This study aims to identify teachers’ perspectives regarding their experiences of the school disaster response and management in the aftermath of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Since this event, the Chinese government has been working to develop a response and recovery structure in educational institutions. School leadership has been challenged to balance the need for standard operating procedures against an ability to bring flexibility to existing organisational structures in response to specific problems brought on by disasters. Teachers are expected by school leadership to take a more active role in providing essential services for students whilst also dealing with their own stress in post-disaster situations. For this reason, teachers’ well-being after disasters comes out as a central issue that is being explored in present research. This research began with a pilot survey (n=100) in November 2011. Through this process, a rigorous research instrument was developed and validated for the data collection of the current study. The scale reliability was calculated using Cronbach’s alpha; the data were found to be reliable (>0.8). The findings of this study report a particular situation of being stressed,it is held to be responsible for the success or otherwise of a massive, state-regulated school reconstruction process. In this context, it is not so much concerned with the nature of teachers’ stress as an indication of individual physical or mental health and well-being. I draw on the experiences, challenges and stress that the teachers reported. In addition, the results also suggest that teacher ‘personal experiences and professional environment such as students’ behavioural changes in response to disasters have important impacts on teachers’ resilience and well-being levels.

What is the virtue in collaboration among practitioners in practical educational research? And if collaboration as elaborated here matters enough for us to care, how will our lives as practitioner-researchers be different? This thesis argues that collaborative research is more than a way of distributing the research burden; it forms a paradigm of practice which requires new modes of conduct and thinking. I illustrate the transformation of my practice from a collaborative methodology to a collaborative ethics, in which changes in status and relationships between participants implied new forms and sources of knowledge. The context of the thesis is a police training college where I held responsibility for staff training and development. The police trainers' thinking was characterised by a means-end rationality and a coyness about public debate of their values. Their practices of both teaching and policing had taken-for-granted aims. underpinned by a faith in certain knowledge and a piecemeal, technical understanding of competence. My research became a critical praxis at the point of interaction with the training staff. I had to learn new skills, and to replace my methodological certainties with a practical and ethical complexity. My collaborative ethics sought to change trajners' relationships with their work. It engendered puzzlement about teaching and learning, and permitted new constructions of practice. An eclectic mix of critical and emancipatory action research, with an autoethnographic approach, points towards a research practice determined by a situated ethics rather than a technical methodology. I contribute to our understanding of 'collaboration' and 'positive freedom' by conceptualising them as qualities of human relationships, judged by their diversity rather than conformity to shared aims, I show how police training culture reproduces conformity, how it may be confronted, and how collaborative relationships can expand understanding of teaching and learning.

No description available.

No description available.

This study aims to investigate the relationship between staff research and teaching in doctoral education with a special reference to disciplinary variations. There is substantial literature on this relationship in higher education, and there has been much debate about whether they are complementary or competitors for the resources of universities. There is however, little research at the level of doctoral education. This may be because it appears to be self evident that there is a posit. ve link at the doctoral level. However this is a hypothesis that needs testing. In order to do this testing, a questionnaire composed of two major dimensions of doctoral education - Supervision and Research environment for doctoral students - was distributed to about 2,200 full-time doctoral students in Education and Chemistry in UK universities. The dimension of supervision was divided into three components - the supervisor's facilitation of learning, his or her accessibility and the relevance of the supervisor's research to that of the student. The dimension of research environment for doctoral students was categorised into four components - the academic culture of social interaction, the intercultural facilitation of research (for international students), the research training programmes and research facilities. The relationship between staff research (the 1996 RAE scores) and the effectiveness of doctoral education as perceived by students is analysed along the above dimensions. Follow-up interviews were also conducted with students. On the whole, little relationship between departmental research performance (the RAE scores) and effectiveness of doctoral education is found in Education and Chemistry, especially pertaining to the aspects of supervision. However, the results of research environment are more complex. With regard to disciplinary differences, although the general findings of a lack of a significant relationship between research and teaching apply to both Education and Chemistry departments, it is interesting to note that doctoral education is more favourably perceived on most counts in supervision and research environment for doctoral students in Chemistry than in Education. Finally, a theoretical framework of research training structures to discuss these findings is offered.

My research began as an exploration of text-based interactions and the part that these relationships played in the development of students’ writing in an online Masters programme in Creative Writing. As well as a discussion of my findings, this thesis chronicles my research journey and the evolution of my ‘intersubjective methodology’. While harnessing an approach that I characterise as informed by grounded theory, my methodology foregrounds the role I played in generating and interpreting data; and it provides the rationale for my reflexive orientation and the resulting approach to presenting this research (part of which includes the use of creative writing). This thesis, then, both gives an account of my research topic and serves to present a way to understand the research process. My ‘findings’ point towards the potential for trust, intimacy and support within the text- based environment. While I found that the process of creative writing development is contested, participants identified wider goals that were related to their becoming writers, and it is here that I found the part played by the relationships on the programme. To extend the potential of the programme I conclude that more might be made of students working together At the same time, in order to facilitate this, it is to tutor development that I suggest attention should be turned in order to enable a shift away from the traditional student-tutor relationship.

This thesis focuses on the relationship between participatory research and visual methods. Firstly, I explore how methodology can be participative, investigating the conceptual base, the possibilities, significance and usefulness. Secondly, I explore whether using visual research methods can contribute to participatory research and how we can do this better as researchers. As I gained more confidence as a researcher, I started to carve out such space within projects to design and use more creative, innovative and visual research tools as a way of engaging with the participants in my research. The thesis elaborates on three main themes: 1. Ideals vs Practice of participatory research: How I have come to understand the difference between the theoretical and conceptual underpinnings of participatory research within the everyday reality (and the affordances and constraints) of educational research when trying to do it well. My early discussion relates to the methodological, practical and ethical challenges faced when, as a researcher, I was keen to be evaluatively formative, inclusive and collaborative (Publications 1, 2, 3). I also relate this to the range of knowledge this can produce. In this theme I explore the underlying principles of participatory research – and how these fit well with my own values as a researcher - and the notion of participation, consider linear modelling and question the concept of voice. I explore the mismatch between what I intended (the ideal) and what happened in reality (practice). I consider whether and how participation can be conceptualised in the less-than-ideal situations of real world research. 2. Quality in practice using visual methods: How visual methods can help individuals think differently. With reference to the development of particular visual research tools, I explore what visual methods can add to the quality of participatory research particularly in terms of ethics, inclusivity and appropriateness (Publications 4 and 5). I argue that visual methods enable me to reject a deterministic framework for exploring human behaviour and experiences, but instead position visual methods as facilitative with the aim of creating ‘space’ – ‘visually-mediated encounters’ - for meaningful dialogue between the researcher and participant. I critically explore the affordances of using visual methods and the different pieces of knowledge that visual methods can facilitate. I argue that the use of visual methods in a participatory setting can evoke a variety of viewpoints, from a range of participants, leading to a more complete and better research process. 3. Making connections: Implications for policy and practice: Revisiting the early concepts in my work, Publication 6 develops my earlier ideas further and proposes a model for effective participatory research. Publication 6 is a result of this journey to date, - as I reflect, refine and further develop tools to improve the research process and the experiences of people within it. During this journey so far I have moved from the structural issues of conducting participatory research (section 3), through to 7 managing the research encounter (section 4) and bringing all that I have learnt through to a policy and practice context (section 5). This thesis draws upon twenty three years as a researcher at Newcastle University, and my experiences of conducting over 60 research projects in many diverse educational settings. These different environments include community-based settings, prisons, and primary and secondary schools. However, it is not the particular settings in which this research takes place that is important in this thesis. It is to some extent about the participants within the thesis, and these include young offenders in the community, prisoners and children and young people. These participants could be described as unheard, or the have nots in the research process (e.g. Munro et al., 2005; Liamputtong, 2007; Arnstein, 1969) and so this thesis will discuss the particular considerations and sensitivities of being a researcher faced with subject groups who are sometimes placed at the margins of society. It explores the ethical, practical and methodological implications of researching with such groups (or for) rather than as objects of research (see Griffiths, 1998). My research experiences and reflections are placed in the wider context of other researchers in the area who advocate an inclusive, and collaborative methodology alongside ‘user involvement’ and ‘participation’ (e.g. Cook, 2003; Crozier and Reay, 2004; Nind, 2014). However, such concepts are contested, often overlapping, used interchangeably and are therefore not unproblematic, as will become evident. Rather than have a single study focus, the thesis charts my journey as an academic across both a series of projects and a timeframe and focuses on the reflection, learning and the thinking which took place within this work over time. This thesis is based on 6 pieces of work published between 2006 and 2012 – five are published in independent, peer-reviewed journals - and the majority of these publications are joint-authored. This reflects the collaborative nature of my work – I have never worked as a lone researcher (nor have I had the desire to) and I have always enjoyed being part of larger research and writing teams. This thesis reflects my own perspectives and therefore my own contribution to this work. Moreover, the publications are not all academic journal articles, one is a report (Publication 6), which is soundly based on academic evidence and robust research (funded through the joint Research Councils UK Connected Communities programme), and has been written specifically for a wider audience. This report is primarily aimed at practitioners and policy-makers and reflects my gradual realisation that by broadening the dissemination from academic journals, such publications can be accessed and utilised by different audiences, academics and non-academics, and perhaps have different kinds of impact. For a full list of the submitted publications for this thesis, please see Table 1. Contextual publications (related to my thesis, but not submitted as part of my thesis) which help to provide the context for my work are referred to in the thesis as [a], [b] etc., and a full reference list is included in Appendix 1.

No description available.

The research outputs within this portfolio demonstrate sustained inquiry over seven years which has added progressively to the understanding of collaborative educational research contribution. This research developed out of my work with the iPED (inquiring pedagogies) research network which I co‐founded in 2005. The portfolio contextualizes and critiques four journal articles and two peer‐reviewed book chapters published between 2007 and 2012. Through these studies of educational research at Coventry University, I make a significant and original contribution to knowledge, firstly by synthesizing evidence of the facilitators, drivers and barriers to contribution within collaborative educational research; and secondly by offering three new models which help to make the contribution of collaborative educational research more transparent. The Influence Wheel provides a visualization of research contributions as an interactive image. The model can also reveal gaps in contribution, and can be adjusted to display the aspects of contribution of interest to an intended audience. Product‐Based Analysis provides a holistic view of the strategic drivers, goals and interim outcomes of research. This model can be used to analyze, develop, track or communicate a research strategy. Finally, the Enhanced Three‐Phase Model articulates the social and cultural transitions through which a collaborative educational research community may evolve. Used alongside an analysis framework I devised using themes from works of fiction, this model exposes the problems and opportunities a collaboration community may encounter. These three tools exemplify my creativity in devising new ways of visualizing information, an approach adapted from the field of management where graphics are commonly used to supplement text. Methodologically, all the portfolio outputs employ insider inquiry strategies which capture different perspectives on the research context. Conceptually, all the outputs offer social representations of collaborative educational research. These studies offer questions and interim findings which provide opportunities for future research.

This thesis explores an autoethnography which is written in the spirit of ubuntu, with and through others. Viewing this as an ethically responsible methodology for educational research conducted in and between the Global North and the Global South, this autoethnography foregrounds both self and other. The story of a practitioner- researcher unfolds around a move from disillusionment with the examinations factories of the English education system into exploring a human ethic of essential care (Boff, 2005) and a pedagogy of unconditional love (Andreotti, 2011) in a Brazilian non- government organisation. In these shifting contexts, the writer shares a journey of critical reflection (Brookfield, 1995; 2000) on ethical relationships in research and education, deconstructing the hegemonic assumptions underpinning her worldview. Borrowing insight from postmodern philosophy for education and actionable postcolonial theory in education, a journey of (un)learning unfolds as the author grapples with taken-for-granted assumptions about and in the Global South. The aims of the study emerge from a life lived forward (Muncey, 2005) through critical reflection on the ends of education and the role of the practitioner-researcher. As such, the nature of data collection becomes a process of data creation incorporating a rich tapestry of research conversations, images, sounds and other embodied memories. As ethical relations become a central focus of the author’s critical reflection, the author has sought to minimise her inflection on the data and in doing so includes many of the original contributions gifted to her throughout a two year period. Through critical self- scrutiny and reflection the author has been able to examine her own educational and cultural assumptions through a different lens in the Global South. The beauty of this autoethnography lies in exploring the kinds of intercultural spaces the author and others inhabit in twenty-first century research and classrooms.