Improving Understanding on CE

During working out an adequate qualitative methodology for a research on Conductive Education, particularly on the emotional and social elements alongside with the physical ones, I met many ideas how to implement different methods for better understanding. Some critics say that it is not useful listening to CE participants, patient’s opinion about their treatment since they are subjectively involved and they won’t inform us about the objective rehabilitation truth. I am and many other qualitative researchers are arguing that point. If we would follow this idea we probably would never get any information about the participants’ lived experience. Lived experience, which is crucial in education, habilitation, rehabilitation.
When we would like to express the lived experience and write down as a narration, we produce an autonomous text, a text that expresses its own meaning. Whatever the production is it does not need any correction. It tells about our world, about “Dasein” according to Heidegger, in English translation about “being in the world”, about our lived world. This is not a factual world outside or lying behind the text, but rather a world in front of the text, a world revealed by the text. Through lived discourses we participate in the CE world, and through the texts, narratives we come aware of this participation. Narratives touch us and move us when they shed light on our or the participants’ lived experience of discourse participation. Being touched and moved may reveal the essential meaning of this participation, this being in the world. Being touched and moved by essential meaning leads us toward the truth. Towards the lived truth of CE.