Two men looked out through the same prison bars, One saw mud, the other saw stars. Unknown

1. Two men looked outthrough the same prison bars,One saw mud, the other saw stars.Unknown ToK plenary on Belenky et al - Alistair

2. Can I – an individual – understand how others see their world? • To what extent? How? • By interacting .. Dialogue .. enable free speak • Qualitative / interview based-research Erklaren(nat. sciences) -- Verstehen(soc. sciences)

3. Research yields conclusions, i.e., knowledge claims • Are the claims true for those interviewed? the question of validity • Are the claims true for cases other than those who were interviewed? the question of generalisability • What is the researcher’s role in making these claims? Discoverer? Inventor? Co-creator?

4. What of “group” differences? • Sex/race/age/culture/sexual preference .. • Can members of one group adequately enter / portray the perceptual worlds of others? • Can research done by US females in the US say anything about Norwegian (or, Kenyan) lads in Flekke?

8. Interview process

9. Outcomes / “results” • Categories of outcome: “emergent” research • “Ways in which women conceive of themselves as knowers”

10. A perspective from which . . • Women experience themselves as mindless, subject to external authority: Silence. • Women experience themselves as capable of receiving, but not capable of creating knowledge on their own: Received (“listening to others”) • Truth and knowledge are conceived as personal, private, subjectively known or intuited: Subjective (Inner voice, Quest for Self)

11. A perspective from which . . • Women learn by applying objective procedures for obtaining knowledge: Procedural (“voice of reason”), • Women experience themselves as creators of knowledge, and value both subjective and objective strategies for knowing: Constructed (“integrating the voices”

12. Where do the results “come from”?

13. These “ways of knowing” are . . • Not necessarily fixed, exhaustive, universal, • Abstract categories that cannot adequately capture any individual’s thoughts, • Similar to patterns found in men’s thinking (NB: bio teacher!) • Might be described differently by different researchers. “Our intention is to share – not prove – our findings” Belenky et al,

14. Do these outcomes generalise? Are they true for . . • women in the USA? • women in Flekke? • men in Flekke? Do any ‘seem true’ to you? “Reader generalisability”

15. “The contemporary philosophical position about the justification of knowledge . . entails . . • That claims, that is conclusions, from all research are often undetermined by the data, which means there will be more than one explanation that is compatible with the evidence, • That claims are defended, not proved, • That their defence consists of . . the marshalling of good reasons on their behalf, and • That there is no absolute justification of knowledge by either experience or reason.” Lythcott & Duschl, 1990

16. Students’ perspectives . . • “My answer is wrong” • “How come my answer is wrong?” • “The answer at the back of the book is wrong”

17. We all know . .