‘Novice researchers are often overwhelmed by the plethora of research methodologies, making the selection of an appropriate research design for a particular study difficult’ (Groenewald, 2004, p. 42). At the start of this research project this was not the most encouraging assertion to come across and my initial reading of literature on the matter certainly appeared to add some gravitas to Groenewald’s statement. However, after studying educational research methodology through the EdD programme it became apparent I needed to let the enquiry focus suggest the research design and the tools for analysis: to carefully consider what it was I wanted to find out and what I needed to do to address the research questions (Hycner, 1999).
I focused on the need to examine the safeguarding and child protection experiences of EYTs and explored empirical research. ‘Empiricism is a philosophical term to describe the
epistemological theory that regards experience as the foundation or source of knowledge’ (Punch, 2009, p. 2). Empirical research enables knowledge to be derived from actual experience rather than from theory, but acknowledges that the links between theory and experience are symbiotic: that one can inform the other. As Gray asserts, ‘Both the empirical and theoretical literature can be used to identify gaps in knowledge’ (2018, p. 176). My intention was to gather primary data from the EYTs experiences and consider related
literature in the field of early years safeguarding and child protection. However, I recognized that, as the researcher, I was already embroiled in the issue. I considered having experience in the field and knowledge of early years safeguarding and child protection, I could not be detached from my own theoretical presuppositions (Hammersley, 2000). As Walliman suggests, ‘Being human ourselves, we cannot take an impartial view of others, and we cannot establish ‘facts’ as fixed eternal truths. We can only aim for interpretation and understanding of the social world’ (Walliman, 2006, p. 14). This ‘social world’ was the starting point for an exploration into phenomenology.
Phenomenology is a term used to encompass a philosophical movement and a range of research approaches that can be traced to Kant (1764), but Husserl (1859-1938) is considered the founder of phenomenology as it is referred to from the twentieth century (when published in English). His philosophical methodology was based on scientific methods for finding and guaranteeing ‘essential structures of consciousness’ (Priest, 2017): that knowledge was derived from experience. He contested that information about the material world could not be
55 considered reliable and that people could only be certain about how things appear whilst in ‘consciousness’.
Heidegger (1889-1976) moved away from this philosophical stance towards an existential and interpretive position (Finlay, 2009). Heidegger introduced the concept of ‘dasein’ or ‘there-being’: the notion that the observer cannot remove themselves from the processes of ‘essence identification’ but that they exist within the phenomenon (Smith, Flowers and Larkin, 2009). Finlay (2009) asserts that according to Heidegger’s position, phenomenology is the study of the nature and meanings of phenomena: the emphasis is on the way things appear through conscious experience (not just consciousness of the phenomenon). People come to know their worlds through their experiences in relation to other entities that also exist in that world. As Miles et al., (2013, p. 411) explain, ‘People’s actions can only be understood when placed within a social construct; thus the ‘taken for granted’ meanings and routines of everyday life can be unraveled and illuminated’.
Schütz (1899 - 1956) furthered the idea of conscious experience and suggested ‘the human world comprises various provinces of meaning’ (Vandenberg, 1997, p. 7). He considered perspectives of phenomena in the life-world were rooted in the unique life history of every person. He suggested ‘stocks of knowledge’ and ‘stores of experience’ are the means by which ‘individuals make sense of their life-worlds’ (Wagner, 1970, p. 13). Schütz (1932) suggests the observer in the experience assigns meanings. These meanings have both
motivation (there is a need to know why an action has taken place), and they are value based (culturally and socially situated). According to van Manen (2001) it is this phenomenological frame that provides a useful pedagogical context for lived experience research: to question the way a person experiences their life-world. In relation to my research project the attraction of this approach situates the experiences of EYTs at the center of in-depth explorations into the phenomenon of safeguarding and child protection: an approach that has the potential to illuminate the phenomenon as experienced by education practitioners. However, the quality of this illumination requires careful attention.
One of the challenges of phenomenology is the reluctance to prescribe methods that might be helpful in the design of the research project and in the data analysis (Holloway, 1997). This is attributed to the possible imposition of a rigid technique or process affecting the ‘integrity of the phenomenon’ (Hycner, 1985, p. 144). Much is written about the difficulties of capturing
56 phenomenological understandings and insights. As van Manen states, ‘The term
phenomenology occurs in a confusing abundance and range of qualitative studies and
publications’ and he cautions against ‘constructivist approaches to phenomenology where meaning is (pre-) determined, constructed, or attributed to a phenomenon or event by the subject (van Manen, 2017, p. 775). He advocates freedom to be attentive to the enigma of experiences revealing ‘fathomless depths, rich details, startling disturbances, and luring charms’ (van Manen, 2017, p. 779). However, Lester (1999, p. 1) states, ‘Adding an
interpretative dimension to phenomenological research enabling it to be used as the basis for practical theory, allows it to inform, support or challenge policy and action.’ This notion was appealing in terms of my research project. I had already identified that the intended
participants’ were employed within professional practice and the phenomenon under consideration was situated within that practice. The interpretative dimension would provide the frame from which pedagogical meanings might emerge (van Manen, 2001).
The diverse and extensive interpretive challenge meant an awareness that the design and methods used in this research project would be influenced by, and represent my own thinking about the ‘social reality’ being studied (Denzin and Lincoln, 2000). I bring to the research assumptions about how the world is socially constructed in early years safeguarding and child protection and this frames my methods. This aligns with empirical phenomenology that ‘is characterised by the way the researcher approaches the field’ (Aspers, 2009, p. 7). Empirical phenomenology is concerned with how ‘philosophical and theoretical insights of
phenomenology can be used in empirical research’ (Aspers, 2009, p. 1). It builds on assumptions that the social world is socially constructed, there is a central role of theory in research and that it is ‘the actors’ perspectives that are central to the analysis’ (Aspers, 2009, p. 1). This resonated with my positioning within the framing of the research project and this is discussed in the following paragraphs.
All research undertakings begin with a focus, a problem or an interest (Creswell, 1994) and in this case the issue was not knowing what safeguarding and child protection matters were being experienced by EYTs as they began to report challenges in practice. As the researcher, my epistemological position, or as Walliman (2011) defines, my ‘theory of knowledge’, was that any information about this issue was held within their everyday practice experiences. I decided that if this phenomenon was to be investigated then I would need to engage in dialogue with EYTs but recognising their subjective meanings play a crucial role in their
57 social actions: that each would interpret safeguarding and child protection practice
experiences, dependent upon their unique personal and professional situations. Indeed Schütz (1966, p. 5) argues the researcher should ‘start with the life-world where the person acts’ within these ‘taken-for-granted attitudes’. Likewise, van Manen (1979, p. 520) asserts, research into the life-world is an approach that enables ‘an array of interpretive techniques which seek to describe, decode, translate, and otherwise come to terms with the meaning of naturally occurring phenomena in the social world’. Schütz (1932) suggests in the study of the social world, the starting point is examining the lived experiences of the people who are ‘looking at the world from within the natural attitude’ (Schütz, 1932, pp. 97-98). He
illuminates the importance of constructing meaning and explains,
The thought objects constructed by the social scientist, in order to grasp this social reality, have to be founded upon the thought objects constructed by the common- sense thinking of men, living their daily life within their social world. Thus, the constructs of the social sciences are, so-to- speak, constructs of the second degree, that is, constructs of the constructs made by the actors on the social scene. (Schütz, 1962, p. 59)
Schütz clarifies that the participants in my research project will have constructed meanings about the safeguarding and child protection aspects of their professional practice in early years. As the researcher I will be constructing my own meanings from their accounts,
disclosures and considerations of this phenomenon. Schütz acknowledges the researcher and participants might be more likely to construct meaning if they are aware of ‘each other’s provinces of meaning’ (Schütz, 1962, p. 220): that common signs and language in face-to- face interactions can facilitate understanding. I consider that reality and experience are socially constructed and interpreted and represent different ‘truths’ from the perspectives of those involved. In this respect I reasoned my ‘provinces of meaning’ might be considered what Connelly (2015) terms an ‘asset’ in the interpretation of reported experiences from different perspectives: that I might be able to make meaning from experiences reported by the EYTs as someone who uses similar language and has worked in similar environments, whilst also being alert to my assumptions, conjectures and beliefs.
I acknowledged that through the process of the research project I might inhabit multiple roles and identities such as lecturer, researcher and/or practitioner. There is literature that suggests the role undertaken by the researcher during the interview impacts upon the responses of the participants (Berger, 2015). My approach was to adopt the position of one who knows about the phenomenon (safeguarding and child protection) but not how this is experienced in
58 practice unique to GE graduates. This was articulated to the participants prior to each
interview (appendix, A, p. 163) as an attempt to generate respectful rapport as education professionals. I wanted the participants to help me understand their experiences and as Schütz states, understandings might be realized if ‘one understands what the other means’ (Schütz, 1932, p. 20).
Schütz (1932) argues that in the social world each person constructs different perspectives that are due to their unique biographies and relational experiences. The inference is that the EYTs may reveal difference in their experiences of the phenomenon. The intention of this research is not to provide generalisations or to find one truth, but to analyse and reveal meanings that belong to the EYTs and that might lead to some understanding of the phenomenon being explored (Swanick and Barlow, 1994). As Aspers states, ‘We must not simply deliver descriptions of states of mind: social science must understand why and how things happen, and this must refer to the way people understand and relate to these
phenomena’ (2009, p. 4). It is my intention in this research project to reveal interpretations and meanings attributed to safeguarding and child protection within the realities of early years practice. It is concerned with understanding the phenomenon of early years
safeguarding and child protection from the reporting of the EYTs involved.
EYTs are employed in diverse settings and in varied roles. Their reality is their interpretation of their world and, ‘what in any given situation is formulated, communicated and understood is only a fraction of what could be noticed. Not everything present in a situation is relevant to the person’s involved in it’ (Wagner, 1970, p. 14). Schütz (1962) concedes that the
individual’s life-world is selective and is also pre-structured by the other actors in the world through social construction of what is considered to be normal in that moment. He suggests the life-world is ‘prodded and guided by instructions, exhortations, and interpretations offered by others’ (ibid). In my research project this might mean practices in safeguarding and child protection that are influenced by stakeholders inside and outside of the setting such as colleagues, parents, children and other professionals: the adoption of some practices that shape their reporting of experiences. This suggests participants may share views of their life- world that could provide some ‘unity of outlook’ (ibid): some similarities. Alternatively, that the phenomenon might be in a constant state of change, as it is reliant on the social
interactions and interpretations as they take place and therefore reveal differences unique to the EYTs. As the researcher I need to be aware of these complexities, however, as Schütz
59 (1962) advocates, I can explore their life-worlds, recognising that they are in the moment and personal. It is by examining the very uniqueness of their experiences that insights into what it is like to experience safeguarding and child protection might be revealed. It is intended that from these insights new knowledge may be generated that will inform my understanding and be of interest to others in early years or related fields.
Starting from the original aim of this project and related research questions I have identified an interpretive approach to the methodology, known as empirical phenomenology, as the means to frame this research project. The appeal of this methodology relates to examining a phenomenon that is temporal and uniquely located within the individual’s experience of professional practice. However, as a novice researcher I have to understand the complexities of planning the project, gathering and analysing data and reporting findings from this
position. In the follow section (3.3) I provide some explanation of how I drew on key texts to inform the research design.