academia and at the same time be loyal to the process of helter-skelter that has been the nature of this reflection and action process. This has not been anything like a linear process where a leads to b that leads to c etc. A dialogical process unfolds itself along quite different paths, more like emerging knowledge without any definite origin or end. I did not want to use theory as one model of explanation, but rather use theory as ideas and utterances to be placed in a ‘ voice-resource-bank’2 later to be used in my reflections during the research process. Still, it was in Bakhtin’s description of the dialogue that I found the frame of reference for the report, both in terms of the therapeutic relationship, methodology and method. I shall expand on some ideas of what I have called the Dialogical Approach to research, present some ideas from the tradition of Action Research and finally fit this together in what I have called Dialogical Action Research. The process is described chronologically, and I share with the reader the client’s and my own reflections during the period of inquiry. This part of the report will be the one that deviates most from traditional methods of information gathering and analysis. In the present form of inquiry theses and syntheses will evolve through the process and reflexively influence each other. My aim is to meet the criteria for doing constructionist research3 by participating in a transparent and dialogical process, and through giving an accurate an account as possible of that process.
The dialogues I have participated in, while conducting this research have expanded my understanding of my role as a therapist by giving me an opportunity to reflect on my practice. I would be pleased if my readers - that is anyone with an interest in listening as part of the interaction between people, colleagues, tutors and examine board - said something like: This makes sense, I haven’t thought about that in this way before, or this provokes my curiosity. I would also appreciate if the readers felt invited into an open-ended dialogue concerning the issues addressed.
As described on p. 17. As described in Chapter 5, Methodology and Chapter 6, Dialogue as Method.