A section of the Kirklees Graphical Poster: Participants' questions. (Click to see this in more detail)
In its introduction, the Kirklees Learning History makes it clear that it is but a partial account of a complex project that involved many different people. From the workbooks it appears that readers appreciated and got value from the stories presented, but, not surprisingly, many questions were raised. Several of these centred on the perspectives that were missing.
For instance what about the community involved in the regeneration project? Had the scheme worked for all involved? Has it improved real-life on the estate?
The missing perspective from Kirklees council also left some unanswered questions dangling. Who provided the leadership to make this happen? How did the relationship evolve when KNH moved out of the council. Another reader was suspicious of why the researcher had not gained access to inquire into the pre-history of the case. He wondered if the changing political context in Kirklees had been a factor.
The Kirklees Learning History highlights more than any other, that this research is not about drilling down to the absolute 'truth' of what happened; rather it is about finding value in the stories we can gather. There will be more to say about this later when I comment on the research process.
In the meantime, further perspectives on Kirklees are very welcome though an extensive round of perspective gathering will not be carried out (as we did with Merton).
Return to the summary of readers' comments
[Lost? Click here to find out what this blog is about, how to navigate around and how to take part in the conversation]
Comments