The Reflexive Practitioner

Image by Lernert & Sander for the Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant.

Developing Reflexivity in Research. For this post see texts by Dr Christina Hughes from Warwick University

Developing Reflexivity in Research: The ‘reflexive turn’ is well documented in social science. Dr Christina Hughes provides an overview of the term reflexivity as it has been developed within various literatures (social science methodology, adult and organisational learning). An analysis of ‘four moments’ of reflexivity is given, together with practical discussion of developing reflexivity in relation to research.

Hughes discusses the relevance of:

Biographical aspects of researcher
values
motives
politics
employment
personal status’s
issues related to the key social divisions of age
gender
sexuality
ethnicity
ability as they specifically apply to the research

All knowledge produced through social research is imbued with these aspects of a researcher’s biography.

Class exercise: think about your biography. How might it impact and be part of your approach to your research. How does your biography affect how you see yourself and others, and how others wee you? Are you a black sheep? Does everyone see you that way or do they look at your haircut and see a poodle?

 

Work-based Practice

The key to practitioner success is “developing one’s own continuing theory of practice under real-time conditions” (Argyris and Schon, 1974: 157).

This requires “the practitioner to be able to reflect on his or her own microtheories of action (that is, contextually specific ideas about what works in the real world) and to relate these microtheories to institutional norms and to client expectations’ (Brookfield, 1986: 245).

The process of reflection-in-action is essentially artistic, that is, the practitioner makes judgments and exercises skills for which no explicit rationale has been articulated but in which she nevertheless feels an intuitive sense of confidence’ (Brookfield, 1986: 247).

Understanding and facilitating adult learning: A comprehensive analysis of principles and effective practices

Brookfield, Stephen. Understanding and facilitating adult learning: A comprehensive analysis of principles and effective practices. McGraw-Hill Education (UK), 1986.

The challenge of  real-time conditions

But, there is a problem, around time – “when time is extremely short, decisions have to be rapid and the scope for reflection is extremely limited” (Eraut, 1994: 145)

“…looking to our experiences, connecting with our feelings, and attending to our theories in use. It entails building new understandings to inform our actions in the situation that is unfolding.

The practitioner allows himself to experience surprise, puzzlement, or confusion in a situation which he finds uncertain or unique.

He reflects on the phenomenon before him, and on the prior understandings which have been implicit in his behaviour.” [My emphasis]

How do we prepare if we know our research will be in real-time? Will there be time for note-taking? Might we forget key moments? What techniques can be used to help capture and record these scenarios so that we can analyse them and reflect on them later ? Video or audio recordings? A colleague who takes notes, with, or, for us?

It is easy to gloss over surprise, puzzlement, or confusion, to dismiss them as ‘noise’ in our data. However, often these feelings, however fleeting are signaling to us that something important is taking place. Try to make note of them. Will they help you pinpoint, after reflection (see PAR) the need for an adaption of your research plan? If you look more closely at your confusion does it show you that you may need to read another text, ask a new question?

‘Thinking on our feet’ – Donald A. Schon

“He carries out an experiment which serves to generate both a new understanding of the phenomenon and a change in the situation. (Schön 1983: 68)

We test out our ‘theories’ or, as John Dewey might have put it, ‘leading ideas’ and this allows to develop further responses and moves.

Significantly, to do this we do not closely follow established ideas and techniques – textbook schemes.

We have to think things through, for every case is unique. However, we can draw on what has gone before.”
http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-schon.htm

Action Research (AR) and Participatory Action Research (PAR)

Image: Action Research Protocol after Kemmis (cited in Hopkins, 1985)

Key text: Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986), Becoming Critical: education, knowledge and action research

Stephen Kemmis has developed a simple model of the cyclical nature of the typical action research process.

Each cycle has four steps: plan, act, observe, reflect. Carr and Kemmis (1986) describe action research as:

  • the improvement of practice
  • the improvement of the understanding of practice
  • the improvement of the situation in which the practice takes place

The notion of improvement can be problematic when viewed from the outside. One person’s improvement can be another person’s deterioration. It depends on the beliefs and values underpinning the individual’s perspective. Paradoxically, however, this uncertainty is perhaps the one truth of professional practice. Practice is contingent upon the practitioners’ intentions, values and beliefs and the situation in which those elements are given form.

Reference:  http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/actionresearch/arhome.htm

See more on PAR and AR by Valsa Koshy. Action research for improving practice: A practical guide. Sage, 2005. A useful chapter is available here.

Principles of Action Research

Winter (1989) provides a comprehensive overview of six key principles.[iv]

  1. Reflexive critique
  2. Dialectical critique
  3. Collaborative Resource
  4. Risk
  5. Plural Structure
  6. Theory, Practice, Transformation

Reference: An Overview of the Methodological Approach of Action Research O’Brien, R. (2001). Um exame da abordagem metodológica da pesquisa ação [An Overview of the Methodological Approach of Action Research]. In  Roberto Richardson (Ed.), Teoria e Prática da Pesquisa Ação [Theory and Practice of Action Research]. João Pessoa, Brazil: Universidade Federal da Paraíba. (English version) Available: http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html

Introduction

Illustration: Luke Pearson
Illustration: Luke Pearson

The 20 second question

Can you explain your PhD in 20 seconds or less? Practice this! Every week with friends, colleagues and supervisor.

It is really important to have a clear, focused and non­‐technical motivation for what your PhD is about in terms of contribution to knowledge.

Live with this and adapt it as things change. I’ll ask you to explain this every week, we started out doing it in 1-2 minutes and the goal is that you will get more precise with your use of language, and more concise as the weeks go by.

The assignments that you have to complete for this course dovetail with your formal PhD requirement for year 1. At the end of year 1 you must submit your Literature Review (though it will get updated throughout your PhD study). Therefore, you are expected to complete the first draft of the Literature Review for this course. You will discuss this with your supervisor. We will do some group writing in class to help you start and to prepare you for Academic Writing Month in November. I will closely edit your Literature Review drafts and give you detailed feedback on your writing.

You will also give a short presentation on your PhD research during this course. This will prepare you for conference presentation and we will all work together to help you to improve your presentation skills.

Thanks to Mark d’Inverno for his contribution to this week’s class.