Paper for Nordic Working Life Conference, University of Tampere, 2.-4. November 2016
Rikke Thomsen, Industrial PhD student, Roskilde University and HK/Stat DK
Anders Buch, Professor (mso), Department of Learning and Philosophy, Aalborg University
How to engage in practice-based studies that make a difference
The purpose of this extended abstract is to discuss opportunities to create practice changing work practices as part of a research- and a trade union strategy. We draw on contemporary practice theory (Schatzki 2002, Nicolini 2012, Kemmis et al. 2014a) and on a study of administrative practices in order to investigate what happens when a new technology – in this case an exam management system – is implemented in ongoing work practices. The study administrative practices are shaped by a practical understanding and teleoaffektive structures, produced,and reproduced by its participants (Schatzki 2002). The study provides an insight into how connections to a teaching practice have an impact on how participants in the study’s administrative practice meet changes, as well as the more unintended consequences of change.[1] Based on the specific study we discuss how critical participatory action research projects can spur changes starting from the concrete practices. We also discuss the roles as researchers (and union activists).
A study administrative practice
In this section we will by examples illustrate how work practices unfold amongst teachers and administrative personnel in a University College in Denmark.
There is a large counter right when you enter the door, and behind the counter three desksare situated close to the windows, where the study administrative employees are sitting. A young man stands at the counter: "I have been told that I need to tell you that I’m actively studying again". A study administrative employee looks up and says, “Yes come over here with me, what is your social security number?” There are shelves with foldersin front of the desks. On the walls,there are pictures of Hundertwasser providing color, and something shines when the sun comes into the room. One of the other employees ispicking up the phone. A censor is on the phone, who has forgot to fill out some papers. The third of the study administrative employeestalks with a teacher standing next to her computer. The teacher has an urgent need to print a list. A teacher walks into the room, pass the counter and approaches the student administrative employee, who is helping the student: "Hm .. is there anyone of you who knows anything about M-time? I usually ask Anders, and he is not here." The employee answers without looking up,"It’s the HR department, you need to call them. They are the ones to help you.” The man replies: “Well ... I just completely forgot it ...." “Keep your mouth shut Johan" he says to himself, smiles and walks out of the room, singing loudly.
The most interesting thing about the above observation is the elements that are not manifest and directly visible. The study administrativework is characterized by much interaction and it is highly unpredictable. Students and teachers come to the study administration when they are looking for answers totheir inquiries. Particularly three aspects of the practice characterizes the work:1)an emotional aspect, 2) a bureaucratic aspect and 3) a technological aspect.
The emotional aspect is about being able to understand the students’ problems. But the understanding of the teachers needs is also an essential element to help them on their way. Questions are immediate and unpredictable and require a factual reply, or at least a direction for obtaining a constructive answer, whether it is to tell where theeducation head office is situated, or how to fill out a special form, etc. Teachers need to be provided with student listings, help with it-systems, etc. This support requires an ability to handle issues and problems in the specific situation, but it also requires an understanding of how to deal with different people – upset students, frustrated teachers, etc. The administrative employees are supposed to provide specific answers and practical solutions to challenges that different people face just-now-and-here. Some of these answers require a great insight into educational programs, rules, regulations, examination, etc. Othersalso require an organizational insight and understanding of timing and opportunities for coordination with other work practices. A student is not just a student, and a teacher is not just a teacher. There is a lot going on in theencounters, which is not just about a practical clarification. Students may be frustrated by exam defeat,and teachers can be stressed.These circumstances mayaffect the interaction with the study administrative employees. Most of the work is invisible, even though it is precisely what makes things work out, and prevents conflicts and clashes with students and teachers.
The bureaucratic aspect is also an invisible aspect. Up until now, the study administrative domain has not been influencedsignificantly by new technological systems. It has been prioritized to build experience in developing systemsbased on the problems experienced in the local work situations. The systems make it possible to feed and retrieve specific information.The it-systems should be able to provide the right lists and information for teachers, students, and management. Every new educational programarerequestingparticular new technical features, but often educational programs are developed and implemented without considering the administrative angle. This often results in long working hours for the administrative employees. According to the administrative employees, it takes about two years to figure outhow to adopt an education program to administrative it-systems. The technological aspect is about being able to handle systems. This part of the work is also invisible.
The study administrative practices are informed by a clear project that specifies what is necessary and important for the practices to accomplish. It is important to provide a good service and meeting both students and teachers needs, and help them on their way. The new technology is not questioned. Although the situation isambivalent, (colleagues are being dismissed due to efficiency measures) the new technology is articulated as necessary if 'you want to be a part of the future'.
The bureaucratic aspect – understood as the formally correct way to proceed – is often pushed to the background in order accomplish practical tasks. However,we observe bureaucratic values as part of the teleoaffektive structures of the administrative practices.The practices of the administrative employees seeks to insure that students are treated equally and have the same opportunities. When the studentsenter the office,they areall welcomed with kindness and a professional attitude. As regards the teachers, the attitude of the administrative employeesis collegial – depending on how well they know the teacher, but spirits are high if a teacher makes jokes. Not only is it important to provide a good service, but it is also important to create a good atmosphere in relation to the students and teachers. The participants of the practice take a high responsibility for implementation of new technologies and administrative procedures. This responsibility does not only relate to their own specific tasks, but it can be seen as a broadertechnological and an organizational responsibility. This point comes out in the example below of the implementation of a new management system for dealing with examinations.
Wiseflow changing relationships between practices and aspects of work
In this section we proceed to illustrate how transformations in work practices at the University College manifest themselves.
A female teacher enters the lunchroomduring the study administrative employees’coffee break. She pops the question: "Can you remember the deadline for the teams 18?” Heidi replies: "No .. not right now, but we can work it out." Lotte leaves the room. She comes back quickly: "It is the 17th of November." The teacher asks: "And they [the students] just hand [their assignments] over to you?" Lotte looks up at the teacher and answers: "No, it is in WiseFlow." "Oh no ..., whew .. [the teacher takes her hand to her head].” Lisa smiles at the teacher and says: "It's no problem whatsoever. You just tell the students that they should go to the portal, where everything is, guides, and so on. They must read them carefully. They are not very long. Once they have done that, it’s a piece of cake. You can tell them thatwe have already done it on several courses. From the first of January we must all do it."
Major organizational changes are happening in the study administration. Tasks are centralized and a number of new it-systems is simultaneous implemented. The observation is about the implementation of a new examination management system, which is part of a general digitalization of the study administration. The employees are told by management,that they must start to implement the tool, and that everyone must start using the system from January1. However, the teachers have not been informed. Management is under the impression, that the technology is ready for use. But what happens? Wiseflow eliminatesroutine tasks, such as copying, and is supposed to make work more efficient. However, an ‘invisible’ effect of the system is that the administrative employees have less physical interaction with the students and teachers. The interaction is now in the system. The study administrative employees were very positive at the start of the implementation process (despite of the heavy workload that accompanied the implementation process). The system challenge teachers’ work processes: in the future the teachers are supposed to read student assignments directly from the computer screen. The teachers prefer to read the printed assignments (they think this arrangement creates the best overview of the text;they can write comments, as they use to etc.). At the outset of the implementation process, the participants in the study administrative unit were under the impression that the implementation was just 'a piece of cake'. It was thought to be an easy task. Each time the administrative employeesinteracted with theteachers, they tried to ward off potential problemsandconvince the teachersthat system supporterswould be able to help the teachers out, if they encountered problems with the system. The teachers encountered technical problems, e.g. with printing functions. The technical problems resulted in the teachers resisting to use the system. This example illustrate a ‘clash’ between two practices: The study administrative employeestakes onresponsibility to get the system up and running and prevent any challenges and difficulties.On the other hand, the teachers are resisting taking part in the implementation of the system.
The teachersenvisionthe system as yet another step in the direction of the administration 'taking control' of their work. Several of the teachers expresstheir uncertainties and frustrations. They have problems with login functions and their browser. They think that dealing with these issues is a study administrative task. The ‘clash’ between the study administrative employees and the teachers relate to questions about how work should be organized when Wiseflow is implemented.
The example sheds light on the tensions and contradictions that arise between thework practices of the administrative employees and the practices of the teachers. The different ways of dealing with the new technology involves various practical understandings and teleoaffektive structures, whichare enhanced and made visible in the face of change. The study administrative practices use the new system to challenge existing roles between teachers and student administrative employees.
Approaching processes of change as transformations of interrelated practices
Practice theory seeks to understand not only how human activity unfold as practices, but also how different practices are related and interlinked, and how changes in one practice affects affiliated practices in larger constellations of practices and material arrangements. Furthermore, Kemmis et al. (2014b) seeks to extend practice theory from the domain of academic analysis of complex social transformations to an action oriented and interventionist approach. In what follows we will briefly sketch Kemmis et al.’s practice theoretical ambitions 1) to understand processes of change in complex formations of practices or practice ecologies, and 2) to develop an interventionist assistive framework that can guide processes of transformation in work practices.
In Kemmis et al.’s practice ontology (2014a), processes of transformation in large constellations of practices are analyzed as effects of complex dynamics taking place in different practices that are situated in different sites. Practices are interlinked in the sense that changes taking place in one practice might be consequential for the reproduction of other practices. The general idea is, that one practice often can be considered as part of the practice architecture for other practices. To give an example: If we study the work practices of teachers at the University College, we must understand that these practicesare shaped by the practice architecture in the site. In the practice architecture, we find material arrangements and technologies, like the it-system, but we also find other practices: most prominently, of course, the administrative practices performed by the administrative employees. So, if administrative practices are changed the teachers work practices are effected – and vice versa. Practices thus become practice architectures for other practices, and one practice can thus influence another through reciprocal chains of actions. It is Kemmis et al.’s claim, that these interdependencies between practices can be understood as ecological interdependencies. The educational system – understood as a large social phenomenon consisting of a number of practices and practice architectures – can, accordingly, be analyzed as an eco-system.
Kemmis et al. (2014b) wish to extent practice theoretical analysis to a program of critical participatory action research (CPAR). The ambition is to make practice theoretical investigations a tool for interventionist processes of change in practice ecologies. This interventionist program proceeds in three stagesto facilitate change processes. In the first stage, the researchers collaborate with the practitioners in the relevant practices in order to understand their practices; how practices are constituted by the actors’ projects, dispositions, practice traditions, the rules and material arrangements, etc.; how the practices are interrelated and form practice architectures for one another; how changes in one practice affects other practices. In the second stage, the researcher engage with the practitioners in order to critically question and problematize existing practices. In this stage, the researcher and practitionersconduct a process of inquiry that seeks to illuminate the consequences of the conduct of the practices and how they, eventually, form practice architectures for other practices. Finally, in the third stage, the researcher engage in a dialogue with practitioners about the conditions under which they practice. In this stage, the researcher and the practitioners discuss what conditions need to change in order to proceed in more productive, sustainable, inclusive and just ways. The approach developed in critical participatory action research thus aims to foster a ‘practice changing practice’ (Kemmis 2009) that is integral to the practice ecology that is the object of processes of transformation.
Activist engagement with work practices
The CPAR approach provides a nuanced and elaborate framework for researchers to engage in interventionist projects of changing and developing practice ecologies to become more sustainable. It takes its point of departure in the formations of existing work practices and facilitate processes of investigation with practitioners to foster thorough understandings of the mechanisms that constitute and drives work practices. By taking its point of departure in the practice theoretical ontology, the CPAR approach recognize that work practices are constituted by, and constituting for, the ongoing activities of the practitioners. Thus, in order to change existing practices, practitioners must – themselves (with the assistance of researchers) – engage in new practices that might bring about transformation of the existing practice ecology. Fostering ‘practice changing practices’ thereby becomes the vehicle for transformations in work practices.
This approach resonates with fundamental ideas in trade union activism about involving practitioners in organizational processes of transformation (Buch & Andersen 2014): practitioners in work practices must take a leading role in transforming the practices by seeking to 1) understand the mechanisms in and relations between work practices; by 2) conducting investigations about how specific work practices affect other work practices in the practice ecology; and 3) how practitioners might envision bringing about changes in their working conditions. Shop stewards familiar with the CPAR approach – and possibly assisted by working life researchers –have the opportunity to facilitate these processes of transforming work practices. The organizational changes at the University College due to the implementation of the new it-system could have benefited, if it had been underpinned by the CPAR approach.
References
Buch, A. & Andersen, V. (2014):Rationalities in Trade Union Practices: A Discourse Analytic Perspective on The Strategies of Three Danish Trade Unions for Professionals, in Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 4(4), 137-155
Nicolini, D. (2012). Practice theory, work, and organization, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Kemmis, S. (2009): Action Research as a practice-based practice, Educational Action Research, 17(3), 463-474
Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboer, P. & Bristol, L. (2014a): Changing Practices, Changing Education, Singapore: Springer.
Kemmis, S., Mctaggart, R. & Nixon, R. (2014b): The Action Research Planner. Doing Critical Participatory Action Research,Singapore: Springer.
Schatzki, T. (2002): The site of the social. A philosophical accout of the constitution of social life and change, Pensylvania: Penn State Press.
Thomsen, R. (forthcoming): Administrativt arbejde – er det noget særligt? Et praksisperspektiv på arbejde og forandring. Doctoral dissertation,
1
[1] The study is one of three casestudies about administrative workpractices and changes. The study, which is referred to here (Rikke Thomsen, forthcoming), is based on eight weeks participation observations in three but primarily in one study administration.