Co-production Blog - Exploratory Practice, Inclusivity and Co-production
Dr Judith Hanks, Associate Professor in Language Education, School of Education
In this blogpost I consider experiences of people (teachers, learners, students, i.e. practitioners) involved in co-production in the fields of applied linguistics and language education. As an applied linguist and a language teacher and teacher educator myself, I work in and through languages, with practitioners (i.e. teachers and students of the language), and I consider myself a practitioner of teaching, of learning, and of research. I’ve been involved with co-production over many years, focusing particularly on inclusivity and integrating research and pedagogy. I want to tease out some of the dilemmas and questions that arise when considering co-production.
A definition of co-production
Bramley’s (2019) definition of co-production is particularly helpful to keep in mind:
“Co-production is a fundamentally different type of research, and this challenges accepted practices and definitions of “excellence”. It means that ALL types of knowledge and experience have to be respected and valued equally, that time and resource has to be invested in building relationships, managing power differentials and establishing trust. No longer are the research findings the sole output of the research programme; they are just one form of knowledge and impact that emerges from co-produced research” (Bramley, 2019, https://www.n8research.org.uk/co-production-and-the-n8/ )
Exploratory Practice: co-production with learners, students, teachers
The specific form of co-production under discussion is Exploratory Practice (Allwright & Hanks, 2009; Hanks, 2017). This is a framework of principles for practitioner research which prioritises learners, students and teachers as co-researchers in agenda-setting, data collection, data analysis and dissemination of findings. It is a way of conducting inclusive research, while also getting learning and teaching done.
Exploratory Practice is in the long-established tradition of Practitioner Research (Zeichner & Noffke, 2001). This ‘family’ also includes Action Research, Reflective Practice, and Lesson Study (see Hanks, 2019). While the latter three focus very much on teachers as researchers, Exploratory Practice is distinctive in that it explicitly includes learners, students, novice/experienced teachers, educational psychologists, and others, as co-researchers.
Teachers and students in the UK sharing their explorations
Inclusivity
Co-producing research questions (practitioner-initiated puzzles) with language learners and teachers provides multiple opportunities for power-sharing. Their insights into pedagogy are profound, and the implications for methodology cannot be ignored. Exploratory Practice is unusual in that it positions students as active agents (‘key developing practitioners’) who have the power to shape the research agenda.
As students investigate what puzzles them about their learning, they discover for themselves the understandings that they seek.
It is exciting to hear what puzzles practitioners about their language learning/teaching processes. The questions that learners, students and teachers ask about their praxis are inspiring, providing deep insights into their learning/teaching lives. For example, students ask: “Why don’t I like writing classes?”, “Why am I anxious about studying at a British university?”, “Why do I struggle to concentrate in lectures?”, “Why do I struggle to use new vocabulary?”. Concurrently, their teachers ask: “Why do they struggle to use new vocabulary?”, “Why do they struggle to concentrate in class?”, “Why do I feel nervous when they ask me questions?” (see Hanks, 2015a, 2015b, 2021). Similar co-produced work is ongoing in Japan (Kato & Hanks, 2021; Kato, 2024), Turkey and Northern Cyprus (Dikilitas & Hanks, 2018).
Teachers sharing puzzles in N. Cyprus
In Brazil, I’ve seen middle school students asking pertinent questions such as “Why does racism exist?” or “What motivates us to go to English class?”. Meanwhile, their teachers (both novice and experienced) want to know “Why do teaching institutions affect so much our mental health?”, “Why is it important to deal with affect in the classroom?”. Teachers and students have collaborated to investigate, and presented posters on, for example “Anti-racist practices in teaching processes: understanding life in classrooms and what emerges from them”. Such research is deeply relevant to the teachers, students, learners themselves, and highly relevant to academic researchers where research themes such as motivation, emotions, social justice are prominent. Working together to develop communal understandings of these questions, which are relevant to the participants themselves, can offer multiple opportunities for developing mutually beneficial understanding, not only for teachers, students and learners but also for researchers.
Photograph of a group of high school students’ poster (in Portuguese) presented by them at the 20th Anniversary Exploratory Practice Event in Rio de Janeiro. (Translations: “Why in Rio does violence veto the right to education? Why do people settle for misery? Why is being a teacher an act of resistance?”)
Co-production Challenges, Benefits, and Questions
At a meta-level, co-production raises questions about the importance and relevance of the research agenda to those who are most closely affected: the teachers, students and learners themselves. Who sets that agenda? Who forms and refines the Research Questions? Who conducts the research and who presents the findings? Power-sharing can also throw light onto previously hidden hierarchical structures. Whose questions get priority? Who decides what will be investigated? Who organises group formation and functioning of both class(es) and research? How to integrate research and pedagogy effectively?
Photograph of Judith Hanks speaking at a conference with diagram of Exploratory Practice principles on screen.
I have argued elsewhere (Hanks, 2024) that if we are to be truly inclusive, we need to offer the opportunity to conduct research to everyone. For some people, this inclusive approach can be disconcerting. It is often assumed that each group will ‘stay in lane’, i.e. that teachers teach, learners learn, students study, and researchers conduct research. In co-produced research such as Exploratory Practice, the boundaries between these roles are blurred. A teacher/learner/student conducts research alongside (or even without) an academic researcher. In my experience, practitioners in different settings (schools, universities, institutes) have expressed pleasure at being asked what puzzles them, and they have demonstrated a high level of motivation to explore.
A huge problem is the assumption that ‘Research’ must be conducted by researchers in universities. A common question is ‘But is this really research?’ It can be difficult to persuade traditionalists of the value to be found in co-production – I am still battling with these entrenched positions today.
Another problem is that we are all (researchers, teachers, students alike) socialised into problem-solution thinking. It is all too easy to jump to an answer; very tempting to say ‘I know why students struggle to concentrate, it’s because… [fill in your own answers here]’. But this really misses the point: if we just tell people what we think is the answer, we lose in so many ways. We lose the wealth of insights that practitioners can provide; we miss the richly complex and complicated lives they lead which impact on their ability to learn/teach as well as they might. Far better to actually ask and then listen to the stories they tell. As students investigate what puzzles them about their learning, they discover for themselves the understandings that they seek.
Co-production also throws a spotlight on the position of the researcher. Provocatively, it could be asked ‘What is the point of the researcher, if practitioners are doing the research themselves?’. There are, of course, particular skills that academic researchers have, which could be useful to the co-production endeavour. No longer in an exploitative relationship with participants, drilling down to extract their experiences, perceptions, motivations or emotions, the researcher comes as an equal in a group which acknowledges the different skills and contributions of each person.
Although there are some important contextual differences for people working in different educational settings, there are also some common threads, useful for anyone interested in the complexities of co-production. Research outcomes are, almost by definition (because co-created with teachers and students themselves) more relevant. Teachers and students report enhanced learning/teaching experiences because they themselves are in charge.
Embedding Impact
What I have noticed is that although co-production can be challenging, the process of encouraging practitioner-centred investigations and analysis), and sharing dissemination of findings, is highly motivating. From my experience, a tolerance of ambiguity and a willingness to work with practitioners, listening first to what they have to say, are crucial to the success of any co-production endeavour. Co-produced research affords creativity too. In addition to the published works cited here, vivid examples of teachers and students in the Rio de Janeiro Exploratory Practice Group can be found in an e-book written by the teachers and students themselves (in Portuguese https://tinyurl.com/czk54amx and in English https://tinyurl.com/4fc853mx ). Crucially, impact is embedded from the start if/when students, learners and teachers (and others involved) are invited to collaborate, sharing their questions about what puzzles them, investigating together, and acknowledged as equal (but different) partners in the enterprise.
This blogpost is an invitation for readers to become part of a larger conversation with practitioner-researchers around the world. The Fully Inclusive Practitioner Research network (https://www.fullyinclusivepr.com/ ), including practitioner research from Australia, Brazil, China, Japan, Turkey, the UK and the USA (amongst others) provides more food for thought. I invite readers to participate in the conversation and look forward to hearing what you have to say.
Websites and e-books:
Bramley, A. (2018). Co-production and the N8. https://www.n8research.org.uk/co-production-and-the-n8/ (accessed 3.12.2024)
Fully Inclusive Practitioner Research (2019) URL: https://www.fullyinclusivepr.com/ (accessed 03.12.2024)
N8 Research Partnership. (2016). Knowledge that Matters: Realising the potential of co-production. ESRC www.n8research.org.uk (accessed 29.11.2024)
Rio de Janeiro Exploratory Practice Group. (2020). Por que trabalhar para entender a vida em sala de aula? Available at: https://tinyurl.com/czk54amx
Rio de Janeiro Exploratory Practice Group. (2021). Why seek to understand life in the classroom? Experiences of the Exploratory Practice Group. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/4fc853mx
References:
Allwright, D. & Hanks, J. (2009). The Developing Language Learner: An introduction to Exploratory Practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
Dikilitaş, K., & J. Hanks (Eds.). (2018). Developing Language Teachers with Exploratory Practice: Innovations and explorations in language education. Palgrave Macmillan.
Hanks, J. (2015a). 'Education is not just teaching': learner thoughts on Exploratory Practice. ELT Journal, 69(2), 117-128. (Editor’s Choice) https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccu063
Hanks, J. (2015b). Language teachers making sense of Exploratory Practice. Language Teaching Research, 19(5), 612-633. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814567805
Hanks, J. (2017). Exploratory Practice in Language Teaching: Puzzling about principles and practices. Palgrave Macmillan.
Hanks, J. (2019). From research-as-practice to exploratory practice-as-research in language teaching and beyond. State-of-the-art article. Language Teaching, 52(2), 143-187. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000016
Hanks, J. (2021) Co-production and multimodality: Learners as co-researchers exploring practice. Educational Action Research 29(3), 462-482. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2020.1812417
Hanks, J. (2024) Shifting perceptions of inclusive practitioner research: Epistemological affordances of Exploratory Practice. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688241265432
Kato, Y. (2024). Puzzles in exploratory practice: The role of why questions. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688231220447 [open access]
Kato, Y. & Hanks, J. (2021). Learner-initiated exploratory practice: Revisiting curiosity. ELT Journal, 76(4), pp. 421–431. (Editor’s Choice) https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccab039
Zeichner, K.M., & Noffke, S.E. (2001). Practitioner Research. In V. Richardson (ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching. (4th edn) (pp.298–330). American Educational Research Association.
If you would like any further information, please email Judith Hanks - [email protected].
If you are a member of staff at the University of Leeds, or an external partner who works with us, and would like to write a blog on your experiences of co-production, please contact [email protected] to discuss your idea. Please join the Co-production Network, which is hosted on the Engaged Research MS Team (University of Leeds staff only).