E-Journal of Philosophy of Education:
International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 2, 2017

What does it mean to be “doing phenomenology”?
Reasons for reflecting on personal experiences used as case studies
Rui OTSUKA
Aoyama Gakuin University
Abstract
From her time as a student to the present day, the author has had dealings with children through having
been a volunteer at children’s homes and elementary schools, and has researched case studies fromthe theoretical background of phenomenology. In addition to presenting a case study from a children’shome, this paper discusses two issues. The first issue is that, within the process of conducting researchusing case studies taken from personal experience, there are encounters with three kinds of ‘Others’;
the children from whom the line of enquiry starts, the improvised actions of the ‘Self’, and theaudience for the research. The second is the consideration that the activities involved in “doingphenomenology” are case study research, with its opportunities for encountering the three kinds of‘Others’, and a series of cyclical changes in the ‘Self’.
Keywords
doing phenomenology, case study on children, reflection on personal experience, the three kinds ofothers

Introduction: Composition of this paper
From her time as a student to the present day, the author has had dealings withchildren through having been a volunteer at children’s homes1 and elementary schools,
and has researched case studies from the theoretical background of phenomenology. In
addition to presenting a case study from a children’s home, this paper discusses two issues.
The first issue is that, within the process of conducting research using case studies taken1

A children’s home is a type of children’s welfare institution established by the Child Welfare Act which provides
a home for children between the ages of 1 and 20 who cannot live with their own families due to abuse. Theauthor has been conducting research at a certain children’s home for a dozen years and has been involved with thechildren there once or twice a week.

What does it mean to be “doing phenomenology”?

27

from personal experience, there are encounters with three kinds of ‘Others’; the children
from whom the line of enquiry starts, the improvised actions of the ‘Self’, and theaudience for the research. The second is the consideration that the activities involved in“doing phenomenology” are case study research, with its opportunities for encountering
the three kinds of ‘Others’, and a series of cyclical changes in the ‘Self’.

1. Case Study
The event described in this case study relates to an occasion when two boys who
had been living in a children’s home for approximately one year were faced withseparation from the other children, because the other children were being taken to new
homes by their mothers2. The narrator of the events is the author herself, but the namesof the two boys have been changed.
As soon as the other children who had come to say good-bye were out of sight,
Kohta (8) came back to where I was standing. He grinned, and then suddenly started
slapping Yuuto on the face and head while saying, “Yuuto’s an idiot! Yuuto’s stupid!”
As he was saying this, Kohta continued to hit Yuuto relentlessly. “Doesn’t hurt! Youidiot!” said Yuuto provocatively. “Kohta, stop it. Yuuto, don’t provoke him,” I
screamed while trying to protect Yuuto with my arms. However, Kohta laughed tohimself as he reached in through the gaps between my arms to thump Yuuto’s head andface several more times with his fists. “You can’t hurt me, you idiot! I hate you!
Kohta, I hate you!” All the while Yuuto was being attacked, he continued to provoke
Kohta. “Kohta, Yuuto, what’s got into you? Both of you, stop it please!” I shouted.
I could feel that, by avoiding my arms, Kohta was still using his fists to hit Yuuto, but allI could do was to scream at him to stop. At that moment, one of the staff of thechildren’s home was passing and held Kohta firmly before leading him away.

2. The meaning of a marginal existence: Confronting two types of the ‘Other’
The author feels that she has a “marginal existence” when dealing with children
because her identity is neither that of a child nor of an adult, neither that of a childcare2

For the purposes of writing this paper, minor additions and revisions have been made which do not affect thecontent.

E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 2, 2017

28

R. OTSUKA

worker nor that of someone being cared for, neither that of an educator nor that ofsomeone being educated. A marginal existence is different to being a childcare workeror a teacher because there is no clear educational intent in spending time with the children
and does not fit into the ‘mold’ of being either a childcare worker or an educator.
Because the author met the children without typical educational objectives and did not fit
into a typical ‘mold’, the children behaved outside the framework of being cared for oreducated. For this reason, the improvisation and uniqueness, which are built-in featuresof dealings with the ‘Other’, stand out in the practical experiences of the author. For
example, in the case study mentioned, the author reacted instantly (reflection in action)3
when Kohta suddenly started to hit Yuuto. In that situation, the two boys wereencountering the author as an overwhelming ‘Other’ who was beyond their expectations.
For this reason, after the author’s dealings with the two boys had come to an end, theauthor asked herself the simple question; “Why did Kohta suddenly attack Yuuto, andwhy did Yuuto provoke him further?”Another simple question arose concerning the author’s ‘Self’ at the time of theevents in the case study. This was because the author’s ‘Self’ in the past, which had
acted impulsively on a sudden decision, was an unknown ‘Other’ to her present ‘Self’ as
it reflected on the events in the case study. From the very fact that her involvement withchildren was always a one-off matter, with no opportunity for making amends later, theauthor felt regret that she could not answer the question of, “Should I have tried to restrain
Kohta more forcibly when he started to hit Yuuto?” It was because the author was amarginal existence and did not have a typical educational intent or fit into a typical ‘mold’that she always faced children as a unique individual with the way of thinking, way ofbehaving, and way of living of her own ‘Self’.
The process of putting an experience into words and doing a mental reconstructionof the experience which provided the opportunity for the author to consider the questionof the two kinds of ‘Other’, namely the children and her ‘Self’ in the past, gave arise to afresh realization and another question (reflection after action) 4 . In the case study
described, “I had not been aware of it at the time, but while I was trying to protect Yuuto
with my arms, Kohta was trying to hit only Yuuto in the spaces which remained between
my arms. This goes to show that Kohta was completely composed at that time. Thatbeing the case, there must have been some meaning behind the attack.” This reflection
prompted the author to realize something new and to ask yet another question of herself.
3Shön, D. 2001. Senmonka no chie [The Reflective Practitioner]. Translated by Manabu Sato and Kiyomi Akita.
Yumiru Publishing.
4Shön, D. Previously cited.
Thematic Research: Educational Practices, from Which Philosophy Emerges: Frontiers of Philosophy of Education

What does it mean to be “doing phenomenology”?

29

The author thinks that this realization and self-examination was prompted by writing her
experience down in order to record it and becoming aware that her ‘Self’ in the past had
become objectified as the ‘Other’5.
Through the medium of case study research, as the author confronted the two kindsof ‘Other’ which were the two boys and her ‘Self’ in the past, she took a step towards
understanding the subject of the research (the ‘Other’ and the circumstances surrounding
her practical experience). The author also took a step towards understanding her ‘Self’
when dealing with the ‘Other’ in that situation, and to changing her perceptions and herrecognition of things. Through that moment of realization and understanding, bychanging her perceptions and her recognition of things, the behavior of the author alsochanged when she was dealing with children. As shown in the case study, by observing
the event with a knowledge of phenomenology6 the author came to understand that, “forsome types of children violence is a means of communication”. The author’s automatic
perception of children’s violence as negative disappeared, and she became able to deal
with it as violent behavior directed towards the ‘Self’7. When this happened a new
relationship developed between the boys and the existence of the author.
In other words, the “reflection on action” involved in researching a single case study,changed the author’s ‘Self’. As a result, further “reflection in action” made the author
ask another question. That question produced, in turn, further “reflection on action” andreflections on that produced further changes in the author…, and so a cycle of behavior
was started. Within this cycle of conducting case study research and having practicalexperiences, if there is also reinforcement or conclusive evidence which leads to tentative
answers regarding understanding the ‘Other’, in cases where the relationship between theresearcher and the children was successful, then it produces a recollection of furtherincidents which exceed assumptions of having been successful, and changes becomenecessary. The author considers that this cyclical series of self-changes is the essenceof conducting research (phenomenology).
5Phenomenologist, Yasuhiko Murakami said, “When Husserl recorded the stream of his own consciousness, thephenomenon took on a kind of ‘Otherness’. (Abbreviated) In other words, even when you are analyzing your own
experiences, you are analyzing them as the experiences of the ‘Other’ (Murakami, Y. 2016. Sennin to mousou detosuru [A Delusional Date with a Mountain Hermit]. Jimbun Shoin. p.230). In this way, for “qualitative research inphenomenology” it can be said that the ‘Self’ which experienced the event appears as the ‘Other’ in relation to the‘Self’ which analyzes the event as a case study.
6For further reading about observing case studies, refer to chapter 3, section 4, of Otsuka, R. 2009. Shisetsu dekurasu kodomotachi no seicho [The Development of Children Living in Institutions]. Tokyo: University of TokyoPress.
7The author, who does not fit a typical pattern and therefore has a marginal existence considers that behavior which
is produced through the understanding of the ‘Other’ gained through case study research could be said to be theauthor’s individual pattern.
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 2, 2017

30

R. OTSUKA

3. Encounters with third-party ‘Others’ in the course of presenting research
The previous section of this paper outlined; (1) that the author herself was a marginalexistence without fitting into a typical ‘mold’, (2) that for that very reason, within
relationships in which improvisation and uniqueness stand out, encounters with the twokinds of ‘Others’ as represented by the boys and her ‘Self’, became the opportunity forcase study research, and (3) that one case study research is not a complete ending, but
produces further case study research and a series of cycles in understanding of the ‘Other’.
This section focuses on how the verbalization of experiences as case study research canlead to a dialogue with third-party ‘Others’.
The case study which the author has presented was a unique incident between theauthor and the two boys which cannot be replicated. In spite of this, when the author
describes this case study in presentations, she often receives feedback such as, “I canempathize, because I’ve had similar experiences”. People who offer this kind of
feedback are not limited to those connected with child welfare; some have connections
to formal school education, some are medical personnel, some are parents, and some arestudents. Despite the fact that the circumstances in which an incident occurs, and therelationship between the people involved and the ‘Other’ will be completely different ineach case, the people who give feedback to the author have experienced “similar”, that isto say analogous, experiences, and the author’s words have “reactivated” those people’s
experiences8. The author considers that whether or not the experiences of her audiencecan be “reactivated” is a measure of the validity of her reflections on case study research9.
In the previous section, within the series of cycles of case study research and practical8

Husserl, E. (1974). Yōroppa shogaku no kiki to chōetsuronteki genshōgaku [The crisis of European sciences andtranscendental phenomenology]. Japanese trans. Tsuneo Hosoya and others. Tokyo: Chuokoronsha.
9The author considers that her marginal existence is a consequence of her not fitting into a typical ‘mold’, and forthe author, an understanding of the ‘Other’ based on case study research, and the existence of behavior createdthrough that understanding of the ‘Other’, could, perhaps, be said to be the author’s own type of ‘mold’. Thereasons for this are as follows. In phenomenology based on a theoretical background, as exemplified in theexpression “individuality is expressed through universality”, there are indications towards a fundamental
understanding of the essence of ordinary human experiences which are gained from personal experiences (“zu denSachen selbst her = from the things themselves”). Accordingly, the author thinks that discussion about case study
research is close to the essence of ordinary human experiences when case study research produces empathy withinpeople who come from a variety of practical backgrounds. Certainly, within qualitative research incorporating casestudy research, there is little objectivity in terms of potential for replication. Instead, case study research produces
reactivation of similar experiences in many readers or listeners and allows for vicarious experience of the case study.
In other words, the validity and universality of qualitative research is secured because it includes this kind of potentialfor replication.
Thematic Research: Educational Practices, from Which Philosophy Emerges: Frontiers of Philosophy of Education

What does it mean to be “doing phenomenology”?

31

experience, it was mentioned that, by making successful relationships with children, atentative answer leading towards an understanding of the ‘Other’ can be reinforced orconclusively proved. However, the same kind of reinforcement or conclusive proof canalso be produced by empathy from readers and listeners.
Conversely, there are also times when suggestions or criticism from her audience inregard to the author’s practical experiences, writing style, or considerations regarding acase study, can elucidate fresh viewpoints and realizations. For example, in connection
with the case study described, although the author came to realize that “for some types ofchildren, violence is a form of communication”, people often opine that, “violence mustnot be tolerated in any situation”. When people make suggestions like this, the author
searches for an expression which shows that she is not condoning violence, and shequestions anew whether her understanding is appropriate. The very fact of doing
research into case studies which are personal experiences means that suggestions andcriticism from other people have a direct influence on the author herself. Sometimes
people express empathy and sometimes people offer suggestions or criticism.
Encounters with the third-party ‘Others’ who are the people who attend a researchpresentation are outside the series of personal case study and practical experience casestudies outlined above, and this produces a series of cycles based on third-party ‘Others’
who have listened to the research. This duality in the cycle of research results in thecontinued changing of the ‘Self’ and this is probably what is meant by phenomenology.

Conclusion
Within improvised relationships consisting of chance meetings, a confrontation withchildren in the role of being the ‘Other’ was an opportunity for questions to be raised.
In order to answer those questions, the author described the situation as a case study andher ‘Self’ in the past which appeared as an ‘Other’. A single example of case study
research can be brought to completion by writing a paper or giving a presentation, but thefact that it has been made into a formal style allows for encounters and dialogue with new‘Others’ who are the audience for the research. This kind of dialogue with third-party‘Others’ leads to a reinforcement of the validity of the author’s interpretation andproduces a fresh set of questions.
This process can be described as a double cycle. The first cycle is the cycle of casestudy research and practical experiences, and the second is the cycle arising fromdialogue with third-party ‘Others’ who have observed the presentation of research results.
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 2, 2017

32

R. OTSUKA

It is because the author has been researching case studies based on personal experiencethat this series of double cycles inevitably becomes harmonized with normal changes inthe author. Each individual case study can be brought to a conclusion, but the very actof researching personal experiences results in changes in the author’s ‘Self’, which
continue to develop based on satisfaction, indecision, and trial and error, without reachinga conclusion.

Thematic Research: Educational Practices, from Which Philosophy Emerges: Frontiers of Philosophy of Education