Teaching, Research, Poiesis

FieldValue
dc.contributor.authorConway, Kyle
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-13T17:29:43Z
dc.date.available2022-07-13T17:29:43Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationKyle Conway, "Teaching, Research, Poiesis," translation of "Enseignement, recherche, poïésis," Communication 39, no. 1 (2022).
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10393/43782
dc.description.abstractIn this paper, the author presents a different approach to research writing by first looking at the nature of the research being written. He calls into question a distinction all too often taken for granted, namely that between research and teaching, to shed light on the important links between the two. The experiential aspect of a course suffers the moment it is written down and the content set in stone. That is the first paradox. The second relates to the content itself. A course’s content is a stream of signs too dynamic for our conventional analytical tools. The third paradox concerns this setting-in-stone, which, no matter what, does not stop the course-as-text from becoming an experience once more. This is where the potential of teaching-as-research is fully realized. These analyses revisit the first two paradoxes before tackling the third in the conclusion, where the author describes how a course-as-text can become an event to be experienced once again.
dc.language.isoen
dc.rightsAttribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
dc.subjectresearch
dc.subjectteaching
dc.subjectpoiesis
dc.subjectRicoeur, Paul
dc.subjectcourse-as-text
dc.titleTeaching, Research, Poiesis
dc.typeArticle
CollectionCommunication - Publications

Files
2022-teaching-research-poiesis.pdfmain file142.05 kBAdobe PDFOpen


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons