Kontekstiks ambitsioonist, kuidas muuta politseipraktikad professiooniks:

“In 2012 the Coalition Government created the College of Policing as the professional body for policing. The College was given a mandate to transform policing into a profession (Lumsden, 2016; Holdaway, 2017).” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 2)

Pragmatism tuleb appi politseiprofessioonist mõtlema:

“This article proposes Pragmatism as an overarching philosophical framework that could underpin the professional knowledgebase. It is a flexible philosophy that can accommodate different research methods, different perspectives and ways of understanding.” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 2)

Pragmatismi juured:

“The philosophy of Pragmatism developed out of the thinking of Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, John Dewey and George Herbert Mead in the mid-19th century (Simpson, 2018; Kaushik and Walsh, 2019). They did not set out to create a philosophical movement and disagreements amongst them led them to champion different versions of pragmatism (Greene and Hall, 2010; Hookway, 2013).” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 2) […] “Pragmatists argue that knowledge is fallible, contextual and the basis of a belief on which we are prepared to act (Hothersall, 2018). Therefore, is created and tested within real-world problemsolving (Greene and Hall, 2010; Simpson, 2018).” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 2)

Domineerib käsitöölismõtteviis:

“Currently policing practice and knowledge is acquired following an ‘on the job’ apprenticeship approach. The accepted view within policing is that policing is best learnt by doing.” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 3)


“The College of Policing currently promote evidence-based policing (EBP) as the best approach to building a pro” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 3) […] “This approach privileges quantitative research methods with randomised control trials promoted as the ‘gold standard’ research approach and, when these are not practicable, other rigorous designs such as quasiexperiments are accepted as valid alternatives to assess police interventions (Mitchell and Lewis, 2017; Ariel, 2019).” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 3)

Positivistlik perspektiiv:

“This scientific approach is based on a positivistic philosophy that argues that the social and the physical world are both are ‘out there’, external to individual, and that individuals are subject to patterns of deterministic processes that influence their behaviour leading to a series of natural outcomes, similar to natural forces acting on the physical world (Neuman, 2011; Denscombe, 2017).” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 3)

Interpretivism sekkub vahele:

“These concerns represent an interpretivist account of the world which asserts that the social world is fundamentally different from the physical world, arguing that human beings give meaning and relevance to their social reality, while physical objects and forces do not (Bryman, 2016). Social reality is created and experienced within interactions that are contextualised by historical and cultural factors, whilst at the same time remaining” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 4) […] “personal and subjective (Creswell, 2009; Bryman, 2016). Interpretive research uses qualitative methodology to capture and understand the meanings and beliefs that individuals employ within these social interactions (Creswell, 2009; Denscombe, 2017).” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 5)


“The interpretivist purist rejects the scientific approach as an oversimplification of the complexity of human experience, claiming it demeans notions of individual choice, freedom and morality (Burns, 2000). While proponents of the scientific approach claim that the interpretivist approach is unscientific and presents biased subjective opinion rather than credible evidence (Denzin and Ryan, 2007).” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 6)

Pragmatism saab võimaluse:

“Pragmatism privileges the question, encouraging the researcher to choose the method most likely to provide an answer, rather than letting epistemological and ontological premises constrain the researcher’s choice (Morgan, 2007; Biesta, 2010; Biddle and Schafft, 2015).” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 7)

Pragmatism praktikas:

“Pragmatists claim that knowledge is created within problem-solving situations, through an” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 7) […] “iterative process in which successful outcomes from previous experiences are hypothesised as potential solutions to the current problem situation. Potential solutions are tested, revised, and retested in both a cognitive and a practical process of intelligent reflection (Ormerod, 2006; Ansell, 2016; Kaushik and Walsh, 2019). This is not solely a mental process, it is an active process of thinking, action and reflection, it has a physical element, it is literally ‘something that we do’ (Dewey 1916p367, cited in Biesta 2014 p38).” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 8)

Enda kogemused maksavad:

“In policing there is an almost universal respect for experience, it is the foundation of most officer decision making (Lee and Punch, 2004; Lumsden, 2016). Research suggests that most police officers, including those in managerial ranks, prefer to rely on their own experience or advice from trusted colleagues over ‘evidence’ provided by academic researchers who have little or no policing experience (Fleming and Rhodes, 2018; Hunter” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 10) […] “et al., 2019). The domination of craft knowledge is rarely questioned or challenged by police officers” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 11)

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

“The main motivation for professionalising the police and creating a professional police knowledgebase is that police now operate in a pluralistic and complex society. The police” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 16) […] “need a body of knowledge that is validated and defensible to replace the idiosyncratic experiential and ‘authority’ knowledge that is the current basis for practice in policing.” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 17) […] “A consensus on the incorporation of craft knowledge and an adaptation of the existing rank-based hierarchy to replace idiosyncratic experiential and ‘authority’ knowledge as the basis for practice.” (McCanney et al., 2022, p. 17)

McCanney, J., Taylor, J. C., & Morris, K. (2022). Professionalising the police pragmatically. The Police Journal, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032258X221128401