JL’s PgCert blog

The research I have undertaken is a qualitative research. It is a small-scale scholarly enquiry, as required within the framework of the PgCert. I see it as a prototype for a possibly larger, more long-term investigation.

I have progressed through an iterative process of firstly establishing a baseline by looking at the current experience of my students of a year long online teaching & learning MA course; virtual spaces replacing in-person interactions on campus; then I followed on with three interventions, all investigating if we can take tools and methods successfully being used in psychotherapy for decades, in order to alleviate and prevent any negative impacts of the shift to the online medium.

I have gathered four data sets and made several learning points, which have flown from one intervention into the next interventions, during my iterative Action Research (pls see also the previous four blog posts on this, as well as my Workflow entry on Research Methods).

When I researched into ways of analysing qualitative research data I came across this description by Tesch, which struck a strong cord with me:

“Qualitative research is to a large degree an art. The question of its valicity does not depend on replicable outcomes. It depends on the employment of a data ‘reduction’ process that leads to a result that others can accept as representing the data. The result of the analysis is, in fact, a representation in the same sense that an artist can, with a few strokes of the pen, create an image of a face that we would recognise if we saw the original in a crowd. The details are lacking, but a good ‘reduction’ not only selects and emphasises the essential features, it retains the vividness of the personality in the rendition of the face. In the same way a successful qualitative data reduction, while removing us from the freshness of the orig­inal, presents us instead with an image that we can grasp as the ‘essence’, where we other­wise would have been flooded with detail and left with hardly a perception of the phenomena at all” (Tesch, 1990, p. 304).

I have distilled the data sets I collected during my interventions by picking out (and anonymising) key extracts, as described above, trying to make the necessary brushstrokes to get the likening of the overall study. I have further drawn from it the key learning points and fed them back in turn into the next iteration of my intervention (please see the blog posts on the three interventions).

Distilling the data sets I followed the described criteria in Visualizing Research (Gray; Malins, 2004, p.132). They describe the metaphor of using spectacles, sieves and filters in order to analyse data. This I found really useful. I filtered to come to the essential distillation, sieves to capture precious material and spectacles to apply new vision.
Now how would I like to present the overall picture?
I have chosen to employ a creative analytic practice, i-poems, as described in Kara, 2015, p. 117-118: “I-poems are a way of identifying how participants represent themselves in interviews, by paying attention to the first-person statements in the interview transcripts. This technique was developed by Carol Gilligan and her colleagues in the 1990s and used more recently by UK researchers Rosalind Edwards and Susie Weller in their longitudinal research investigating change and continuity in young people’s senses of self over time. The interview transcripts are carefully read to identify the ways in which interviewees speak about themselves, paying particular attention to any statements using the personal pronoun ‘I’. Each instance of ‘I’ is highlighted, together with any relevant accompanying text that might help a reader to understand the interviewee’s sense of self. These highlighted phrases are then copied out of the transcript and placed in a new document, in the same sequence, each instance beginning in a new line, like the lines of a poem. I-poems can be very helpful in identifying participants’ senses of self by foregrounding the voice, or voices, that they use to talk about themselves. This is an adaptable technique that can be used with participants of different ages, genders, abilities and backgrounds (Edwards and Weller 2012: 206) although working with I-poems is quite time consuming, so they’re best used with a small sample or sub-sample (Edwards and Weller 2012: 215).”

I combined this i-poem approach with the method of using filters, sieves and glasses, as described further up (Gray, Malins, 2004).

Here are the two poems that are the outcome:

1.) I-poem distilled from the data set prior to intervention, so talking about the online learning experience over past year:

In the beginning I didn’t like it. I didn’t like it at all. I missed the atmosphere. But […] I travelled and this gave me hat freedom.

[…] after months I started to feel less involved, …. this feeling started…. I felt I was somehow cut-off from the group.

I felt, … sometimes after switching of the PC it felt as if the world of the university, all students and everything just disappeared, as if, you know, like after switching off a movie

[…] I have to be on my toes, that if I don’t watch out I loose the university, or the university disappears

I somehow feel more anxious about my progress on the course, or, or, no more like I fear for my place in the university

I haven’t been in the actual building, on campus for months and months and months it ‘s like Does it exist? How sure can I be?

I find it more difficult to communicate online

I am missing the random chats. And also in an actual classroom I felt more immersed, as I was fully there and no distractions

2.) I-poem distilled from the three data sets of the three interventions, so after the therapy exercises:

I found some areas easier to access than others, e.g., when we got to the toes it got really intense, I could really feel my awareness and I felt a tingling sensation.

I wasn’t aware that I had so much tension in parts.

I was totally gone. Afterwards I felt less inhibited to talk about my project. I felt more calm and light

I felt more focussed afterwards, somehow…

I felt like, like we just experienced something together

I feel like I can communicate

I mean I am somehow more here

I think I am not explaining myself very well

I was really ready

I feel more open

I lost track of time

References:

Edwards, R.; Weller, S. (2012) Shifting analytic ontology: using I-poems in qualitative longitudinal research. Qualitative Research 12(2) p. 202– 17.

Gray, C.; Malins, J. (2004) Visualizing Research: A guide to the research process in art and design. Aldershot: Ashgate. 

Kara, H. (2015) Creative Research Methods in the Social Sciences : A Practical Guide. Bristol: Policy Press

Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative Research Analysis Types and Software Tools. New York: Falmer Press. 

My third intervention with MA AI students took place on 13th April and six students took part. Following the iterative approach to interventions in my Action Research, as described in the Research Method section on my Workflow page, I integrated what I learned from the previous interventions. Here the learning points I had made from the second intervention (for those from the first intervention, see previous blog post):

1.) The addition of a breathwork exercise proofed good and valuable and I have taken it back into this third intervention.

2.) In the last intervention I emphasised on the relaxation aspect a bit too strongly: students got deeply relaxed, possibly their energy went a little too low. Therefore I ensured in this third intervention to add invigorating and energising aspects right at the end, so that the students had a lot of relaxed energy available to be vocal and active in the tutorial that followed.

During the intervention we did: three tension release breaths, body scan exercise (both described and referenced in the previous two blog posts), then stretching & reinvigorating movements, and at the end I counted up, 0 to 5, to give the students enough time and a predictable timeframe to come out of the immersive experience.

Here anonymised extracts from the semi-structured interviews:

Student A: Empties the mind and relaxes the body. All parts of the body, feel like the whole body is released. Feel more present. Having done this now for the third time, it becomes so familiar, it’s good, like a structure, a ritual – yes, a good ritual as a start of to the tutorial

Student B: Enjoyed it very much, again. Agree, it’s good to know this is coming, what to expect and yes, like a ritual. It’s like, like a complete reset. Like rebooting a laptop. I was really ready for the tutorial session afterwards – my mind was so busy before.

Student C: It really made me more confident, I mean I have no problems presenting my project, but I do have butterflies in my stomach, beforehand, usually and this really helped; feeling much more calm about it

Student D: I feel more open, more happy to share, ah, I mean the feeling of sharing without actually saying much, I feel I share by just being here, if that makes sense. It almost creates a space, though virtual, but like a space for us – a communal space.

Student E: I lost track of time. I thought it was really long – I thought we had filled the whole tutorial time,or almost – no basically wouldn’t be able at all to tell how long this was

Student I: The counting up helped to slowly get back into… I mean face the return from the interior experience.

Student B: This time round was even better than last time I think the bit about us stretching and moving and and increasing the pace, brought in energy, ready to take action in the tutorial, really up for it

My second interventions with MA AI students took place two weeks later. This time eight students took part. Following the iterative intervention approach of Action Research as described in the Research Methods section on my Workflow page, I integrated in this second intervention what I had learned from the first intervention. These learning points had been:

1.) I let all students switch off their camera, so that they could comfortably close their eyes during the whole intervention without doubts of being observed. I left my camera on, but angled myself 45 degrees to the camera and closed my eyes as well during the whole intervention.

2.) I had a semi-structured group interview directly after the intervention and a second one after the tutorial that followed in order to find out about the impact onto the tutorial experience.

I experimented with slight changes in exercises for this second intervention: We started off increasing the awareness of the body. Then we did three Tension Release Breaths. This is a technique whereby you breath in quickly through your nose on a count of four until your lungs are completely filled with air, then you hold your breath on a count of four, then you breath out slowly through your mouth on a count of eight. This breathwork exercise turns off the body’s natural stress response, allowing heart rate and blood pressure to decrease and tension in muscles to relax (Davis et al., 2008, p. 41-46). After that we did a body scan exercise as described in my blog post about the first intervention.

Here some key anonymised extracts from the semi-structured interviews:

Student A: The three special breaths have really helped to increase the quality of breathing… slower breathing, filling the lung out more and, and felt the air in the whole body, feeling more… alive

Student B: had tension from various issues and this allowed me to switch much more easily to the course work and this got me into a totally different vibe, calm. Loved it. Didn’t want to come back.

Student C: It was great. I was totally gone. Afterwards I felt less inhibited to talk about my project. I felt more calm and light, somehow at peace. Or… more close to the others maybe

Student D: Yes, agree. And I felt more focussed afterwards, somehow… more focussed and collected, calm and collected.

Student E: Yes, was quite good, but I found it difficult to go with it – kept thinking about the tutorial to come

Student F: Found it very calming, yes, and felt more present afterwards.

Student G: I felt like, like we just experienced something together, so we’ve been in this together, even if everyone was doing it individually, a personal experience, but doing it together. I feel like I can communicate, just by being more here,… eh.. I mean I am somehow more here – more present is the word, sorry, I think I am not explaining myself very well

Student H: Yes, agree – that made me feel more open or relaxed about us being together, in the tutorial I mean.

References:

Davis, M.; Robbins Eshelman, E.; McKay, M. (2008) The Definitive Guide to Stress Management. Oakland: New Harbinger Publications

I undertook the first intervention on 2nd February 2021 ahead of my group tutorial with the MA students of Applied Imagination in the Creative Industries at CSM.

The students had been made aware of what was coming, what this is for and gave their written consent (more details about my approach to cover ethical requirements can be found in my Ethical Enquiry Form on Workflow).

The intervention started off with me setting the scene and getting everyone to relax in their chairs and close their eyes. I followed on with mindfulness instructions, e.g., as to how to let go of distracting thoughts, becoming a passive observer of thoughts, feelings and emotions etc. Then I went through a series of progressive muscle relaxation exercises after Jacobson: Different groups of muscles are being tensed and subsequently relaxed in turn, until the whole body has been progressively relaxed (Robertson, 2012, p. 122). Including the breathing pattern in this exercise is important and to pay attention to the shifts in muscle tone and posture prior and after tension. For this we still kept our eyes closed as to better be able to focus on the experience and the subtle changes in muscle tone.
Afterwards, still with eyes closed, I walked the students through a body scan exercise. This is based on the ancient technique of Vipassana meditation. You are directing your attention and your awareness through all parts of the body, from top of the head to the tips of the toes and back. This is the way to learn to understand the nature of direct experiencing and to learn to re-inhabit the body. The body is the most accessible ground to our direct experience in the body and bodily sensations form a door to the present (Crane, 2009, p. 49). And Merleau-Ponty even takes this further: “The body is our general medium for having a world” (Merleau-Ponty, 1962, p. 169).

After these exercises I undertook a semi-structured interview with the students. That day these were only three students. Quite a small number, but it was a useful exercise and the small number meant this was an intimate event with a good atmosphere.

Here some anonymised extracts from the data set of the interview:

Student A:

relaxing, peaceful, allowed me to let go of thoughts. When we did the scanning of the body, with the attention I found some areas easier to access than others, e.g., when we got to the toes it got really intense, I could really feel my awareness and I felt a tingling sensation.

Student B:

very relaxing, loved it; At first felt a bit self-conscious as even though we all have our eyes closed, I am aware the camera is on. Not that there’s much to see, just the muscle tensing and relaxing, that part, is a bit… I mean, it doesn’t matter and I know I’m not observed, but somehow are aware that camera is on and so… just a bit of self-consciousness

Student C:

Amazing. The tensing and releasing of muscles, that made me aware, I wasn’t aware that I had so much tension in parts. It somehow made the muscles feel more, more warm.

References:

Crane, R. (2009) Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy. Hove: Routledge

Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962) Phenomenology of Perception. Translated from French by Colin Smith. London and New York: Routledge.

Robertson, D. (2012) Build your Resilience. London: Hodder Education

Before undertaking any interventions I thought it important to find out what the impact of nearly a year of online learning experience has had so far on the students. This is in order to establish where the baseline state is, as otherwise it would be impossible to analyse an impact of my interventions.

I emailed my students a list of prompt questions and got them to think about their experience of online learning environments during the past year. I on purpose phrased and re-phrased various questions and got them the opportunity to answer to some or all of them and to do so in writing or during the semi-structured group interview that followed. I also covered all ethical requirements and consent needed as outlined in my Ethical Enquiry Form on Workflow.

The prompt questions I supplied where:

“In the virtual learning/teaching environment we have since last year:
Do you feel just as connected to your classmates and tutors, or less? What do you feel are the differences between being in a room with your classmates / tutors / lecturers and being in a virtual room? Do you feel less understood, or more? Less heard, or more? Is it easier to talk and contribute or more difficult? Do you feel it is easier to ‘be yourself’ or more difficult? Is it easier to be open, frank and honest, or more difficult? Do you feel more present, with your whole body and mind, in the offline or in the online situation? Can you reflect on what emotions, feelings and physical sensations are linked with this difference (if there is one)?”

Only two out of ten students answered in writing, however there was a lively discussion and a lot of engagement when we met and discussed as a group. Here are some of the key extracts, anonymised:

Student C: In the beginning I didn’t like it. I didn’t like it at all. I missed the atmosphere. But on the positive side: I travelled and this gave me that freedom. To travel. You can be anywhere. Maybe a mix of both could be good. Online is like a take-away. That’s convenient and practical. But sometimes you want to go to a restaurant. Hold the menu and get the atmosphere.

Student A: Yes. the advantage is that you can be anywhere in the world, that feels much freer. But connection and technical issues can become a problem (this student moved as far as I am aware from London to countryside in Italy, then to Tenerife as a digital nomad, all during the past 8 months)

Student D: during online teaching there’s a bit of a disconnect – in a room one automatically feels more present

Student G: in the beginning enjoyed not having to commute to campus, staying at home for lectures, and tutorials, feeling more free with my own time but then after months I started to feel less involved, …. this feeling started…. I felt I was somehow cut-off from the group

Student D: jumps in , laughing, yeah it sounds mad, I felt, … sometimes after switching of the PC it felt as if the world of the university, all students and everything just disappeared, as if, you know, like after switching off a movie

Student G: nods, yes, and it leaves this sort of anxiety, that, that I lost touch. Hmm… it gives me the feeling that I have to be on my toes, that if I don’t watch out I loose the university, or the university disappears

Student D: yes, I somehow feel more anxious about my progress on the course, or, or, no more like I fear for my place in the university

Student G: hahah, yeah it’s like sorry, your access code has changed and… and … and it feels less real. I haven’t been in the actual building, on campus for months and months and months it ‘s like Does it exist? How sure can I be?

Student A: I find it more difficult to communicate online, as much of our senses are not involved and sometimes there is a lag, so that one keeps interrupting each other, things overlap. Without the whole person in the room…. more difficult to read and understand people and read between the lines… yeah, communication is impacted to some extent.

Student B: at the beginning enjoyed the cosiness and comfort of being at home. But particularly after a longer time: the energy is missing, and I am missing the random chats. And also in an actual classroom I felt more immersed, as I was fully there and no distractions

Student B: for me personally there is an advantage though also in the online communication: In reality I have often struggle to make and hold eye contact. I’m not sure why this is, but I am aware of it and sometimes find this a problem. Online this is now not a problem anymore as with the different camera angles direct eye contact is not really possible anyway, and there is no dilemma who to look at, when speaking, where to turn if you see what I mean

This is a book I read many times in the past for my practice as a psychotherapist and it was a joy to revisit it for my PgCert Self-initiated Project.

I am here summarising a part of the book that is vitally relevant to my research project. The body scan / Vipassana meditation technique I am using in my interventions is being employed in Crane’s Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT). The emphasis here is on learning to be with direct experience as it arises in the body by paying attention to physical sensations in the body. Awareness is being brought to each part of the body, bit by bit, part by part, using the kinaesthetic sense of feeling sensations in the body.
This is the method to re-inhabit the body and in my research I examine that this could be essential to stay fully, authentically and honestly connected to your self and also to others, in the virtual space were we have a mostly disembodied experience, and a focus on verbal communication.

Rebecca Crane states: “All our thoughts, emotions, speech and action are (whether we are aware of it or not) guided by background felt meanings, which are expressed through our experiencing in our body. […] We had this ability to ‘know’ through our body before we were able to talk. The price we pay for being a language-based species is that labelling our experience offers us a means to objectify and separate from it. (Crane, 2009, pp. 49-50)”

Reference:

Crane, R. (2009) Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy. Hove: Routledge

When looking at what type of interviews would be suitable for my action research project I found the chapter “Interviews” (pp. 409-443) of this book helpful and it gave me a lot to reflect on.

There is a good collection of key terms which determine quantitative vs. qualitative approaches:

And it follows on to describe:

This makes sense to me and very much describes, what I had intuitively assumed before conducting the first action research intervention and short interview with my students last week, in order to investigate my research question. I went for the qualitative type of interview approach, semi-structured, as this is more suitable for the personal and subjective data I am gathering for this particular research question.

Additionally these key characteristics of qualitative research interviews are very valuable to my own interview design:

Reference:

Cohen, L.; Morrison, K.; Manion, L.; Bell, R. (2011) Research methods in education. London: Routledge.

I looked in particular at chapter 4 of this book: “Collecting, Collating and Conversing with Data”. Here the author discusses what counts as data and follows on to talk about quantitative versus qualitative data. She establishes that in action research the type of data to be collected and the type of collection is highly depending on the individual research question. Reading this I started to reflect on my own research question and the research methods I had chosen so far. I felt confirmed that semi-structured interviews which gather qualitative data are greatly suitable for my research question.

Further on in the chapter she lists reflective diaries as sources for data. This is an interesting thought and I am not quite sure yet, how exactly I would extract data from my research diary, but I find her argument plausible and will consider it as an additional data source.

She highlights the importance of chronology in a reflective diary and states that “[…] the diary can be seen as a way of producing a running commentary on the project, to record observations and, crucially, a space in which to begin the process of theorising practice in order to develop contextualised understanding of specific problems or concerns” (McAteer, 2013, p. 70).

Returning to the research method of interviews, McAteer outlines some key points to consider on page 75, which I find really useful:

• selection of interview participants
• location and time of the interview
• relationship between interviewer and interviewee
• ensuring encouragement during the interview without asking leading questions
• capturing the content of the interview.

Reference:

McAteer, M. (2013) Action research in education. Los Angeles: SAGE.

This is an interesting paper by Jim Parsons. It is mostly geared towards Action Research at schools, but can easily translated for the use of Action Research at universities.

He starts off with collating information about the unique context of Action Research and follows on going through five key principles of research ethics for Action Researchers. He elaborates on each of these and gives some great examples and thoughts on how to implement these principles.

Also of particular interest to me where the 25 questions he lined up at the end of the paper. These are questions to consider when engaging in Action Research and I find them very useful. These allow me to consider the impact of my action research on the lives of my students and on the university community.

Reference:
Parsons, J. (2015) An Introduction/Review of Action Research and Its Ethical Practices. 
Available at:
https://www.academia.edu/19869893/An_Introduction_Review_of_Action_Research_and_Its_Ethical_Practices  (Accessed: 1 February 2021)

My SiP examines how grounding and awareness of the physical presence through various therapeutic approaches, can help to feel present, authentic and connected in a virtual teaching and learning environment. Therefore I was quite excited when I came across Merleau-Ponty’s book “Phenomenology of Perception”. In it, he states:

“The body is our general medium for having a world.” (Merleau-Ponty, 1962, p. 169)

He furthermore elaborates that the existence, so the way of being present in the world, is determined not by consciousness, but by human “corps propre”. “Consciousness is being-towards-the-thing through the intermediary of the body” (Merleau-Ponty, 1962, p. 159-160).

His thinking is validating my line of enquiry and I find it very encouraging.

He also highlights the interconnectedness and the relational, which is very relevant to my research. Those aspects of Merleau-Ponty’s theory are brilliantly summarised by Robert Macfarlane in the introduction to Nan Shepherd’s amazing book “The Living Mountain”:

“Consciousness, the human body and the phenomenal world are […] inextricably intertwined and ‘engaged’. The body ‘incarnates’ our subjectivity and we are thus, Merleau-Ponty proposed, ’embedded’ in the ‘flesh’ of the world. He described this embodied experience as ‘knowledge in the hands; our body ‘grips’ the world for us and is ‘our general medium for having a world’. And the world itself is therefore not the unchanging object presented by the natural sciences, but instead endlessly relational. It is made manifest only by presenting itself to a variety of views, and our perception of it is made possible by our bodies and their sensory-motor functions. We are co-natural with the world and it with us, but we only ever see it partially.” (p. XXX)

References:

• Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962) Phenomenology of Perception. Translated from French by Colin Smith. London and New York: Routledge.
• Shepherd, N. (1977) The Living Mountain. Introduced by Robert Macfarlane (2011).
  Canongate Books.