Judy Bailey shows how narrative inquiry can be a valuable tool by relating how she used a narrative inquiry methodology to expand her own understanding of mathematics curriculum.
Using narrative inquiry to explore
mathematics curriculum
Judy Bailey
Abstract
Curriculum can be interpreted broadly to include not only what is taught but how a subject is taught or enacted. Over recent years reflection has become an accepted practice as educators seek to develop their awareness about both what and how they teach. Narrative inquiry is one way in which educators can engage in such reflection. In this paper I describe narrative inquiry, briefly outline my own experience of how narrative inquiry supported a deeper exploration of my thinking about mathematics curriculum (the what and how), and propose that narrative inquiry is a valuable means to deepen one’s understandings of curricula.
Introduction
A broad interpretation of curriculum to include not only what is taught but also how it is taught or enacted appears to be embedded in both Mathematics in the New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 1992), and The New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007). For example, in The New Zealand Curriculum the achievement objectives for each level are prefaced with the statement, “In a range of meaningful contexts, students will be engaged in thinking mathematically and statistically. They will solve problems and model situations that require them to: …” This gives a broad outline of how mathematics may be taught in the classroom and is followed by a list of achievement objectives that outline what is to be taught. The what and how of curriculum are intimately linked, and an educator’s beliefs and perceptions of what a particular subject area such as mathematics is will influence how they might go about supporting learning in this curriculum area.
Narrative inquiry is one way to learn more deeply about one’s practice, including beliefs and perceptions, and is regarded as a powerful means by which learners can reflect on and develop their own professional practice (Chambers, 2003; McCormack, 2002; Rushton, 2001). It follows that such inquiry can also be an effective way to reflect on curriculum in the broadest sense. Beattie (1995) makes a particularly strong case for the use of narrative inquiry within educational research, writing, “at the heart of meaningful educational reform and change, lie the narratives” (p. 66).
Recently I engaged in narrative inquiry for a period of approximately 20 months to investigate my professional practice while working with preservice primary teachers in mathematics education. One theme that emerged centred on the use of mathematical investigations as a vehicle for supporting preservice primary teachers to consider what the learning and teaching of mathematics may entail; that is, how the mathematics curriculum might be enacted. As part of this process I personally undertook several mathematical investigations. This combined mathematical and narrative process resulted in significant learning about previously unrecognised beliefs that I held about the nature and learning of mathematics; that is, the what of mathematics. A consequence of this was some changed beliefs and teaching practices; in other words, change in how I envisage mathematics and mathematics education curricula.
Narrative inquiry, a form of action research, thus appears to be a way in which educators can become aware of their perceptions about what and how the curriculum can be enacted in their classroom. In this article I describe narrative inquiry and then, in order to illustrate the potential of narrative inquiry for education practitioners, I briefly describe my own experiences of how such inquiry supported a deep exploration of mathematics curriculum in the context of preservice primary teacher mathematics education.
Narrative inquiry
Over the past two decades the practice of reflection has been recognised as a legitimate aspect of action research in education (Adler, 1993; Francis, 1995; Schön, 1983). More recently, narrative inquiry has also become valued (Chambers, 2003; Luwisch, 2001; O’Connell Rust, 1999). With the development of such research in education, where the teacher is central to the research (Brown, 2001; Winkler, 2003), there has been an associated move away from empirical, analytical models of research. It would appear that this move in professions such as health and education has resulted from the “apparently insoluble problems resulting from the attempt to use a model derived from the logic of natural science” (Winter, 2003, p. 141). Some of the problems include requirements for “replicability” (needed in empirical, analytical research), when the reality is that individuals and settings are unique; and the ethical problems embedded in randomised controlled trials.
Storytelling
Narrative, in essence, is storytelling. Most narrative research has developed in written form, although alternatives such as visual narratives do exist (Johnson, 2002). Beattie (1995) refers to narrative as a way in which teachers “find voices to tell their own stories” (p. 59) and gain new understandings of their lives and the communities within which they live. Clandinin and Connelly (2000) write in a similar vein, stating, “the study of narrative is the study of the ways humans experience the world” (p. 2). It is thought that by describing our narrative identity we come to know who we are (Ricoeur, 1986, cited in McCormack, 2002). Thus, narrative inquiry is a journey during which the practitioner comes to know more deeply about their life, their understandings (for example, their understandings of curriculum), and who they are as a person.
Who benefits from narrative inquiry?
Some authors (for example, Winter, 2003) suggest that narrative inquiry is a way in which one can contribute to humankind—not only for the researcher but for all participants. Clandinin and Connelly (2000, p. 2) state that a “goal of narrative inquiry is mutual learning among the participants that changes their thinking and their lives”. The teacher-researcher is understood to be an agent of change for the better (Brown & England, 2004). Chambers (2003, p. 413) writes similarly, stating, “the essence of reflective practice is that it can make a difference to individuals”. Francis (1995) goes further, arguing that reflection on one’s teaching is only worthwhile if it has a positive impact on one’s students.
One might suppose that narrative research would involve the seeking of an ideal, such as becoming the “ideal” teacher. Brown and England (2004) write that such striving for an ideal, including an endpoint, where there is a supposition of a deficit position from which researchers seek to free themselves, is one particular stance described in the literature. An alternative to this is to reject the notion of achieving an ideal in favour of having a perception of research as creating “stories that help us for the present, as we make sense of the past, as we nudge to the future” (Brown & England, 2004, p. 77). Although there is a notion here of rejecting an ideal or resolution, there is still a belief in the possibility of social change. As such, narrative inquiry can be an “instrument through which we build and understand our practice, not to reach some higher plane of perfection … but rather to make explicit a reflective/constructive narrative layer that feeds, while growing alongside, the life it seeks to portray” (Brown & Jones, 2001, p. 69).
Reflection
Reflection is integral to narrative inquiry and is linked to gaining new understandings. Brown (2001, p. 211) states that “self-reflection is integral in the teacher’s self-positioning in the teaching act and in assessing its affect [sic] on the student”. Chambers (2003) points out that “both the narrative itself and reflections upon the narrative appear to facilitate understanding and to generate new knowledge” (pp. 404–405). Johnson (2002) also indicates that the process of (re)reading one’s narrative can offer new and alternative learning. As such, narrative inquiry has many levels of potential for reflection (Brown & Jones, 2001; Chambers, 2003), and this reflection is important in facilitating teachers’ personal and professional growth (Johnson, 2002).
Korthagen (2004) also refers to the possibilities of multifaceted reflection. He presents an “umbrella model of levels of change that could serve as a framework for reflection and development” (p. 77). Korthagen states that there has been a considerable emphasis on promoting reflection in teachers, but points to a lack of direction about what teachers might reflect upon. He proposes an onion model, whereby a series of layers provide a possible structure for the content of reflection. These layers include a consideration of the teaching environment, teacher and student behaviours, teacher competencies, beliefs, professional identity, and mission, with mission being the innermost layer or core. One can see how reflecting upon whether enough windows are open to ventilate a teaching space (the teaching environment) is quite a different depth of reflection to pondering one’s beliefs and/or mission in life.
The innermost level in Korthagen’s (2004) model—mission—includes a consideration of professional identity. Mission is what is “deep inside us that moves us to do what we do” (Korthagen, 2004, p. 85). It is about what gives meaning to our existence. Korthagen believes that this level may have a very concrete significance in teachers’ professional development, but also recognises that little theoretical research has yet focused on professional identity and mission.
Winter (2003) provides a caution about the need to be critical in one’s reflection in order to avoid reflection being “merely an elaboration of the familiar” (p. 149). He also suggests that “during an inquiry process, it is important that we engage in the particular type of reflection that entails noticing the reflexivity of our judgments” (p. 150). So, a narrative inquirer needs to be aware that reflections and judgements about reality are dependent on previous thoughts and experiences (the principle of reflexivity) (Winter, 2003). In narrative inquiry, then, we are called to stand back and begin to notice the reflexivity of our judgements. Winter contends that this enables a noticing of contradictions, and a movement forward in a creative manner.
Unfolding stories
In narrative inquiry “the subject is never given at the beginning, but … unfolds as the story is told” (Ricoeur, 1986, cited in McCormack, 2002, p. 337). Beattie (1995) also refers to the lack of predetermined goals in such a process. Similarly, McCormack (2002, p. 338) writes that “predicting the outcome is less important than understanding the journey”. This aspect of narrative inquiry can be unsettling. Often we have an idea about aspects of our practice that we feel would benefit from reflection, and possibly changing, but in narrative inquiry the practitioner actually needs to remain open to the different stories that may unfold within the context of examining one’s professional practice.
As a teacher with a background in science and mathematics, and empirical, analytical models of research, I initially found this unfolding aspect of narrative inquiry to be problematic. I thought I should have a specific question in mind and should systematically collect data that would answer my question. However, despite my enduring resistance, my narrative gradually unfolded and resulted in valuable learning. I found myself exploring two basic curriculum issues: the nature of mathematics, and beliefs about how the mathematics curriculum is taught and learnt.
Interpretations and influences on perception
Different perspectives or interpretations of situations (and writing) are always possible when writing narrative (Brown & England, 2004; Mason, 2002; Wilber, 1998; Winkler, 2003; Winter, 2002, 2003). Not only are different perspectives possible, but alternative “personas” are referred to in the writing of Brown and England. They suggest that the task of the writer is a re-examination of one’s life with an aim to become aware of alternative personas that may be adopted, and the subsequent relationships to the world these alternatives create (Brown & England, 2004).
It seems to follow from the notion of multiple perspectives or interpretations that no piece of writing “has an absolute meaning” (Brown, 2001, p. 218). Brown suggests that another story can always be placed alongside any particular piece of writing. It is also suggested that the stories teachers write cannot necessarily be resolved: “There are multiple stories of what it is to be a teacher to be negotiated—stories that do not lend themselves to final resolution in relation to each other” (Brown & England, 2004, p. 71). Thus, not only do multiple perspectives of any situation exist, but understandings of any writing are also always temporary and subject to reformulations (Brown & Jones, 2001).
Interestingly, the concept of multiple interpretations is regarded as a positive rather than a problematic aspect of reflection. Chambers (2003) says that “different perspectives further open up possibilities for engaging in the process of reflection in that they offer specific and sometimes comparable or contrasting points of view” (p. 412). Wilber (1998), however, warns against the extremes of postmodernism that take the position that all interpretations are equally valid. While Wilber agrees that “the world is in part a construction, an interpretation” (p. 34), he clearly states that “all interpretations are not equally valid: there are better and worse interpretations of every text” (p. 34). It seems, therefore, that while the proposition of multiple interpretations is valid, it should not be taken to the extreme of accepting all interpretations as being equally valid.
Becoming aware
Becoming aware of those things we take for granted is an integral part of narrative research (Francis, 1995; Mason, 2002; Winkler, 2003). McLaughlin (2003) explicitly states that “we are often unconscious of our assumptions and judgments” (p. 68). Brown and Jones (2001) recognise that layers of assumptions may result in constraining individuals and their actions. For me this suggests that, given the deeply embedded nature of social values (Brown, 2003; McLaughlin, 2003), it can be difficult to identify the social norms that the narrative inquirer may be unconsciously operating under, which might limit the choices and/or actions in one’s practice.
With the possibility of multiple interpretations and the existence of unconscious assumptions and judgements, writing and analysing narrative is not a straightforward task. Winkler (2003) writes that “reality is seen as a multiple complex construct”, and “reality is not fixed out there, but is an intricate, collaborative experience informed by purposes and intentions of those who live it” (p. 390). Winkler also recognises how her own personal stories strongly influenced her intuition and determined the kind of knowledge she constructed within her research. In a similar vein, Brown and England (2004) refer to the work of Lacan when writing, “I notice what I do in so far as my actions inhabit my fantasy frame of who I am” (p. 73). They go on to state, however, that observations are also “haunted by the aspects I choose not to see” (p. 73).
Such complexity is a recurrent theme encountered in the writing located for my literature review (Bailey, 2004) on narrative methodology (for example, Luwisch, 2001; McLaughlin, 2003; O’Connell Rust, 1999). Winter (2003) continues this theme: “our analysis of data must trace the links between physical events, social relationships, organisational structures, psychological states of mind, and moral values in order to formulate wise and compassionate action” (p. 148). Just as we are called to notice the reflexivity of our judgements (Winter, 2003), we are also asked to learn to distinguish between an experience and our “conceptual response to that experience” (Winkler, 2003, p. 392).
Issues of validity, authenticity, and results
A premise of positivist scientific and empirical, analytical models of research is that research must meet criteria such as being objective, value-free, scientific, and therefore valid (Sikes, 2002, cited in Clough, 2002). Narrative inquiry, because of its inherent subjectivity, would therefore appear to be problematic. However, the literature encountered for my literature review (Bailey, 2004) does not perceive a loss of objectivity to be a problem (for example, Mason, 2002). Brown (2001) acknowledges the seeming loss of supposed objectivity inherent in this form of research, but suggests that this is replaced with an account of what might be seen and how best to see it. Winkler (2003) also supports the notion of subjectivity, going so far as to suggest that a rational and objective framework for research could compromise “the generative force of each teacher’s story” (p. 393).
Wilber (1998) once again cautions against narcissistic possibilities when there is no demand for evidence at all. He states that the idea that “there is nothing but interpretation, and thus we can dispense with the objective component of truth altogether” (p. 119) is absurd and self-defeating. Winkler (2003, p. 400) also cautions that within narrative inquiry there must be:
systematically collected data, skeptical questioning and rigorous examination of meanings that are conveyed. The validity and ethical defensibility … depends on the critical acknowledgement of multiple realities and on self-aware, discriminating and informed judgments about these realities.
Thus, while subjectivity appears to be acceptable, we are warned against totally dispensing with searching for an objective component of truth.
It has been suggested that the validity of narrative reports resides in their authenticity (Winter, 2002) or trustworthiness (Winter, 2003). However, problems arise when one considers issues such as authenticity and truth. Winter (2002) suggests that rather than asking, “Is this narrative true?” (p. 145), it may be more helpful to ask:
… is this narrative shaped and moulded in such a way that we feel it is trustworthy, i.e. does it persuade us that we might helpfully rely on the insights it presents about that particular situation to guide our thinking about other situations? (p. 145)
Winter (2002) also suggests that “an understanding of the complexity of one’s ‘existential condition’” (p. 149) and emphasising the dialectical reflexivity of narrative are ways of resolving the dilemmas posed when considering authenticity; that is, being aware that there is not a single, correct perspective and that any analysis is tentative and cannot be regarded as “‘accurate’ but merely as ‘trustworthy’” (p. 148).
Results of narrative inquiry
The results of narrative research are not definitive statements or generalisations about that which is being researched (for example, Brown & Jones, 2001). Brown (2001) uses an analogy of the research resulting in a traveller’s guide rather than a map or an encyclopaedia entry. McCormack (2002) also refers to this research not providing a map but allowing “the reader to witness the process of the story’s construction and its meaning for the storyteller” (p. 337). Brown states that the reader of such research has a right, having read the research, to tell stories about how it may connect with their own practice. “As such the task of research is not to provide a mapping of ‘how things are’ but rather is about production that triggers renewal” (Brown, 2001, p. 249). Winkler writes in a similar way when suggesting that “the narrative nature of the study … allows insights to be transferred from one context to the next” (2003, p. 392).
The affective dimension in research
The research literature acknowledges that emotion is an integral aspect of teaching that is worthy of consideration (Cobb & Mayer, 2000; Confrey, 1995; Hargreaves, 2000; Pool, 1997; Zembylas, 2004). Some recent research is now also acknowledging that emotions have a role in the research process (for example, McLaughlin, 2003). McLaughlin makes a strong case for acknowledging and working with emotion in the research process, stating that “emotional blindness will not enhance the research process: it will only drive underground the examination of assumptions” (p. 76).
Chambers (2003), in his article describing a range of approaches to narrative, also acknowledges the role of feelings in narrative writing. He suggests that “a creative approach to the writing of narratives can promote learning from practice which is affective as well as cognitive” (p. 412). McLaughlin (2003) goes further to suggest that even the state of the perceiver (writer) at any particular moment will influence what is perceived at that moment in time. Winter (2003) also refers to how our psychological states of mind can affect data analysis.
McLaughlin (2003) cites authors who have challenged the rational and cognitive models of reflection, and the notion of reason and emotion being opposites. She suggests that reason and emotion are linked, and that “more attention needs to be given to the importance of the role of emotion in understanding and developing the capacities for reflection which facilitate personal, professional, and ultimately systems change” (2003, p. 66). While acknowledging that emotion is central to reasoning and decision-making, McLaughlin also states that too much or too little can hinder the process. McLaughlin also cites Claxton’s (2000) writing about the role of intuition as being a part of most knowledge generation. McLaughlin further develops Claxton’s idea, writing that intuition has been wrongly associated with “the untrammelled forces of repressed emotion” (2003, p. 66).
McLaughlin (2003) describes how researchers who are involved in examining their own practice may experience defensive or threatened feelings when their professional and intellectual security is challenged. The ability to endure these feelings is seen as being crucial to the process of appraising one’s practice. Elbaz-Luwisch (1997, cited in Winkler, 2003, p. 399) states that our narratives “are most instructive and revealing when they are most personal, and often when the owners of the stories are most vulnerable”. McLaughlin suggests the practitioner-researcher may also encounter confusion, anxiety, exhaustion, frustration, doubt, feelings of inadequacy, and a desire for clarity. Beattie (1995) also refers to the triumphs and setbacks of professional growth, and further suggests that narrative ways of knowing teaching and learning can be a difficult process that requires introspection and the re-formation of held beliefs.
Mathematics curriculum
I will now briefly outline my own experience of using narrative inquiry to examine my professional practice in order to illustrate how I personally experienced narrative inquiry to be an effective way of developing my understanding of the mathematics curriculum.
In my narrative inquiry, where I examined my professional practice with preservice primary teachers in mathematics education, I used a combination of writing using a computer and keeping a journal in a book (I found a blank-paged exercise book useful because it allowed me to incorporate diagrams, mind maps, and graphs as part of my writing process). Some of my initial excerpts of writing occurred in response to questions posed by a colleague; for example: What criteria do I judge effectiveness by in terms of teaching, and in terms of mathematics? As time went by my narrative became more of an ongoing reflection about how I implemented my planned curriculum, including issues that emerged in class and in discussions with colleagues. I also recorded my work on mathematical investigations, and my concurrent reflections on these in my journal.
My experience was that it was both in the writing of my stories and in later reflections (making an attempt to notice the reflexivity of my judgements) that I discovered contradictions in my writing. This resulted in new insights that led to subsequent change in how I implemented curriculum. One example early on in my narrative involved whether or not my communication with students provided them with space to share their ideas. Later reflection on this writing reveals a developing awareness that my teaching was not actually doing this. This awareness resulted in a change in my teaching practice, such that I began to provide students with more space to explore and develop their own ideas.
In the course of personally completing some mathematical investigations, along with the associated narrative, I discovered beliefs about mathematics and learning in mathematics that I did not know I held, and that were contrary to what I espoused in the classroom. These included beliefs that “real” mathematicians should solve problems quickly, do so on their own, and not get stuck. Now that I have become aware of these beliefs and have experienced extended, collaborative investigations that involved periods of being stuck, aspects of my enacting of curriculum have become more congruent with what I have espoused for a number of years. These changes include:
•&;&;using mathematical investigations as a teaching approach, in the belief that students can effectively learn mathematical ideas using this approach
•&;&;accepting that this may involve periods of being stuck, and that this does not mean that I need to immediately help the students to become unstuck
•&;&;using more in-depth interactions, including questioning, to support mathematical learning
•&;&;accepting that mathematics can be learnt by people working collaboratively.
The notion of differing perspectives offering a contrasting point of view was pivotal in my research and led to me reconsidering my beliefs about the nature of mathematics. This arose as a colleague, after reading some of my writing, offered the perspective that perhaps I needed to soften when considering ideas of communication and “mathematical truths”. Being offered another perspective, although uncomfortable, afforded me an opportunity to more closely examine my beliefs about the nature of mathematics.
Such deliberations about the nature of mathematics were ongoing throughout my narrative. The noticing of contradictions (Winter, 2003) within my writing, and the offering of a contrasting interpretation (Chambers, 2003), were part of this reflection, and included a consideration of what it means to do mathematics. There has been a subsequent shift in my thinking, from where I (unconsciously) perceived mathematics as a separate body of “correct” mathematical truths, where the emphasis on doing mathematics was on attaining the “correct” answer. I now view mathematics as more of a sense-making activity, involving discovering, doing, and communicating about numbers, patterns, shape, and space. I now believe mathematics to be mainly found in the doing rather than existing as a predetermined body of knowledge—primarily, a process and thinking curriculum rather than a content curriculum.
Reflective work such as narrative inquiry needs to result in benefits for learners. In this instance the learners were the preservice teachers I was working with. In order to ascertain possible benefits I interviewed four preservice teachers, using semistructured informal interviews, to explore their experiences as they engaged with mathematical investigations. It would seem from these interviews that benefits did result for at least these four learners, and hopefully others (a larger, quantitative study was not done due to the scope of my research). The preservice teachers spoke of “deeper” learning; truly understanding mathematical concepts for the first time; engaging in a more thorough approach to investigations; an openness to the idea of multiple solution strategies; and a willingness to try such an approach in their enactment of curriculum. One preservice teacher returned to see me after her second-year practicum to show me the results of the children’s work, which was the culmination of an extended algebra investigation. The preservice teacher was enthusiastic about the learning the children had achieved and the enthusiasm with which they had approached their mathematics lessons.
Narrative practitioners also benefit from reflective inquiry by coming to have deeper knowledge about their life and who they are as a person. Despite starting my narrative inquiry with considerable scepticism, this has been the case for me. My learning and changes in my teaching practice have been multifaceted, encompassing not only learning about narrative inquiry but also thinking about the nature of mathematics, learning more about the teaching and learning aspects of curriculum, and, more specifically, learning about my own professional practice as a preservice mathematics educator with particular reference to the use of mathematical investigations.
My initial ideas about what was appropriate to write about in my narrative inquiry influenced the context of my earlier writing and did not acknowledge the emotive elements involved. I certainly experienced a range of emotions while engaged in my narrative inquiry, including feelings of vulnerability, anxiety, and defensiveness. Once I had read literature that acknowledged the role of emotion in narrative inquiry, I wrote much more fully, resulting in the discovery of hidden beliefs (as previously described).
Conclusion
In this paper I have described various characteristics of narrative inquiry and attempted to illustrate the value of narrative inquiry for exploring curriculum by briefly outlining my own experiences of undertaking a narrative inquiry in the field of mathematics education. Narrative inquiry is presented as an appropriate form of research for practitioners in education, as opposed to positivist, scientific models of research. Scientific models are regarded to be unsuitable, particularly in light of the uniqueness of settings and individuals, and ethical concerns. Authors (for example, Winkler, 2003) suggest that positivist models would compromise the integrity of teachers’ stories, and that meaningful educational reform emerges from narratives (Beattie, 1995). Although issues of subjectivity and multiple interpretations are not seen as being problematic, a demand is still made where narrative research must include systematically collected data (for example, writing), sceptical questioning, rigorous examination of meanings, the critical acknowledgement of multiple realities, and self-aware, discriminating, and informed judgements (Winkler, 2003).
A central tenet of narrative inquiry, and of action research in general, is change (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000). Although change is an integral aspect of narrative inquiry, this is not seen to imply an initial deficit position, nor the seeking of an ideal (Brown & England, 2004). Rather, the research process is regarded as building a narrative layer that supports the writer. Francis (1995) provides the challenge, however, that reflecting on one’s practice is only worthwhile if students benefit.
Narrative as a form of storytelling can provide a framework within which to make sense of the personal journeys we encounter as we seek to develop our professional awareness. Many authors (for example, Clandinin & Connelly, 2000) cite narrative as a powerful means by which learners can reflect on and develop their professional practice, and I certainly have experienced it as such. At the end of my own narrative research I did not have a definitive statement about how to be a teacher of preservice students learning mathematics, but I had a story to share. My stories have led me to envisage mathematics differently, to emphasise the aspects of doing and thinking over knowing within mathematics curricula. I have also changed aspects of my practice, including using more extended investigations in my teaching of preservice teachers. At this point I do not have a definitive statement about how to enhance one’s professional awareness. Instead, I share my learning about narrative inquiry as a possibility for furthering one’s professional awareness of curriculum matters.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful for the ongoing support and guidance of Merilyn Taylor, my colleague in mathematics education at the University of Waikato. My thanks also to Andy Begg for encouraging me to write about my research.
References
Adler, S. A. (1993). Teacher education: Research as reflective practice. Teacher and Teacher Education, 9(2), 159–167.
Bailey, J. (2004). Mathematical investigations: A primary teacher educator’s narrative journey of professional awareness. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Waikato, Hamilton.
Beattie, M. (1995). New prospects for teacher education: Narrative ways of knowing teaching and teacher learning. Educational Research, 37(1), 53–70.
Brown, T. (2001). Mathematics education and language: Interpreting hermeneutics and post-structuralism. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
Brown, T. (2003). Making mathematics inclusive: Interpreting the meaning of classroom activity. Waikato Journal of Education, 9, 113–128.
Brown, T., & England, J. (2004). Revisiting emancipatory teacher research: A psychoanalytic perspective. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 25(1), 67–79.
Brown, T., & Jones, L. (2001). Action research and postmodernism: Congruence and critique. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Chambers, P. (2003). Narrative and reflective practice: Recording and understanding experience. Educational Action Research, 11(3), 403–414.
Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Claxton, G. (2000). The anatomy of intuition. In T. Atkinson & G. Claxton (Eds.), The intuitive practitioner: On the value of not always knowing what one is doing (pp. 32–52). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Clough, P. (2002). Narratives and fictions in educational research: Doing qualitative research in educational settings. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Cobb, C. D., & Mayer, J. D. (2000). Emotional intelligence: What the research says. Educational Leadership, 58(3), 14–18.
Confrey, J. (1995). A theory of intellectual development. For the Learning of Mathematics, 15(2), 36–45.
Francis, D. (1995). The reflective journal: A window to preservice teachers’ practical knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(3), 229–241.
Hargreaves, A. (2000). Mixed emotions: Teachers’ perceptions of their interactions with students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(8), 811–826.
Johnson, G. C. (2002). Using visual narrative and poststructuralism to (re)read a student teacher’s professional practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(4), 387–404.
Korthagen, F. A. J. (2004). In search of the essence of a good teacher: Towards a more holistic approach in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(1), 77–97.
Luwisch, F. E. (2001). Understanding what goes on in the heart and the mind: Learning about diversity and co-existence through story telling. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(2), 133–146.
Mason, J. (2002). Researching your own practice: The discipline of noticing. London: Routledge Falmer.
McCormack, B. (2002). “Removing the chaos from the narrative”: Preparing clinical leaders for practice development. Educational Action Research, 10(3), 335–351.
McLaughlin, C. (2003). The feeling of finding out: The role of emotions in research. Educational Action Research, 11(1), 65–77.
Ministry of Education. (1992). Mathematics in the New Zealand curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.
Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.
O’Connell Rust, F. (1999). Professional conversations: New teachers explore teaching through conversation, story, and narrative. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(4), 367–380.
Pool, C. R. (1997). Up with emotional health. Educational Leadership, 54(8), 12–14.
Rushton, S. P. (2001). Cultural assimilation: A narrative case study of student-teaching in an inner-city school. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(2), 147–160.
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
Wilber, K. (1998). The marriage of sense and soul: Integrating science and religion. New York: Random House.
Winkler, G. (2003). Are we nice or are we real? Ethical issues emerging from collaborative narrative research. Educational Action Research, 11(3), 389–402.
Winter, R. (2002). Truth or fiction: Problems of validity and authenticity in narratives of action research. Educational Action Research, 10(1), 143–154.
Winter, R. (2003). Buddhism and action research: Towards an appropriate model of inquiry for the caring professions. Educational Action Research, 11(1), 141–155.
Zembylas, M. (2004). The emotional characteristics of teaching: An ethnographic study of one teacher. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 185–201.
The author
Judy Bailey is a lecturer in mathematics education at the University of Waikato. She has previously taught mathematics in primary and secondary schools, and in a private training organisation with adult learners. She has recently completed her master’s thesis, which won the 2005 New Zealand Rae Munro Award from the New Zealand Association for Research in Education.
Email: jlbailey@waikato.ac.nz