School actors, especially teachers and pupils, are faced with the challenge of meeting different demands associated with various functions that a school as an institution fulfills (Fend, 2006). This does not always work smoothly. Teachers have to deal with structural tensions and constantly make decisions, such as in which situations they are more likely to follow a subject logic or turn to the needs of the pupils (Helsper, 2021). Pupils must find a way to deal with the demands they are confronted with while they go through processes of identity development, learning and Bildung, in which peer milieus have an effect (Breidenstein & Jergus, 2008). Neither teachers nor pupils are determined how they will deal with such tensions. However, they have to make decisions and thereby have to deal with uncertainty, or, in Luhmann’s term, with double contingency (Vanderstraeten, 2002).

Uncertainty is a central feature of communication and interaction in the classroom. On the one hand, when teaching contents and skills, teachers cannot predict with certainty what consequences their actions will have for their pupils. On the other hand, dealing with topics and requirements that are new to them includes the potential for uncertainty for pupils and they must learn to deal with the freedom of choice they are given.

Research shows that teachers and pupils develop routines and habits that enable them to deal with uncertainty and contingency (Hinzke, 2018). Routines are characterised by the fact that no decisions have to be made. Instead, established solutions to problems are used, which is often based on implicit, habitualised knowledge (Kramer & Pallesen, 2019). At the same time, it is a requirement of the professionalism of teachers to constantly reflect on routines for their appropriateness. Routines are also evident in the classroom when a stable social practice is formed through repeated procedures and a more or less fixed organisational framework.

The Documentary Method is a research method allowing to analyse empirically this mixture of uncertainty on the one hand and routines and habitus on the other. This method is based on the Praxeological Sociology of Knowledge (Bohnsack, 2018) – a methodology that goes back to Karl Mannheim's Sociology of Knowledge but is also based on Harold Garfinkel’s Ethnomethodology, Pierre Bourdieu's concept of habitus and theorems of System Theory of Niklas Luhmann. Against this background, the Documentary Method distinguishes between communicative and conjunctive knowledge. While the former can be explicated, e.g. by teachers, conjunctive knowledge cannot be explicated so easily. This knowledge is implicit, has partly sunk into the body and structures the thoughts and actions of school actors. The Documentary Method makes it possible to reconstruct implicit knowledge via the interpretation steps of formulating and reflecting interpretation (Bohnsack et al., 2010). In the context of school research, one of the questions of interest is which implicit knowledge underlies the perception of uncertainty and how school actors and prospective teachers deal with it.

The aim of the symposium is to present the Documentary Method and the Praxeological Sociology of Knowledge, as it has been increasingly developed for school research in recent years, especially in German-speaking countries (Hinzke et al., 2023), to a European audience, to demonstrate the opportunities and limitations of the method using exemplary research projects in the field of school research and to discuss connections to other (qualitative) research strategies used in Europe. To this end, a basic introduction to the methodology and method of the Documentary Method will be given before three current research projects demonstrate the results that the method can produce in the field of school research. The discussant opens a transnational conversation.

Bohnsack, R. (2018). Praxeological Sociology of Knowledge and Documentary Method. In D. Kettler & V. Meja (eds.), The Anthem Companion to Karl Mannheim (p. 199-220). Anthem Press. Bohnsack, R., Pfaff, N., & Weller, W. (eds.) (2010). Qualitative Analysis and Documentary Method in International Educational Research. Budrich. Breidenstein, G., & Jergus, K. (2008). Doing Pupil among Peers. In H.-H. Krüger et al. (eds.), Family, School, Youth Culture (p. 115-132). Lang. Fend, H. (2006). Neue Theorie der Schule. VS. Helsper, W. (2021). Professionalität und Professionalisierung pädagogischen Handelns. Budrich/UTB. Hinzke, J.-H. (2018). Lehrerkrisen im Berufsalltag. Springer VS. Hinzke, J.-H., Gevorgyan, Z., & Matthes, D. (2023). Study Review on the Use of the Documentary Method in the Field of Research on and in Schools in English-speaking Scientific Contexts. In J.-H. Hinzke, T. Bauer, A. Damm, M. Kowalski & D. Matthes (eds.), Dokumentarische Schulforschung. Schwerpunkte: Schulentwicklung – Schulkultur – Schule als Organisation (p. 213-231). Klinkhardt. Kramer, R.-T., & Pallesen, H. (2019). Der Lehrerhabitus zwischen sozialer Herkunft, Schule als Handlungsfeld und der Idee der Professionalisierung. In R.-T. Kramer & H. Pallesen (eds.), Lehrerhabitus (p. 73-100). Klinkhardt. Vanderstraeten, R. (2002). Parsons, Luhmann and the Theorem of Double Contingency. Journal of Classical Sociology, 2(1), 77-92.