might this in some way explain why she/he made such strenuous efforts to be to be as belonging? ‘accepted’ – ‘acknowledged’ – We have already seen in Chapter Four (4.2.4:102) how Alex has referred to himself/herself as someone who has from the course”, albeit only “graduated just. The research provided opportunities for Alex to with the tutors, “engage to some minor extent, in, in a way that will model again an engagement with the tutors that could be, could slightly open up the silence” (Int3). There was evidence here of Alex’s perceptions of how he/she could be the ‘bridge’ between these two learners and teaching staff, which echoes ‘communities’ – a community of practice approach. It is not clear, however, why Alex feels that there is a which needs to be up’ perhaps there is ‘silence’ ‘opened – something here which links to earlier expressions of dissatisfaction with the course (p.101). Is it that Alex to be perceived in this role, both by self and others, and has constructed this accordingly? Alex appears to be demonstrating ‘identity’ how his/her knowledge and actions validate a claim to legitimate participation within the community of teaching professionals. Alex also identified himself/herself as the amongst fellow-learners on the DTLLS course, ‘expert’ with reference to being experienced on the same course, but a higher “at level of the same thing” (Int3). Yet, does this indicate that these identities are or simply that Alex is behaving and enacting behaviours which would, ‘strong’, in some way, reduce the gap’ between the and the ‘imagined ‘ideal’ real self’ (Schaffer, 2000: 164)? If Alex’s participation as a ‘perceived volunteer was motivated by a to carry out the activities of the group” “need (Mayes, 2992: 169), then this would become more of a social identity with
might this in some way explain why she/he made such strenuous efforts to be ‘accepted’ – to be ‘acknowledged’ – as belonging? We have already seen in Chapter Four (4.2.4:102) how Alex has referred to himself/herself as someone who has “graduated from the course”, albeit only just. The research provided opportunities for Alex to “engage with the tutors, to some minor extent, in, in a way that will model again an engagement with the tutors that could be, could slightly open up the silence” (Int3). There was evidence here of Alex’s perceptions of how he/she could be the ‘bridge’ between these two ‘communities’ – learners and teaching staff, which echoes a community of practice approach. It is not clear, however, why Alex feels that there is a ‘silence’ which needs to be ‘opened up’ – perhaps there is something here which links to earlier expressions of dissatisfaction with the course (p.101). Is it that Alex to be perceived in this role, both by self and others, and has constructed this ‘identity’ accordingly? Alex appears to be demonstrating how his/her knowledge and actions validate a claim to legitimate participation within the community of teaching professionals. Alex also identified himself/herself as the ‘expert’ amongst fellow-learners on the DTLLS course, with reference to being experienced on the same course, but “at a higher level of the same thing” (Int3). Yet, does this indicate that these identities are ‘strong’, or simply that Alex is behaving and enacting behaviours which would, in some way, reduce the ‘imagined gap’ between the ‘ideal’ and the ‘perceived real self’ (Schaffer, 2000: 164)? If Alex’s participation as a volunteer was motivated by a “need to carry out the activities of the group” (Mayes, 2992: 169), then this would become more of a social identity with
Observations_a%20vehicle%20for%20enabling%20learner%20voice%20and%20developing%20expert%20learners.docx