Recently, there has emerged an important interest on ‘returning’ to a cohesive body of work of practices theories in the field of education (see Landri, 2012). Particularly, by focusing on the practice turn (Schatzki, Knorr Cetina, & Von Savigny, 2001) educational research has lay a path to observe and analyse the coexistence of educational activities and things in diverse contexts.

Inspired by Schatzki’s practice theory (2001, 2002) and specifically his late work on ‘the timespace of human activity’ (2010) this presentation shortly sets the stage for developing  empirical research on educational practices. It does so by, first, discussing diverse theoretical elements of Schatzki’s theory referring particularly to the entangled composition between practices and material entities. In doing so, a particular emphasis seeks to bring into view the way in which Schatzki’s work has inspired different educational fields to analyse their empirical phenomena from a social ontology approach. Over the last years a branch of educational research, mostly associated with his site ontology has focused on different kind of learning practices (e.g. Czerniewicz, 2016; Manidis & Scheeres, 2013). Meanwhile a similar approach has taken a recent interest on the specific field of information literacy from the standpoint of Schatzki’s practice theory (Lloyd, 2010; Schreiber, 2014). Likewise, a relevant line of work for this research has taken interest on Schatzki’s relational composition of social phenomena, particularly in his analysis of practice-material relations (Burnett, 2016; Hopwood, 2016; Hopwood, Rooney, Boud, & Kelly, 2016; Noens & Ramaekers, 2014).

Secondly, the focus shift to exploring the conditions of ‘observing educational practices. Yet, Schatzki himself hints some empirical elements for researching educational practices (2012, 2017), there are, to my knowledge, no substantive discussions about the way in which researchers observe the indeterminate composition of educational practices. The aim, however, is not present a guide to adopting participant observation in practice-based educational research. Rather, I want, through a brief examination of the conception of participant observation, to reflect upon this research practice and consider different paths to observe educational practices. As with many other research approaches, participant observation has been developed as a technique that must be accurately performed in order to obtain scientific knowledge. Achieving that goal implies, in that perspective, a set of procedures and behaviours that indicate “how to” participate in the life of others and inscribe the data obtained during observations. But, what if we think about participant observation not just as a technique to gather information or consider that researchers are more than instruments that emulate roles to becoming insiders. As it will argued in the presentation, rather than aiming to grasp the insider motivations for their actions assuming a “friendly role”, what a researcher should seek is to attend to the actions and things involved in a practice. Drawing on the work of Tim Ingold (2014, 2017) and Jan Masschelein (2010) my point is that, when observing educational practices, the issue is not about choosing the right method. Rather, participant observation can be described more as a relationship than a technique. When actions happen and are shown to us, we get involved with those who performed the actions and, also, with other entities that become entangled in that activity. Thus, when practicing this kind of observations the researcher exercise a discipline to attend and respond to others: to follow their actions with her senses and walk their paths with her body. In this sense, her method is constructed in the experience of a practice with others. Thus, what I mean with “observing educational practices” is paying attention to what is going on in its present activity.

Based on the empirical fieldwork conducted in the AGORA Learning Centre of KU Leuven (Belgium), the aim is to present an insight of the participant observations and descriptions that constituted the empirical approach of a studying practices’ research. This Learning Centre was opened in the first semester of 2013 with the objective of creating a new space of study in addition to the libraries. That aim was motivated by a different sense of formality and adaptability corresponding to the different ways of studying. The disposition of different spaces (social, silent and group study rooms) and technological resources for studying defines AGORA as a space that reunites the students under different study styles. Observations were conducted focusing on students’ activity in specific locations in AGORA. Social study areas, specifically, Time-Out and Flexispace Zones were designated to explore studying practices and material arrangements Regardless of their strict application and usefulness, initial observation guidelines and protocols were included as part of the methodological design. However, the details of the ‘fieldwork’ were not attributed as a necessary condition to obtain scientific knowledge, but instead treated as a starting ‘naïve approach’ to participate and observe studying activities in AGORA. As such, those initial considerations offered ways of observing to, moving with, writing about, and waiting for the ongoing activity that happened during certain lapses of time. However, following the researcher’s attention to activity, those considerations were flexible enough to facilitate seeing and moving along with significant ‘scenes’ that happened there. Acknowledging the importance of the event of studying activity, fieldwork focused on observing and describing a narrative of ‘scenes’ of studying. Paying attention to students from the moment they enter to the room until they leave it, allow the researcher to move away from the standpoint of observer and ‘walk along’ with the students during their studying activities. As such, when observing those sessions the primary concern was to present what students do while studying in AGORA.

Educational research is usually assumed as a practice that must bring something new, or at least, an improved form of the old. The background condition of this state reflects two main aspects of our today’s understanding about researching in education. An initial consideration relates with why a research is worth do it. In particular, PhD students and other initiates in researching activities are often prompted to provide clear justifications for their work. This, then, lead them to account for what they want to do under functional grounds that aims to contribute and be relevant in their context. A second consideration has to deal with ‘empirical accountability’: the researchers’ need to justify descriptions and analysis to establish data trustworthiness (Lather, 1986). As a consequence of this need for accountability, a major decision for researchers is related with how to do their research. Pondering about this issue usually involves choosing a particular way of representation, and accordingly, taking decisions about whether which technique is better suited to gather and analyse the required information to corroborate their viewpoint. However, as it will be argued in the presentation, the issues about how and for whom reality should be represented must not guide the motives and actions of the researcher during participant observations. What it is necessary, then, is not a method to reveal the meaning of actions performed during a practice. Instead, it is required a disposition. In this respect, Ingold (2017) describes participant observation as “an ontological commitment”, where researchers “attend” and “respond”. We do not, in other words, have to follow strict guidelines expecting reveal hidden knowledge, in order to account for scientific objectivity. Rather, what it is proposed is a disposition, in order to attend and respond to things and actions that are showing up during social practices.

Burnett, C. (2016). Being together in classrooms at the interface of the physical and virtual: implications for collaboration in on/off-screen sites. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(4), 566-589. Czerniewicz, L. (2016). Student practices in copyright culture: accessing learning resources. Learning, Media and Technology, 1-14. Hopwood, N. (2016). Professional practice and learning: Times, spaces, bodies, things. Heidelberg: Springer. Hopwood, N., Rooney, D., Boud, D., & Kelly, M. (2016). Simulation in Higher Education: A sociomaterial view. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 48(2), 165-178. Ingold, T. (2014). That's enough about ethnography! HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 4(1), 383-383. Ingold, T. (2017). On human correspondence. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 23(1), 9-27. Landri, P. (2012). A return to practice: Practice-based studies of education. In P. Hager, A. Lee, & A. Reich (Eds.), (pp. 85-100). Dordrecht: Springer. Lather, P. (1986). Research as praxis. Harvard educational review, 56(3), 257-277. Lloyd, A. (2010). Framing information literacy as information practice: site ontology and practice theory. Journal of Documentation, 66(2), 245-258. Manidis, M., & Scheeres, H. (2013). Practising Knowing: Emergence(y) teleologies. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 45(12), 1230-1251. Masschelein, J. (2010). The idea of critical e-ducational research: E-ducating the gaze and inviting to go walking. In I. Gur-Ze'ev (Ed.), The Possibility/Impossibility of a New Critical Language in Education (pp. 275-291). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Noens, P., & Ramaekers, S. (2014). The family as a "gathering": How the life of an object "makes" a family. International journal of child, youth & family studies, 5(4.2), 722-740. Schatzki, T. R. (2002). The site of the social: A philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change. Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Schatzki, T. R. (2010). The timespace of human activity: On performance, society, and history as indeterminate teleological events. Lanham: Lexington Books. Schatzki, T. R. (2012). A primer on practices: Theory and research. In J. Higgs, R. Barnett, S. Billett, M. Hutchings, & F. Trede (Eds.), Practice-based education:Perspectives and strategies (Vol. 6, pp. 13-26). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Schatzki, T. R. (2017). Practices and learning. In P. Grootenboer, C. Edwards-Groves, & S. Choy (Eds.), Practice theory perspectives on pedagogy and education: Praxis, diversity and contestation (pp. 23-43): Springer.