This research will utilise a poststructural case study methodology, underpinned by Foucault’s power/knowledge relationship theory (Foucault, 1973, 1980) to investigate how Early Childhood Professionals (ECPs) engage families in ‘shared support’ relationships contributing to children’s wellbeing. Research on family engagement in educational settings has previously focused on active participation, collaboration, and partnership models. This research proposes a reflexive model, where stakeholder agency is paramount and power relationships are fluid.

Aligning with the theoretical paradigm, the exploration of multiple truths is enabled by harnessing a strengths-based single case study, with three case sites. Thorough data collection methods including semi-structured interviews, participant observations, and artifact collection are applied to a purposive intensity sample (N=4). In acknowledging the position of the shared support phenomenon at the meso-level of a social ecological model, Systematic Analysis (SA) is utilised for its consideration of complex social contexts and influences (Clarke, 2005). The Foucauldian lens framing this study supports data analyse that exposes the multiple truths of those living the experience of shared support. Thorough deconstruction of discourse provides a critical approach through which the power-knowledge nexus in family-educator relationships can be understood.

Journaling, utilisation of the Johari Window Model (Ramani et al., 2017; Smith et al., 2017), and an adaptation of the Powerful Insider Researcher Model (PIRM) (Degenhardt & Duignan, 2010), supports researcher reflexivity. Positioning the researcher within the research aligns with the goals and theoretical framework of the study. Trustworthiness of data is supported by the methodology, methods and analysis tools that align to the consistently robust theoretical paradigm informing this research.

Findings of this study will shed new light on understandings of family engagement both theoretically and in practice. A Foucauldian underpinning provides opportunities to expand poststructural case study design in social science and educational research, specifically the harnessing of participant involvement in Situational Analysis mapping processes.

A poststructural Foucauldian lens frames this research design. The relativist ontology and emic epistemology of the researcher supports design decisions based on the notion that the phenomenon cannot speak for itself, and multiple interpretations of such are legitimate. (Creswell, 2018; Denzin & Lincoln, 2017; Lather & St. Pierre, 2013; Patton, 1990). This theoretical underpinning informs the research design, position of the researcher, methodology, data collection and analysis tools. Yin (2014) postulates that case study design allows for the investigation of phenomenon where context and subject are blurred. This case study aligns with poststructural tenets of multiple perspectives, and recognition that there is no absolute truth (Foucault, 1973). A flexible design supports deep exploration of discursive relationships, enabling consideration of how perception, power/knowledge relations and context shape the phenomenon (Foucault, 1980; Mohammed et al., 2015). The case, Willow Early Education*, is an early learning centre in a semi-rural community in Queensland, Australia, owned by the researcher. Purposive intensity sampling is utilised in selecting an ECP (N=1) and families (N=3) to explore the phenomenon. As this study’s intent is to deeply understand a small number of participants, there is no prevailing rule regarding sample size (Cohen et al., 2017; Patton, 1990). The positioning of the researcher within the context as an active participant and research instrument is supported by the theoretical framework and research design of this study (Clarke, 2005; Lather & St. Pierre, 2013). Data collection techniques for this study include semi structured interviews (n=4) with the ECP and each family, participant observations and artifact collection. Stake (1995) encourages multiple data sources, enabling the poststructuralist investigation of various truths whilst accomplishing Yin (2014) requirement for triangulation of data. Mohammed et al. (2015) contend that this “allows for examination of multiple relationships among participants in different social positions, observational data or documentation” (p. 103). Situational Analysis (SA) supports the intent to uncover multiple truths through a cooperative and participatory opportunity between researcher and participants. In a unique contribution to the methodological application of SA, this study proposes a parallel analysis of data at the situational mapping phase, where participants and researcher create abstract situational and relational maps from research data. The SA process embraces the researcher as participant, demanding reflexivity as a caveat in the method (Clarke, 2003, 2005) necessitating memos of thinking, decision making, inclusion/exclusions, and relationships within the data.

This study seeks to extrapolate understandings of educators and families in shared support relationships. It is anticipated that relational mapping collaboratively with participants will draw heavily on the fluidity of roles in successful shared support relationships. SA yields thick analysis (Fosket, 2002), considering the complexity of social contexts (Clarke, 2005) rivelling the thick description results of thematic analysis methods. Findings drawn from the three types of maps created by this cartographic approach. These are Situational maps, Social world/arena maps, and Positional maps (Clarke, 2003; Clarke et al., 2016). Social world/arena maps will provide for deconstruction of contextual influences creating barriers and/or enablers to the shared support relationship for actors. Social worlds/arena maps can elucidate transparent understandings and appreciation for each actor’s context and positioning in creating foundational relationships. The positional maps will identify family and ECP positions on various aspects of their shared support relationship, as well as bring to light silent data. These maps enable the representation of heterogenous complexities in the data (Clarke, 2005; Clarke et al., 2016). The Foucauldian framework, and SA embrace the complex positionality of the researcher as instrument and participant while demanding reflexivity (Clarke et al., 2016; Clarke & Braun, 2018; den Outer et al., 2013; Kahn, 2014). SA repositions the researcher from ‘all knowing’ to ‘acknowledged participant’ in production of knowledge (Clarke, 2003; Denzin & Lincoln, 2017; Holstein & Gubrium, 2002). Insider-researching requires safeguards for trustworthiness. The PIRM (Degenhardt & Duignan, 2010) supports the multiple roles of the researcher, and complex ethical considerations of the purposive sampling and case site selection within this research. This model will be applied as it “provides protection for participants and the research, facilitates feedback to the insider-researcher in a position of power, and supports her in making meaning” (Degenhardt & Duignan, 2010, p.73)

Clarke, A. E. (2003). Situational Analyses: Grounded Theory Mapping After the Postmodern Turn. Symbolic interaction, 26(4), 553-576. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.2003.26.4.553 Clarke, A. E. (2005). Situational Analysis: Grounded Theory after the Postmodern Turn. SAGE Publications Inc. Clarke, A. E., & Friese, C. (2007). Grounded Theorizing Using Situational Analysis. In K. Charmaz & A. Bryant (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory (pp. 362). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848607941.n17 Clarke, A. E., Friese, C., & Washburn, R. (Eds.). (2016). Situational analysis in practice : mapping research with grounded theory. Routledge. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education (8th edition. ed.). Taylor and Francis. Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design : qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (Fifth edition. ed.). SAGE. Degenhardt, L., & Duignan, P. A. (2010). Dancing on a shifting carpet : reinventing traditional schooling for the 21st century. ACER Press. den Outer, B., Handley, K., & Price, M. (2013). Situational analysis and mapping for use in education research: a reflexive methodology? Studies in higher education (Dorchester-on-Thames), 38(10), 1504-1521. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.641527 Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). (2017). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (Fifth edition. ed.). Sage. Fosket, J. (2002). Breast Cancer Risk and the Politics of Prevention: Analysis of a Clinical Trial University of California]. San Francisco. Foucault, M. (1973). The order of things : an archaeology of the human sciences. Vintage Books. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge : selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977. Harvester Press. Lather, P., & St. Pierre, E. A. (2013). Post-qualitative research. International journal of qualitative studies in education, 26(6), 629-633. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2013.788752 Mohammed, S., Peter, E., Gastaldo, D., & Howell, D. (2015). Rethinking Case Study Methodology in Poststructural Research. Canadian journal of nursing research, 47(1), 97-114. https://doi.org/10.1177/084456211504700107 Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed. ed.). Sage Publications. Ramani, S., Könings, K., Mann, K. V., & van der Vleuten, C. (2017). Uncovering the unknown: A grounded theory study exploring the impact of self-awareness on the culture of feedback in residency education. Medical teacher, 39(10), 1065-1073. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2017.1353071 Smith, R., Carraher, E., & DeLisle, P. (2017). Johari Window Model. In Leading Collaborative Architectural Practice (pp. 221-224). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119169277.ch16 Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage Publications. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research : design and methods (Fifth edition. ed.). SAGE.