Participatory Research as a Third Space

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7346/-fei-XXI-01-23_16

Keywords:

Participatory research, Systemic thinking, Third space, Third-person research, Empowerment

Abstract

In recent years, the conception of educational research has undergone a fundamental transformation. The traditional approach of relying solely on self-contained research strategies has become inadequate. The notions of space, time for reflection, and the deliberate process of constructing and planning no longer provide effective responses due to the acceleration of processes and methods in reflection, action, and imagination. The relentless pursuit of speed hampers the ability to dedicate focused attention to a single task, both in terms of cognitive processes and the methods used to establish mental and geographical boundaries. This study argues that the "pedagogical/educational object of study" can only be briefly examined through a variety of tools before rapidly moving away, akin to placing it under a figurative magnifying glass. Slow education, as a metaphor, strives to attain the rapid advancements of the digital realm through an extroflexive approach. Simultaneously, the perspective of participatory research planning necessitates a linear path while accommodating recursive exploration. The concept of the third educational space, in conjunction with other disciplines, emerges as a platform that allows for a pause to delve into the interconnected relationships within various contexts. This encompasses the dyadic connections explored through philosophical, psychological, and psychoanalytic approaches, as well as the collaborative dynamics within work environments that emphasize teamwork and organizational structures. Additionally, it extends to the realms of neighbourhoods and cities, embracing the notion of smart cities, and even encompasses nations committed to the ecological and systemic management of politics in defence of the planet.

References

Ammaniti, M., & Gallese, V. (2014). La nascita della intersoggettività: Lo sviluppo del sé tra psicodinamica e neurobiologia (1. ed). Raffaello Cortina.

Anzieu, D. (2017). L’Io-pelle. Milano: Raffaello Cortina. (Original work published 1985)

Ball, M. (2022). Metaverso, Cosa significa, chi lo controllerà e perché sta rivoluzionando le nostre vite. Milano: Garzanti.

Benjamin, J. (2019). Il riconoscimento reciproco. L’intersoggettività e il Terzo. Milano: Cortina.

Bianchi, P. (2012). Impresa. In Dizionario di Economia e Finanza. Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana fondata da Giovanni Treccani. Retrieved January 31, 2023, from https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/impresa_%28Dizionario-di-Economia-e-Finanza%29/

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecologia ello sviluppo umano. Bologna: Il Mulino.

Calvani, A. (1998). Ricerca azione on-line: nuovi modelli per l’innovazione e sperimentazione educativa. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 6(3), 27. Retrieved February 25, 2022 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/184002/. Currently available at https://web.archive.org/web/20220225182929/https://ijet.itd.cnr.it/article/download/652/585/

Cappannari, L. (2022). Futuri possibili. Come il metaverso e le nuove tecnologie cambieranno la nostra vita. Firenze: Giunti.

Dallago, L. (2006). Che cos’è l’empowerment. Roma: Carocci.

Ferrari, S., Triacca, S., & Braga, G. (2021). Design for learning in the third space: Opportunities and challenges. Research on Education and Media, 13(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.2478/rem-2021-0006

Florenskij, P. A. (2001). Il valore magico della parola (It. Trans. G. Lingua). Milano: Medusa. (Original work published 1920)

Floridi, L. (2020). Pensare l’infosfera: La filosofia come design concettuale (1st ed.). Milano: Raffaello Cortina.

Gutiérrez, K. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the Third Space. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(2). https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.43.2.3

Heron, J. (1996). Co-operative Inquiry: Research into the Human Condition. London: Sage.

Hinshelwood, R. D., & Skogstad, W. (Eds.). (2002). Observing Organisations: Anxiety, Defence and Culture in Health Care (1 ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203135150

Husserl, E. (1931). Méditations cartésiennes: Introduction à la phénoménologie (Fr. Trans. G. Peiffer, & E. Levinas). Paris: Armand Collin.

Jullien, F. (2014). Contro la comparazione. Lo “scarto” e il “tra”: Un altro accesso all’alterità: Milano-Udine: Mimesis.

Kaneklin, C., Piccardo, C., & Scaratti, G. (2010). Introduzione. In C. Kaneklin, C. Piccardo, & G. Scaratti (Eds.), La ricerca-azione: Cambiare per conoscere nei contesti organizzativi. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.

Metitieri, L., & Converso, D. (2010). La ricerca-azione in una prospettiva clinica. In C. Kanelin, C. Piccardo, & G. Scaratti (Eds.), La ricerca-azione: Cambiare per conoscere nei contesti organizzativi (1. ed, pp. 55–76). Milano: Raffaello Cortina.

Miller, J. C. (2004). The transcendent function: Jung’s model of psychological growth through dialogue with the unconscious. State University of New York Press.

Morin, E. (2003). Educare per l’era planetaria. Il pensiero complesso come metodo di approfondimento. Roma: Armando.

Parola, A. (2014). Ricerca-Azione e Competenze Mediali. RicercAzione, 6(2), 251–262. Retrieved January 31, 2023, from https://iris.unito.it/handle/2318/154496

Parola, A. & Turri, M. G. (2021). Legami vitali fra scuola, università e impresa. Milano: FrancoAngeli.

Potter, J., & McDougall, J. (2017). Digital Media, Culture and Education: Theorising Third Space Literacies. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55315-7

Reason, P., & Marshall, J. (2003). Approaches to Action Research. Unpublished Multimedial Materials. Centre for Action Research in Professional Practice, University of Bath (UK).

Riva, G., & Gaggioli, A. (2019). Realtà virtuali: Gli aspetti psicologici delle tecnologie simulative e il loro impatto sull’eperienza umana (1. ed). Firenze: Giunti.

Rosa, H. (2020). Pedagogia della risonanza. Brescia: Morcelliana.

Rossi, P. G. (2019). La didattica al tempo del digitale. In P. C. Rivoltella, & P. G. Rossi (Eds.), Tecnologie per l’educazione (Ch. 1). Milano: Pearson.

Tagliagambe, S., & Bartolini, P. (2020). Per una filosofia del TRA: Pensare l’esperienza umana sulla soglia. Milano-Udine: Mimesis.

Trevarthen, C., & Aitken, K. J. (2001). Infant Intersubjectivity: Research, Theory, and Clinical Applications. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42(1), 3–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00701

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Winnicott, D. W. (1953). Transitional objects and transitional phenomena; a study of the first not-me possession. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 34, 89–97.

Winnicott, D. W. (2016). Transitional Objects and Transitional Phenomena. In D. W. Winnicott, The Collected Works of D. W. Winnicott (pp. 447–462). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/med:psych/9780190271350.003.0088

Published

2023-04-30

How to Cite

Parola, A. (2023). Participatory Research as a Third Space. Formazione & Insegnamento, 21(1), 122–131. https://doi.org/10.7346/-fei-XXI-01-23_16