Hi Maha, thanks for reading the blog post.
I am interested in pulling to bits this idea of rigor.
I keep getting the expression ‘rigor mortis’ distracting my dissection of the concept. It’s a very annoying interference.
I am interested in what ‘scholarship’ might mean and what ‘scholarship’ does mean and what ‘scholarship’ did mean.
I have an initial impression that the people involved in hybrid pedagogy are moving in the right direction and are asking the right questions as far as ‘scholarship’ is concerned.
I view traditional ‘academic’ writing as of interest as a) a fun game b) a means to meet people c) as intellectual stimulation d) as a strategic tool
There are all sorts of problems with it.
I see no interest in it if it is not used as a transformative tool.
In order for it to be a transformative tool, it, itself, must be transformed.
As for blogging I just respect an urge to write.
It frees me for moments so I can more easily accept the boundaries of ‘academic rigor’ when the mood takes me.
I suppose for me that research is in both the process of writing/of creation and in the ongoing reflection on what emerges.