Continuing my research programme
into the growth of my educational knowledge
Part Three: Inclusionality 2005 - ?
Developing the dynamic boundaries
of living standards of judgement in educational enquiries of the kind, Ôhow do
I improve what I am doing?Õ
The
present phase of my educational enquiry is focused on the educational influence
of inclusionality in my learning. I am thinking of the educational influence of
inclusionality in relation to my sense of vocation in education. This sense of
vocation moved me from teaching science in secondary schools in London
(1967-1973) to a Lectureship in Education in the University of Bath (1973- ). I
moved from being a teacher in a school to becoming an educational researcher in
a University to accomplish my purpose of contributing to the reconstruction of
educational theory into forms of understanding that could account for
educational influences in the learning of individuals and for their educational
influences in the education of their social formations. It was a mistake in the
dominant ÔdisciplinesÕ approach to educational theory, that moved me into
educational research at the University of Bath in 1973. This mistake was well
put in 1983 by Paul Hirst, one of the major proponents of the ÔdisciplinesÕ
approach, when he acknowledged that much understanding of educational
theory will be developed:
"É in the context of immediate practical experience
and will be co-terminous with everyday understanding. In particular, many of
its operational principles, both explicit and implicit, will be of their nature
generalisations from practical experience and have as their justification the
results of individual activities and practices.
In many characterisations of educational theory, my own
included, principles justified in this way have until recently been regarded as
at best pragmatic maxims having a first crude and superficial justification in
practice that in any rationally developed theory would be replaced by
principles with more fundamental, theoretical justification. That now seems to
me to be a mistake. Rationally defensible practical principles, I suggest, must
of their nature stand up to such practical tests and without that are
necessarily inadequate." (Hirst, 1983, p. 18)
In my enquiry into the growth of my
educational knowledge, I have analysed transformations in my logics, values and
methodologies in my explanations for my own learning in enquiries of the kind,
ÔHow do I improve what I am doing?Õ (Whitehead, 2004). In this present enquiry
I see myself working towards a clearer comprehension and communication of the
implications of inclusionality for my research programme into the nature of
educational theory. Following Rayner (2004), by inclusionality I mean the
relationally dynamic awareness of a complex self, of space and boundaries that
are connective, reflexive and co-creative. By a complex self I am meaning a
fully contextualized understanding of self-identity as being formed with the
reciprocal coupling of inner and outer special domains through an intermediary
self-boundary. My reason for focusing on the meanings of standards of judgement
is because of their role in the validation and legitimation of claims to
educational knowledge. As my learning is being transformed through the practice
and understanding of inclusionality in my educational relationships I am
focusing my research programme on developing my understanding of the nature of
the living standards of judgement that are flowing in the labyrinthine channels
and boundaries of communication and that are opening and closing through the
internet
The conversation that is focusing
my enquiry into the implications of inclusionality for my understanding of
these living standards of judgement is one between Alan Rayner and Ted Lumley
(2005)
"Alan - There is a process
of explicit cognition involved in understanding that space and boundaries are
necessarily connective, reflective and co-creative, rather than divisive, in a
dynamic, heterogeneous Universe. And this explicit cognition can undermine the
absolute closure (rather than relative opening and closing) imposed by
rationalistic thought, hence opening up the possibilities for relating with the
ever-transforming shape of the space of the now."
Ted -
Òi would see this more as relational intuition, rather than explicit
cognition. i don't know about you, but everytime i write about
inclusionallity, i cannot do it from explicit foundations but must continually
ask myself whether what i've written 'feels right'.Ó (e-mail 8 January 2005)
What I now want to do is to see if I can communicate my
meanings of living standards of judgement that have formed in the flow of the
boundaries of my educational relationships. Their formation involved both relational intuitions that
felt right and their explicit cognition of the following narratives. These are
now flowing through the labrythine channels and boundaries of communication of
the internet. I see this flow as open to your intersubjective agreement,
criticism, rejection or amendment and hence part of a validation process which
can help to establish the legitimacy of such standards of judgement.
To communicate my meanings of the living standards of
judgement flowing with and through the boundaries of educational relationships
in awareness and understanding, I will start by using images of flow forms from
biology and geology before moving to the video-images of educational
relationships.
My understanding of inclusionality and flow-forms was moved
on by Karen TeesonÕs diagram of the interconnecting and branching channels of
communication opened up by the tubular channels of connection between tubular
structures in anastomosis in fungi. I have added some spaces to the closed
lines in the second diagram to emphasise the relative permeabilities of the
boundaries.
The second image of flow-form was provided to me by Maggie
Farren:
The first image began the transformation of my understanding
of communications through the internet. From thinking of such communications as
following linear pathways it moved to seeing an interconnecting and branching
labyrinth of channels and boundaries of communication. The second image serves as a metaphor
for understanding flow-forms of living standards of judgement. The flow of
water, with the boundaries of the sand is forming patterns.
I am seeing the water as flows of communication in which
living forms of judgement include both relational intuitions of the living
flows of meaning in educational relationships and their explicit meanings. I
now want to consider the possibility that such living meanings of inclusional
standards of judgement can be expressively distinguished in intuitive and
explicit communications through the following narratives. The five narratives
focus on the practical activities which clarified inclusional meanings of, a
loving flow-form of life-affirming energy, scientific enquiry, contextual
understandings, originality of mind, critical judgement and educational
enquiry, in the course of their emergence in practice. My choice of narratives
was influenced by the intuition that demonstrating the possibility of
intersubjective agreement about these inclusional meanings from ostensive
definitions would be a significant contribution to a new epistemology for a new
scholarship of educational enquiry.
1) Can a loving flow-form of life-affirming energy in
educational relationships be distinguished as a living standard of judgement in
educational relationships?
One of my most vivid recollections of a flow of
life-affirming energy was on a gloriously sunny day in Newcastle, as a 22 year
old student in 1966. I was aware of a flow of cosmic energy that flowed through
and around me and that continues to resonates for me in what Bataille refers to
as assenting to life to the point of death and what Tillich refers to as a
state of being grasped by the power of being itself. I continue to find the
source of this cosmic flow of energy is a mystery to me and while I experience
the flow of this energy as having personal and social expression, I see that
the flow existed before my own experience of it and I believe it will continue
to flow, outside myself, when I am dead. I know that any explanation of what I
do would be incomplete and invalid without the inclusion of an acknowledgement
of the significance of my experience of this energy. I see such energy flowing
through individuals as they express what really matters to them and I usually
distinguish what really matters to people, what they care about, in terms of
their values.
I identify such a flow of life-affirming energy in the life
and work of Salvador Dali. I imagine that we will have different responses to
the following quotation. You may feel that there is an unbearable ego at work
here. I am identifying with the idea that one can experience a supreme pleasure
that I experience as a flow of life-affirming energy, in being oneself together
with the humour of my response to ÔModesty is not exactly my specialityÕ!
Every morning upon awakening,
I experience a supreme pleasure:
That of being Salvador DaliÉ
And I ask myself, wonderstruck
What prodigious thing will he do today,
This Salvador Dali
Modesty
Is not exactly
My speciality.
(Levi, 2000, p.122)
A value which seems to find expression in every culture is
love. In seeking intersubjective agreement about the meaning of a Ôloving
flow-form of life-affirming energy in educational relationshipsÕ I am thinking
of inclusional meanings that hold together, while at the same time
distinguishing love and energy in a loving flow-form of life-affirming energy
in educational relationships.
Evidence for my belief that it is possible to reach an
intersubjective agreement on the meaning of such a living standard of
educational judgement is provided by the agreement between Moira Laidlaw and me
that the relational flows of meaning in the video clip below, from which the
following still image was taken, can be described through our agreed ostensive
definition as a loving flow-form of life-affirming energy in educational
relationships:
More still images from the
classroom with Moira Laidlaw at Guyuan Teachers College in China on the 15
October 2004 can be seen at:
http://www.jackwhitehead.com/moira151004/moira151004.html
The following 9 MB video clip will
take several minutes to download using Broadband (10 minutes on my system) and
opens in Quicktime.
http://www.jackwhitehead.com/mlendSorenson.mov
I am fascinated by the question of whether it is possible
and desirable to extend this agreement between Moira and me, with your
agreement that as we watch the video-clip
we are experiencing a loving flow-form of life-affirming energy in the
channels of space and dynamic boundaries of the educational relationships. So,
one of the tests of validity of my belief that it will be possible to enhance
such loving flows of life-affirming energy within our social contexts and
educational relationships, rests on this meaning resonating with your own,
first through the uniqueness of our intuitive responses and then into the
explicit cognitions of our shared language.
My curiosity about the possibility of agreeing shared
meanings such as a loving flow of life-affirming energy, extends to the
development of inclusional meanings of a living standard of judgement of
scientific enquiry in questions of the kind, ÔHow do I improve what I am
doing?Õ
2) Can a flow-form of a scientific enquiry into
educational influence in educational relationships be distinguished as a living
standard of judgement in educational research.
My meanings of scientific enquiry have been influenced by my
first degree in physical sciences where scientific experiments were conducted
using controlled experimental designs to detect the causal influence of one
variable on another. I conducted such experiments and understood their
significance in the testing of the validity of scientific theories through the
generation and testing of hypotheses from a theory. The understanding of a
scientific theory in my first degree programme was that it was constituted by a
set of determinate relationships between a set of variables in terms of which a
fairly extensive set of regularities could be explained.
My meanings have also been influenced by Karl PopperÕs
understandings of the logic of scientific discovery as involving problem
formulation, a tentative theory, error elimination and the reformulation of a
problem. They have been influenced by Peter MedawarÕs point that the biggest
defect of PopperÕs hypothetic-deductive system for the growth of scientific
knowledge was its explicit disavowal of any competence to speak of the creative
acts in a scientific enquiry. For Medawar, as a nobel prize winning scientist,
the intuitive leaps of imagination were a necessary part of his scientific
enquiry.
My meanings have also been influenced by John DeweyÕs logic
of inquiry which resonated with my own experience that I consciously
experienced concerns or problems when my values were not lived fully in my
practice, I imagined ways forward in action plans, acted on these and gathered
data with which to make a judgement on my effectiveness, I evaluated my actions
in relation to my values and understandings and modified my concerns, plans and
actions in the light of my evaluations. I first explicated this form of my
understanding of scientific enquiry in 1976 as I worked with a group of 6
teachers over two years to see if we could develop enquiry learning with 11-14
year old pupils in their science lessons (Whitehead, 1976). While it isnÕt
necessary to access this for my present purpose if you are interested in the
evidence I am drawing on in this account you can access it at:
http://www.actionresearch.net/writings/ilmagall.pdf
(It will take several minutes to download with broadband and
open as a PDF file)
What I am interested in here, is whether it will help the
flow of values that carry hope for the future of humanity to validate and
legitimate a living standard of judgement to distinguish an inclusional
flow-form scientific enquiry. The first stage in this process is to see if I
can distinguish and communicate the meanings of an inclusional flow-form
scientific enquiry as a living standard of judgement in an educational enquiry.
During 1971 a major transformation in my understanding of
scientific enquiry in the generation and testing of educational theory
occurred. Working towards my
masters degree in the psychology of education I was researching what I called a
preliminary investigation of the process through which adolescents acquired
scientific understanding. As I was using a controlled experimental design with
pupils randomly allocated to different groups so that I could see if I could
detect the educational influence of using guided discovery or enquiry learning
in pupilsÕ learning and also studying the mathematization of psychological
space in KellyÕs Personal Construct Theory and Lazersfeld Latent Structure Theory
of Attitudes, I began to reject the assumption in my educational theory that it
was constituted by disciplines of education such as the philosophy, psychology,
sociology and history of education. I could see that non of these disciplines
either individually or collectively could answer my question, ÔHow do I help my
pupils to improve their scientific understandings?Õ
The problem for me seemed to rest in my conception of
educational theory and scientific enquiry. I needed to develop a different
approach to educational theory to the one that claimed that it was constituted
by the conceptual frameworks of disciplines such as philosophy, sociology,
psychology and history. I felt that I needed an educational theory that was
consciously emerging from educational practice. I was helped by ideas in
Michael PolanyiÕs personal knowledge to articulate the new base in
consciousness for the creation of my educational theory and approach to
scientific enquiry. I am thinking particularly of the decision to understand the
world from oneÕs own point of view as a person claiming originality and
exercising judgement with universal intent.
Another event which helped to transform my understanding of
both educational theory and scientific enquiry was being given a video-camera by
the Inspectorate in Barking in London, to explore its potential. Looking at
video-tapes of my classroom startled me with the revelation that I was existing
as a living contradiction in believing that I had accomplished certain things
in my classroom with video evidence that I had not accomplished what I thought
I had. This experience that I felt as a living contradiction moved me towards
developing my understanding of dialectics as a form of scientific enquiry
because contradiction is at the nucleus of dialectics. I know that for those,
like Popper, who believe that dialectical forms of theorising are entirely
useless as theory because of their embrace of contradiction, that they can use
two logical laws of inference to demonstrate that anything that contains a
contradiction is entirely useless as a theory. Using these two laws of
inference any statement can be demonstrated to be true even ones that are known
to be false, once contradictions between statements are accepted as true.
In answering his question, ÔWhat is Dialectic?Õ, Popper
(1963) rejects dialectical claims to knowledge as, Ôwithout the slightest
foundation. Indeed, they are based on nothing better than a loose and woolly
way of speakingÕ (Popper, 1963, p.316).
In developing my dialectical view of a scientific enquiry in
my educational research I embraced contradiction in the sense that in my
question, Ôhow do I improve what I am doing?Õ, I existed as a living
contradiction in my embodied experience. This consciously stimulated my imagination
to move towards the realisation of some values rather than others, for example
freedom in preference to oppression and justice in preference to injustice. By
1980 I could understand the significance of the question asked by the Soviet
logician Eward Ilyenkov , ÔIf an object exists as a living contradiction what
must the thought be that expresses it?Õ. My present understanding of the
history of dialectics follows IlyenkovÕs analysis.
Developing this dialectical approach to a scientific enquiry
in my educational research helped me to clarify the meanings of embodied values
in the course of their emergence in my educational enquiry. Using the
dialectics of asking questions, expressing concerns, imagining action plans,
acting and gather data, evaluating action in relation to values and
understanding, modifying concerns plans and action and submitting accounts of
my learning in the educational enquiry to the mutual rational controls of
public criticism, I felt confident that I could show how embodied values could
be transformed into living and communicable standards of judgement in the
course of their emergence and clarification in practice. I think that I
achieved this in relation to the embodied value of academic freedom in my 1993
text on the growth of educational knowledge.
The present transformation in my understanding of scientific
enquiry in my educational enquiry is closely related to the educational
influence of Alan Rayner and Karen Teeson and their ideas in my learning about
inclusionality that I described in the first section of the paper. As I develop
my inclusional understanding of a scientific enquiry I am retaining the
Popperian Schema for the growth of scientific knowledge and DeweyÕs logic of
inquiry in my transforming understanding in my educational enquiry of a
flow-form scientific enquiry.
The flow-form I have in mind is the relational dynamics of
experiencing concerns when values are not being lived as fully as seems
possible, of imagining ways forward in an action plan, acting on the plan and
gathering data on which to make a judgement of accomplishment, evaluating oneÕs
actions and accomplishments in terms of oneÕs values, modifying concerns, ideas
and actions in the light of the evaluations, sharing accounts of oneÕs learning
in a process of democratic evaluation of the validity of the account.
My transforming understanding is connected with my identity
in terms of being a complex self who can demonstrate that his learning is extending his
contextualized understanding of self-identity as being formed with the
reciprocal coupling of inner and outer spatial domains through an intermediary
self-boundary. In my life I engage with such boundaries in my life between
home, work, the schools I visit, the people I work with, the university which pays
me and the conferences at which I present my papers and hear the presentations
of others.
Because of the importance of such contextualized
understandings in the growth of my educational knowledge I want to consider the
possibility of reaching an intersubjective agreement on contextual
understanding in learning as a living standard of judgement.
3) Can a flow-form of contextual understanding in
learning be distinguished as a living standard of judgement in both the
education of a complex self and the education of a social formation.
The context of my answer is in my educational relationship
with Jackie Delong as I work in doctoral supervision sessions with her to
clarify the nature of her thesis as it is being expressed in draft abstracts of
her thesis. You can access a previously published account of my educational
influence in these supervision sessions at:
http://www.actionresearch.net//multimedia/jimenomov/JIMEW98.html
The video-clip at http://www.bath.ac.uk/multimedia/jimenomov/ajwsys.mov is of a doctoral supervision in which I am seeking to
support Jackie in her submission of a thesis that expresses her originality of
mind and critical judgement. These are two of the standards of judgement used
by examiners of doctoral theses in the Universiy of Bath. In JackieÕs research
these standards of judgement are related in an enquiry that includes an explanation
of her ÔsystemÕs influenceÕ as a Superintendent of Schools. ÔSystemÕs
influenceÕ is in Jackie's professional practice and research as one of her
standards of judgement. This systemÕs influence was recognised in an award for
her leadership in action research by the Ontario Educational Research Council
in December 2000.
Hence I am working, in the
conversation, to enhance the clarity of a draft abstract in its communication
of originality of mind and critical judgement in relation to ÔsystemÕs influenceÕ.
I am also focusing on 'system's influence' because of a criticism made by Susan
Noffke, about a limitation she perceived in the lack of capacity of theories
generated from self-study to address:
"Ésocial issues in terms
of the interconnections between personal identity and the claim of experiential
knowledge, as well as power and privilege in society (Dolby, 1995; Noffke,
1991). The process of personal transformation through the examination of
practice and self-reflection may be a necessary part of social change,
especially in education; it is however, not sufficient.Ó ( Noffke, 1997, p. 329)"
By focusing on 'system's
influence' in the context of social change and the development of cultures of
inquiry I believe that the theories of practitioner-researchers provide the
evidence to show that Noffke is mistaken as they learn to develop their own
inclusional meanings in the development of their contextual understandings.
The
two drafts of the Abstract were produced within 5 days of each other. I have placed
them together so that you may get a clearer understanding of the differences
between them in the clarity with which they express the precise nature of the
claims to originality of mind and critical judgement in relation to ÔsystemÕs
influenceÕ. On reading the first draft I could not see clearly the precise
nature of the claims to originality of mind and critical judgement in relation
to Ôsystems influenceÕ. The second draft makes this influence explicit and the
final abstract shows the development of JackieÕs contextualised understand in
the creation of a culture of inquiry. The final abstract and full thesis on ÔHow can I improve my practice as a
superintendent of schools and create my own living educational theory?Õ can be
accessed at http://www.actionresearch.net/delong.shtml
First Draft of the Abstract
This thesis is a journey of
professional learning, reinvention and self-discovery through research-based
professionalism in asking the question, ÔHow do I improve my practice as a
superintendent of schools in a southern Ontario school district?Õ It represents
and demonstrates my originality of mind and critical judgment as I describe and
explain my living standards of practice for which I hold myself accountable.
The values that I am
articulating are grounded in my practice, in what I know from reading and
dialogue, from experience and from reflecting on that experience. Through
writing about my values that emerge in my practice, I am able to construct and
deconstruct the transformation that has taken place over the six years of the
research and to understand what has moved me forward.
Through narrative and
image-based research I describe and explain the birth and growth of an action
research movement in a school system that is restructuring amidst the negative
pressures of market policies.
I offer my story as my own
living theory of my educative influence as an educational leader and insider
researcher living in turbulent times - 1995-2001, not as a model or exemplar. I
do, however, want to encourage professional educators to consider the process
of practitioner action research as a means to self-assessment, renewal and
professional development
Second Draft of the Abstract
This thesis is my own living
theory of my learning about my educative influence as a superintendent of
schools, an educational leader and insider researcher living in turbulent times
- 1995-2001. It is a journey of professional learning and self-discovery
through research-based professionalism as I ask, research and answer the
question, ÔHow can I improve my practice as a superintendent of schools in a
southern Ontario school district?Õ
It represents and demonstrates
my originality of mind and critical judgement as I describe and explain my
living standards of practice that can be understood through my values for which
I hold myself accountable. My originality of mind is being expressed through
narrative and image-based form of communication in which I describe and explain
stories of myself, a self—discovery of my need for internal and external
dialogue, of how I hold together continuously in a living, dynamic way, a
plurality of actions. I describe and explain my work in my many portfolios
including the birth and growth of an action research movement in a school
system that is restructuring amidst the impact of economic rationalist
policies.
This thesis focuses my critical
judgements on the clarification and use of the values that have emerged in my
practice as I am able to construct and deconstruct the transformations that
have taken place over the six years of the research and to understand what has
moved me forward. The meaning of those values that I am articulating are
grounded in my practice and constitute my living standards of practice and
judgement in my explanations. They emerge through reading, dialogue and
reflection on my experience as I account for myself in my practice by ever
moving forward while holding on to the sanctity of personal relationships and democratic
evaluation within a hierarchical system and power relations.
Here is the video-clip again, and
a transcript of the conversation. I want to focus on the additional meanings
which the visual record can communicate about the nature of our embodied values
that we are using and transforming into our educational standards of practice
and judgement.
(http://www.bath.ac.uk/multimedia/jimenomov/ajwsys.mov)
Jack É to show how I am encouraging
and supporting you, to make explicit in a way that is publicly shareable your
own understanding of your standard of practice as a superintendent which is
related to your systemÕs influenceÉ.
Jackie É..there is a big
emphasis on relationships and connections. ThatÕs a common standard that runs
through almost everything I do - if I can see a way of helping people or ideas
or systems to connect I think it creates a more effective system to support
student learning. If youÕve got people or systems going in different directions
it is wasting the talent and the energyÉ the other thing is that when I see
people who can carry something forward I try to pull all the supports behind
them so that they can do that. ThatÕs two pieces of it. It doesnÕt capture it
all but it captures two pieces of — And my need to see things always
getting betterÉ
I want to focus both on the
embodied value of her contexualised understanding in JackieÕs non-verbal
expressions as well as her statements about her ÔsystemÕs influenceÕ.
I am thinking of the embodied
values Jackie is expressing non-verbally when she is saying
i) if I can see a way of helping people or ideas or systems
to connect I think it creates a more effective system to support student
learning.
ii) when I see people who can
carry something forward I try to pull all the supports behind them so that they
can do that.
My own perception is that Jackie
is expressing passionately both her life-affirming energy and contextualised
understanding.
In her thesis Jackie writes about
the importance for extending her systemÕs influence of supporting people, who
she believes have the talent, energy and commitment to improve student learning
in the development of a culture of inquiry. To understand what Jackie is
meaning by her value of pulling all the supports behind them it is necessary to
experience the sustained and inclusional commitment she expresses over time in
the organisation of this support. This in turn rests on her passion to improve
learning with students. The final abstract for the thesis emphasises the
importance of the development of a culture of enquiry in a further development
of contexualised understanding.
Abstract of successful PhD Submission 2002
One of the basic tenets of my
philosophy is that the development of a culture for improving learning rests
upon supporting the knowledge-creating capacity in each individual in the
system. Thus, I start with my own. This thesis sets out a claim to know my own
learning in my educational inquiry, 'How can I improve my practice as a
superintendent of schools?'
Out of this philosophy emerges
my belief that the professional development of each teacher rests in their own
knowledge-creating capacities as they examine their own practice in helping
their students to improve their learning. In creating my own educational theory
and supporting teachers in creating theirs, we engage with and use insights
from the theories of others in the process of improving student learning.
The originality of the
contribution of this thesis to the academic and professional knowledge-base of
education is in the systematic way I transform my embodied educational values
into educational standards of practice and judgement in the creation of my
living educational theory. In the thesis I demonstrate how these values and
standards can be used critically both to test the validity of my
knowledge-claims and to be a powerful motivator in my living educational
inquiry.
The values and standards are
defined in terms of valuing the other in my professional practice, building a
culture of inquiry, reflection and scholarship and creating knowledge.
4) Can a flow-form of critical judgement in learning be
distinguished as a living standard of judgement in an individualÕs education.
5) Can a flow-form of originality of mind in learning be
distinguished as a living standard of judgement in an individualÕs education.
6) 5) Can a flow-form of educational enquiry be
distinguished as a living standard of judgement in an individualÕs education.
Levi, B. (2000) The Dali University, London; Inter Arts
Resources.
Hirst, P. (Ed.) (1983) Educational Theory and its Foundation
Disciplines. London;RKP
Popper, K. (1963) Conjectures and Refutations, Oxford:
O.U.P.