Introduction

1. Empowerment, participation and voicingin participative action researchNicolina Montesano MontessoriUtrecht University of Applied Sciences, Netherlandsnicolien.montessori@hu.nl

2. Introduction Both presenters are working as practice-orientedresearcherswith a shared commitment tosocialjusticeandinclusionand A focus on collaboration, emergent research designs, critical discourse analysis, horizontal research relations and context-relevant research

3. Purpose of this presentation Sharing examples of small-scale practitioner research, facilitated by experienced researchers from the university of applied sciences ; Explanation of purposes and characteristics of the research approach developed to reach our specific goals; Brief explanation of these principles in our first research on social justice (presentation 1); Presentation of 3 examples of case studies (presentation 2)

4. General characteristics of our research approach • Practitionersandpupils are invitedandpreparedto act as participant researchers in the project • Horizontal research relations betweenuniversityand participant researchers • A hermeneutic research approach • Emergent research designs • Participants have ownership of theirown part of the research • A shared process of knowledgeconstruction EAPRIL empowerment, participation and voicing

5. Methodology • The design of a theoretical-methodologicalframeworkbased on bothparticipative action research andcritical discourse analysis • The use of dialogicalmethodsto collect data • The use or design of new practices in the environment of the participant researchers EAPRIL empowerment, participation and voicing

6. Initial project: social justice in four primary schools Keyquestions: How do teachers make sense of the socialprocessesandrelationships in their classrooms in terms of socialjustice? How do theyunderstand the dilemma’s theyexperiencewhentryingtorealise these socialprocessesandrelationships? How do theyunderstand the institutional, politicalandculturalconditions in whichtheir teaching is realised in terms of socialjustice? EAPRIL empowerment, participation and voicing

7. Development of an emergent research design Combination of Participative Action Research andCritical Discourse Analysis 1st cycle: open narrative interviews with teacher participants on their views on andexperienceswithsocialjustice Focus group (1) 2nd stage: descriptionand analysis of bumpymoments Focus group (2) 3rd stage: observationbyteachers of specificchildrenand a constructivedialogue Focusgroup (3) EAPRIL empowerment, participation and voicing

8. Focus group 1 • General check of the outcome of the analysis of the narrative interviews • Teachers definedtheirown research questionsfor the next stage of the research • (shift in role: fromproviding information tobecoming a participant researcher) • Teachers define ‘social justice’ as enhancing the self-regulative capacity of pupils • Selection and evaluation of Harvey (1996) model of social justice ECER Social Justice and Intercultural EducationHU powerpoint template

9. Stage 2 study of bumpymoments • Bumpymoments are moments of tension in the classroom whichevokemoralreflections in the teacher: did I take the right action? • First unstructeredreportsand feedback fromuniversityresearchers • Second: a design whichincludeddescription, formulation of alternatives, reflectionand plan for the futureand feedback fromuniversityresearchers EAPRIL empowerment, participation and voicing

10. Focus group 2 • Teachers understoodthatforsocialjusticetobereached, their focus should shift to the individualchildratherthan the group • Teachers decidedto focus on a particularsituation or pupil for the 3rd, reconstruction stage EAPRIL empowerment, participation and voicing

11. Stage 3 • Pupilsstartedto design instrumentstoresolvetheirconflicts (conflict board, re-writinginccidentsthroughnarratives) • Pupilsdesignedtheirown personal action plan whenfacingdifficultmoments • Pupilswereinvitedtoexplain the background of challengingbehaviour, afterwhich the road was open for new solutions or different behaviour EAPRIL empowerment, participation and voicing

12. Outcomes 1 The practitioners involved developed an understanding of social justice understood as the facilitation of students in terms of enhancing their self-regulative capacity Students designed solution-oriented plans which they used when bumpy moments occurred Teachers developed innovative ways of involving students to solve conflicts or to deal with bumpy moments EAPRIL empowerment, participation and voicing

13. Outcomes 2 New research approaches and methods: The use of narrative inquiry as an instrument for voicing A template to record bumpy moments and to facilitate reflection and thinking of alternative ways of acting Applying Harvey’s model from social theory in an educational practice and adding an extra moment to the model EAPRIL empowerment, participation and voicing

14. Outcomes 3 Teachers reported that bumpy moments became less frequent More students developed competencies to regulate their behavior Students learned to support and help each other and to give and receive feedback A more organic process of learning and living together led to a more positive, tolerant and stimulating climate in the classroom where individual strengths of students became the prime focus EAPRIL empowerment, participation and voicing

15. Outcomes (4) Shift in definition of dilemmas ECER Social Justice and Intercultural EducationHU powerpoint template

16. References Ayers, W., Quinn, T. and Stovall, D., (2009). (eds)., Handbook of social justice in education, New York, London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group. Carr, W., Kemmis S. (1986). Becoming critical. Education, knowledge, and action research, London: Palmer. Habermas, J. (1974). Theory and practice. Trans. John Viertel. Londen: Heinemann. Harvey, D. (1996). Justice, nature and the geography of difference, Oxford: Blackwell. Kemmis, S., Smith, T. (2008). Enabling Praxis: Challenges for education, Rotterdam, Taipei: Sense Publishers. Montesano Montessori, N., Schuman, H. & De Lange, R. (2012). Kritischediscoursanalyse. De macht en kracht van taal en tekst. Brussel: Academic & Scientific Publishers. Montesano Montessori, N., Schuman, H. & Ponte, P. (2011). “Omgaan met diversiteit in een reguliere schoolklas n het licht van sociale rechtvaardigheid”. Orthopedagogiek: Onderzoek en Praktijk, 50, nr 4. 2011, pp. 147-159. Montesano Montessori, N. & Ponte, P. (2012). “Researching classroom communications and relations in the light of social justice”, Educational Action Research 20:2, pp. 251-266 Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Eds.) (2001). Handbook of Action Research – Participative Inquiry and Practice. London: Sage.Trahar, S. (ed.). (2006). Narrative Research on Learning: comparative and international perspectives, Oxford: Symposium Books. Van Kan, C.A. van, Ponte, P., Verloop, N. (2009). A phenomenological repertory grid design for understanding moral dimensions in complex teacher - pupil interactions (this article is being submitted for publication). Young, I.M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference, Princeton: Princeton University Press. EAPRIL empowerment, participation and voicing