Donna Frost

Chapter 4 90 Co-operative inquiry formed the basis of the CCCI design. In the first place because it enabled inquiry into the research questions via an approach congruent with the methodological principles elaborated in chapter three: collaborative, iterative investigation of a phenomenon; explicit valuing and use of diverse forms of knowledge and ways of knowing; creating conditions for human flourishing for all people involved in the study; valuing and using both critical and creative processes and ways of being. As well, the steps involved in and the practise of co-operative inquiry are thoroughly and clearly described, not only by Heron ( 1996 ) and Heron and Reason ( 2001 ), but by others who have built on or further developed such collaborative inquiry processes (eg. Barrett, 2001 ; Jenkins, 2007 ; Yorks et al., 2008 ; Tuazon-McCheyne, 2010 ; Bridges & McGee, 2011 ; Napan et al., 2018 ). When setting up the CCCI groups and determining the outline of the CCCI process I had yet to meet the other members of the inquiry groups and so this part of the chapter is written from my perspective. I found Bridges and McGee ( 2010 ) and McArdle ( 2008 ) helpful when considering ways of approaching practitioners and inviting them to join the inquiry, ways of setting up and facilitating the first meeting and reminding me to pay attention, even in the early stages, to making agreements about the products of the inquiry, for example this thesis. Higgs’s ( 2001 ) account of setting up a co-operative inquiry and Titchen and Manley’s ( 2007 ) guidelines for collaboration were also clarifying. They discuss, for example, finding common ground and achieving a balance between offering a project framework so that there is some structure to begin with and enabling a collaborative process to grow so that collaborative planning takes over, or can take over, from the original structure. Bray, Lee, Smith, and Yorks ( 2000 ) offer a comprehensive and clear account of working iteratively, negotiating the forms of engagement within the inquiry groups and paying attention to rigorous inquiry. With respect to rigorous inquiry I also drew strongly on Heron’s ( 1996 ) own recommendations and the descriptions within Simons and McCormack ( 2007 ) and Titchen and McCormack ( 2010 ) of contestation and cognitive and creative critique. As illustrated in Figure 4 . 1 , the CCCI methodology emphasizes the collaborative generation of data in practice situations based on shared experiences, practice observations and creative responses to and dialogue about those experiences. These aspects of the design took inspiration from descriptions given by Dewing, McCormack, and Titchen ( 2014 ) and Titchen and McMahon ( 2013 ) of drawing on practice situations that are happening anyway, and being alert to the opportunities to investigate (eg. Hardy, Titchen, McCormack, & Manley, 2009 ) and learn (eg. Snoeren, 2015 ; Snoeren, Niessen, & Abma, 2015 ) within and from practice.