FROM ROUTINE TO RENEWAL: AN AUTOETHNOGRAPHIC EXPLORATION OF ACADEMIC VISITS IN INFORMATION MANAGEMENT EDUCATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJMOE.831083Keywords:
Analytic Autoethnography, Place-Based Learning, Teacher Reflection, Affective Engagement, Experiential LearningAbstract
Purpose: The reformation of two analytically distinct dimensions of an Information Management course students’ observable engagement with archival learning and the lecturers’ own pedagogical self-renewal is investigated through this collaborative analytic autoethnography based on a field-based academic visit to the National Archives of Malaysia. Method: This study employed a collaborative analytic autoethnographic approach, in which the lecturer-researchers collectively reflected on and analysed their experiences of the field-based academic visit. Multiple sources of data were incorporated to complete the study, including the lecturer-researchers’ personal journals, post-visit observational notes, memory-based reconstruction checked against contemporaneous records, and naturally occurring student responses documented during and immediately after the visit. The materials were revisited continually through coding for recurring patterns, comparison across sources, and interpretation according to Experiential Learning Theory, place-based pedagogy, and scholarship on emotion in learning. Rather than presenting student outcomes as measured learning gains, the study presents them as observed and expressed responses. Findings: There are three interrelated themes: Firstly, affective engagement reflected in students’ sense of responsibility, sustained attention, questioning, participation, and post-visit discussion. Secondly, theory-to-practice integration, as students observed and attempted the process of tissue repair and book-sewing in an authentic archival setting. Thirdly, teacher self-renewal arose from witnessing familiar disciplinary content become newly meaningful to students. The analysis shows how concrete experience, reflection, conceptual connection, and action overlapped during the visit, while the archive itself functioned as a pedagogically consequential place rather than a neutral venue. Contribution: The study extends field-visit research by foregrounding the reciprocal relationship between students’ situated learning and educators’ reflective renewal in archival and records management education, a context rarely examined through collaborative analytic autoethnography. It argues cautiously that well-designed academic visits may create conditions for both disciplinary meaning-making and renewed pedagogical purpose, without assuming that such outcomes are universal.
Downloads
References
Anderson, L. (2006). Analytic autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(4), 373–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241605280449
Bauerle, T. L., & Park, T. D. (2012). Experiential learning enhances student knowledge retention in the plant sciences. HortTechnology, 22(5), 715–718. https://doi.org/10.21273/horttech.22.5.715
Chang, H. (2008). Autoethnography as method. Left Coast Press.
Dirkx, J. M. (2006). Engaging emotions in adult learning: A Jungian perspective on emotion and transformative learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2006(109), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.204
Djonko-Moore, C. M., & Joseph, N. M. (2016). Out of the classroom and into the city: The use of field trips as an experiential learning tool in teacher education. SAGE Open, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016649648
Ellis, C., Adams, T. E., & Bochner, A. P. (2011). Autoethnography: An overview. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 12(1), Article 10. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-12.1.1589
Fagan, J. B., & Sturm, S. R. (2015). “Drawing in the sand” as a tool for teaching coastal geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 39(3), 478–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2015.1038700
Gruenewald, D. A. (2003). The best of both worlds: A critical pedagogy of place. Educational Researcher, 32(4), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032004003
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2005.17268566
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.
Krakowka, A. R. (2012). Field trips as valuable learning experiences in geography courses. Journal of Geography, 111(6), 236–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2012.707674
Larsen, C., Walsh, C., Almond, N., & Myers, C. (2017). The “real value” of field trips in the early weeks of higher education: The student perspective. Educational Studies, 43(1), 110–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.1245604
Smith, G. A. (2002). Place-based education: Learning to be where we are. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(8), 584–594. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170208300806
Thakur, A., & Cai, Y. (2018). Field trips as a pedagogical tool in interior design education: Student perceptions. The International Journal of Design Education, 12(1), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.18848/2325-128X/CGP/v12i01/21-29
Wurdinger, S., & Allison, P. (2017). Faculty perceptions and use of experiential learning in higher education. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/150
Zembylas, M. (2007). The power and politics of emotions in teaching. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 15(1), 19–35.
