conversations in relation: the research relationship in/as artful self-study

This article was downloaded by: [North Dakota State University]On: 30 August 2013, At: 11:21Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Reflective Practice:International andMultidisciplinary PerspectivesPublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/crep20

Conversations in Relation: Theresearch relationship in/as artfulself-studyMaura McIntyre a & Ardra L. Cole aa Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Universityof Toronto, CanadaPublished online: 18 Aug 2010.

To cite this article: Maura McIntyre & Ardra L. Cole (2001) Conversations in Relation:The research relationship in/as artful self-study, Reflective Practice: International andMultidisciplinary Perspectives, 2:1, 5-25, DOI: 10.1080/14623940120035497

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14623940120035497

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressedin this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content shouldnot be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/crep20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/14623940120035497

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14623940120035497

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expresslyforbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Re¯ ective Practice, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2001

Conversations in Relation: the researchrelationship in/as artful self-studyMAURA MCINTYRE & ARDRA L. COLEOntario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Canada;

e-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT Our work is situated within the context of the self-study of teacher education

practices. We focus on the role of the other in self-study and suggest that both the quality

of the research relationship and the process of researching-in-relation engender a level of

understanding and knowledge development not possible through independent self-study. We

assert that self-study is a shared task and a shared adventure in which the understanding

of teaching and learning is deepened through the active involvement of another. We

characterize the quality of our research relationship as intimate and our process of

researching as artful. We tell our research story through four narrative phases of our

research-in-relation, explore several themes that emerge from our conversation, and consider

their implications for self-study work.

Introduction

It’ s much easier to learn from someone else than from yourself. Andinertia, which is often a major block in solitary work, hardly exists at allhere: A releases B’ s energy, B releases A’s energy. Information ¯ ows andmultiples easily. Learning becomes many-sided, a refreshing and vitalizingforce. (Nachmanovitch, 1990, p. 96)

The self-study of teacher education practices is an activity or practice that intention-ally focuses on both the ongoing understanding and improvement of practice(professional development) and the advancement of knowledge in a broader sense(research). Its value for both purposes is increasingly recognized especially by thoseteacher educators for whom self-study is an integral part of their professional agenda(see Cole & Finley, 1998; Hamilton et al., 1998; Loughran & North® eld, 1996;Loughran & Russell, 1997; Mitchell & Weber, 1998; Richards & Russell, 1996;Russell & Korthagen, 1995).

Some self-study researchers and practitioners work alone; some work collabora-tively with one or more others. The process of study and insights gained aremarkedly different in the two approaches because of what is made possible throughrelationship. In this paper we focus on the role of the other in self-study and suggest

ISSN 1462-3943 print; ISSN 1470-1103 online/01/010005-21 Ó 2001 Taylor & Francis Ltd

DOI: 10.1080/14623940120035497

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013

6 M. McIntyre & A. L. Cole

that both the quality of the research relationship and the process of researching-in-relation engender a level of understanding and knowledge development not possiblethrough independent self-study. Like Loughran and Gunstone (1996) andLoughran and North® eld (1996, 1998), we assert that self-study is a shared task anda shared adventure in which the understanding of teaching and learning is deepenedthrough the active involvement of another. We characterize the quality of ourresearch relationship as intimate (following and extending the work of Busier et al.,1997) and our process of researching as artful (following the contemporary genre ofarts-based educational research).

Our experience of researching together in an artful way heightened our awarenessof the important role another can play in one’ s self-development. As we workedtogether we became increasingly aware of the intimacy developing between us andthe in¯ uence of that intimacy on us as individuals, on the multiple roles we playedin each other’ s lives, and on the research itself. We attempt here to convey a senseof our research experience by storying some of the nuances of our research process.On one level our research story tells the tale of a collaborative autobiography aboutteaching and learning; it is also a story of a relationship dance in which twoself-contained women develop a mutuality that results in a productive interdepen-dence.

The Project

`Dance Me to an Understanding of Teaching’ began almost as a title that Ardraproposed to Maura and ended up as an elaborate three-act choreographed narrativeinvolving text, musical selection, and dance which we composed and performedtogether at an international conference on the self-study of teacher educationpractices (Cole & McIntyre, 1998).

PRELUDEDance Me to the End of Love (Leonard Cohen)

ACT ICONSTRAINTDance: Drills

Narrative: RefrainMusic: Wizard of Oz

ACT IICONFLICT

Dance: Steps Out of TimeNarrative: Arrhythmia

Music: You Gotta Change (All that Jazz)Ghengis Dreams (Oliver Schroer)

Piano Concerto No. 1 in B Flat Minor Op. 23 (Tchaikovsky/Clayderman)Common Threads (Bobby McFerrin)

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013

Conversations in Relation 7

ACT IIICREATIVITY

Dance: ImprovisationNarrative: Synchronicity

Music: Tha Mi Sgith (College of Piping Celtic Singers)Mist Covered Mountains (Bill Gardens Scottish Orchestra)

Shake your Groove Thing (Peaches and Herb)I Heard it through the Grapevine (Marvin Gaye)Shake your Groove Thing (Peaches and Herb)

FINALEDance Me to the End of Love (Leonard Cohen)

The project had two broad purposes: to better understand the relationshipbetween teaching and learning, speci® cally as they relate to one’ s autobiography;and to explore the use of non-conventional forms for understanding and represent-ing teaching and learning.

Ardra is a professor of teacher education; Maura is a doctoral candidate incounselling psychology and a therapist. Before embarking on this collaborative

FIG. 1. Act I narrative: refrain (pat-a-cake).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


FIG. 2. Act II narrative: arrythmia.

endeavour we had been acquainted for several years in the roles of teacher-studentand supervisor-researcher within the context of the institution and academy. In thisproject the teacher-supervisor (Ardra) became the researched. The project providedthe context/space for us to engage with each other in new and different ways.Through `Dance Me ¼ ’ , the inquiry and performance, we developed a relationshipthat transcended traditional boundaries of researcher and participant or co-re-searchers. `Dance Me ¼ ’ brought us together as co-workers, colleagues, andwomen. Through the research we developed an intimate research relationship thatpropelled the project further and faster to a deeper understanding of the phenom-enon of inquiry.

As we individually and together re¯ ected on the process of collaborative self-study, it became clear that, in addition to the mutually developed rendering of theresearch (our performance and written text), each of us was also developing asub-text of our experience. These sub-texts were main points of negotiation in ourresearch `conversation’ and that negotiation was in¯ uenced by the qualities de® ningour relationship. The story of our research is central to understanding the develop-ment of the research relationship and the role of the other in self-study. We tell ourresearch story through the four narrative phases of our research-in-relation: lookingfor and ® nding a dance partner; ® nding our rhythm; a formal invitation to dance;and, last dance. In a discussion we explore several themes that emerge from ourconversation and consider their implications for self-study work.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


FIG. 3. Act III narrative: synchronicity.

Looking For and Finding a Dance Partner

Ardra: In the winter of 1993, while on study leave, I enrolled in tap dancingclasses partly because I wanted to (re)learn some of what I thought I had learned asa child but with a more mature attitude and desire, and partly because I thought thatplacing myself in the position of learner and studying that experience would help megain insights into myself as learner (and by extension) teacher. I kept a journal of myexperience of learning to tap dance which remained unanalysed and tucked awayuntil the time was right’ . (This was part of my ongoing self-study agenda which isa re¯ ection of my commitment to better understand myself as teacher and topractice what I preach, that is, that self-study is an essential part of teachers’ ongoingdevelopment.)

In the summer of 1997 I was invited to teach a course on re¯ exive inquiry andteacher development at the University of British Columbia, Canada. I usually ® ndthat some of my best ideas emerge through the creative spaces of classroomdiscourse. Somewhere in one of those spaces, in a discussion of the multi-dimen-sional nature of teaching and the need for more appropriate ways of researching andrepresenting teaching, a title ¯ ashed through my mind. (I might have recently seena Matisse exhibit at the city art gallery or the then recently published book, Dance

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


Me to the End of Love, or heard Leonard Cohen’ s poem by that name.) For whateverreason I jotted down the title, `Dance Me to an Understanding of Teaching,’ in myjournal notebook. After class that day I roughly sketched out a plan for a study ofmy teaching which required a non-conventional kind of engagement with datarelated to my teaching. I saw an opportunity to reopen my `Learning to Tap’ journaland I wanted to try to incorporate rhythm and music into the data analysis andrepresentation as an alternative form of inquiry. Beyond that, I had no idea how Iwould proceed or what I would end up with. I carefully placed the idea aside forsafe-keeping, not sure where to go with it.

Maura: Last fall the university granted me funding as a graduate assistant; from several

options posted on a bulletin board in the department, I needed to choose a faculty member

to assist. The ® rst position that I was intent on fell through (I had looked forward to gaining

some practical experience and to doing some work that would look good on my reÂ sumeÂ ).

When I scrambled around looking for another position, I came across an ad posted by

Ardra.

Ardra: The substance of the ad, as I had written it, was pretty mundane. I wantedassistance with the study of my teaching but was uncertain of what that would looklike. The nature of the work would depend on the kind of relationship I woulddevelop with my research partner. And that would depend on how our respectiveinterests, backgrounds, perspectives, and personalities came together and on inex-plicable interpersonal qualities. I knew I was moving toward a more creative andnon-conventional form of self-study but was not sure how that would play out.

Maura: While I found the posting a bit vague, from working with Ardra as my thesis

advisor, and from taking several courses with her, I expected that being a research assistant

with her would be satisfying: at the very least I knew already that she is organized and

reliable; she returns phone calls promptly, and shows up on time. I was clear that I wanted

a no fuss research assistant experience. (I might add that I came across another posting that

appealed to me: a professor was looking for an assistant to explore arts based research. But

I thought, `Maura, you’re always doing unusual things. Do something conventional, take

part in a project that will ª countº as research. Work with Ardra.’ )

Ardra: I was noti® ed mid-September that I was assigned a Graduate AssistantÐMauraÐ and that she would be contacting me soon. Almost immediately, uponlearning who had applied and been assigned to work with me, my mind was a buzz,not with anything discernible, mostly just activity and indecipherable possibilities. Iknew Maura but not well. She had been in a few of my courses and had worked asa graduate assistant some years before on a relatively benign assignment. We hadvery little personal contact; in fact, our interactions had been quite limited andnarrowly de® ned. Yet, I knew enough about Maura (or my responses to Maura) toknow that I had found a research partner who would move with and stretch metoward more artful self-study.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


Until Maura’ s name was mentioned I had not consciously thought of the `DanceMe ¼ ’ project as this year’ s self-study. But when her name was mentioned I almostinstantly turned my journal notebook to the pages where I had sketched out the`Dance Me ¼ ’ idea. I translated some of it to the computer and wrote a tentativeoutline of what eventually became `Dance Me ¼ ’ , the performance (at that point theidea of a performance had not entered my mind).

Although I had little idea beyond the initial conceptualization or grand image ofthe study, I wanted to appear clear enough in my thinking when I met with Maurato talk about the project. I assumed that she would be expecting me to know whatI was doing. I didn’ t. My impression of Maura was of a strong individual, a free anddeep thinker, a bit of a maverick, always on the edge of and ready to challengeconvention. I saw her as the perfect research partner; I needed to be able to convinceher to dance freestyle with me.

Maura: Our ® rst meeting was at the beginning of October in Ardra’ s of® ce. She began

by giving me a draft of her `Learning to Tap’ story, a self study account of her experience

as an adult student of tap dancing. Intrigued, and somewhat baf¯ ed, I quickly read it. In

the silence of the room as I read, I could feel the breadth of Ardra’ s investment in this

project. Then she began talking: about the rhythms of teaching and learning; about music

as an analytic construct; about the inadequacy of traditional forms of representation in

research; about music as a representational form. Her words were so ® lled with movement

and momentum that it surprised me to still see her sitting before me, contained in a chair.

I left her of® ce that day knowing that this was not going to be the traditional paper I had

imagined. `Dance Me to an Understanding of Teaching?’, I thought. I wondered how I had

found the one assistantship posting (surely there couldn’ t be others) that would involve tap

dancing. (Even then I believed that the project would require Ardra to dance.)

Finding Our Rhythm

Maura: Over the fall, Ardra and I met six times in her of® ce at the university. We

talked in depth about the inquiry. Two of our six meetings were devoted to interviews. For

these meetings I came prepared with questions that were intended to clarify and deepen data

already gathered through previous discussions. Ardra also gave me some audiotapes of her

classes, a written account of her teaching done by a former student, and some autobiograph-

ical writing about her learning as a child. During this time I also observed Ardra teaching

in order to reconsider impressions that I had already formed as her student, in the current

context of this new project. By our fourth meeting (still at Ardra’ s of® ce), the audiotapes

of interviews and of Ardra’ s classes, her autobiographical writing and other written

accounts, and my observation notes amounted to a lot of data. All along we had been

analyzing and interpreting all of this material. We had exchanged ideas about the

representational form of the project, but had not yet actually begun to experiment with music

(and most certainly not with dance). I was starting to feel a bit itchy to literally get my

hands on the material; I felt we needed to take a step into our presentational form.

Ardra: I had said that I wanted to explore dance as a metaphor and constructfor looking at my teaching and that, rather than reading and analyzing the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


data in traditional ways, I wanted us to listen to them to try to discern rhythms.While I was committed to the concept and intuitively knew that I was on tosomething, I had no idea what it would look like and how to proceed. I thoughtMaura trusted that I knew what I was doing but I didn’ t. Where would we go fromhere? How could we even begin to work with these ideas? Was I foolish to havestarted this? What must she think of me? We were supposed to have worked with thedata to try to come up with some ideas for analysis and representation. I hadn’ t beensuccessful. My self-doubt was running high. She, on the other hand, had somethingto run by me.

Maura: When I arrived at Ardra’s of® ce for that meeting I was feeling a bit nervous.

The more I had `listened’ to the data (which is what we had agreed to do), the more I began

to feel almost viscerally the rote rhythms she described in her writing and our `early learning’

interviews. I imagined a child jumping rope, singing rhyming tunes, playing pat-a-cake. I

imagined the child who danced. It occurred to me that while it made perfect sense to me (at

home, far from the institution), to represent Ardra’s early learning experience in a

pat-a-cake rhyme, she might ® nd the idea absurd or, worse, she might think that I was

making fun of her. I was aware that I was on new ground; I was taking a risk.

I explained to Ardra that I wanted her to listen to the data as I had represented them;

I wanted her to hear the rhythms, and in order for her to really feel it, I wanted her to turn

away. Looking a bit perplexed, she swiveled in her chair and turned her back to me. While

Ardra looked out her of® ce window, I nervously performed an early version of, what came

to be called in our performance script, the pat-a-cake narrative.

Ardra: When I heard her introduce (an early version of) the pat-a-cake narrativemy heart soared. I knew at that moment that she understood, better than I, what Iwanted to achieve. It was as if the starting gate had been opened and we were off andrunning (or dancing).

* * *

Maura’ s preview of the pat-a-cake narrative was such a pivotal point in the projectand in our relationship that it seems important to try to represent it here. We digressfrom our conversation to present the pat-a-cake narrative.

VERSE 1(Together, seated facing one another with knees touching, playing pat-a-cake):

When Ardra was a pupil,a pupil, a pupil,

when Ardra was a pupilit went like this:

(pat-a-cake movements stop with Maura’s and Ardra’s hands raised and held againsteach other)

going to school,being in school

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


be likedbe goodperform

show what you know,and the rest will � ow


teacher’s helper, teacher’s petnever a moment did she regretlots of pencils, lots of books,lots of very pleasant looks

VERSE 2(Pat-a-cake resumes. Together):

She knew she knew the answer,the answer, the answer,

she knew she knew the answerit went like this:


learning the rulesgetting them rightreciterepeatrewrite

show what you know.and the rest will � ow

reciterepeatrewrite

� ll in the workbook� nish the readercomplete the storygo on …

close the bookget off the hook

move on!

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013



She never asked the question,the question, the question,

she never asked the questionit went like this:


follow the rules,the answer is therephonicsgrammarspelling

show what you know,and the rest will �ow

close the book,I don’t have to lookreadingwritingrhyming


She knew she’d be a teacher,a teacher, a teacher,

she knew she’d be a teacherit went like this:


going to schoolbeing in school


have a look,get the booksfollow the rulesalways in school


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


the teacher knows bestthe teacher knows all

there are books for the restjust pass the test


She learned to be a teacher,a teacher, a teacher,

she learned to be a teacherit went like this:




show what you knowand the rest will �ow


she wrote to her teacherher � rst special teacher,she’d do it just like her

get her toolsdo the tradeso a teacher could be made


When � rst she was a teacher,a teacher, a teacher

When � rst she was a teacherit went like this:



she was likedshe was goodshe performed

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


show what you knowand the rest will � ow

she was likedshe was goodthey performed

there were things on the wallbut it wasn’t a ball

the duties were met,but she felt some regret …

there must be something more


When Ardra went to grad school,to grad school, to grad school

when Ardra went to grad school,it went like this:

(pat-a-cake movements stop with Maura’s and Ardra’s hands raised and held againsteach other):

go to schoolget the credentials


show what you knowand the rest will � ow

jump through the hoopsnever say, ‘Whoops!’

she had done it all before

show what you knowshow what you know?

she knows she is likedshe knows she is good

she knows it’s time to …

show what you knowshow what you know?

show what she does not knowshow what she does not know

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


A Formal Invitation to Dance

Ardra: Through Maura’s creation of the pat-a-cake narrative I could start to seethe tangible possibilities of differently working with and representing the data.Nevertheless, I still was uncertain about where to go next in our inquiry, even inspite of my strong belief in the idea of music and rhythm as a construct, and theknowledge that we had amassed considerable data.

Maura: After the pat-a-cake episode, the next time I saw Ardra we were at a meeting

about another matter at her home. As things were breaking up at the end of the evening,

she brought her tap shoes out to show me. I politely admired them. Inwardly I was pleased

with the direction I saw her taking: she seemed to be inviting me to invite her to dance. I

had a feeling that she was getting ready to try on those tap shoes for size.

Ardra: Initially, we had talked about using different musical selections to rep-resent and re¯ ect different rhythms of teaching embedded in the data. We had yetto make any sense of those selections or even consider some possibilities together.That seemed to be the logical next step. When I heard the rote rhythm of thepat-a-cake narrative, I heard past it to the rote rhythm of taps on a hardwood orconcrete ¯ oor. I suggested to Maura that I might try recording some tap sounds athome and perhaps they could serve as a backdrop for our narrative. We agreed tohave our next self-study meeting at my home so that we could listen to some musicand work on other narrative forms that we were independently creating. (At thispoint the performance was still not conceptualized.)

As promised, and in preparation for our next meeting, I audiotape recorded sometap sounds. Disappointed both with the quality of the recording and the overalleffectÐ or lack of itÐ I thought about using clips from well known dance movies. Iconsulted my own collection and also rented and viewed a couple of my favouritevideos, noting excerpts that I thought might work. (By that time it was clear thatthere needed to be a developmental progression of my teaching and learningrepresented somehowÐ through music and text I originally thought and then, morerecently, with images of dancers dancing.)

Maura: When I arrived at Ardra’s home for our ® rst day-long self-study meeting, one

of her ® rst remarks was that her husband had started telling people that she would be

dancing as part of our presentation. She said this while rolling her eyes, making it clear that

she had no intention of dancing. She told me that she had tape recorded some tap dance

steps the night before but that she wasn’ t very pleased with the results. I asked if maybe she

would be willing for me to hear some live tap.

Ardra: I set Maura straight on the idea that I was not going to dance as part of theproject. To my mind, nothing was further from the realm of possibility. She took allof this in stride while unpacking her knapsack and getting settled to start work.Almost on cue, when I reminded Maura once again that `This was not about dance’ ,her hand emerged from her pack holding a pink net tutu-like skirt and a satin

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


sequin-covered body suit belonging to her daughter. I brought these along to showyou. Thought you might want to try them on’, she said matter-of-factly. `You’ve gotto be out of your mind! I wouldn’ t be caught dead wearing either one of those! Andwhy would I? I’m de® nitely not dancing. Besides, they wouldn’t ® t. Well, thesequined number for sure is too small.’ I heard my de® ance begin to weaken.

By the end of the day it had become clear to me that, in order to fully explore thepossibilities of the inquiry as a way of understanding teaching, I needed to be fullypresent in the representation and bring the metaphor of dance alive. Like it or notI would be dancing. Looking over the work we had doneÐ the text we wrote, themusic we selectedÐ it was crystal clear that I had been written in as a dancer allalong. Maura had clearly known this from the beginning. I had spent weeks andeven months in denial.

Maura: By way of invitation, I had already `written Ardra in’ as a dancer by placing

her in the metaphor of dance in the ® nal sections of the performance. I was optimistic; while

she had edited some sections out, she had left her `dancer self’ in. I had a feeling that she

would consider dancing as part of the presentational form only if it emerged, almost as a

necessary next step, in the way in which we worked with the data.

Ardra: Listening to the music, feeling the shoes on my feet and hearing theirsound on the ¯ oor, seeing the little pink tutu lying on the chair in the corner,realizing the strength and con® dence of the partner who was leading me in the danceinspired me to move from the podium onto the dance ¯ oor. I had a partner I couldrely on to move with me, sometimes leading, sometimes following, always inrhythm.

Maura: When I arrived for our second day-long self-study meeting Ardra was already

wearing her tap shoes. By then the project felt like it had its own momentum: we were in

steady e-mail and phone contact dialoguing about particular details within the form and

structure that we had established. Ardra had been thinking about our costumes (black tights

and tops as a base), and about changing her tap shoes to go with each of the scenes. She

wasn’ t wondering if she should dance; she was thinking about how to get her hands on the

different kinds of tap shoes we needed. Making adjustments and alterations to various

aspects of the piece, like the pat-a-cake narrative, our costumes, or one of the musical

selections, felt as logical and regular as editing a paper. We both became aware of how

specialized our shared language about the project had become, and felt some concern about

the ability of our audience to apprehend the phenomenon through the form we were using.

We made several adjustments that were intended to illuminate the material in places where

we imagined that the audience might need help understanding our uses of metaphor and

music. In our passionate investment with the material had we both lost all perspective?

Would they, could they understand `Dance Me ¼ ’?

Ardra: Much preparation went into the ® nal performance of `Dance Me ¼ ’ Ðmonths of conceptual, technical, intellectual, and creative work. Each time werehearsed was thrilling. I loved what we had created and I had come to look forwardto our working together on the project. We travelled to England to the conferencewith props, costumes, script, music, and technical assistance for the production.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


Although I was aware that the conference performance was our goal, it hadn’ t hit methat the performance would mark the end of the project. It would be our last dance.

Last Dance

Ardra: The excitement of the `big night’ kept me buoyed. It was what we hadworked towards. The performance was a success; it went off without a hitch.`Backstage’ , after the performance in our makeshift dressing room, amid the ¯ urryof people leaving, our set being dismantled, us changing out of costume and packingup our props, we found ourselves sorting out who owned which props and pieces ofcostume. `Here, Maeve [Maura’s daughter] can ® nally have her skirt back’ , I said,passing the pink tutu to Maura. Òh right’ , said Maura, ànd here’ s your kilt [partof Maura’s costume which belonged to me]’ . `Thanks’ , I replied stuf® ng it into mybag. Ì guess that’s it then. Ready for a beer?’ `Why not?’

We joined others to celebrate our performance and made no further reference tothe exchange that had just taken place; yet, I was aware of a part of me that was notcelebrating. All night my sleep was troubled by con¯ icting feelings of exhilarationand something else that was not exhilarationÐ loss, perhaps?

* * *

The next day at lunch in the conference dining hall Maura and I sat across from oneanother. We exchanged comments and afterthoughts about how things had gone theevening before and how odd it felt to have the project behind us. I was itching toshare with Maura my feelings of loss but felt embarrassed. It was a research projectfor God’ s sake! Finally, after everyone else had left the table I awkwardly andsomewhat reservedly let my thoughts tumble forth. `This is going to sound weird’ ,I prefaced, `but you know when we each took back our clothes, that left me with astrange feeling, a kind of emptiness’ . Maura nodded, `The passing back of theskirts’ . It seemed so symbolic in a corny kind of way’ , I admitted. `So ® nal.’ It wasclear from the silence between us that it was a feeling we shared. `You know, I’vebeen thinking’ , said Maura, breaking the silence, Ì have an idea for our nextproject.’ The relief was palpable. `You go ® rst’ , I urged, `So do I’.

Relational Self-Study

While we did not know each other before the project began, beyond a narrowlyde® ned academic context, we each had enough experience of the other to haveformed some impressions. We engaged in the project (threw ourselves into it)without ever explicitly negotiating the terms of our relationship either in a contractor through conversation about such matters as con® dentiality. More traditionalresearch relationships are usually anchored on the foundation of an explicitlyestablished agreement. Hammersley & Atkinson (1979), for example, liken thisprocess of negotiation to a business deal where a `research bargain’ is establishedbetween the researcher and the researched. It èstablishes rules about what each isallowed to do in the context of the research ¼ additional clauses outline what each

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


expects from the other’ [Hammersley, 1979, in Measor & Sikes, (1992) p. 79].Since these are practices that we support, recommend to others, and are stringentabout ourselves in other research projects, it is interesting in retrospect to realize thatwe both set these practices aside and relied on our intuitions about the other.Negotiating the terrain of the relationship was something that occurred implicitly, inprocess. From the beginning, we assumed (and trusted), without having to articulateit, that con® dentiality would be maintained. We assumed a sophisticated level ofrelationship expertise, where `such competencies need not be formulated in explicitrules or verbalized at all’ [Kvale, 1997 and Mishler, 1990 in Kvale (1999)].

Con® rmation of our intuitions occurred implicitly as the project unfolded. Forexample, Maura anticipated that Ardra would be a reliable research partner whileArdra imagined that Maura would encourage her creativity. When intuitions such asthese were proven accurate early in the project, an atmosphere of trust continued todevelop which encouraged greater degrees of risk taking and, in turn, led to adeepened understanding of Ardra’ s learning and teaching (the focus of our self-study). For example, our agreement on the pat-a-cake form was an initial and, wediscovered later, crucial `test’ of our commitment and willingness to engage in anintimate and creative process. Maura’ s anxiety about presenting the pat-a-cakerhyme dissipated as quickly as Ardra connected with its form and content. Therepresentational form Maura had selected required us to join hands, literally leavingneither of us untouched by the self-study process. Had we established an agreementregarding `the nature of our relationship’ in advance of the project, the open-endedquality of the relationship, which gave rise to exploration and risk taking, might havebeen curtailed [Hammersley, 1979 in Measor & Sikes (1992), p. 79].

Elsewhere, Maura draws parallels between her role as self-study partner andtherapist in relationship with a client. Although the two roles are quite different inpurpose, she suggests that there are similarities in process and outcome. Mauradescribes her work as therapist in the following way:

My overall task as a therapist ¼ is to develop a relationship with each clientthat is characterized by safety, trust and mutual respect. I accomplish thisby being consistently reliable and authentic, and by negotiating boundariesin each relationship. I try to help my clients feel connected: emotionallyand physically within themselves, within their relationships, their com-munities, and in the natural environment.

Once we are meaningfully connected, a relational space emerges be-tween us that allows the client to begin to explore. Feeling empowered inthe relationship, she begins to challenge previously held personalboundaries. She takes risks. Using symbols and metaphors to explore theterrain of her experience, she looks for new meaning. Feelings begin to shiftand new understandings and insights are gained. Change can occur.(McIntyre, 1998, p. 218)

Our relationship in `Dance Me ¼ ’ followed a similar trajectory and createdpossibilities for enhanced learning. Maura’ s orientation to therapy guided her in her

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


role as self-study partner. Ardra’ s commitment of herself as learner engendered awillingness to situate herself more fully in the work which meant making herselfvulnerable by exploring new ways of being a learner. That this was also thesubstantive focus of the inquiry meant that during the self-study a complementaryinterplay developed between research process and substance. Maura the therapistand graduate student became Maura the teacher. Ardra the teacher became Ardrathe learner. The role ¯ uidity that came to be part of our process (and also part ofthe performance) added an extra dimension of meaning to our understanding of thephenomenon.

Yow (1994) emphasizes the boundaries that must be maintained in researchrelationships, cautioning that intimacy can lead to faulty expectations. For example,she suggests that problems with respect to closure of a project can arise when thereis misunderstanding about the rules for a professional relationship’ (p. 123). Thisway of thinking, that `the role of researcher obstructs the development of a disinter-ested friendship’ (p. 123), assumes a level of separation between the personal andprofessional that prevents entry into more exploratory forms of relationship and ofresearch. Our feelings of sadness after our ® nal performance speaks not to ourunwillingness to facilitate closure of the project, but to the resonance that can beexperienced when the personal and the professional combine. In looking forward toour next project we look forward to developing and extending our relationship as apersonal-professional `knowledge producing site’ [Kvale, 1997 in Kvale (1999), p.103].

That the project took up space in time (about a year), from data gathering suchas interviewing and observation, to listening to music and making selections, torehearsals and the ® nal performance, meant that our relationship as a `knowledgeproducing site’ had its own space and time to evolve. With empathy underpinningour developing rapport, a feeling of intimacy began to emerge that allowed us todeepen the relationship and consequently, the scope of the investigation (Merriam,1988). Paradoxically, while the intimacy and consequent informality that wasdeveloping between us gave the project its shape, it did not distract us from ourpurpose. That the relationship remained focused on the phenomenon under investi-gation even as a sense of personal familiarity developed, allowed the `conversation inrelation’ as methodology to ¯ ourish. Couched in a relationship with this quality ofinterpersonal resonance, the research interview with its traditional distance between`knower and known’ is transformed into a `conversation with a purpose’ (Lincoln,1993, p. 33; Merriam, 1988, p. 40).

Van Manen (1990) explains, that a conversation of this quality `has a hermeneuticthrust: it is oriented to sense making and interpreting of the notion that drives theconversation. It is for this reason that the collaborative quality of the conversationlends itself especially well to the task of re¯ ecting on the themes of the notion orphenomenon under study.’ Conversely, as with a `true conversation’ , `the speakersare involved in a conversational relation with the notion or phenomenon that keepsthe personal relation of the conversation intact’ (p. 98). Simply put, the relationshipfed the research as much as the research fed the relationship, and both felt full.Knowledge that is produced through `personal interrelationships over an extended

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


period of time’ cannot be accused of contributing to a `tourist psychology’ based onìnstamatic snapshots’ ; rather, it has a depth and resonance re¯ ective of the relation-ship in which it is embedded [Kvale, 1997 in Kvale (1999) p. 103]. Às we meet theother we are able to develop a conversational relation which allows us to transcendour selves’ (Van Manen, 1990, p. 105).

Self-study as Collaborative Artful Inquiry

Artful self-study invites a different quality of engagement. Working with the researchtext in multiple ways was a multi-dimensional engagement that afforded a sensuallearning experience. We made analysis and representation decisions through cogni-tive engagement with the data but also through technical, instrumental, aesthetic,and embodied involvement. For example, revising and practicing the pat-a-cakenarrative brought attention to issues of voice and identity that emerged through theresearch and emphasized the essential nature of the themes embedded in that text.The framework of safety and trust that developed between us enabled us to be morefully present with each other and consequently with the data. As Lincoln suggests,òpenness, trust, and reciprocity between researcher and researched may involveunlearning and relearning old habits and behaviours and most certainly mandatesnew relationships between the two’ (Lincoln, 1993, p. 42). Even as it was occurring,we were both aware that it was the conditions of our research relationshipÐ theintimacy that had grown between usÐ that gave the project its shape.

Performance of the research text is an embodiment and representation of theinquiry process as well as a new process of active learning. The possibility of activelearning in each performance or recreation of the text exists through our ongoingcommitment to maintaining the conditions of our relationship. Each performance isan experiential basis for re¯ ection, analysis, and learning because in relationship weare `participants-as-collaborators’ (Lincoln, 1993, p. 42). Together we were able todraw out each other’ s knowledge and strength.

While re¯ exive inquiry or self-study processes, themselves, invite a degree ofartfulness, collaborative self-study processes require a quality of artfulness in theresearch relationship. By artfulness in relationship we mean a high degree ofspontaneity and improvisation which implies trust and respect for and connectionwith the other. In highlighting this quality we acknowledge its ethereal nature. Wedo not intend to detail processes that lend themselves to replication; rather, weintend to point out, through our account of our research conversation, thesigni® cant role the research relationship plays in collaborative, artful inquiry. Risk-taking and trust are integral to both self-study and artful research. As our relation-ship developed we also gained momentum in our experimentation with multipleforms of representation which, in turn, propelled our understanding of our self-studyfocus. As Maura asserts elsewhere, Ìn assisted self-study the project is the relation-ship; that is, the horizons of an assisted self-study project depend on the potential ofthe working relationship’ (Mclntyre, 1998, p. 218).

In the literature on self-study of teacher education practices there is surprisinglylittle mention of self-study as a collaborative endeavour wherein one research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


partner facilitates the self-study of another. Loughran and North® eld are oneexception. Jeff North® eld involved John Loughran in the analysis of a year’ s accountof his (Jeff’ s) teaching because, according to Jeff, `John [Loughran] was able toexamine the records without the personal involvement of teaching in this classroom.His analysis now allows me a clearer understanding of my teaching and learningexperience and the nature of knowledge and its generation’ (Loughran & North® eld,1996, p. 135). Feldman and Rearick (1998, p. 229), who used `an eclectic mix ofqualitative methods to study each other’ s practices together’ represent anotherexample.

Most of the published collaborative self-study accounts involve two or moreteacher educators either engaged in meaning making of their individual experiencesthrough dialogue (e.g. Abt-Perkins, Dale & Hauschildt, 1998; Arizona Group, 1995,1997, 1998; Conle, Louden & Mildon, 1998; Knowles & Cole, 1994, 1995a,1995b) or jointly engaged in an inquiry focused on some element of teachereducation practice (e.g. LaBoskey, Davies-Samway & Garcia, 1998; Lomax, Evans& Parker, 1998; Tidwell & Heston, 1998).

Loughran and North® eld (1998) maintain that the real value of self-study as areframing or learning experience can be realized best through the involvement of an`important other’ whose perspective and somewhat distanced location from thestudy focus enhances the understanding acquired. They describe collaborativeself-study as:

¼ a shared adventure in which the participants are jointly involved indeveloping the study and learning through collaborative experiences ¼The intensely personal aspects of the study that might otherwise be simplyaccepted without challenge or scrutiny are able to be professionally andconstructively challenged from within the study itself. In so doing, newunderstandings become better clari® ed and questioned. (p. 14)

We concur but suggest that attention to the relationship in such a shared adventureis critical.

Any truly collaborative relationship is developed based on qualities of mutualtrust, respect, and care. The risks inherent in any collaborative self-study requireparticular attention to these qualities. Collaborative self-study in which the researchlens is predominantly focused on one of the research partners demands even greaterattention to issues of process and research relationship. As teacher educatorscontinue to engage in self-study and to ® nd ways of collaboratively researching,including alternative forms of inquiry and representation, exploration of the researchrelationships that propel this work will need to occur as a parallel process. Self-studyhas inherent value as a mechanism for personal± professional development. Withinthe research context, being re¯ ective about one’ s research practice honours theprocess of researching as something more than an apersonal means to an ob-jecti® able end. Engaging in research re¯ exivity places the research relationshipcentral, honouring its role in the research and its in¯ uence on the human conditionof those involved.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


References

ABT-PERKINS, D., DALE, H. & HAUSCHILDT, P. (1998) Letters of intent: collaborative self-study asreform in teacher education, in: A.L. COLE, R. ELIJAH & J.G. KNOWLES (Eds) The Heart of

the Matter: Teacher Educators and Teacher Education Reform (San Francisco, CA, Caddo GapPress), pp. 81± 99.

ARIZONA GROUP: GUILFOYLE, K., HAMILTON, M.L., PINNEGAR, S. & PLACIER, M. (1995) Becomingteachers of teachers: the paths of four beginners, in: T. RUSSELL & F. KORTHAGEN (Eds)Teachers Who Teach Teachers: Re¯ ections on Teacher Education (London, Falmer), pp. 35± 55.

ARIZONA GROUP: GUILFOYLE, K., HAMILTON, M.L., PINNEGAR, S. & PLACIER, M. (1997) Obli-gations to unseen children, in: J. LOUGHRAN & T. RUSSELL (Eds) Teaching aboutTeaching: Purpose, Passion and Pedagogy in Teacher Education (London, Falmer), pp.183± 209.

ARIZONA GROUP: GUILFOYLE, K., HAMILTON, M.L., PINNEGAR, S. & PLACIER, M. (1998) Negotiat-ing balance between reforming teacher education and forming self as teacher educator, in:A.L. COLE, R. ELIJAH & J.G. KNOWLES (Eds) The Heart of the Matter: Teacher Educators andTeacher Education Reform (San Francisco, CA, Caddo Gap Press), pp. 171± 192.

ARTIST UNKNOWN (1939) Untitled work. On The Wizard of Oz [motion picture soundtrack](Victor Fleming Productions).

BUSIER, H.L., CLARK, K.A., ESCH, R.A. GLESNE, C., PIGEON, Y. & TARULE, J. (1997) Intimacy inresearch, Qualitative Studies in Education, 10(2), pp. 165± 170.

COHEN, L. (1984). Dance me to the end of love. On Various Positions [CD] (Don Mills, Ontario,CBS Records).

COLE, A. & FINLEY, S. (Eds) (1998) Conversations in Community: Proceedings of the SecondInternational Conference of the Self-study of Teacher Education Practices (East Sussex, S-STEP).

COLE, A. & MCINTYRE, M. (1998) Dance me to an understanding of teaching, Performancepresented at the International Conference for the Self-study of Teacher Education Prac-tices, Herstmonceux, England.

CONLE, C., LOUDEN, W. & MILDON, D.A. (1998) Tensions and intentions in group inquiry: a jointself-study, in: M.L. HAMILTON (Ed.) Reconceptualizing Teaching Practice: Self-study inTeacher Education (London, Falmer), pp. 178± 193.

FELDMAN, A. & REARICK, M. (1998) Ways of knowing and of being teacher educators, in: A.L.COLE & S. FINLEY (Eds) Conversations in Community: Proceedings of the Second InternationalConference of the Self-study of Teacher Education Practices (East Sussex, S-STEP).

GARDENS, B. (1992) [Traditional arrangement]. Mist covered mountains, [Performed by BillGardens Scottish Orchestra]. On Amazing grace [Sound track from the video A real highland

¯ ing] (Kilsyth, Scotland, B.G.S. Productions).GAYE, M. (1983) I heard it through the grapevine. On The Big Chill [CD from the motion picture

soundtrack] (Scarborough, Ontario, Motown Record Corporation/Quality Records).HAMILTON, M.L. with PINNEGAR, S., RUSSELL, T., LOUGHRAN, J. & LABOSKEY, V. (1998) Recon-

ceptualizing Teaching Practice: Self-study in Teacher Education (London, Falmer).HAMMERSLEY, M. & ATKINSON, P. (1979) Ethnography, Principles in Practice (London, Tavistock).KENNEDY-FRASER, M. [Traditional arrangement]. Tha mi sgith [Performed by College of Piping

Celtic Singers]. On Ancestral voices (Summerside, PEI, College of Piping Productions).KNOWLES, J.G. & COLE, A.L. (1994). We’ re just like the beginning teachers we study: Letters and

re¯ ections on our ® rst year as beginning professors, Curriculum Inquiry, 24(1), pp. 27± 52.KNOWLES, J.G. & COLE, A.L. (1995a) Researching the `good life’ : re¯ ections on professorial

practice, Professional Educator, 17(1), pp. 49± 60.KNOWLES, J.G. & COLE, A.L. (1995b) Teacher educators re¯ ecting on writing in practice, in: T.

RUSSELL & F. KORTHAGEN (Eds) Teachers who Teach Teachers: Re¯ ections on Teacher

Education, (London, Falmer), pp. 71± 94.KVALE, S. (1999) The psychoanalytic interview as qualitative research, Qualitative Inquiry, 5(1),

pp. 87± 113.LABOSKEY, V.K., DAVIES-SAMWAY, K. & GARCIA, S. (1998) Cross-institutional action research: a

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013


collaborative self-study, in: M.L. HAMILTON (Ed.) Reconceptualizing Teaching Practice:

Self-study in Teacher Education (London, Falmer), pp. 154± 166.LINCOLN, Y.S. (1993) I and thou: method, voice, and roles in research with the silenced, in: D.

MCLAUGHLIN & W. TIERNEY (Eds) Naming Silenced Lives: Personal Narratives and the Processof Educational Change (New York, Routledge).

LOMAX, P., EVANS, M. & PARKER, Z. (1998) For liberation ¼ not less for love: a self-study ofteacher educators working with a group of teachers who teach pupils with special educationneeds, in: M.L. HAMILTON (Ed.) Reconceptualizing Teaching Practice: Self-study in Teacher

Education (London, Falmer), pp. 167± 177.LOUGHRAN, J.J. & GUNSTONE, R.F. (1996) Self-study of teaching and research, Paper presented

at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.LOUGHRAN, J. & NORTHFIELD, J. (1996) Opening the Classroom Door: Teacher Researcher

Learner (London, Falmer).LOUGHRAN, J. & NORTHFIELD, J. (1998) A framework for the development of self-study practice,

in: M.L. HAMILTON (Ed.) Reconceptualizing Teaching Practice: Self-study in Teacher Education

(London, Falmer), pp. 7± 18.LOUGHRAN, J. & RUSSELL, T. (Eds) (1997) Teaching About Teaching: Purpose Passion and Pedagogy

in Teacher Education (London, Falmer).MCFERRIN, B. (1990) Common threads. On Medicine Music (Linda Goldstein).MCINTYRE, M. (1998) Choosing to dance with a partner: methods and issues in assisted

self-study, in: A.L. COLE & S. FINLEY (Eds) Conversations in Community: Proceedings ofthe Second International Conference of the Self-study of Teacher Education Practices. pp.218± 220.

MEASOR, L. & SIKES, P. (1992) Visiting lives: ethics and methodology in life history, in: I.F.GOODSON (Ed.) Studying Teachers’ Lives (London, Routledge).

MERRIAM, S.B. (1988) Case Study Research in Education. A Qualitative Approach (San Francisco,CA, Jossey-Bass).

MITCHELL, C. & WEBER, S. (1998) Beyond Nostalgia: Reinventing Ourselves as Teachers (London:Falmer).

NACHMANOVITCH, S. (1990) Free Play: Improvisation in Life and Art (New York, Jeremy T.Archer/Putnam).

OVERSTREET, W.B., HIGGINS, B. & MARKS, E.B. (1979) There’ ll be some changes made [Per-formed by Ann Reinking]. On All that jazz [Recording from motion picture soundtrack](Edward B. Marks Music Corp.).

PEACHES & HERB (1994). Shake your groove thing. On The Adventures of Priscilla; Queen of the

Desert [CD from the motion picture soundtrack] (Mother Records).RICHARDS, J. & RUSSELL, T. (Eds) (1996) Empowering our Future in Teacher Education: Proceedings

of the First International Conference on Self-study of Teacher Education Practices (East Sussex,S-STEP).

RUSSELL, T. & KORTHAGEN, F. (1995) Teachers who Teach Teachers: Re¯ ections on Teacher

Education (London, Falmer).SCHROER, O. (1996) Ghengis Dreams. On Oliver Schroer and the Stewed Tomatoes [CD] (Toronto,

Ontario, Big Dog Music).TCHAIKOVSKY, P.I. (1874). Piano Concerto No. 1 in B Flat Minor Op. 23 [Arranged by O.

Toussaint/G. Salesses, recorded by R. Clayderman]. On Richard Clayderman: The Classic

Touch (Muse, 1991).TIDWELL, D.L. & HESTON, M.I. (1998) Self-study through the use of practical argument, in: M.L.

HAMILTON (Ed.) Reconceptualizing Teaching Practice: Self-study in Teacher Education (Lon-don, Falmer), pp. 45± 66.

VAN MANEN, M. (1990) Researching Lived Experience. Human Science for an Action SensitivePedagogy (London, Ontario, The Althouse Press).

YOW, V.R. (1994) Recording Oral History: A Practical Guide for Social Scientists (Thousand Oaks,CA, Sage).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

th D

akot

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

30

Aug

ust 2

013

conversations in relation: the research relationship in/as artful self-study

Documents