Using Innovative Methods in Early Years Research

Beyond the Conventional

Zeta Brown, Helen Perkins, Zeta Brown, Helen Perkins

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN:
  9781138389502
• eBook ISBN:
  9780429753305
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Early Childhood Education

Exploring a range of unconventional research methods and considering how these can be used effectively in practice, this accessible textbook encourages the use of innovative approaches to conduct research in early years contexts.

Using Innovative Methods in Early Years Research provides key information on a range of non-traditional research methods, and details the strengths, limitations and challenges involved in diverging from more standard research methods. From researching with young children, practitioners and parents, to harnessing the arts, vignettes, identity boxes and narrative accounts, chapters draw on authors' first-hand experiences to highlight the value of 'thinking outside the box' and developing innovative research methods that meet the needs and aims of the researcher, while also involving and empowering research participants. Including detailed information on ethical concerns and the importance of reflexivity, individual and group tasks encourage students to take a critical and well-thought-out approach to conducting independent research.

This will be an invaluable and inspiring resource for high-level undergraduate and postgraduate students as they embark on research projects in the field of early years education and care.

PART I Research in early education

1	Reflexivity in educational research Jackie Musgrave

Introduction

This chapter begins by examining how reflexivity has become an essential ingredient in high-quality educational research. It explores a range of definitions of reflexivity in qualitative educational research, drawing on peer-reviewed journal articles to illustrate how reflexivity is addressed in the literature. The content identifies the factors that inform and shape our beliefs, and in turn our motivation for conducting our research. A central argument is that our research is ‘not a voyage of discovery that starts with a clean sheet’ (Denscombe, 2007: 68). The reasons why it is imperative to acknowledge and lay bare our motivations and reflexivity are foregrounded, helping the reader to be aware that it is impossible and unnecessary to be objective, and in fact it can be unethical not to explore and declare our reflexivity in relation to our research. The skills necessary to be reflexive are also discussed, such as the ability to be critically reflective, especially in relation to the possible impact our research may have on others. Examples of how I used Brookfield’s lenses to achieve this in my doctoral thesis are included (Musgrave, 2014). The chapter also acknowledges that reflexivity can be a painful process when the subject of our research is deeply personal. An aim of the chapter is to support the researcher to navigate the line between excessive or indulgent self-reflection (i.e. ‘navel-gazing’), but instead giving guidance about getting the tone right when writing about one’s reflexivity. The chapter concludes by emphasising that reflexivity is an essential ingredient of high-quality early childhood educational research.

Reflexivity in qualitative research

Until the middle of the last century, researchers were divided into those who used quantitative and those who used qualitative paradigms. Indeed, Wellington etal. (2005) suggest that such polarisation between the two paradigms still exists, pointing out that the qualitative/quantitative dichotomy is artificial and unhelpful. Such was the strength of feeling among academics about the merits of the two approaches that there were heated ‘discussions’ about their value to research. In brief, quantitative research was seen as being scientific, robust and objective, whereas qualitative research was seen as being subjective, less robust and less trustworthy. Part of the ‘problem’ with qualitative research, from the advocates of the use of quantitative data, was that issues were explored in greater depth, using smaller numbers of human participants.

Qualitative data explored the stories behind the numbers that were gathered in quantitative data. The tension between advocates of quantitative or qualitative research was partly based on the historical need to be objective and scientific when presenting findings. As approaches to qualitative research developed, there was a realisation that researchers needed to ask questions that were meaningful to them. When a researcher has a deep interest in a research question, it can reduce the objectivity, or, as Denscombe (2007) puts it, ‘what chance is there that the research will provide a fair and balanced picture?’ (p. 5). Research that is close to our hearts means that there is undoubtedly and understandably a bias and lack of objectivity; our interests inevitably mean that we are subjective about our research. This may mean that bias may be difficult to remove from the research. Consequently, as qualitative research has emerged and matured, there is a realisation that such subjectivity, defined as ‘the quality of being influenced or informed by one’s own opinion’, should be recognised and explored as part of the methodology of research (Oates, 2018). The process of examining one’s motivation for pursuing our chosen research is referred to as reflexivity.

Defining reflexivity

There are a number of different definitions of the concept of reflexivity; however, it would appear that academics who have offered their interpretation are united in agreement that reflexivity is to do with self-awareness. This means that there is a need to be self-aware about the motivations for focusing on the area of research. It is important to differentiate between a similar term that is used in qualitative research (i.e. reflectivity), which is defined by Oates (2018) as ‘the act of applying critical evaluative thinking to one’s behaviour. In research, seeking to become aware of potential personal biases or shortcomings in all stages and aspects of research’. While the use of reflectivity is important in research, Oates (2018) distinguishes reflectivity from reflexivity:

In research, reflexivity refers to a researcher applying to themselves the same critical frame, methods or analyses that they apply to their research topic, participants and data. For example, a discourse analyst might reflexively analyse their own discursive treatment of their data. Commonly erroneously used interchangeably with ‘reflectivity’.

Therefore, one can see that, as Oleson (2005) suggests, ‘reflexivity goes beyond mere reflection, it demands a steady and uncomfortable assessment of the interpersonal and interstitial knowledge’ (p. 251). Reflexivity is to do with examining how the self is part of the account of the research. It requires, as Punch (2003) states, ‘constant reflection on the social processes and the personal characteristics and values of the researcher which inform the data generated as well as the subsequent interpretation and data analysis’ (p. 97). This implies that applying reflexivity is a thread that runs through each aspect of the research process.

How ‘to do’ reflexivity

As researchers, we can ‘do’ reflexivity (i.e. by isolating the focus of our research and asking critical questions of ourselves so that we can capture the reasons why our research is important to us). Therefore, the process of applying reflexivity to your research requires you to closely examine your motivations for choosing the research. Wellington etal. (2005), in a book aimed at doctoral students, suggests that examination of our motives starts with examining our life history. He and his colleagues created a framework for a personal life history, which is a list of questions that are designed to provoke reflection on students’ lives. The questions ask for information that covers personal information about family, experience of childhood, educational experience, occupations, personal relationships, and interests and pursuits. Such questions are designed to encourage deep reflection of not only the chronology of lives, but examination of how and why events may have initiated feelings about or developed our interest in a certain issue. Wellington etal. (2005) claim that examining our life history in this way and acknowledging our motivations is a vital part of the process because our ‘life history can’t be compartmentalised’ (p. 20), meaning that we cannot suspend our beliefs, separate our experience or delete our memories because our experiences will be inextricably linked with how we view and analyse the data we collect during our research.

INDIVIDUAL TASK

As Wellington etal. (2005) state, there is no ‘right way’ to do a life history; they suggest that a timeline using a chronological approach can be helpful. The following task is based on their framework for a personal life history:

1. Consider your life history. Start with your place and date of birth, and write down details about the context of your life to include family and your childhood, experience of education, community and context, and personal relationships.

2. When you have completed part 1, consider how the life events and the attitudes and beliefs of your family and community shaped you. How did gender, social class, ethnicity and sexuality influence who you are?

3. Does any of this information help to shine a light on why you are interested in your area of research?

Using reflexivity in my research

When I had reached the point in my doctoral research where I felt that I had a research focus and had started to plan my questions, I realised that I needed to critically reflect on my reasons for feeling so drawn to this focus. My research question was: How do practitioners create inclusive environments for young children with chronic health conditions? As I reflected on the reasons for the origins of my research, I experienced an ‘aha’ moment (i.e. a critical event that contributed to my reasons for choosing this research focus). As a teacher of early childhood studies students, I had been visiting nursery settings to carry out visits to students on placements. While there, I noticed that several young children had eczema; the angry patches of inflamed skin were very evident, especially on their hands and faces and in the folds of their arms. The word ‘eczema’ is derived from the Greek word meaning ‘to boil’ because the discomfort of this skin condition is akin to the pain caused by the skin being boiled. One 6-month-old baby was so itchy because of the eczema patches that he would rub his cheek against the fabric of the baby rocker in order to relieve the itch. He would also use his nails to scratch the patches on his arms, scratching with such vigour that he would make himself bleed. Such was the intensity of his scratching that the practitioners had put socks on his hands to stop him from scratching. The only time that the gloves were removed was when his key person could sit with him for one-to-one interaction, where she would distract him from thinking about the constant itch and his need to scratch to relieve the pain and discomfort. The practitioner used toys and talked and sang to him so that his attention was diverted. I remember thinking to myself: I wonder if wearing the socks on his hands is interfering with his fine motor skill development? How does he feel when he gets an itch on a part of his body that he can’t reach to scratch and relieve the itch? I realised that I was particularly drawn to this baby and the ways that the eczema was interfering with his life, and I was aware that he relied on his key person’s knowledge and understanding about him and how eczema affected him. I realised that I wanted to explore how practitioners had developed inclusive practice for children with common chronic health conditions such as eczema. Although this incident is critical and vividly etched on my memory, I was aware that there were other motivations for my interest in this area of research that needed to be explored and articulated.

Exploring motivations for my research focus

Cannella and Lincoln (2007) remind us that part of becoming an ethical researcher requires the researcher to ask, ‘How do I assemble myself as an ethical researcher?’ (p. 326). I became aware that a starting point in assembling myself as an ethical researcher began as I identified my reflexivity in relation to my research. My interest in the research question is informed by professional and personal interest. Ely (1991, cited in Possick, 2009) suggests that research projects are interwoven with the researcher’s deepest social and professional passions and commitments.

Considering other personal and professional perspectives

Having reflected on my personal life history earlier, I realised that being reflexive needed me to not just take a linear and chronological approach to examine my life history, but also to examine my life history from the different roles (i.e. the perspectives) that had influenced my choice of research. However, the differing perspectives were interwoven, and I needed a framework that would help me to critique the reasons why these different perspectives had influenced my research. I realised that adapting an approach similar to that of Brookfield’s (1995) lenses would help me to examine each part of my life through a different lens. By separating out each part of my biography, I could shine a light on the influences and reasons why my research was so important (see Figure 1.1).

Adapting Brookfield’s lenses

Brookfield (1995) highlighted the importance of extending our reflection and becoming critical reflectors. Being critical does not entail just being negative, although it is important to examine the ‘cons’ as well as the ‘pros’. In order to be a critical reflector, Brookfield (1995) suggests that we use different ‘lenses’ in order to look at an issue from a different perspective or vantage point. The analogy is that in the same way a pair of spectacles with prescription lenses will help an individual to see the world clearly, in a similar way, ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• List of Abbreviations
• List of Figures
• Notes on the Contributors
• Introduction
• Part I Research in Early Education
• Part II Researching with Children
• Part III Researching with Practitioners and Parents
• Index