Researching And Explaining Improvements In Practice With Children's Services From An Educational Perspective on Learning.

Symposium Proposal for the British Educational Research Association 2007 Annual Conference at the University of London, Institute of Education.

 

Convenor Marie Huxtable

Chair Je Kan Adler-Collins, Fukuoka University.

Discussant Dr. Margaret Farren, Dublin City University

 

Presenters:

Nigel Harrisson, Inclusion Manager for Special Educational Needs, Bath & North East Somerset.

Christine Jones, Inclusion Officer for Bath and North East Somerset.

Marie Huxtable, Senior Educational Psychologist, Bath & North East Somerset.

Jack Whitehead, Lecturer in Education, Department of Education, University of Bath.

Overview

There is much debate in BERA and elsewhere about the nature of the standards that are appropriate for judging the quality and validity of the knowledge created by educational researchers who are researching their own workplace practices.  The presentations focus on the narratives of the educational influences in learning of four practitioner-researchers who explicate their living standards of judgment as explanatory principles in their workplace practice. The narratives explain their educational influences in learning in the processes of improving practices in the context of children's services. The ontological coherence in each narrative is given by each researcher outlining the ontological values and understandings they use to give meaning and purpose to their productive lives in their workplace. The methodological coherence is supported through the use of an action research approach in which the embodied ontological values expressed in practice are clarify and formed into explanatory principles. These principles are used to explain the educational influences in learning in the processes of improving practice.

The coherence of the symposium is also supported by its educational perspective on the focus of learning in educational research. Educational research is characterized in terms of educational theories that can explain the educational influences of individuals in their own learning, in the learning of others and in the learning of social formations through their organizational learning. As well as principles of coherence being derived  from ontology, epistemology and methodology, the main principle of coherence is provided by the logic of inclusionality.

Following Marcuse, logic is taken to be the form of thought that is appropriate for comprehending the real as rational. Following Rayner, the logic of inclusionality is a flow form of relationally dynamic awareness of space and boundaries that is connective, reflexive and co-creative.  Each presenter demonstrates this awareness of inclusionality in the interconnecting and branching networks of their communications as they influence each others' enquiries into their work as:

an Inclusion Manager for Special Educational Needs, managing parts of the service;

an Inclusion Officer responsible for recommending the award of the Inclusion Quality Mark to Schools;

a Senior Educational Psychologist working with teachers to enhance the gifts and talents of all pupils through a perspective of inclusionality;

a University Educational Researcher seeking to contribute to educational knowledge through research into the logics and values of inclusionality.

Supporting Statement


¥ Background to the topic

The membership of BERA has always included education and educational researchers (Whitty, 2005). The kinds of theory generated by education and educational researchers are different. Education researchers generate and test theories within the forms of fields of knowledge associated with sociology, psychology, philosophy, history, theology, economics, politics, leadership and management. Educational researchers generate and test theories of educational influences in learning. As an association of Educational Researchers we hope that BERA members will be interested in the educational theories generated by educational practitioner-researchers, with their living standards of judgment, logics and values of inclusionality (Jones & Huxtable, 2005).

¥ Research questions and foci of enquiry

The issues and questions that move the enquiries of the four researchers are:

Integrating Local Authority Children's Services-Living values of judgement as a leader and manager involved in educational inclusion.

 

How can I improve my practice as an Inclusion Officer responsible for recommending the award of the Inclusion Quality Mark to Schools?


How do I improve my educational practice; supporting educators developing inclusive and inclusional theory and practice of gifts and talents as I respond to national developments?

 

How do I improve my practice as a University Educational Researcher seeking to contribute to educational knowledge through research into the logics and values of inclusionality?



The question that draws the researchers into a collaborative enquiry is:

How do we influence each others' enquiries into the generation of educational theories that can explain each individual's educational influences in their own learning, in the learning of others and in the learning of social formations?

¥ Research methods and mapping of literature

The living theory action research methodology draws on the work of Whitehead and McNiff (2006) and includes the methodological inventiveness described by Dadds and Hart (2001) and the emergent living theory approach to inclusional and responsive practice developed by Naidoo (2005). In relation to the methods used to study the organisational learning, Naidoo's inclusional and responsive approach to learning will be connected to ideas on organisational learning (Porras and Robertson, 1992, Marshall 2004). Organisational Learning will be taken as a metaphor that provides a 'rallying cry' (Harvey and Denton, 1999) for those in organisations who are tasked with developing their organisations to adapt to their environments (Harrisson, 2005).  A key feature of the research approach is the integration of learning with 'organising' (Kirk, 2001) in the organisation.

 

¥ Analytical and theoretical frames


The robustness of the analytic and theoretical frames will be ensured by the application of the principles of rigour for action research first explicated by Winter (1989) and the principles of social validity in Habermas' (1976) analysis of communication and the evolution of society. The theoretical frames of each individual's explanation of educational influence in learning will be formed from the ontological principles used by the individual to give meaning and purpose to their productive work in education (Whitehead & McNiff, 2006).

¥ Research findings and contribution to knowledge

The contributions to educational knowledge will be constituted by the explanations given by each practitioner-researcher for their educational influences in learning. Evidence of this influence will be provided by narratives subjected to the social validation of peers in the service. The original contributions to knowledge will be in the explication of relationally dynamic standards of judgment for evaluating the quality and validity of the explanations of influence in learning about improving practices of inclusionality within a childrens' service.  The contributions will include visual narratives with video-data to show that standards of inclusionality can be understood in terms of the expression of the individual's embodied values in workplace relationships.

References

 

Dadds, M. & Hart, S. (2001) Doing Practitioner Research Differently, p. 166. London; RoutledgeFalmer.

 

Harrisson, N. (2005) Integrated Local Authority Children's Services: A Critical Review. Dissertation for the MSc in Leadership and Organisation in Public Services, University of the West of England. Retrieved 10 January 2006 from

  http://www.jackwhitehead.com/B&NES/nhma.pdf

 

Harvey C. and Denton J. (1999) 'To come of age: the antecedents of organisational learning'. Journal of Management studies 36:7

 

Jones, C. & Huxtable, M. (2006) How can we support educators to develop skills and understandings inclusionally?  Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British Educational Research Association, 7 September 2006, Warwick University. Retrieved 10 January 2007 from http://www.jackwhitehead.com/bera06/mhcjbera06.htm

 

Kirk P. (2001) 'Organisational Learning: containing the turbulence'. Unpublished notes for the Leadership and Organisation in Public Services course (LOPS). University of the West Of England.

 

Marshall, J. (2004) Living systemic thinking: Exploring quality in first-person action research. Action Research Vol. 2 (3) Summer 2004, pp. 309-329.

 

Naidoo, M. (2005) I am because we are (a never ending story). The emergence of a living theory of inclusional and responsive practice. Ph.D. University of Bath. Retrieved 10 January 2006 from http://people.bath.ac.uk/edsajw/naidoo.shtml .

 

Porras J and Robertson P (1992) 'Organisation Development in handbook of industrial and organisational psychology, eds. Dunnette M and Hough L 3: 719-822. Consulting Psychologists Press.

 

Whitehead, J. & McNiff, J. (2006) Action Research Living Theory, London; Sage.

 

Whitty, G. (2005) Education(al) research and education policy making: is conflict inevitable? Presidential Address to the British Educational Research Association, University of Glamorgan, 17 September 2005.