From this perspective, knowledge is not simply discovered but continually constructed and refined through inquiry, experimentation, and reflection within specific contexts.
Initially, pragmatism’s emphasis on identifying “what works in practice” appeared compatible with the action-oriented nature of residential childcare. However, deeper engagement revealed that pragmatism is not merely concerned with efficiency or practical outcomes. Rather, it requires a critical and inquiry-driven stance in which practitioners examine how particular strategies, assumptions, and institutional practices shape learning and relational experiences for young people. This recognition challenged my previous tendency to interpret effective practice primarily through observable engagement or compliance with policy frameworks. Pragmatism emphasises the importance of reflective judgment, where professional decisions are guided by context, experience, and evidence rather than by uncritical adherence to established procedures (Bryman, 2015). However, this flexibility can also be a weakness, as it may lead to inconsistent or subjective decisions if practitioners lack sufficient expertise or clear standards.
Week 7 deepened this shift by focusing explicitly on the role of unacknowledged assumptions in shaping professional thinking. Drawing on Gibbs’ (1988) reflective cycle and Brookfield’s (2017) framework for ‘critical reflection’, the discussion highlighted how practitioners frequently operate within invisible belief systems influenced by cultural norms, professional socialisation, and institutional discourse. A particularly significant insight emerged during cohort discussions exploring how everyday decisions are often guided by assumptions that appear self-evident or “common sense,” yet remain largely unexamined. Recognising the existence of these assumptions prompted a critical reassessment of the foundations of my own practice and the extent to which my professional judgement had been shaped by unchallenged beliefs about learning, leadership, and educational success.
Brookfield (2017) argues that uncovering hegemonic assumptions is essential for critical reflection and for challenging power dynamics in education. Dewey (1993) criticised Brookfield model for being overly focused on critique, which may lead to paralysis or inaction if practitioners become preoccupied with deconstructing assumptions rather than implementing practical solutions. When considered alongside pragmatism, this insight exposed an important tension: while pragmatism emphasises practical effectiveness, without critical reflection it risks reinforcing dominant institutional priorities rather than genuinely improving learning experiences. Consequently, effective practice cannot simply be defined by what appears to “work,” but must also consider why particular approaches work, for whom they work, and within which structural or relational conditions they operate.
Gibbs (1988) structured reflective model further supported this process by encouraging systematic analysis of not only actions and outcomes but also the emotions, values, and alternative perspectives embedded within professional experiences. Moon (1999) criticised model or being overly rigid and linear, which may limit the spontaneity and fluidity of reflection in complex, real-world professional situations. This process exposed previously unquestioned “common sense” assumptions regarding leadership, evidence, and educational purpose. For example, my earlier emphasis on activity-based engagement, shaped by my background in sports coaching I had often prioritised participation as an indicator of learning. Critical reflection revealed that such assumptions may overlook deeper cognitive, emotional, or relational dimensions of educational experience. Through this reflective process, I begin to recognise the need for a more deliberate and philosophically informed approach to practice.
.