Bricolage

In line with Lévi-Strauss’s (1966) intriguing thoughts in The Savage Mind, Lincoln

and Denzin (2000) introduced the term bricolage as a research methodology.

The French word bricoleur is defined as ‘a handyman or handy woman who

makes use of the tools available to complete a task’ (Kincheloe and Berry, 2004, p.1). In consonance with such a metaphoric implication, researchers as bricoleurs ‘pick up the pieces what’s left and paste them together as best they can’ (Hays et al., 2011, p.179). This type of active engagement in the research process while constructing rigorous knowledge is feasible on the grounds that bricoleurs embrace new ontological and epistemological notions of human understanding.

Bricoleurs’ philosophical and methodological rationale is parallel with non- positivist paradigms that employ humanistic and qualitative perspectives in knowledge construction. In the stream of this non-positivist or post-positivist movement in the research world, a so-called ‘blurred genre phase’ has appeared with a variety of new interpretive tools and qualitative approaches including hermeneutics, structuralism, semiotics, phenomenology, cultural studies, and feminism (Denzin and Lincoln, 2005). In the core of this new qualitative paradigm lies humanity:

In the blurred genre phase, the humanities became central resources for critical, interpretive theory and the qualitative research project broadly conceived. The

109

researcher became a bricoleur, learning how to borrow from many different disciplines (Ibid., p.3).

In conjunction with this acknowledgement of humanity, in order to grasp the bricoleur’s mind and tools, it is important to understand the ontological and epistemological foundation. Kincheloe (2004) stresses the bricoleur’s ontological insights into the social, cultural, and historical situatedness of human interpretation and knowledge production, which impels them to pursue rigour and the complexity of the context:

As bricoleurs recognize the limitations of a single method, the discursive strictures of one disciplinary approach, what is missed by traditional practices of validation, the historicity of certified modes of knowledge production, the inseparability of knower and known, and the complexity and heterogeneity of all human experience, they understand the necessity of new forms of rigor in the research process. (p.51).

In accordance with such a recognition of the historicity, heterogeneity, and complexity of human knowledge, bricoleurs contend that ‘the object of inquiry is ontologically complex in that it cannot be described as an encapsulated entity. In this more open view of the object of inquiry it is always a part of many contexts and processes, it is culturally inscribed and historically situated’ (Ibid., p.73). Through this new level of understanding of human knowledge and our cultural, historical existence, bricoleurs ‘examine phenomena not as detached things-in- themselves, but as connected things-in-the-world’ (Rogers, 2012, p.10).

Bricoleurs’ wide ontological view toward certain phenomena naturally encompasses epistemological grounds in human understanding. This is because the knowledge-constructing processes cannot be separated from the complex

110 reality of the object of inquiry. Kincheloe (2004) asserts that ‘ontology and the epistemology are inextricably linked in ways that shape the task of the researcher’ (p.73). He further argues that bricloeurs must understand this correlation between individuals and their contexts, i.e. ‘the identities of human beings and the nature of the complex social fabric’ (Ibid.). Hence, Kincheloe (Ibid.) suggests, to capture the deeper level of social phenomena, researchers employ bricoleurs’ manoeuvers by applying a new axiom of analysis, a multidimensional point of view on phenomena.

Such a notion of bricoleurs’ multiple ways of seeing the world that was grounded upon a mixture of ontological and epistemological assumptions is significant to establish my dual role as a teacher-researcher. This is because bricoleurs’ pursuance of seeking the non-fixed reality and human perceptions and their investigation toward the complex nature of the world accords with the teacher- researcher’s dynamic involvement in the process of asking, researching, and answering questions. Kincheloe (2003) asserts the potential of teacher- researchers’ scholarly activities for the sake of advancing our current pedagogy:

Using their multiple perspectives, teacher researchers study the diverse interests and the different players who work to promote or impede social and educational transformation. Again, teacher scholars employ their rigorous knowledge work abilities to gain complex insights into the formulation of public political policy and educational policy as well as the way such politics shape classroom activities and non-formal educational experiences – in other words, cultural pedagogies (p.251).

Therefore, I contend that, in line with the bricoleurs’ knowledge production through employing multiple perspectives, the knowledge gained from these practitioners (teacher-researchers) can be complex, rigorous, and relevant to the

111 real situation, phenomena, needs, and the solution for current education. From now on, I will describe how I actively have participated in the meaning-making process by equipping myself with a bricoleur’s ontological and epistemological sensitivity while reconciling the two worlds of the teacher and the researcher. Furthermore, I will discuss the vision of teacher-researchers’ involvement in the research, which is highlighted by their insightful inquiries and deep understanding of the phenomena in the course of their professional practice.