This reflexive bibliography provides an account of how different bodies of scholarship shaped, supported or sat alongside this Action Research Project. Some texts are cited directly in Blogs 1-7 because they informed analysis, interpretation or methodological decision-making. Others were engaged with more loosely during reading, sense-making, and reflection and influenced the project without being explicitly mobilised in the written outputs. Making this distinction visible allows for a more honest account of how knowledge was assembled across the enquiry.

Category 1: Conceptual and theoretical architecture

These texts provided conceptual language for thinking about relationality and anti-positivist epistemology. They functioned less as connective metaphors that helped me understand knowledge as dynamic and relational rather than fixed or procedural. In particular, Deleuze and Guattari’s work shaped how I conceptualised emergence, becoming and multiplicity across the project, and how I came to understand collegial feedback and partnership as relational and emergent infrastructures.

Category 2: Methodology and analytic practice

This literature directly informed how I conducted, justified, and reflected on qualitative analysis, reflexivity, ethics and interpretation. Braun and Clarke, Alvesson, Banks, and McNiff shaped how I understood rigour as reflexive responsibility, transparency and analytic judgement. These texts were central to articulating how meaning was constructed through reflexive thematic analysis. They also supported my positioning as an insider-researcher and helped me navigate the ethical and interpretive responsibilities that accompanied that role.

Category 3: Practice-facing and contextual lenses

These texts helped me interpret participants’ accounts in relation to organisational life, professional dialogue, psychological safety and relational labour. Applied deductively to the research, they clarified how interpersonal risk and psychological safety are produced through interaction rather than assumed as baseline conditions. They also provided language for emotional and affective labour that resonated strongly with participants’ descriptions of feedback as care work. Leadership and professional development literature helped situate the findings within broader conversations about learning, collaboration, and organisational culture, without prescribing solutions.

Bibliography audit and categorisation

A. Explicitly cited in Posts 1–7

Conceptual and theoretical architecture

Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. (1987) A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Jackson, A.Y. and Mazzei, L.A. (2012) Thinking with theory in qualitative research. London: Routledge.

Law, J. (2004) After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. London: Routledge.

Methodology and analytic practice

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2021) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: SAGE.

Alvesson, M. (2011) Interpreting Interviews. London: SAGE.

Banks, S. (2016) ‘Everyday ethics in professional life’, Ethics and Social Welfare, 10(1), pp. 35–52.

McNiff, J. (2002) Action Research for Professional Development. London: Routledge.

Irvine, A., Drew, P. and Sainsbury, R. (2013) ‘Clarification and responsiveness in semi-structured interviews’, Qualitative Research, 13(1), pp. 87–106.

Practice-facing and contextual lenses

Akama, Y. (2015) ‘Being awake to Ma : designing in between-ness as a way of becoming with’, CoDesign, 11(3–4), pp. 262–274. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2015.1081243.

Akama, Y. (2015) ‘Being awake to relational work’, in Proceedings of C&T 2015. New York: ACM.

Carson, M. (2006) ‘Saying it like it isn’t: The pros and cons of 360-degree feedback’, Business Horizons, 49(5), pp. 395–402. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2006.01.004.

Edmondson, A.C. (2018) Psychological Safety in Health Care and Education Organizations: A Comparative Perspective. Harvard Business School Working Paper.

Edmondson, A.C. et al. (2016) ‘Understanding psychological safety’, Research in Human Development, 13(1), pp. 65–83.

García, E.C. (2024) ‘Peer feedback for teaching professional development’, Cogent Education, 11(1).

Ribosa et al. (2024) ‘Teachers’ closeness of professional relationship’, Teaching and Teacher Education, 140.

Hutchins, G. and Storm, L. (2019) Regenerative Leadership. WordsWorth Publishing.

B. Engaged with but not explicitly cited in Posts 1–7

Methodology, reflexivity and citation

Ahmed, S. (2017) Living a Feminist Life. Duke University Press.

Ellis, C.S. and Bochner, A.P. (2006) ‘Analyzing analytic autoethnography’, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(4), pp. 429–449.

Arnold, L. and Norton, L. (2021) ‘Problematising pedagogical action research’, Educational Action Research, 29(2), pp. 328–345.

Bowen, G.A. (2009) ‘Document analysis as a qualitative research method’, Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), pp. 27–40.

Harwood, N. (2009) ‘Functions of citations’, Journal of Pragmatics, 41(3), pp. 497–518.

Mott, C. and Cockayne, D. (2017) ‘Citation matters’, Gender, Place & Culture, 24(7), pp. 954–973.

Peer learning, feedback and professional relationships

van Blankenstein et al. (2025) ‘Ask your peer!’, Educational Research and Evaluation, 30(1–2), pp. 36–57.

Gray, J., Kruse, S. and Tarter, C.J. (2016) ‘Collegial trust and learning communities’, EMAL, 44(6), pp. 875–891.

Darling-Hammond, L. et al. (2017) Effective Teacher Professional Development. Learning Policy Institute.

Torres-Cajas, M. et al. (2021) ‘Teacher Coassessment Process in Higher Education’, Atenea (Concepción), 26(523), pp. 347–364. Available at: https://doi.org/10.29393/AtAt523-425MTTC40425.