Philosophy, Theory, and Research-Informed Enquiry
Introduction
The field of residential childcare is characterised by complex interdependencies between care, pedagogy, identity, and institutional governance. As practice moves beyond routine caregiving to encompass intentional educational engagement, it becomes necessary to critically examine not only what practitioners do, but also the ontological and epistemological assumptions that underpin professional knowledge. Practitioners frequently support young people who have experienced disrupted schooling, trauma, or specific learning difficulties (SpLD), requiring decisions that are simultaneously ethical, pedagogical, and relational.
Prior to engaging with the Theory and Philosophy module, my professional identity, largely shaped by a background in sports coaching, prioritised engagement, motivation, and experiential activity. While this approach was effective in encouraging participation, it relied heavily on tacit assumptions about how learning is undertaken and the purpose of education, often privileging activity over deeper reflective or ethical scrutiny (Kolb, 1984, p. 38).
Ontologically, this assignment adopts the position that learning is not a fixed or isolated product but a situated process emerging through relational, social, and embodied interactions (Vygotsky, 1978; Lave & Wenger, 1991). From an epistemological perspective, it argues that knowledge in residential childcare is constructed through interpretive, dialogical, and reflective practices rather than being solely assessed through behaviourist measures or procedural checklists (Bruner, 1996; Biesta, 2010).
This reflexive critique therefore examines the implicit assumptions underpinning my previous practice, particularly those concerning learner agency, professional judgement, and ethical engagement. In doing so, it frames these reflections within broader philosophical discussions on the aims of education and the responsibilities of practitioners in fostering meaningful learning experiences in residential care settings.
Engagement with philosophical frameworks and educational theory has made these previously implicit assumptions visible, open to critique, and subject to systematic interrogation. Rather than accepting practice as inherently “effective,” I have been encouraged to examine the normative, ethical, and power-laden dimensions embedded within everyday pedagogical decisions. This reflects the position that education is never neutral but is always shaped by underlying values, purposes, and assumptions about learners and knowledge (Pring, 2013; Carr, 2013).
At the same time, engagement with research methods has strengthened my capacity to evaluate evidence critically, moving beyond the instrumental application of research towards a more analytical and reflexive stance (Crotty, 1998; Bryman, 2015, Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2018). Within this context, practitioner enquiry has emerged as a valuable mediating framework, enabling the integration of philosophical perspectives, empirical evidence, and the relational realities of residential childcare practice.
Week 6, which introduced pragmatism as a philosophical approach to educational research, represented a significant turning point in my professional thinking. Prior to this point, my understanding of practice had largely been shaped by organisational expectations, inherited beliefs, and tacit assumptions developed through experience. These assumptions often operated implicitly, guiding everyday decisions without being consciously examined. Pragmatism disrupted this orientation by framing knowledge not as fixed or universally valid, but as provisional and evaluated through its consequences in practice (Dewey, 1916).