Looking at the diff perspectives that comes out of the two research approaches will be fascinating, a research project in itself!
Speaking for myself and not others: I was thinking though, that the collab autoethnography did not *need* to be that open. The point was to be collaborative, participatory, to allow people to express their story in their own voice. Openness was more a tech convenience than an intended value (for me anyway) but some people seem to have felt that openness fit well with the ethos of the course and research.
The issue for me is that what is open is not the research but the raw data. I was thinking of the raw data like a series of mini-blogs (so was ok with people looking in) but now realize it is not really.
I think the plan now, though, is to publish the raw data in some form but with the caveat that we do not wish it to be interpreted by anyone outside the group. I wrote about the collab autoethnography
In the latest article Shyam and I wrote for Hybrid Pedagogy and I did not link to it. I realize now that I would never have linked to it in its raw form because it is not yet (in my mind) at that stage yet (not yet “research”)… But we’ll get there. I like that keeping it open meant ppl could dip in and out and comment and revisit. I see how tweeting thr link online meant anyone could”listen in”.