Living Inquiry: Personal, Political and Philosophical Groundings for Action Research Practice

Author(s):  
Patricia Gayá Wicks ◽  
Peter Reason ◽  
Hilary Bradbury
1999 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 281-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Reason ◽  
Brian Goodwin

The development of complexity theory in the natural sciences is described, and summarized in six principles of complex emergent wholes. It is suggested that complexity theory is leading biology toward a science of qualities based on participation and intuition. It is argued on metaphorical and epistemological grounds that these principles which describe the emergence of complex wholes can be applied to social and organizational life. The six principles are then applied to qualitative and action research practice, with a particular reference to co-operative inquiry, in order to provide principles for good practice and theoretical support for the nature of valid inquiry processes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-257
Author(s):  
James Butler

Abstract Within theological action research the language of discernment has become increasingly important and resonances with spiritual practices such as Lectio Divina have been recognised. This led to practices of corporate prayer being introduced in to the research process. This paper reflects on this experience and identifies key resonances between prayer and theological action research. Through engagement with theological accounts of prayer these resonances are explored turning the question of the place of prayer within theological research on its head. It is not simply that prayer practices add an important dimension to theological action research, but that they actually disclose the ways it is already a practice of prayer. After engaging with potential challenges to such a position through notions of true prayer, control and rigour the paper ends by suggesting that this proposal is not as radical as it first appears, and may instead be an orthodox account of theology.


2005 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheryl Cockburn-wootten ◽  
Alison Henderson ◽  
Caroline Rix

2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Reason ◽  
William Torbert

We offer an epistemological basis for action research, in order to increase the validity, the practical significance, and the transformational potential of social science. We start by outlining some of the paradigmatic issues which underlie action research, arguing for a “turn to action” which will complement the linguistic turn in the social sciences. Four key dimensions of an action science are discussed: the primacy of the practical, the centrality of participation, the requirement for experiential grounding, and the importance of normative, analogical theory. Three broad strategies for action research are suggested: first-person research/practice addresses the ability of a person to foster an inquiring approach to his or her own life; second-person research/practice engages a face-to-face group in collaborative inquiry; third-person research/practice asks how we can establish inquiring communities which reach beyond the immediate group to engage with whole organizations, communities and countries. The article argues that a transformational science needs to integrate first- second- and third-person voices in ways that increase the validity of the knowledge we use in our moment-to-moment living, that increase the effectiveness of our actions in real-time, and that remain open to unexpected transformation when our taken-for-granted assumptions, strategies, and habits are appropriately challenged. Illustrative references to studies that begin to speak to these questions are offered.


2007 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 301-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Hemment

This article contributes to discussions of a public anthropology by bringing participatory action research (PAR) into dialogue with anthropology. PAR appears uniquely compatible with the goals of critical ethnography. Deeply concerned with global/structural inequality, it is also attentive to the power relations inherent within the research encounter; its point of departure is the kind of collaboration that the new (critical) ethnography proposes. However, despite these obvious affinities, few anthropologists have engaged PAR. At a time when more and more anthropologists are advocating forms of collaborative research practice, I argue that these two approaches to research can offer each other a great deal and that juxtaposing them is productive. Tracing the stages of her own fieldwork in post-Soviet Russia, the author argues that PAR offers the ethnographer a stance, or a framework to affect public anthropological engagement in the field. Further, it offers a means by which we can bring critical anthropological insights to collaborative projects for social change.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document