made all the changes you suggest re. these words - apart from teacher educator where you say:
Perhaps you could find a more forceful and significant term to express this role
I havenâ€™t really found another term which encapsulates my meanings as well, in that I want to suggest the real chalkface â€teacherâ€™ as well as a broader, deeper concept of education. If we were writing in Swahili I would suggest mwalimu which carries all the resonance I intend, but unfortunately we are not!
3) Confusion about the numbering and sub-sections in the account of values.
Yes, agreed. I have much simplified this so each section now is a smooth paragraph explaining â€where I standâ€™ in relation to each value, and returning to examples now shared earlier in the paper. I have also clarified my meanings for connection and empathy, and how I see the difference between them.
4) I have aimed to clarify all through the teaching base for each of my statements, as you suggest â€“ explaining what are you communicating about with these people? I hope this is clear now!
5) You have also helped me to clarify the difference between knowledge transformation as describing the creative process, and creative space â€“ where I am intending to describe the teaching process. I have added this explanation in several places now.
Je Kanâ€™s review
You have mentioned in several places where I have used vocabulary you thought over-academic, been wordy or obscure. My view is that if you think so, it must be the case â€“ as you say, I am writing for the reader, so I have made changes to each of these: Eg. Allegory â€nice word but could it not be said in clear English?â€™ (p. 1) ; the opening to section 3.
You also mention where I have listed references without explaining them: â€give an indication of why and how these writers influenced your thinkingâ€™ Agreed! I have looked at each of these over-referenced sections and worked hard to unpack what those references mean to me, and if they are not important enough, deleted them; so I hope these sections read now much more transparently and smoothly.
Like Catherine, you also ask for more personalizing and explaining of my own position, â€Where are you and your experiences?â€™ Yes! Agreed! So now, I have included all through â€“ as I hope you will see- critical incidents from my experience, and have worked much harder at explaining the origins of my beliefs through specific examples and experiences.
In my novel extracts, you found some of the changes in voice confusing. â€Readers, unclear to this form of writing, will need clear sign posts as to what is coming in the textâ€™. Yes, understood, and I have written brief introductory paragraphs for each of the novel extracts, and the different voices contained there.
You found some of the accounts of values woolly and not really evidenced from my experience. I have prepared for this section much more carefully, with an introduction to a critical incident and how values emerged through this. You also mention â€links to inclusionalityâ€™. Since each of my 3 reviewers have referred to this, I have conceded this point and explicitly link my notions of empathy and connection with Raynorâ€™s work on inclusionality.
You ask what the photo is adding to the account â€you need to say why this picture is important to youâ€™ : I have included a short explanation to this, and also an explanation of the video extract so this no longer depends on a viewing.
Presentation points from Moira, Catharine and Je Kan
There are a number of formatting and presentation points you have identified: eg. Quotations shorter than 40 words need to be embedded in text.
Page referencing needs to be consistent.
Quotation marks should be single not double .
Indentations should not be so marked, and poems should be centred.
Full stops at the end of biblio references.
More careful use of colons and semi-colons.
I have tried to resolve these but may have been staring too closely at the text for too long to see them all clearly!
I read your new version of "Where I stand" yesterday evening in the garden, as the weather is warm here in Nairobi at the moment! I really enjoyed the session, especially as the paper has gained enormously in clarity of expression, interest, depth and validity / life thanks to the personal experiences and the comments from your students which you have now included! I appreciate the hard work and humility it takes to revise a paper based on suggestions made by other people, as I know it is not easy at times, partiallyÂ because one's work is so personal!
I particularly like the way you have explained the difference between two of your values: connection and empathy! I find it very interesting and very true to life, as we have much in common due to that fact that we are all human beings (making empathy possible), and yet there is so much that is particular, different due to our uniqueness as persons and the diversity of our cultures (making connection necessary)!
I would have only two suggestions:
1. on p. 20, par. 2. last line: "The following realisations emerged, based on experiences in my first teaching incarnation" => I can see that you have really tried to give us the context for this point on "Teaching as a writer", however, due to the expression "in my first teaching incarnation", I am not sure if the following points come from your teaching up to 1987 or after 1987, when you started working in Switzerland, etc...
2. on. p. 21, par. 3:Â the explanation you give of the creative process activity that you have developed is very clear and helpful to the reader in understanding what follows. However, when I reached p. 25, after your own poem on the violin, I became confused by the next line "Other examples of students responding to creative space can be found...". After the urls, you explain the image of yourself at the conference in Malaysia, from which I understood thatÂ at thisÂ point you are illustrating how you provide the creative space necessary to facilitate the creative process in your students. I think that the references to the student's creative work on the urls needs to be distinguished a bit more from your efforts to create the appropriate space! Perhaps it would helpÂ if you add a brief paragraph explaining that the students are able to become involved in the creative process thanks to your efforts to provide the necessary creative space! Â I feel that your efforts to provide this space need to be highlighted more explicitly as they make the process possible and, above all, because these efforts reflect how you live your educational values! The image could then be presented as evidence of how you try to create the appropriate space, and explained afterwards. As I understand it, it is your effort to provide creative space, and thus facilitate the creative process in your students which helps them to learn English effectively, that has "put you on the map", so to speak and broadened your working parameters, as you refer to at the top of p. 26. Perhaps I am mistaken in these observations, and as always, many things are a matter of opinion! So please feel free!
There may be a few minor errors in terms of words joined together, repetition of some terms and use of colons which I will leave to the expertsÂ in text revision.
In my opinion, the paper is practically ready for publication amd will be of great interest, especially to language teachers among others!
Regarding your doubt about the title, perhaps it would be good to include a reference both to the creative process you have developed and the creative space you provide? e.g. "Towards a living theory of facilitating the creative processÂ by providing creative space"??? I don't know!Â Perhaps it is too explicit for a creative writer! I am sure that whatever title you finally choose will be the best!
I look forward to working with you again Jane!