Action Research: Session 1

When the students asked me if we could have a Drawing Reading Group meeting today even though it wasn’t scheduled, I did not hesitate to say yes. The three false starts we have had have been incredibly frustrating for me, as I really needed to gather some data to feel I was getting into the project. With such a busy schedule, being so stretched in my 2 jobs and preparing for my PhD, I didn’t need the stress and the complication brought by unexpected illnesses, snow blizzards and double bookings.

I have to say it caught me by surprise but, fortunately, I managed to prepare in one hour. I carry the forms and recording equipment with me and just had to get my mind into researcher’s mode. We had scheduled this session for the 25th January and it involved thinking about artists or artworks that would illustrate Derrida’s concept of blindness and drawing. Suring lunch, I had run into the library to find Duchamp’s Green Box writings, which had come into my mind the first time I read the text.



After briefly explaining to them the purposes, aims and methods of the project, I asked the students to fill in the consent forms (for ethical and data protection issues) and the preliminary (purple) questionnaire. I then started recording the session, led by TC. Very quickly, we got into a fruitful and intense discussion. I thought TC led the session very well. She read the text (as it was only a couple of paragraphs) and then introduced the key ideas before opening it to us. Of the techniques described in the handout, we probably only used the one about definition of terms, which was very appropriate due to the nature of Derrida’s discourse (which is mainly about language)

I tried my best to just participate (taking a more passive role, rather than leading) and to forget I was conducting a research project. I found it difficult to take notes because the discussion was so interesting but after an hour and a half we had covered a substantial amount of ground, which I just bullet pointed. I knew I had to type those notes as soon as I could in order to expand them a little or to make them more coherent. Rather than writing them chronologically as they were raised, I decided to organise the bullet points thematically to gain further clarity. Reading back on them, I think the Drawing Reading Group archive is going to be one of the most useful outcomes of the action research project.


On reflection, I think one of the things I would change about how the session went is to timing of the preliminary feedback. Rather than at the beginning of the session, just after the Methodologies Reading Group (remember that our Drawing Reading Group today was spontaneous) I would ask the students to fill them in a week or so in advance. I don’t think the data has been particularly damaged, or that the students felt the pressure of me being there or having to complete it in 10 minutes (they took the time they needed) but perhaps having them beforehand would allow them to think about the statements and the role of the Drawing Reading Group within their overall PhD. Besides, the session feedback forms are already meant to be quick responses.

I don’t want to jump to premature conclusions but glancing at 2 of the 3 preliminary questionnaires I got back today, I think the data I am going to have will not match my expectations that closely and I am in for a few surprises. Apart from completely matching the feedback G and P gave me in December, this could be great training for my PhD (which I am sure will be full of unexpected outcomes. Once again, I am reminded to let go and not to predict the future so rigidly.

As I mentioned before, I tried very hard to forget the action research part while we were in the session. I was so successful in this respect I forgot to hand out the feedback forms and had to send them by post (as the questions need to be responded to without much thinking or sinking in)… Paradoxes of research: controlled fluidity.