CDAI Cyber Library

Additional FUN
CDAI Fellowship Resources

(a film, a science fiction story, etc.)

1) See the three-minute-long Dance of the Action-Logics for an aesthetic, intuitive appreciation of the developmental action-logics, choreographed and enacted by Action Inquiry Fellow Karen Yeyinmen, with the support of an Alchemists’ Workparty and her husband, Ali.

2) Do you like Star Trek? Then this analysis of a Star Trek episode ( STAR TREK ) in which Captain Picard falls in love with Commander Nella Daren may be a relatively painless way for you to become more acquainted with how relational and organizational action-logics can transform.

3) Are you more interested in a work-related example of how a person can use CDAI to play a relatively constructive role in a small software company’s transformation? ( Transforming a Small Software Co ) If so, give a gander.

4) If you are interested in a more general account of how action learning can help large divisions of a major companies transform, ( Fresh Perspective on Action Learning-2 ) you want Action Inquiry Associate and Fellow, Mary Stacey’s story about that. Check it out.

5) Are you so serious about these CDAI ideas and practices that, in order to try to trace the developmental changes in your own life, you might try to write your own five or ten or twenty-page autobiography (being scrupulously true to your agonies and your ecstasies, since it’s just for you!)???

Then, you may enjoy “History & Herstory: Your Story & My Story” ( student autobio ) It shares Action Inquiry Fellow Ed Kelly’s initial summary autobiography (which doesn’t reveal anything really terrible ( : ) ) because he didn’t quite get what the real challenge is, back in 2009 when he wrote it). Ed’s first brief effort is followed by a much fuller and truly self-scathing-and-self-appreciating autobiography written by ‘Gwen,’ a participant in a long, long ago elective course, who gave her permission to use her (disguised) work for educational purposes such as yours.

6) Let’s say you are a student or a teacher, or both… and you’d like to consider what a class might do and feel like if it were conducted, not only in order to teach the content of whatever subject is at stake (engineering, research methods, leadership, etc.), but also in order to encourage both the students’ and the instructors’ development through action inquiry.

If your focus is college undergraduate learning and teaching, ( CMiller – Dissertation FINAL pdf ) and you want to hear about some really challenging experiences for both the students and the teacher, you’ll want to look at Action Inquiry Friend, Dr. Cara Miller,’s University of San Diego, School of Leadership and Education Sciences doctoral dissertation, completed in May 2012.

(Dissertations are long, so here’s a hint: if you’re new to action inquiry, then the first half is great for showing you others getting a first taste too and should be helpful; if you’ve already read Action Inquiry and made some attempt to practice new patterns of action for yourself, then you may want to skip lightly through until about halfway, when you really start getting an idea what double- and triple-loop learning can mean in particular instances of teaching and learning.)

If your focus is Masters’ level teaching and learning – whether in engineering, law, public service, education, or medicine – take a peek at Action Inquiry Fellows Erica Foldy, Jenny Rudolph, and Steve Taylor’s article “Teaching Reflective Practice.” ( HAR chapter – Taylor, Rudolph & Foldy )

If your focus is Doctoral level social science research methods teaching and learning, ( 06 08 Integral Ed ch.doc ) try the chapter in Integral Teaching by Erica Rosen and Bill Torbert. Its second half offers many illustrations of double- and triple-loop learning opportunities.

7) Okay, this is your next to last chance. This set of options is aimed primarily toward social scientists who care about the nature of science itself and about how a science with, about, and for people in action must triangulate among the traditional third-person voice and perspective of the natural sciences and our enacted first- and second-person voices and perspectives.

a) Action Inquiry Fellows Erica Foldy and Steve Taylor offer articles on the significance of claiming one’s own first-person voice in action inquiry and interweaving it with second- and third-person voices. See Foldy’s “Claiming a Voice on Race”,( Claiming a Voice-1 ) and/or Taylor’s “Presentational Form In First-Person Research”. ( PFFPR )

b) Action Inquiry Fellows Hilary Bradbury-Huang and David McCallum SJ offer pieces on primarily second-person voice action research engagements. Bradbury-Huang’s is in the form of an interview with Joanna Macy on her approach to sustainability issues ( Bradbury-1.MacyARJ )

McCallum offers his dissertation, ( David McCallum Dissertation ) a third-person study of how participants at different developmental action-logics describe in their first-person voices how differently they experience the same second-person learning environment of a group relations conference. McCallum’s finding about the different ways people at different action-logics fall back to earlier action-logics and recover from such fallback has become particularly well-known in developmental circles.

c) Three more general discussions (but with first- and second-person voice illustrations) of what a social science that interweaves all three types of voice looks like are:

  • AI Fellow Hilary Bradbury’s “What Is Good Action Research?” ( ARJ_WhatisGoodAR-1 )
  • AI Fellows Torbert & Taylor’s “Interweaving Multiple Qualities of Attention for Timely Action”, ( HAR chapter Torbert & Taylor ) and
  • AI Fellows John McGuire, Chuck Palus, and Bill Torbert’s “Toward Interdependent Organizing and Researching”. ( 07 Interdep Org & Res HCMRCh6 )

d) Action Inquiry Fellow Jenny Rudolf’s award-winning article on “The Dynamics of Action-Oriented Problem-Solving.” ( JWR2009DxProblemSolving )

8) Finally, much of Bill Torbert’s published work is available under Bill Torbert on this Resources page…