Recent legislation within the English special educational needs arena details coordinated child and family centred provision whereby person-centred approaches are advocated for as a central way of working. Pupil voice and participation in planning, however, have not been found to be well embedded in mainstream school practice and are likely to require a high level of understanding and openness, for successful implementation. This paper explores the experiences of a group of educational practitioners aspiring to develop person-centred informed practice by engaging in cycles of inquiry and action. A cooperative inquiry group engaged in dialogue around practice, exploring both personal and professional values and their resonance with values embedded within person-centred practice. A significant claim of the paper is that cooperative inquiry, in its alignment of values with person-centred practice, is a powerful tool to facilitate the learning necessary to embody collaborative person-centred practice, strengthen the voice of both those engaged and in turn the children and young people on the receiving end of practice and make discussable the performative contradiction inherent in developing person-centred practice systemically.
ArmstrongD.GallowayD.TomlinsonS. (1993) Assessing special educational needs: The child’s contribution. British Educational Research Journal19(2): 121–131.
2.
BodenR.GreenwoodD. J.HallB.LevinM.MarshallJ.WrightS. (2015) Action research in universities and higher education worldwide. In: BradburyH. (ed.) The SAGE handbook of action research, 3rd ed. London, UK: SAGE, pp. 281–290.
BraggS. (2007) But I listen to children anyway! Teacher perspectives on pupil voice. Educational Action Research15(4): 505–518.
5.
BrayJ. (2002) Uniting teacher learning: Collaborative inquiry for professional development. In: YorksL.KaslE. (eds) Collaborative inquiry as a strategy for adult learning, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
6.
BurnsD. (2014) Systemic action research: Changing system dynamics to support sustainable change. Action Research12(1): 3–18.
7.
Children and Families (England) Act 2014, Ch. 6. London, UK: The Stationery Office.
8.
CoghlanD.BrannickT. (2010) Doing research in your own organization, 3rd ed. London, UK: SAGE.
9.
CordingleyP.BellM. (2012) Understanding what enables high quality professional learning: A report on the research evidence, London, UK: Pearson.
10.
CorriganE. (2014) Person centred planning ‘in action’: Exploring the use of person-centred planning in supporting young people’s transition and re-integration to mainstream education. British Journal of Special Education41(3): 268–288.
11.
DfE (Department for Education) (2015a) Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years, London, UK: HMSO.
12.
DfE (Department for Education) (2015b) Special educational needs: An analysis and summary of data sources, London, UK: HMSO.
13.
DfES (Department for Education and Skills) (2002) Listening to learn: An action plan for the involvement of children and young people, London, UK: DfES.
14.
DfES (Department for Education and Skills) (2003) Every child matters, London, UK: DfES.
15.
GearhartM.OsmundsonE. (2008) Assessment portfolios as opportunities for teacher learning (CRESST Report 736), Los Angeles, CA: CRESST.
16.
HardyI. (2010) Critiquing teacher professional development: Teacher learning within the field of teachers’ work. Critical Studies in Education51(1): 71–84.
HeronJ. (1996) Co-operative inquiry: Research into the human condition, London, UK: SAGE.
19.
HeronJ.ReasonP. (2001) The practice of co-operative inquiry: Research ‘with’ rather than ‘on’ people. In: ReasonP.BradburyH. (eds) The handbook of action research, London, UK: SAGE, pp. 144–154.
20.
HowesA.DaviesS.FoxS. (2009) Improving the context for inclusion: Personalising teacher development through collaborative action research, London, UK: Routledge.
21.
LomE.SullengerK. (2011) Informal spaces in collaborations: Exploring the edges/boundaries of professional development. Professional Development in Education37(1): 55–74.
22.
LuttenbergJ.ImantsJ.van VeenK. (2013) Reform as ongoing positioning process: The positioning of a teacher in the context of reform. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice19(3): 293–310.
23.
LuttenbergJ.van VeenK.ImantsJ. (2013) Looking for cohesion: The role of search for meaning in the interaction between teacher and reform. Research Papers in Education28(3): 289–308.
24.
MarshallJ. (2001) Self-reflective inquiry practices. In: ReasonP.BradburyH. (eds) The handbook of action research, London, UK: SAGE, pp. 335–342.
25.
MarshallJ. (2011) The practice and politics of living inquiry. In: PedlerM. (ed.) Action learning in practice, Farnham, UK: Gower, pp. 173–182.
26.
MarshallJ.ReasonP. (2007) Quality in research as ‘taking an attitude of inquiry’. Management Research News30(5): 368–380.
27.
Martin, N., Worrall, N., & Dutson-Steinfeld, A. (2005). Student voice: Pandora’s box or philosopher’s stone? Paper presented at the International Congress for school effectiveness and improvement, Barcelona, 2–5 January.
28.
MayH. (2005) Whose participation is it anyway? Examining the context of pupil participation in the UK. British Journal of Special Education32(1): 29–34.
29.
MountB. (2002) More than a meeting: Benefits and limitations of personal futures planning. In: O’BrienJ.O’BrienC. (eds) A little book about person-centered planning, Toronto, Canada: Inclusion Press, pp. 55–68.
30.
NASUWT (National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers), NUT (National Union of Teachers) & ATL (Association of Teachers and Lecturers) (2014). Joint union survey: Causes of work-related stress. October 2014.
31.
NelsonT. H.SlavitD.PerkinsM.HathornT. (2008) A culture of collaborative inquiry: Learning to develop and support professional learning communities. Teachers College Record110(6): 1269–1303.
32.
O’BrienJ.O’BrienC. (2002) Introduction. In: O’BrienJ.O’BrienC. (eds) A little book about person-centred planning, Toronto, Canada: Inclusion Press, pp. 5–10.
PonteP.AxJ.BeijaardD.WubbelsT. (2004) Teachers’ development of professional knowledge through action research and the facilitation of this by teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education20(5): 571–588.
35.
ReasonP. (1999) Integrating action and reflection through co-operative inquiry. Management Learning30(2): 207–226.
36.
ReasonP.BradburyH. (2011) Introduction. In: ReasonP.BradburyH. (eds) The handbook of action research; participative inquiry and practice, 2nd ed. London, UK: SAGE, pp. 11–14.
37.
ReasonP.HeronJ. (1986) Research with people: The paradigm of cooperative experiential inquiry. Person Centered Review1: 456–476.
38.
RudduckJ.FieldingM. (2006) Student voice and the perils of popularity. Educational Review58(2): 219–231.
39.
Sanderson, H. (2000). Person-centred planning: Key features and approaches. York, UK: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
40.
SummersD.TurnerR. (2011) Outside the green box: Embedding education for sustainable development through co-operative inquiry. Educational Action Research Journal19(4): 453–468.
41.
Taylor-BrownM. (2012) How did young people identified as presenting with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties experience a person-centred transition review meeting?Educational and Child Psychology29(3): 54–66.
42.
TorbertW.TaylorS. (2011) Action inquiry: Interweaving multiple qualities of attention for timely action. In: ReasonP.BradburyH. (eds) The handbook of action research; participative inquiry and practice, 2nd ed. London, UK: SAGE, pp. 239–251.
43.
WatzlawickP.WeaklandJ.FischR. (1974) Change: Principles of problem formation and problem resolution, New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.
44.
WengerE. (2000) Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization7(2): 225–246.
45.
WoodsK.StothardJ.LydonJ.ReasonR. (2013) Developing policy and practice for dyslexia across a local authority: A case study of educational psychology practice at organisational level. Educational Psychology in Practice29(2): 180–196.
46.
YorksL. (2015) The practice of teaching co-operative inquiry. In: BradburyH. (ed.) The SAGE handbook of action research, 3rd ed. London, UK: SAGE, pp. 256–266.
