# data[].attributes.body
Read and Engage in DLL:

❏ Paul & Marfo (2001)

❏ Lather (2006)

❏ Koro-Ljungberg et al. (2009)

❏ Akkerman et al. (2021)

# data[].attributes.headline
Z - the collapse of the intellectual framework of empiricist science - Paul and Marfo 2001

# data[].attributes.subject
Z - the collapse of the intellectual framework of empiricist science - Paul and Marfo 2001

# data[].attributes.body
I can understand that the authors argued that there are and need the research paradigms shifts happening, either to expand research and knowledge building for the community, or to revise and reject the hegemony in research powers. However, I did not find much explanation of "the collapse of the intellectual framework of empiricist science", and only the quantum physics vs traditional Newton physics makes sense to me. As said, quantum mechanics revealed that observation can affect the outcome of experiments (e.g., wave-particle duality). Otherwise, I hold my opinions for now...

# data[].attributes.body
"Bringing together researchers who do not share a common paradigmatic stance can be difficult and even disastrous, if not approached carefully and with a clear purpose." p.542

-- it is said that research paradigms cannot be simply reconciled by empirical data alone - I agree.

# data[].attributes.headline
Z - This is very exciting: "A debate between Elliot Eisner and Howard Gardner at the AERA annual meeting in 1996 on whether a novel should be accepted as a dissertation filled to overflowing one of the large ballrooms at the conference hotel." p.528

# data[].attributes.subject
Z - This is very exciting: "A debate between Elliot Eisner and Howard Gardner at the AERA annual meeting in 1996 on whether a novel should be accepted as a dissertation filled to overflowing one of the large ballrooms at the conference hotel." p.528

# data[].attributes.body
Eisner, For; Gardner, against. I read both of the two prestigious scholars' work during my MA in Art & Design. No wonder, we artists would argue that art and craft could serve as graduation project, and that is the reality.

However, outside that specific field, I would be pragmatic. The way to assess achievement in a program needs to conform to the way the program being designed, that is, how students are supposed to be trained. If this is a rigorous quantitative training program, then a freestyle narrative novel will not be the best representation of students' understanding of mathematical relationships. I think few people would doubt the wisdom, creativity, and intelligent labor inside a novel, and such forms of intelligence are highly desired. I can understand claims from both sides - that a valid measure should be about what it intends to measure (i.e., what skills the program is training, such as methodologies and evidence-based inquiries), and that a well-established work demonstrates enough epistemic contribution yet skips the logistic procedures. Maybe in the future, there can be substitute formats, but there is also a distinction between the aim of a program and the aim of ultimate education.

# data[].attributes.body
The language of this article is very fancy.

on p.42, this sentence is very interesting: "As Britzman (1995) reminds us, the limit of intelligibility is the boundary ‘where thought stops what it cannot bear to know, what it must shut out to think as it does". At first I think it is a bit too abstract, but relating it to the context, I think I kind of know what it means. The exploration of knowledge inquiry not only challenge what we don't know, but also what we know. In many cases, the findings deviate from what we belive they should be - in many cases, we will just discard that because we don't want to challenge the whole large systems of assumptions. An example would be - recognizing this would challenge my identity as a feminist/religious person /... so I would reject that idea... I am just thinking about that, may not be the truth.

# data[].attributes.body
This article is very dense, I am very sure there's a lot of wisdom in it, and I need time to digest it.

While I am taking in most of the information, I also held a doubt. I think it is not to have a research paradigm first and then do the research, it is that we first have a research question - a specific thing that we want to know about. We care about group differences and want to compare them to the larger population, then we use statistical analyses. We care about a specific community, then we do ethnography. It would not make sense that investigation of 3 people to employ inferential statistics.

I would agree that there are a lot of disadvantages to quantitative research and statistics, however, qualitative research did not solve the inherent "bias" or "position", either. Therefore, the attack that quan methods endured did not make much sense to me. Ultimately, it is what researchers want to investigate. I don't like the behavior attacking other folks' research paradigms.

# data[].attributes.body
This article is not really within my domain of interest, but the chart is very well made!

# data[].attributes.headline
J - What's your "ontological synchronization" - Akkerman et al. (2021)

# data[].attributes.subject
J - What's your "ontological synchronization" - Akkerman et al. (2021)

# data[].attributes.body
Akkerman et al. (2021) said the "ontological synchronization” is a continuous attunement to what is happening and matters

at hand, and what future is being generated, including what values and judgments researchers themselves perpetuate in

society.

What are the values you carry into your research and work?

# data[].attributes.headline
J - Personal Connection - Akkerman et al. (2021)

# data[].attributes.subject
J - Personal Connection - Akkerman et al. (2021)

# data[].attributes.body
Nowadays, we overly value things that are practical. Ok, What does “practical” mean? Yes, nowadays, it refers to something profitable. I visited one of my favorite professors in another city right before the Thanksgiving holiday, and she told me some sad news. There was a program that she directed, which really reflected her value in humanizing education. However, as the Dean of the department changed to a man who was ambitious in marketing and selling the school, he changed the program to something “AI” related… No more deep&  philosophical reflection on humanization and its praxis.

# data[].attributes.headline
I think here comes a good question！- about the relation between science and philosophy. I learned this saying years ago: "in the past several centuries, philosophy leads science. However, now it is a totally different story." Science, AI, tech, Quantum physics - moves so beyond traditional philosophy that philosophy lacks prospective in explaining the phenomena. What do you think?

# data[].attributes.subject
I think here comes a good question！- about the relation between science and philosophy. I learned this saying years ago: "in the past several centuries, philosophy leads science. However, now it is a totally different story." Science, AI, tech, Quantum physics - moves so beyond traditional philosophy that philosophy lacks prospective in explaining the phenomena. What do you think?