Background
Co-operative Inquiry is a way of investigating the world as a way of learning about it. It starts from the working assumption that much of the personal world we live in overlaps with the social world that shapes and forms us. These two worlds are not separate in experience.

They can, however, be discussed separately and it is possible to develop a way of thinking that overlooks the fact that these two different ways of 'being in the world' are always spilling over into one another, subtly and sometimes crudely, each having an impact upon the other. Most 'study', however, is centred on the external, given, subject matter, or at best the accounts of those who have gone before about what there is to learn and therefore know.

Co-operative Inquiry (and other forms of Action Research) recognises that most of the questions that occupy people and shape the personal meaning they give to the world around them, the relationships of the elements that surround them and the influences that affect them have not been answered before - by themselves.

Such personal learning is what helps to give shape and direction (or lack of it) to our lives and yet we are rarely encouraged to explore, investigate, or express together how we come make sense of the experiences and events that happen to us or to celebrate the way we understand what it means to be the person we are with those other persons that are also distinctly themselves and with whom we share our daily lives.

In addition, most of us have acquired the belief that what we think is not important or that our personal understanding of the subject matter is not likely to be relevant to the inquiry they are wishing to make. Centuries of dogmatic repression places doctrine over experience - that leaves individuals believing they have to be told the nature of their experience by others who are 'experts'.

As individuals learn about Co-operative Inquiry (and other Action Inquiry and Action Research methods), they may think that rigour and validity are overlooked in favour of, 'If this is my experience and it is authentic then that's enough'. But most people who persevere with CI approaches want to go far beyond the purely subjective response and inquire into the meaning of the responses they have. They seek to evaluate the similarities and differences of their explorations against those of others and to share the tentative understanding and significance of what they are doing - something that can best be done in the company of others.

Out of such 'dialogue' it may be possible to begin to formulate some way of describing the 'findings' in such a way that they may be of use to others who have an interest in the topic area. However, such findings are not a way of exhausting the inquiry for others, merely offering learning to stimulate or to give some assistance.

The Starting Point - Conditions
There are certain conditions that, if in position, will enhance the possibilities for an inquiry to make the most of the opportunity to explore both the task in hand and the whole process of coming together in a group to work in this way. The minimum of these conditions needed to get a co-operative inquiry up and running together with an outline process for initiating an inquiry are given below:

1. A topic that 'calls people' to come together to meet for initial discussion. 'What do you/I want to explore with
   me/you/ us?'
   
   
2. A launching off point for the inquiry itself. This is a time for outlining, exploring and collecting ideas about the themes, styles, and options. In the example of Integrated Practice & Holistic Learning, (IPHL) the inquiry meeting began with accounts from the individuals who had been meeting explaining the work and thinking behind the theme.
   
   
3. It is important that everyone holds the same shared information at the outset beginning. Clarity of background and aspirations etc. need to be made explicit to those who are entering into the inquiry invitation from 'cold'.
   
   
4. From this basis it is then possible to move into an exploration of the personal meaning the words used in the inquiry invitation hold for those likely to join.
   
   
5. Each person involved in the inquiry needs to be willing to find their authentic response and express it. Since the quality of any inquiry process depends upon the directness and authenticity of those involved, it is important that it is encouraged at the outset.
   
   
6. Early attempts to fudge issues of seek early compromises are neither necessary nor helpful. People can get what they want, but only by learning to declare it clearly. They may also find they change their minds rapidly in the light of hearing other people's contributions and suggestions and this they may find a little disturbing.
   
   
7. The willingness to resist consensus collusion from developing in the group is the best form of guarantee of inquiry health. Healthy scepticism at the search for 'too neat answers and solutions' to its developing and unfolding process are welcome signs.
   
   
8. It is important to raise attention at efforts to avoid issues and attempts to bring about premature agreement as a way of reducing anxiety in the face of uncertainty. Just as there is a need to be willing to challenge the game of: 'It's alright for you to act in any old way because you are only being who you are and we are all here to tolerate one another'.
   
   
9. Recognising that we are engaging in a form of participative co-creation. This is a profoundly radical act of autonomous free association between individuals with self direction and yet with a simultaneous capacity to co-create a research process centred on some aspect of the human condition that might lead to lifelong benefits for all concerned.
   
   
10. A willingness to regard the manifestations of frustration, anxiety and other distress distorted reactions as valuable opportunities for burning up the ego and not being subject to distorted expression of need or pathological efforts at suppression of genuine distress.

A Tentative Framework

Supporting Aspects
Since our culture and past educational experience does tend to reinforce the belief that our own knowledge/learning is not adequate or valuable there are certain aspects within a co-operative inquiry approach that can be 're-learned'.

• Restoring the individual's original relation to self and experience.
• Recognising and reaffirming that personal authority lies within.
• Reinforcing the value of the autonomous co-creativity of persons in collaboration.
• Affirming our original nature.
• Developing emotional skills - affective competence - e.g. 'checking projections', - dealing with transference, distortions, and other distress laden 'readings' of other people - emotional house cleaning.

Supporting Mechanisms
For many people, this way of coming together in a group is contrary to all previous experience. This can feel daunting in the early stages and it does have its own hidden dangers and pitfalls, therefore, certain mechanisms need to be consciously put into place to give support to each member of the group.

• Clear initial facilitation of the process.
• The facilitator honouring the importance of the 'guardianship of the process' role and encouragement to others to adopt it early and try it out.
• Clear accounts of the what and the why of the process in the early states
• The Devil's Advocate procedure for testing out any thing at any time - whether of a procedural, content, process, individual or collective nature. This stops the process and must be taken notice of.
• A rigorous commitment to check 'What are we doing?' and 'is this what we said we were doing?' and 'Do we want to carry on if this is what is happening?'
• Frequent vote checking.
• Loving toughness on displacement, anxiety and distress-laden attempts to 'make it all right'.
• The practice of authentic, discriminatory, awareness.
• Creative engagement.