CHAPTER FOUR: PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL COMPLICATIONS IN MY QUEST

Forgetfulness of Being

The biggest challenge I experienced in my study included Seinsvergessenheit, which can be explained as a "forgetfulness of being." Seinvergessenheit was explained by Carola Conle (2000) as being created by the German philosopher Heidegger.

The passing of my father this past June, who had encouraged and supported me in my graduate studies, left me "functioning at the surface." My passion for learning that drives me along my journey of the heart, producing the life affirming energy, was fading. My father not only provided me with financial support, he was also my critical friend whom I would casually meet with to discuss the progress of my studies. My father would listen attentively and with heart, offering advice and pushing my thinking further into new thought and new territory. The loss of my special critical friend resulted in my inability to write in my reflective journal for 6 weeks.

How did I regain my sense of being? My sense of being was regained during a visit to a new kindergarten teacher as requested by the administrator a week before school began. On the Friday before Labour Day Weekend, at 2:00 p.m., I received a phone call from an administrator. She wondered if I could stop in to visit a new teacher who was experiencing difficulty preparing for the new school year. I immediately set off on my "quest" to assist the teacher in distress. Nel Noddings reminds us that "caring involves stepping out of one's personal frame of reference into the other's" (Noddings, 1984, p. 24). I remember the stress and anxiety associated with my first year of teaching that included understanding and application of the new curriculum to meet the needs of the students in my classroom as well as fear of the behaviour challenges that I would encounter. I arrived at the classroom to find the teacher overwhelmed, and in tears, over the prospect of the new curriculum. Her mother was busily assisting her prepare the welcoming classroom environment with rich environmental print and bright visual displays. I listened actively and empathetically, reviewed the kindergarten program with her, and we discussed her first unit of study, "The Life Cycle of Butterflies." I offered to bring developmentally appropriate resources for her unit and asked if she would like assistance in retrieving caterpillars for her unit. She accepted the offer of the resources but commented that she felt it was "beyond my role" to assist her with the search for the small insects. I reassured her that she was going to make a wonderful kindergarten teacher, as evident from her planning and organization, and promised to return with resources next week.

Understanding the difficulty in locating monarch caterpillars, as I had embarked on this quest for my own classrooms in the past, I decided to spend a day over the long weekend looking for caterpillars in rural areas and organizing resources. On the first morning of school, I arrived at the school with caterpillars, milkweeds for the tiny creatures' food source, and resources in hand. The kindergarten teacher had searched over the weekend and had been unsuccessful in locating the tiny insects. The hug and elated response that I was greeted with refilled the emotional void that I had been experiencing. My father had acted as the milkweed, providing support and life-affirming energy as my critical friend, and now I was acting as the milkweed supporting the new teacher. The cycle of life continues....My values of loving care, empathy, and understanding with the help of a very tiny insect had refocused me on my "Journey of the Heart" and back to reflective writing. I have conquered my struggle with reflective writing but now need to independently push my thinking further into new thought and new territory. (H. Knill-Griesser, reflective journal, December 8, 2000)

Action research is not a "neat and tidy" process. "There is a lot of overlap, retracing of steps, review, redirection and refocusing" (McNiff et al., 1997, p. 51). I found it very important to keep on task and be methodical in my approach. If I experienced difficulty in my research or a "writer's block," I found it beneficial to contact my critical friend or support group.

They can keep you focussed, and help you make sense of what you are doing. Many people experience turmoil and instability when they first start doing their research, and often things do not start falling into place until the project is fairly well progressed. (McNiff et al., 1997, p. 51)

The Ethics Review Process

Schön says (1983, 1995), that all organisations live by their own epistemology, their way of knowing; and that any one way of knowing uses its own legitimation criteria and standards of judgement. The dominant epistemology at the university is technical rationality, knowledge of facts and information, which is validated by testing for academic rigour through normative ways such as controlled experimentation and statistical analysis of manipulated variables. (McNiff & Whitehead, 2000, p. 95)

It is the requirement of the Brock University Senate that all research conducted by faculty, staff, and students involving human participants must be submitted to the Research Ethics Board, of the Office of Research Services, to be reviewed and receive prior ethics clearance. When completing the application for ethics review of research with human participants, my initial frustration occurred with the nature of the research checklist that I was requested to acknowledge. I was asked to check which applied to my research study: ongoing track of research, independent study, masters thesis, single study, faculty research, or honours project. Ongoing track of research and independent study definitely applied to my research study. But was something missing? I carefully typed in Masters Action Research Project and marked an X beside the process that I had passionately supported for the past 3 years. I completed and forwarded the application forms, including all consent forms, surveys and questionnaires that I would be administering upon approval from the Research Ethics Board. I received the following correspondence:

" The Research Ethics Board finds that your proposal requires clarification: The researcher may proceed with the work as soon as the following issue (s) have been addressed and approved by the committee:" (Senate Research Ethics Board, e-mail, November 22, 2000).

My anxiety increased as I scanned the eight points of clarification requested by the senate research ethics board. The first point indicated that I had already begun collecting evidence before the approval of the Research Ethics Board (REB) application. I was requested to consider the implications of using previously collected data without obtaining consent to do this from the people who provided the information and "outline the steps that I would take to minimize the retrospective deception implied in this lack of disclosure" (Senate Research Ethics Board, e-mail, November 22, 2000). In retrospect, I should have filed the reply away for a few days until my temper subsided, but instead I replied,

My entry plan upon assuming the role of Teacher Consultant-Primary Division was to survey teachers/administrators that I serve to solicit information about how I might best meet their needs in planning, curriculum, and assessment. I received permission from the Grand Erie District School Board as well as from the Program Co-ordinator. The surveys were done in the interest of doing the best job possible and had nothing to do with any research project. The surveys may prove to be potentially valuable data when I begin my research project.

Each participant will be given the opportunity to review his/her input and the opportunity to withdraw his or her contribution presented. All participants will sign the "attached" consent forms before any research is embarked upon. In the event that data collected under previous circumstances are required, they will be used only after receiving express written consent by the participant. Further, all participants will be allowed to review their contributions prior to publication, and written approval to publish will be requested prior to publication or participants will be given the ability to withdraw the input. (Please refer to Letter of Approval and Consent Prior to Publication.) Any contributions for which signed consent has not been obtained will not be used. (H. Knill-Griesser, e-mail response, November 24, 2000)

McNiff et al. state that "you must let your participants know that their rights are protected and that if they wish to withdraw they may do so" (1997, p. 35). The root purpose of inquiry into teachers' work and development, classrooms, and school contexts is, we maintain, to inform and enhance teachers' practice and pupils' learning (Cole & Knowles, 2000, p. 140). In my role as Teacher Consultant, I support schools and teachers in their plan to improve student learning.

The second point of clarification that I was required to address was the extent to which I have influence over the careers of the participants. Did I influence decisions regarding resource allocation to teachers? I was instructed to explain how I would assure participants that their participation or nonparticipation would not affect their careers or my future consulting relationship with them.

I initiated a conversation with Bill Valoppi, The Curriculum Co-ordinator for the Grand Erie District School Board, indicating that I was upset at being accused of influencing the careers of teachers across Grand Erie. Bill commented that in fact I did influence the careers of teachers when I recommended teachers to participate on committees or influenced their involvement in professional development opportunities. I needed to assure teachers that their careers would not be affected by participation or nonparticipation in my study. I responded to the questions stating,

I do not have an influence over the careers of the participants in the study that is evaluative in nature. I do not have an influence over the resource allocation to individual teachers. Resources to individual teachers are determined by the administrator of the school according to the school budget. I do have an influence over the system-wide resources that will be distributed to schools. I do have an influence over the professional growth and development opportunities that are available to the participants in the study. I will include in the Informed Consent Form the statement "I understand that participation or non-participation in this research study will have no bearing on the future consulting relationship with the researcher or professional development opportunities." All participants are free to discontinue their participation at any time without penalty. Contributions from participants will be invited and not required. Participants will have the opportunity to review and approve the final study paper, prior to publication. Please refer to attached form Letter of Approval and Consent Prior to Publication. (H. Knill-Griesser, e-mail response, November 24, 2000)

Susan Tilley (1998) comments that "returning transcripts to participants, asking them to consider and respond to their words in print, is one way researchers can check their interpretations of the participants' contributions" (p. 326). As a personal experience researcher, I was committed to justifying that narratives and stories written about my colleagues were both reliable and valid, reliable meaning that my data are accurate, and valid meaning the information represents what I claim it to be (Sagor, 2000). All participants were allowed to review their contributions as well as any narratives that were written about them prior to signing written approval to publish. Participants were given the choice to withdraw the input or give recommendations to make sure the data were both reliable and accurate.

Stacey approached me at the beginning of the Kindergarten Conversation Meeting to deliver the Informed Consent Form and to review the narratives that I had written about her. She had made notes on the changes that needed to be made to make the data both accurate and valid. I sat down with Stacey and we rewrote the changes together so that she could have input into the final draft. Stacey commented that my first draft implied that it was her first year of teaching and this was not correct. Her second concern was that I insinuated that she was overwhelmed with teaching very young children, which was not the case. Stacey and I have established a relationship of trust and respect, and mutually rewriting sections of the narrative that are about her has strengthened this bond.(H. Knill-Griesser, Reflective Journal, May 24, 2001)

Clandinin and Connelly (1994) comment on the ethical dimensions of researcher-participant relationships, stating,

When we enter into a research relationship with participants and ask them to share their stories with us, there is the potential to shape their lived, told, relived, and retold stories as well as our own. These intensive relationships require serious consideration of who we are as researchers in the stories of participants, for when we become characters in their stories, we change their stories....As personal experience researchers, we owe our care, our responsibility, to the research participants and how our research texts shape their lives. (p. 422)

Issue number four encouraged me to inform participants that while they were participating in focus groups I would not violate confidentiality in my research communications; however, I could not provide assurance on behalf of other participants in the group situation. Point number four also stated that I could not ensure the security and confidentiality of e-mail communications. McNiff et al. state, "Establish right from the beginning that you are a person to be trusted, and that you will keep your promises about negotiation, confidentiality and reporting" (1997, p. 35). Recognizing the validity of the concerns mentioned by the Ethics Review Board, I addressed these issues in the consent form and information letter to the participants commenting,

Although I will maintain strict confidentiality in my research communications please be aware that I cannot provide that assurance on behalf of other participants in group situations. I cannot ensure security and confidentiality of e-mail communications. Prior to publication, all participants appearing in the study will read the final paper and sign a consent giving permission for their contribution to be used. (H. Knill-Griesser, e-mail response, November 24, 2000)

Number five indicated that if I chose to solicit information from students I would need additional parental and student consent forms. I responded,

The only information that may be solicited from students may be in the form of work samples, photographs, or videos. Names of the students will not be disclosed under any circumstances. An additional consent form requesting student and parental consent has been added.. (H. Knill-Griesser, e-mail response, November 24, 2000)

Issues six, seven, and eight requested changes in the wording and paragraphs of the letters submitted. These changes and amendments were made to the research proposal. Refer to the Appendix for the Ethics Review documents.

Eighteen very long days passed by until finally, on December 11, 2000, I received an "Accepted" e-mail. But to my great dismay in my opening up the e-mail I found I had been given acceptance for someone else's research proposal. A subsequent e-mail titled "Ignore it!", written by Dr. Michael Manley-Casimir, calmed my racing heart. The wrong description had been sent with my approval!! The second e-mail was sent that indicated acceptance of my research proposal. What a relief!!!!!!

What did I learn from the experience of the ethics review process? I recommend that it is of vital importance that the higher education institutional contexts recognize the growing popularity of action research and work towards generating modified policies and procedures for action research paradigms. I also recognize the importance of negotiation in the form of "creative "" confidentiality, and protecting the rights of individuals participating in research studies. The Research Ethics Board acted as advisors to ensure that I was acting in "good faith" in my study, as well as to protect the university from pending legal issues. Keeping "good faith" implies,

Never take anything for granted....Always check back with people if there is any doubt, and, in matters where there is some possibility of misunderstanding, write down what you are hoping to do and get that approved. While you have a duty to protect others, you also need to protect yourself. (McNiff et al., 1997, p.35)

Complications in Communication

Complications were evident in a method of communication that I hoped to use in my study. My action plan included identifying a teacher to dialogue with, using e-mail communication to discuss critical conversations such as significant moments of change in her practice and how I could support her to continue to improve student learning. I found that the communication was "one way." The teacher did not have the time to communicate using e-mail, and I did not want to add to the "expanding and intensifying array of demands" (Diamond, Borho, & Petrasek, 1999, p. 95) that she faced in her classroom. My interactions with teachers, administrators, and support staff involve a personal warmth interaction that is unassuming and quiet. I prefer to meet face to face in social interactions, and I too struggled with communicating using e-mail and preferred to visit the teacher to address issues and concerns.

Many teachers I visit are overwhelmed with new curriculum and Ministry initiatives, planning, and assessment issues. I am concerned with meeting the individual needs of the teacher, maintaining an open, affective line of communication, and listening actively and supportively to understand their emotions and values. I am cognizant of tones of voice, facial expression, body language, and eye contact when I am communicating with my peers. E-mail is impersonal, and my concern was that messages might be misinterpreted and that my values of loving care, empathy, and listening with heart might be neglected.

Delong, at the Ontario Educational Research Council (OERC)/Counseil Ontarien de Recherches Pedgogiques (CORP) Act Reflect Revise Conference on December 7, 2000, commented that the affective domain may be addressed in e-mail if there is an initial human connection established. The sign-off of an e-mail message can be personal, integrating an affective response. I adopted the sign-off message, "Take care" in my e-mail correspondence, reflecting my value of loving care towards others.

Whitehead, at the OERC/CORP Act Reflect Revise Conference 2000, commented that e-mail correspondences are dialogical conversations that can demonstrate evidence of learning as it takes place over time. I needed to trust the process to collect data in order to make judgements to determine if learning was taking place. I have found e-mail correspondence to be successful in my communication with my critical friend and in my daily correspondences with teachers, administrators, and support staff across the Grand Erie District School Board. I have also found e-mail correspondence to be an effective prompt in the writing of new stories in my practice.

The Missing Voice in Research-Based Professionalism

I was discouraged at the missing voice of teacher consultants at the Ontario Educational Research Council (OERC)/Counseil Ontarien de Recherches Pedgogiques (CORP) 2000 Conference "Giving Voice to Research Based Professionalism" was the focus for dialogic discussion.

The issue of "voice" has become so important in my life as I have "discovered that knowing" comes to us through so many different paths. Of course there is a very valuable role of expert, considering those theories and readings and using them, in part, to shape our own ways of knowing. But the key to my revelation is that they form only part of what our knowledge is. What I have discovered is most important, however, is our reliance on and understanding of self, for I believe that it is central to everything that we do. (Cole & Knowles, 2000, p. 39)

The evidential base ensuring consistency of my values in my "Living Standards of Practice" (Whitehead, 1998) in my inquiry is evident in voices. The voices of others, the voices of theory, and my own voice confirm the pedagogical significance of my values.

The OERC/CORP 2000 Conference was initiated by roundtable discussions focussed on the topic "Giving Voice to Research Based Professionalism." The atmosphere seemed well prepared, with cocktails, stimulating conversation, and a guest speaker to introduce the evening session. Eight tables were presented for discussion. Tables one and two were designated for The Classroom Teacher. Tables three and four were represented by The University. Table five was where The School Administrators would meet. Table six was designated for The School Board. Table 7 and Table 8 represented The Ontario College of Teachers and The Students, respectively. Questions to explore included:1)In my role as a ______how do I engage in Action Research? 2)How do I promote this engagement? 3) What challenges and successes have I experienced? 4) What are my next steps? These were questions I was passionate about giving my response to as a reflective and reflexive practitioner (Connelly & Clandinin,1999), but where did my voice fit in? Where was the table for the voices of the teacher consultants? We are definitely not administrators. We are all teachers; however, as teacher consultants we are a level removed from the classroom.

I questioned two other consultants as to what tables they would join. We decided that the teacher table would probably be the table that would be the best fit for our voice. I joined a round table of teachers, but felt like an "outsider" misplaced because of my lack of direct connection to the students. The noise in the room was encompassing, and the narrative conversations became a muted sound of many people talking at the same time. I noticed that the other two consultants had formed their own circle of discussion. Where was the teacher consultants' voice represented in this room dedicated to reflection, research, and renewal? (H. Knill-Griesser, Reflective Journal, December 7, 2000)

The frustration of not being able to share my voice at the roundtable discussions was representative of the difficulty I have encountered finding professional literature written by individuals in the role of educational consultants. Resources are available exploring administrative and teacher leadership, teachers as mentors, and school development; however the voices of teacher consultants are silent.

Jack Whitehead commented in a paper he presented as a visiting professor at Brock University (June, 2000),

There are major contributions to be made to educational knowledge through explaining how we, as teachers, learn from our teaching. I want to encourage the perception that we teacher-researchers are knowledge-creators in the sense of theorising how we learn from our teaching and how we create and test our own living theories in the descriptions and explanations we offer for our own learning in inquiries of the kind, 'How do I help you to improve your learning?' (p. 3)

My reflective journal makes sense of my "reflections-on-practice." I reflect on the context of the situations, reflect on my values, reflect on my practice, and finally reflect on improvement (Ghaye & Ghaye, 1998). My reflective journal represents an autobiographical inquiry of my existence.

Autobiographical inquiry and its representation provide a process by which teachers can gain insights into themselves as developing professionals. Through the reconstructed articulation of prior and current life experiences, teachers have opportunities to pull out narrative threads that hold together the interwoven fabric of their past, present, and future lives and their personal and professional selves. (Cole & Knowles, 2000, p. 15)

My voice will contribute to the professional knowledge base of teacher consultants. I need to make connections with other reflective practitioners who are supporting teachers to improve student learning. At a recent First Steps training session, I had a discussion with a teacher consultant from the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board over the changing role of the teacher consultant.

J. commented that the role of the teacher consultant has changed over the past few years. Her schedule involves facilitating training sessions for teachers to assist them with the implementation of new Ministry initiatives. The role has changed from direct "classroom" involvement to system planning, assisting new teachers with planning, assessment, implementation, and curriculum, as well as providing resource support to teachers frustrated with lack of resources necessary to address the expectations in the Ministry documents. (H. Knill-Griesser, reflective journal, December 13, 2000)

The demands of the out-of classroom landscape (Connelly & Clandinin, 1999) are shaping the role of the teacher consultant. Teacher consultants need to listen to each other's voice to inform the future. The professional knowledge base needs to be established.

I Am A Living Contradiction

A discussion with a teacher one afternoon after modelling math journals in a primary classroom forced me to realize that I was experiencing myself as a living contradiction (Whitehead, 1989).

Today, I modelled the process of whole group math journals in a grade 1 classroom for both the teacher and the students. It was a very challenging class. The students experienced great difficulty working cooperatively in a group situation and actively listening to each other. Many students experienced difficulty taking turns and sharing materials. Despite the difficulty with social skills, the students grasped the concept of explaining their math problem using pictures, numbers, and words, which was evident in their written work and oral presentations.

After the students left the classroom for recess, the teacher asked me if I liked my job as curriculum consultant. I responded that I did, in fact, love my job and enjoyed interacting and sharing ideas with teachers, consultants, and administrators. The teacher commented that the last two meetings she attended involved teachers who were very angry and aggressive because of the new board assessment tools and units that were presented to be implemented in the classroom. She commented that if teachers had been able to vet the new assessment tools, or at least complete them as a pilot project, then they would be happier with the new changes. I listened to the recommendations the teacher proposed and realized that the format for creating new assessment tools and units was contrary to the values which I held in my relationships with teachers in my practice. My values of collaborative decision making, trust, and respect for the knowledge of teachers were being denied. I experienced a concern where my educational values were denied in my practice, and it was now time to act upon it. (H. Knill-Griesser, reflective journal, June 6, 2001)

I contacted the Co-ordinator of Assessment immediately following the meeting

and expressed my concerns, as well as the concerns articulated by the teacher. It was decided that all future assessment units written would have representation from teachers of the corresponding grade level on the writing team. Recommendations for improvement of assessment units written in the past would be reviewed by a team of teachers, and changes would be implemented accordingly. S. Covey (1990) stresses the importance of focussing on things that you can influence. By focussing on your "Circle of Influence" you expand on your knowledge and experience, and build trustworthiness. Covey compares the Circle of Influence to "a muscle that enlarges and gains elasticity with exercise" (S. Covey, 1998, p. 39). I frequently relate a quote by Thomas A. Edison to my children, which I now hear them repeat: "I"ve never made mistake. I've only learned from experience." A mistake is only a mistake if it is not acted upon. Teachers were not included in initial planning sessions for writing assessment units; however their input will be fundamental in future writing teams.

Nel Noddings states that "the primary aim of every educational institution and of every educational effort must be the maintenance and enhancement of caring" (1984, p. 172). I will continue to pursue complications in my quest by acting in accordance with my beliefs and values, which include loving care, trust, empathy, listening with heart, collaborative decision making, and a passion for learning. I will follow Whitehead (1989) in his idea of a living contradiction:

I experience a concern when some of my educational values are denied in my practice;

I imagine a solution to that concern;

I act in the direction of the imagined solution;

I evaluate the outcome of the solution;

I modify my practice, plans and ideas in the light of the evaluation.

(cited in McNiff et al., 1997, p. 48)