Keynote presentation by Professors Chris Pascal and Tony Bertram at the 2nd BECERA Conference (February 2012). To visit the BECERA website go to www.becera.org.uk

1. Praxeological Research Within a
Learning Community: Developing
Evidence Based Practice
Chris Pascal, Tony Bertram and colleagues from the
CREC Learning Circle
Centre for Research in Early Childhood
Birmingham, UK
www.crec.co.uk

2. Presentation aims to:
 Offer a challenge to traditional keynote formats offering exemplification
of a community of practice in action
 Trace the paradigm debate in early years research
 Challenge notions of ‘evidence based’ programmes and practice
 Clarify what we mean by praxeological research and the set of
principles which give it its distinctness
 Foreground the strengths and limitations of this paradigm and its
particular contribution
 Explore issues of status, credibility, utility and power across paradigms
and methodologies
 Explore the growing profile, status and utility of praxeological research
in the UK

3. Tracing the evolving paradigm
debate
 Empirical research
 Interpretive research
 Critical research
 Reflective practice
 Theories of action: action research
 Practitioner or practice based research
 Phronesis and episteme: Praxeological inquiry
Nb: WE MUST CHALLENGE CRITERIA FOR DEFINING
‘EVIDENCE BASED’ PROGRAMMES

4. Pioneering ideas for PR
 Aristotle (384 BC) Phronesis and Episteme
 von Mises (1949,1996) Praxeology
 Freire (1972) Participatory practice for change and liberation
 Stenhouse (1975) Teacher researchers
 McIntyre (1981, 2007) Virtue ethics
 Schon (1983) Reflective practitioners
 Whitehead (1989) and McNiff (2006) Action research and living
theories
 Bourdieu et al (1992) Theory of practical reason
 Wenger (1998) Communities of practice
 Flyvbjerg (2001) Phronetical social science
 Reason et al (2008) Participatory and cooperative inquiry

5. What is praxeological research?
Praxeological research OR practice based research OR
action research :
 is grounded in real world situations and acknowledges
unpredictability of human beings and their interactions
 is carried out by practitioners (anyone involved in
practice) in the situation who know the context well and
have an immediate use for the results of their work
 is research done with people NOT to people and always
done in the company of others
 uses and generates theories of action to reveal the
underlying assumptions we have about our work – to
discover why we do what we do

6. What is praxeological research?
Contd.
 is based on a strong ethical code of action
 aims to advance practice and support practitioners to
develop a more profound understanding of their work
 involves critical self evaluation, reflection and action
(praxis)
 is more than trying out new ideas but exploring why or
how something works through systematic evidence
gathering where the action happens
 Is action based and transformational

7. Underpinning principles of PR
Praxeological research is:
1. subjective and acknowledges multiple perspectives
2. systematic and methodologically rigorous
3. action based, useful, creative and transformational
4. educational, generating and sharing learning
5. democratic, inclusionary, participatory and collaborative
6. ethical, moral and values driven/committed
7. empowering and redistributes power
8. dynamic and continuous with no end point
9. critical, risky and courageous
10. political, concerned with social justice and equity

8. SUBJECTIVE

9. SUBJECTIVE
SYSTEMATIC

10. SUBJECTIVE
SYSTEMATIC
ACTION

11. SUBJECTIVE
SYSTEMATIC
ACTION
EDUCATIONAL

12. SUBJECTIVE
SYSTEMATIC
ACTION
EDUCATIONAL
DEMOCRATIC

13. SUBJECTIVE ETHICAL
SYSTEMATIC
ACTION
EDUCATIONAL
DEMOCRATIC

14. SUBJECTIVE ETHICAL
SYSTEMATIC EMPOWERING
ACTION
EDUCATIONAL
DEMOCRATIC

15. SUBJECTIVE ETHICAL
SYSTEMATIC EMPOWERING
ACTION DYNAMIC
EDUCATIONAL
DEMOCRATIC

16. SUBJECTIVE ETHICAL
SYSTEMATIC EMPOWERING
ACTION DYNAMIC
EDUCATIONAL CRITICAL
DEMOCRATIC

17. SUBJECTIVE ETHICAL
SYSTEMATIC EMPOWERING
ACTION DYNAMIC
EDUCATIONAL CRITICAL
DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL

19. Strengths and limitations
PR Strengths:
 Identifies ways to improve practice and takes
responsibility for this action
 Inspires and generates collaborative learning and action
 Gives a close account of what works, how and why
 Has an ethical and values transparent stance
 Has credibility and utility in the real world of practice
PR Limitations:
 Focuses on specific contexts and smaller numbers
 Does not show cause and effect
 Does not support comparisons or predictions
 Less credibility and utility to guide policy decisions due to
lack of perceived rigour in method

20. Where does praxeological
research sit? Issues of status,
credibility, utility and power
 High table, minstrels gallery or amongst the masses?
 Historically low status and low visibility BUT high
involvement and impact
 Is status, credibility, utility and power of PR changing in
the new world of ECEC?
 Evidence of change in visibility, credibility and power of
PR which is evident in profile of PR in recent
conferences, research projects, international publications
and policy debates

21. Are we at Gladwell’s Tipping
Point?
Gladwell’s Concepts:
Social epidemic: An epidemiology term applied to the
contagious spread of ideas, behaviours and products
with geometric progression (doubles and doubles again)
Tipping Point: The magic moment when a virus spreads
with geometric progression (doubles and doubles again)
and the momentum becomes unstoppable
Stickiness: When an idea, behaviour or product becomes
irresistable
Gladwell M. (2000)
Has praxeological research become ‘sticky’ and has it
reached a ‘tipping point’?

22. Practitioner research centres
and communities of practice
In the UK (CREC, Pen Green) and elsewhere (Childhood
Association, Portugal) practitioner research centres and
professional networks are developing which offer:
 Forums for deliberation and debate about EC practice
and policy and the generation of knowledge
 Spaces for ethical association, open, inclusive and safe
learning communities which aspire to be developmental
and innovative
 Interaction based on mutual respect, shared curiosity
and humanity
 Support and encouragement for ‘Communities of
Practice’

23. Troubling what comes next
 Clear NOT one paradigm for EC research: different and
complementary approaches are needed
 New ways of perceiving EC research are emerging and
changing traditional frames and research processes
 New spaces for intellectual engagement are opening up
and allowing EC research to move forward
 Acknowledged need in policy and practice to be open to
multiple ways of knowing and using research and
practice: challenge to existing ‘evidence based’ selection
process
 More open, critical engagement developing between
paradigm camps and more respect, congruence,
innovation, democracy in EC research is evident