Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
This paper is based on the first analysis of the 25 narrative interviews collected from March to November 2018 in small local communities in the Lower Silesia Region. All narrators belong to the families that were transferred from the former Yugoslavia in 1946 to the western lands which were incorporated to Poland. The socio-cultural conditions are significant for local development, so I present some features of localism after 1989 when the state transformation processes started. Next, I discuss the narrators’ self-identity dilemmas and make an attempt to conceptualize “migrating biography” as one of the features of living in a postmodern world. The aim of the whole project, but not described in this article, is to reveal the intergenerational adult learning processes seen from the insider’s perspective, as well as to describe such lives in a psychosocial and cultural context.
EN
This paper was inspired by the debate between Hammersley (1999), Atkinson and Delamont (2009) and Denzin and Lincoln (2009 [2008]) on the dynamics of qualitative methods development and by the unsettling reductionism and fragmentation of analyses within qualitative research revealed by Atkinson. Similar critique of superficiality in biographical methods has also been formulated by scholars from the interpretative sociology tradition in Łódź (Czyżewski, 2016; Kaźmierska, 2012; Konecki, 2019; Piotrowski, 2016; Waniek, 2019), whose work is applied in pedagogy. The biographical research I conduct in small local communities reveals shifts in the positioning of research participants, but also alterations in the dynamics of grassroot inquiry initiatives in line with Participatory Inquiry Paradigm as described by Heron and Reason (1997). This article aims to characterize the “new” type of research participants, who organize and are involved in (non-academic) “research/amateur teams” within local communities, becoming collective agents of social action. Does it mean that the new “social/research awareness” (Heron & Reason, 1997) of both local actors and academic scholars who “join forces”, along with easy access to the sources, transnational links, and higher level of education trigger grassroot potential of pro-social behavior and a multi-level, polyphonic (Clifford, 1983), conscious and subconscious participation in the life of local communities?
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.