(2020). Reimagining the new pedagogical possibilities for universities post-Covid-19. Educational Philosophy and Theory. Ahead of Print.

A reminder: This text has been created as a series of brut and raw responses representing a collective of “impossible” imaginings. Our collective writing is not about the vision or about insights into the future of qualitative inquiry per se, but it is about ways in which some qualitative researchers wish to stay methodologically and theoretically in flux and motion. We desire to face this uncertainty, rawness, and creative chaos by engaging in collective thinking without constant and continuous purification and “cleaning” efforts. The future of qualitative inquiry is not one but multiple; thus, there cannot be one “vision” but all visions; visions on top of other visions, visions continuing other visions, visions contradicting others, visions lacking and desiring something that cannot be described, understood, or had.

Within the rough ground that is the field of education there is a complex web of ethical obligations: to prepare our students for their future work; to be ethical as educators in our conduct and teaching; to the ethical principles embedded in the contexts in which we work; and given the Southern context of this work, the ethical obligations we have to this land and its First Peoples. We put out a call to colleagues whose work has been concerned with the pedagogies of professional ethics, the ethical burdens of institutional injustice, and the application of ethical theory to education’s applied fields. In the responses we received it can be seen that ethical concerns in education are broad ranging, covering terrain varying from the preparation of preservice teachers, ethics in higher education, early childhood and care, educational leadership, relational and communicative ethics. Perhaps it could also be argued that this paper demonstrates Gibbon’s observation that ‘Assumptions about the particularity of this time as new and ripe with opportunity to make a difference through philosophy of education are not new and there’s much to learn from the persistence of wanting to imagine that they are’ (in Peters et al., 2020 Peters, M. A. , Arndt, S. , Tesar, M. , Jackson, L. , Hung, R. , Mika, C. , Ozolins, J. T. , Teschers, C. , Orchard, J. , Buchanan, R. , Madjar, A. , Novak, R. , Besley, T. , Sturm, S. , Roberts, P. , & Gibbons, A (2020). Philosophy of education in a new key. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2020.1759194 [Google Scholar] , p. 17). However, while the field of ethics is perennially concerned with human relations and pedagogical interventions to improve these, the responses collected here show that educational ethics is far from static. Educational ethics is a field that continues to develop in response to changing contexts.

This article is concerned with developing a philosophical approach to a number of significant changes to academic publishing, and specifically the global journal knowledge system wrought by a range of new digital technologies that herald the third age of the journal as an electronic, interactive and mixed-media form of scientific communication. The paper emerges from an Editors' Collective, a small New Zealand-based organisation comprised of editors and reviewers of academic journals mostly in the fields of education and philosophy. The paper is the result of a collective writing process.