Facilitating critical reflection on practice through collaborative research

This paper emanates from a study that analysed the critical reflection of teacher researchers as they talked about their investigations of the home cultures and literacies of a small group of children from socioculturally diverse family contexts. The collaborative research enterprise was undertaken by university and teacher researchers. The important role that collaborative teacher research and social interaction played in the critical reflection and co-construction of professional understandings in the project is the focus of this paper. The teacher researchers’ theorising about the complexity of their work as a result of the collaborative enterprise is discussed. Through the voiced research and critical reflection of the teachers, it has become obvious that their life’s experiences and resources are powerful in their pedagogical theorising. Teachers comment on the way in which they are positioned by ‘the system’ as technicians and how they experience tension between their own professional and primary discourses and that of the system. It is suggested that teachers be given opportunity within their work sites to enter the conversations about curriculum, pedagogy and change in knowledgeable and meaningful ways that are grounded in collaborative reflection and research. This paper explores the critical reflection and the social construction of new understandings about the complexity of teachers’ work that occurred in a collaborative research project carried out by a university-based researcher and four school-based early years teacher researchers. It will show how the collaborative research process facilitated critical reflection on previously unquestioned or unconsidered issues about the teachers’ work. The paper has been written by the university researcher under the watchful eye of the teacher researchers who want to remain anonymous. Their pseudonyms have been used. When the terms of this project were negotiated among the group, it was agreed that the voices of the teachers would always be reported authentically and anonymously. It was also agreed that any theorising, integrated language analysis (Freeman, 1996) or reporting that might be carried out, would be done by the university researcher That is not to say that the teacher researchers have not spoken about their involvement in the project to colleagues in professional development forums and conferences. Nor is to say that the teachers were not privy to the analysis process. It is to say that written reports for publication are to be done by the university researcher.