Sense-making in theory and practice: a metatheoretical foundation and application for health information seeking

This thesis attempts to provide deeper historical and theoretical grounding for sense-making, thereby illustrating its applicability to practical information seeking research. In Chapter One I trace the philosophical origins of Brenda Dervin’s theory known as “sense making,” reaching beyond current scholarship that locates the origins of sense-making in twentieth-century Phenomenology and Communication theory and find its rich ontological, epistemological, and etymological heritage that dates back to the Pre-Socratics. After exploring sense-making’s Greek roots, I examine sense-making’s philosophical undercurrents found in Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit (1807), where he also returns to the simplicity of the Greeks for his concept of sense. With Chapter Two I explore sense-making methodology and find, in light of the Greek and Hegelian dialectic, a dialogical bridge connecting sense-making’s theory with pragmatic uses. This bridge between Dervin’s situation and use occupies a distinct position in sense-making theory. Moreover, building upon Brenda Dervin’s model of sense-making, I use her metaphors of gap and bridge analogy to discuss the dialectic and dialogic components of sense making. The purpose of Chapter Three is pragmatic – to gain insight into the online information-seeking needs, experiences, and motivation of first-degree relatives (FDRs) of breast cancer survivors through the lens of sense-making. This research analyses four questions: 1) information-seeking behavior among FDRs of cancer survivors compared to survivors and to undiagnosed, non-related online cancer information seekers in the general population, 2) types of and places where information is sought, 3) barriers or gaps and satisfaction rates FDRs face in their cancer information quest, and 4) types and degrees of cancer information and resources FDRs want and use in their information search for themselves and other family members. An online survey instrument designed to investigate these questions was developed and pilot tested. Via an email communication, the Susan Love Breast Cancer Research Foundation distributed 322,000 invitations to its membership to complete the survey, and from March 24th to April 5th 10,692 women agreed to take the survey with 8,804 volunteers actually completing survey responses. Of the 8,804 surveys, 95% of FDRs have searched for cancer information online, and 84% of FDRs use the Internet as a sense-making tool for additional information they have received from doctors or nurses. FDRs report needing much more information than either survivors or family/friends in ten out of fifteen categories related to breast and ovarian cancer. When searching for cancer information online, FDRs also rank highest in several of sense-making’s emotional levels: uncertainty, confusion, frustration, doubt, and disappointment than do either survivors or friends and family. The sense-making process has existed in theory and praxis since the early Greeks. In applying sense–making’s theory to a contemporary problem, the survey reveals unaddressed situations and gaps of FDRs’ information search process. FDRs are a highly motivated group of online information seekers whose needs are largely unaddressed as a result of gaps in available online information targeted to address their specific needs. Since FDRs represent a quarter of the population, further research addressing their specific online information needs and experiences is necessary.

A socially just rationale for an Australian curriculum? : a critical thematic policy analysis of political speeches in education (2007-2010)

In late 2007, newly elected Prime Minister Kevin Rudd placed education reform on centre stage as a key policy in the Labor Party's agenda for social reform in Australia. A major policy strategy within this 'Education Revolution' was the development of a national curriculum, the Australian Curriculum Within this political context, this study is an investigation into how social justice and equity have been used in political speeches to justify the need for, and the nature of, Australia's first official national curriculum. The aim is to provide understandings into what is said or not said; who is included or excluded, represented or misrepresented; for what purpose; and for whose benefit. The study investigates political speeches made by Education Ministers between 2008 and 201 0; that is, from the inception of the Australian Curriculum to the release of the Phase 1 F - 10 draft curriculum documents in English, mathematics, science and history. Curriculum development is defined here as an ongoing process of complex conversations. To contextualise the process of curriculum development within Australia, the thesis commences with an initial review of curriculum development in this nation over the past three decades. It then frames this review within contemporary curriculum theory; in particular it calls upon the work of William Pinar and the key notions of currere and reconceptualised curriculum. This contextualisation work is then used as a foundation to examine how social justice and equity have been represented in political speeches delivered by the respective Education Ministers Julia Gillard and Peter Garrett at key junctures of Australian Curriculum document releases. A critical thematic policy analysis is the approach used to examine selected official speech transcripts released by the ministerial media centre through the DEEWR website. This approach provides a way to enable insights and understandings of representations of social justice and equity issues in the policy agenda. Broader social implications are also discussed. The project develops an analytic framework that enables an investigation into the framing of social justice and equity issues such as inclusion, equality, quality education, sharing of resources and access to learning opportunities in political speeches aligned with the development of the Australian Curriculum Through this analysis, the study adopts a focus on constructions of educationally disadvantaged students and how the solutions of 'fixing' teachers and providing the 'right' curriculum are presented as resolutions to the perceived problem. In this way, it aims to work towards offering insights into political justifications for a national curriculum in Australia from a social justice perspective.

Ukrainan vuosien 1932-33 nälänhädän historiapolitiikka

Ukrainan presidentiksi nousi ns. oranssin vallankumouksen nosteessa Viktor Justsenko. Hänen presidenttikaudellaan (2005-2010) vuosien 1932-33 nälänhätä (holodomor) nousi keskeiseksi sekä sisä-, että ulkopolitiikan teemaksi. Holodomor, joka viittaa nälällä aiheutettuun tuhoon, pyrittiin tuomaan osaksi ukrainalaista kollektiivista muistia. Justsenkon aloitteesta säädettiin laki, jonka mukaan holodomor oli ukrainalaisten kansanmurha. Vuosina 1932-33 ympäri Neuvostoliittoa vallitsi nälänhätä. Ukrainalainen maaseutu kärsi pahoin nälänhädän seurauksista, sillä eri arvioiden mukaan 3,5-10 miljoonaa ukrainalaista menehtyi joko suoranaisesti tai välillisesti nälänhädän seurauksena. Ukrainan itsenäistyttyä nälänhätä, jota oli diasporassa alettu kutsua holodomoriksi (nälkätuho), nousi kansallisen historian keskeiseksi teemaksi. Ukrainalainen historioitsija Georgi Kasjanov on nimittänyt tätä uutta vaihetta historian kansallistamiseksi. Tässä työssä pohditaan sitä, miksi holodomor nostettiin keskeiseen asemaan presidentti Viktor Justsenkon valtakaudella. Keskeinen vastakkainasettelun lähtökohta on ollut itsenäisen Ukrainan ja Neuvostoliiton seuraajavaltion Venäjän suhtautuminen nälänhätään 1932-33. Ukrainalaisissa näkökulmissa on painottunut stalinistisen järjestelmän kritiikki, mikä toisaalta on saatettu tulkita myös koko kommunistisen aikakauden tuomitsemiseksi. Venäjällä taas nälänhätä on tulkittu useimmiten yleisneuvostoliittolaiseksi tragediaksi, joka ei kohdistunut erityisesti mitään tiettyä kansallisuutta vastaan. Tutkimuksen keskeinen lähtökohta on tarkastella ukrainalaisten ja venäläisten tulkintojen eroja ja sitä, millä tavoin holodomorilla on tehty politiikkaa. Tutkimusaineistona on käytetty ukrainalaisten osalta presidentti Justsenkon puheita, lakialoitteita ja muita julkilausumia, sekä eräiden yhteiskunnallisten toimijoiden ja historioitsijoiden kannanottoja. Venäläisen osapuolen tulkintoja on pyritty luomaan muutamien tutkimusten ja yhteiskunnallisten toimijoiden, sekä poliitikkojen lausumien pohjalta. Suurin osa aineistosta on kerätty venäjänkielisistä verkkolehdistä. Presidentti Justsenkolle vuosien 1932-1933 historiasta muodostui ase, jolla hän kävi omaa poliittista taisteluaan lännen puolesta itää vastaan. Välit Venäjään olivat viileät koko hänen presidenttikautensa ajan. Lähimmäksi presidentin kantaa holodomor-kysymyksessä tulivat diasporaukrainalaiset. Venäjällä kritisoitiin ankarasti Justsenkon tanssia haudoilla eli hänen tapaansa käyttää nälänhädän uhreja oman politiikkansa välineenä. Venäläiset korostivat nälänhädän tragediaa kaikkien Neuvostoliiton kansojen tragediana. Holodomor oli osa kansallisen historian uudelleenkirjoitusta ja kansakunnan rakentamisen prosessia. Justsenkon päämääränä oli lähentää Ukrainaa länteen, jolloin ukrainalaisen kansakunnan uhriasema antoi oikeutuksen sanoutua irti neuvostoajasta. Tietyssä mielessä holodomor-projekti oli venäläisvastainen, sillä se implisiittisesti tuki käsitystä venäläisistä rikollisina, kansanmurhan toimeenpanijoina.