Practitioner inquiry: Troubling certainty

Lynn J. McNair*, Simon Bateson, Marlies Kustatscher, John Ravenscroft

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract / Description of output

In this paper, we present an argument for Practitioner Inquiry (PI). We briefly introduce PI, and we indicate how PI recasts the professional and political role of the Early Years Practitioner (practitioner). At the core of this article is the work of the early childhood pioneer, Friedrich Froebel (1782–1852). Froebel provided principles to support the continued professional development of practitioners. We draw on data from our Froebelian Futures project, which could be described as a call to action, where practitioners are viewed as research active, and competing values exist. Several strong, committed practitioners gave their time, energy and intellectual resources to further enhance their knowledge of Froebel and develop their skills as researchers. This led us to ask questions about the role that ethics plays in PI research and the boundaries that exist between university ethics committees and more practitioner led research.
Original languageEnglish
JournalEuropean Early Childhood Education Research Journal
Early online date23 Aug 2023
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 23 Aug 2023

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

  • Friedrich Froebel
  • early childhood
  • practitioner inquiry
  • evidence-based practice;
  • collective research
  • shared insights

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Practitioner inquiry: Troubling certainty'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this