I used the questions that i had formulated in my previous blog to to set up a series of different interview/discussions with a variation of staff memebers within the compnay.
My questions:
Wtihin my workplace, how is the measure of standard procedure balanced with our own methodology?
How far does the individual's requirements affect the outcome of work before it become unbalanced?
At BTEC level, is it necessary to formally equipp a student with the knowledge of the company's beliefs before the arts training begins? should it be and ongoing process?
At what point does the process' of running a charity ever hinder the charity's intent/beliefs? if ever?
I have recorded these discussions and saved them for my personal diaries as they're aswers and opinions are more for my own interest. However what it showed me was the use of extending my special interest group out of the 'study' group. Talking to people who are proffesional within my subject and are working in ways that inspire me, was an eye opener into how my education can be turned into the reality of a proffesion.
This may sound like a 'corney' comment but i was genuwinley suprised at how in oare i felt.
Of course as with any interview process i was then able to compare and contrast the responses to the questions which then led my inquiries down other avenues.
for example: my orgional question was:
How far does the individual's requirements affect the outcome of work before it become unbalanced?
after analysing and evaluationg my responses my new question is:
how should an workshop leader's training be supported in order to avoid trial and error? or should error always be part of the process even at the cost of a participant?
I have recorded these discussions and saved them for my personal diaries as they're aswers and opinions are more for my own interest. However what it showed me was the use of extending my special interest group out of the 'study' group. Talking to people who are proffesional within my subject and are working in ways that inspire me, was an eye opener into how my education can be turned into the reality of a proffesion.
This may sound like a 'corney' comment but i was genuwinley suprised at how in oare i felt.
Of course as with any interview process i was then able to compare and contrast the responses to the questions which then led my inquiries down other avenues.
for example: my orgional question was:
How far does the individual's requirements affect the outcome of work before it become unbalanced?
after analysing and evaluationg my responses my new question is:
how should an workshop leader's training be supported in order to avoid trial and error? or should error always be part of the process even at the cost of a participant?
Emma - good idea to take you inquires into the workplace and ask that professional network - it sounds like tapping into that expertise has already been allowing you to think through some of your questions. The last version in this blog seems very black and white - 'avoid' or 'error...at the cost of the participant' - they don't seem quite congruent with idea of a safe environment - and your organisation has rigourous standards about putting participants first... are there ways of asking these questions that encompass the 'gray areas' that often happen in practice? I look forward to discussing your conversations in more depth because there seems to be some real digging going on...
ReplyDeletei see what you mean..i am very aware of how inclusion itself can be percieved as on big 'grey' area by many outside organisations/networks. In wording these questions in this harsh way it was an attempt to eliminate, as much as possible, the 'grey'. looking back to do agree, however, that some of the wording has taken them to the other end of the spectrum and embracing the 'middle' ground more could be more effective.
ReplyDelete