Perceptions of Inquiry: How Junior Educators Engage in Conversation with their Senior Leaders

Abstract

Inquiry is an important aspect of effective communication. It is the key to understanding other people's points of view, and it is also an essential component of learning. To inquire sometimes requires asking questions or challenging views of other people. However, challenging views is sometimes difficult if a conversation involves people from a more senior role and those from a more junior position. Those from a more junior role might not be willing to inquire into a concern while they are talking with someone from a more senior position because power differentials affect how people behave at work. This qualitative case study set out to explore if hierarchy might have an impact on conversations at work. The main purpose of the study was to understand the views of both senior leaders and junior educators about inquiry. The study involved six participants (three senior leaders and three junior educators) from three different language institutions in Phnom Penh, the capital city of Cambodia. Two research instruments were employed for collecting data: interviews and observations. There were two stages of interviews: initial and follow-up. The follow-up interviews were conducted after the observations, for the purpose of member checking the interview and observational data. The six participants were purposefully selected from a given list by using a random purposive sampling scheme to avoid bias in recruiting the sample from the population. The findings show that the six participating respondents perceived inquiry to be either important or very important. These perceived views were related to 1) building relationships, 2) seeking different ideas, 3) learning opportunities, 4) developing thinking and understanding, 5) not wanting 'yes' people, and 6) avoiding making unnecessary mistakes. Despite such awareness and beliefs, the three junior educators were observed posing no probing questions and offering limited challenges to aspects of their senior leaders' views. Two main reasons were believed to contribute to this. Firstly, the three junior educators perceived their senior leaders as competent; secondly, they explained that they accepted the mistakes identified by their senior leaders as their own mistakes. They said they did not ask any probing questions or challenge any aspects of their senior leaders' perspectives for these two reasons.