Critical Realism (Bhasker, 1978) and Merten’s (2009) Transformative paradigm fused together many philosophical strands to inform the positioning of this doctoral thesis (in progress). The chosen methodology: a combination of co-inquiry (Heron 1996) and realist evaluation will be discussed in relation to the challenges of identifying mechanisms.
Preliminary analysis of data on role resilience within a preceptorship programme will be presented. Preceptorship programmes for newly qualified practitioners are well established in the health professions. Despite this, descriptions of what supports preceptorship has failed to understand what positively influences the preceptorship relationship, and little is known of the personal, professional and contextual factors that influence the effectiveness of these programmes.
Using co-inquiry (Heron 1996) two separate groups, namely newly qualified (n=10) and those who support them, preceptors (n=5) from one local NHS Trust joined two co-inquiry groups. The co-inquiry groups met for four sessions over the duration of a preceptorship programme (6 months). Focused co-inquiry group questions were based on Heron’s (1996) extended epistemology.
Co-inquiry is an inclusive approach in which the practical knowing of those joining the study, referred to as the co-researchers are given equal status to that of the researcher. Throughout the study design, attention was paid to acknowledging this key tenet of co-inquiry, namely to research with, rather than on co-researchers. The construction of the research questions reflected a commitment to ‘Deep Participation’ (Banks et al 2011 p 4). Giving voice to the counter-narratives, and identifying issues as seen by the collaborators who were enacting their role in challenging contexts, was crucial to exploring mechanisms to support role resilience and positively influence the preceptorship relationship.
The first phase was designed to conceptualise role resilience in preceptorship using realist evaluation to explore: ‘What works for whom, in what circumstances and in what respects, and how?’ (Pawson and Tilley, 2004 p2). Themes that were identified by co-researchers were agreed upon and used as search terms for a consultative literature review (Hart and Heaver, 2013). This led to the second phase of co-inquiry, to develop a Preceptorship Resilience Framework (PRF).
Linking to a wider multi-sited research programme on resilience, The Imagine Programme http://www.imaginecommunity.org.uk/projects/the-social-context/, the study aimed to determine whether the process of co-inquiry in which co-researchers were seen as ‘inquiring agents’ (Heron, 1996 p3) could firstly identify mechanisms, and secondly be empowered to ‘switch on’ such mechanisms under existing contextual challenges, to do better than expected (outcomes) during the process. In line with a 5th wave approach to resilience research and practice, ‘Overcoming adversity, whilst potentially subtly changing, or even dramatically transforming, (aspects of) that adversity,’ (Hart, Gagnon, Aumann, & Heaver, 2013) issues of empowerment and change–orientation will be discussed.
Please select one of the following:: Realist evaluation , Please select a maximum of two themes from the following list:: Exploring 'Mechanisms' , Please select a maximum of two themes from the following list:: Innovation in Realist Inqu
