01 SES 13 A, Inclusive Responses to Diversity through Child-Teacher Dialogue
This paper will provide accounts of what happened in three of the schools (Denmark, England and Spain), as trios of teachers worked with their student researchers to implement Inclusive Inquiry. These accounts are produced collaboratively with school teachers, although the university partners take overall responsibility for drawing together the evidence that is collected and drafting the text. The accounts aim to address three key questions: - How did each school use the process of the Inclusive Inquiry model? - How did each school prepare children to become researchers? - What activities were used to engage with the views of children? - What were the challenges encountered in implementing the Inclusive Inquiry model in each of the countries? The evidence used to formulate the accounts is generated by the teachers and the student researchers through their meetings to plan their action research. University partners capture this information through separate focus group discussions with the teachers, the student researchers and groups of other children. Each research lesson is reported using a template as the format. These reports are then analysed qualitatively by the researchers at the end of the first phase of the study, focusing in particular on the relationship between the processes involved and the impact on students and teachers. This initial analysis is fed back to the school partners in written form in a way that is intended to stimulate reflection and draw lessons that will influence future practice within the project schools and more widely. The participation of university staff in the teachers’ action research is intended to strengthen these activities by providing advice and support. At the same time, it should help to overcome some of the reported limitations of action research (Ebbutt, 1985). These include the failure to provide adequate explanations as to how new insights come to be generated through the research process. A central strategy in this respect involves the use of triangulation as a means of analysing and interpreting evidence, and as a way of ensuring trustworthiness in respect to data that are collected (Creswell and Miller, 2000; Lincoln and Guba, 1985; Maxwell, 1992). This requires an engagement with the different views of teachers, students and academics in ways that encourage sharing of ideas and mutual challenge. The views of students regarding their experiences of practice, are seen as being essential elements in providing challenges to practitioners about their existing approaches.
Creswell, J. W. and Miller, D. L. (2000) Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39 (3): 124–130. Ebbutt, D. (1985) Educational action research: Some general concerns and specific quibbles, in Burgess, G. (ed) Issues in Educational research: Qualitative methods. London: The Falmer Press. Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. G. (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. London: SAGE. Maxwell, J.A. (1992) Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educational Review, 62 (3): 279–300.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.