#30 Stephen Kemmis | Becoming Critical Practitioners
TRANSCRIPT SUMMARY
(This transcript summary was AI-generated and then edited by the podcast hosts for quality assurance)
#30 Stephen Kemmis | Becoming Critical Practitioners
- a podcast dialogue with Michael Noah Weiss and Guro Hansen Helskog
INTRODUCTION: ACTION RESEARCH AS A LIVING TRADITION
In this episode of the ResponsAbility Podcast, Stephen Kemmis reflects on a lifetime of work in education, action research, and practice theory. From the outset, the conversation situates his work within a broader intellectual and historical movement—one that seeks to reconnect research with practice, and theory with lived experience.
Kemmis traces his entry into action research back to the 1970s, when he encountered pioneering figures such as Lawrence Stenhouse and John Elliott in the UK. Initially interested in what he called the “democratization of data,” he became increasingly convinced that research should not be conducted on practitioners, but with them. This insight evolved into a commitment to what he now describes as a form of “citizen science”, where teachers themselves investigate the problems they face in their own practice.
From the beginning, action research was not just a method for Kemmis—it was a political and emancipatory project, rooted in the idea that practitioners should have a voice in shaping their own work and the conditions under which it unfolds.
BECOMING CRITICAL: TEACHERS AS AGENTS, NOT TECHNICIANS
A central theme of the conversation is Kemmis’ influential book Becoming Critical, co-authored with Wilfred Carr. Written during a time of intense educational and political transformation, the book challenged dominant views of teachers as passive implementers of externally defined knowledge.
Instead, Kemmis and Carr proposed that teachers should be understood as critical agents—professionals capable of reflecting on, questioning, and transforming their own practices. This perspective was closely tied to broader movements for teacher professionalism, curriculum autonomy, and democratic participation in education.
Kemmis situates this work within a period marked by:
• Teacher strikes and demands for professional recognition
• The rise of school-based curriculum development
• A growing dissatisfaction with purely technical or progressive approaches to education
What distinguished Becoming Critical was its insistence on a socially critical perspective—one that examines how educational practices are shaped by broader ideological, political, and economic structures. These structures, Kemmis argues, can “imprison” practitioners in ways of working that are unjust, unsustainable, or unproductive.
Yet, he is careful to emphasize that critique is not about reaching a final, ideal state. Drawing on Wittgenstein and Gadamer, he suggests that critique is always a work in progress—a way of moving from one set of limitations to another, while remaining attentive to the consequences of our practices.
WHAT IS AT STAKE TODAY: THE TENSION BETWEEN EDUCATION AND SCHOOLING
When asked about the current state of action research, Kemmis identifies a central tension that has guided his work: the contradiction between education as a practice and schooling as an institution.
On the one hand, education is a deeply human, relational, and transformative practice—rooted in encounters between teachers and students. On the other hand, schooling is increasingly shaped by bureaucratic, administrative, and economic imperatives that tend to standardize and constrain this practice.
Kemmis argues that this tension has intensified in recent decades due to the rise of:
• Neoliberal governance
• New public management
• International policy frameworks (e.g., OECD influence)
These forces, he suggests, have contributed to a growing bureaucratization of teaching, where educators are subjected to external controls that often fail to recognize the complexity and moral significance of their work.
Despite this, Kemmis insists that teachers continue to find meaning in moments of genuine educational connection—when students come to see the world differently and expand their ways of thinking and acting. These moments, he suggests, are what sustain the profession and keep the “flame” of education alive.
In this context, action research becomes a way of protecting and nurturing this flame—a collaborative practice through which teachers can reflect on and transform their work, even under challenging conditions.
PRACTICAL WISDOM AND THE TURN TO PRACTICE
A key philosophical thread in the episode is the role of practical wisdom (phronesis) in professional life. Kemmis engages with Aristotle’s distinction between different forms of knowledge—contemplative, practical, and technical—and emphasizes the importance of knowing “what is the right thing to do under the circumstances.”
However, he also extends this classical perspective by drawing on Marx’s famous thesis:
“Philosophers have only interpreted the world; the point, however, is to change it.”
For Kemmis, this marks a crucial shift from knowing about the world to acting within it. Practice is not an application of knowledge; it is the very site where knowledge, action, and transformation come together.
This leads to a broader ontological perspective:
• We do not simply observe the world—we live in it through our practices
• Action is not secondary to thought—it is constitutive of our being in the world
• Learning is not just cognitive—it is embedded in participation and transformation
Practical wisdom, in this sense, involves not only judgement but also critical reflection on the conditions that shape action.
ETHICS AND THE RECOGNITION OF INJUSTICE
When the conversation turns to ethics, Kemmis offers a striking perspective: rather than trying to define what is just in abstract terms, it may be more fruitful to focus on recognizing injustice.
Drawing on Iris Marion Young, he argues that injustice becomes visible through:
• Suffering
• Domination
• Oppression
• Unequal distribution of harm
In this view, ethical action begins not with certainty, but with attentiveness to what is going wrong. It is through recognizing these failures that practitioners can begin to respond and act differently.
This perspective resonates with the broader theme of the episode: that action is always situated in uncertainty, and that ethical judgement requires ongoing reflection rather than fixed rules.
THE THEORY OF PRACTICE ARCHITECTURES
One of Kemmis’ most important contributions in recent years is the theory of practice architectures, which provides a framework for understanding how practices are shaped and sustained.
Rejecting the idea that social life is determined by abstract “structures,” Kemmis argues that what we call structures are actually reproduced through practices—through what people say, do, and how they relate to one another in everyday life.
He distinguishes between:
• Sayings (language, discourse)
• Doings (activities, material actions)
• Relatings (social relationships, power, solidarity)
These are shaped by corresponding practice architectures:
• Cultural-discursive arrangements
• Material-economic arrangements
• Social-political arrangements
The key insight is that practices and their conditions are mutually constitutive. If we want to change practices, we must also change the conditions that make them possible.
This has important implications for action research:
• Change cannot be achieved by individuals alone
• Structural conditions must also be addressed
• Transformation requires collective and systemic effort
• Working with Practice Architectures in Practice
Kemmis also offers concrete examples of how this framework can be used in practice. Teachers and researchers, he explains, can use the theory as a kind of “table of invention”—a tool for analyzing their own practices.
By asking questions such as:
• What are we saying?
• What are we doing?
• How are we relating?
• What conditions shape these practices?
practitioners can begin to see how their actions are influenced by broader historical and institutional contexts.
This process opens up possibilities for critical dialogue and collective reflection, which are essential for meaningful change.
RESPONSIBILITY IN A WORLD OF UNCERTAINTY
In the final part of the episode, the discussion turns explicitly to the theme of responsibility. Kemmis challenges the idea that responsibility is about having full knowledge or control.
Instead, he suggests that:
• We are always already acting in the world
• Our practices constantly reproduce or transform existing conditions
• Responsibility lies in becoming aware of this and acting differently where possible
Using a striking analogy, he compares this shift in thinking to a “Newtonian revolution”: instead of asking what causes change, we should ask what keeps things as they are.
From this perspective:
• The status quo persists because we continue to enact it
• Change requires both self-transformation and transformation of conditions
• Responsibility is not individual control, but participation in shaping the world
Kemmis illustrates this with real-world examples of care, solidarity, and political action, emphasizing that even small, everyday acts can contribute to larger transformations.
CONCLUSION: PRACTICE AS THE SITE OF TRANSFORMATION
Throughout the episode, Kemmis returns to a central insight: we live in our practices. It is through them that we shape the world and are shaped by it.
Action research, practical wisdom, and the theory of practice architectures all converge on this point:
• Change is not external to practice—it happens within it
• Responsibility is not abstract—it is lived in action
• Knowledge is not separate from doing—it is embedded in practice
In a world marked by uncertainty and complexity, Kemmis invites us to take seriously the ethical and political dimensions of our everyday actions—and to see practice itself as the primary site of inquiry, learning, and transformation.
