Thinking refers to exploring, analy Zlng inte. and lnterpretations. It Involves info'. rpreting and explaining events, story llnes s Jtuation. Partners Interpret, explar::~8~ ~econ5ttuctins ~nd or confrontfng the success (nwhatmade ltwork")ord fi 1 " lyze the situation In terms of areas of here?· Why are thihgs·as the' 8., e Whc encles, lssu~and optfons: What Is happening re, at Is missing? 1-iow dad Do we need to challenge certal t ke f, we come to be llke this? evident In our"thfnklng/ practic. e~,:., 7;.,~r-gt ranted assumptions/ realilies that are ? Th e. a can we do to address the sltuatton and move on. e nurse as facllltator encourag~s ell n / ~ e,-partners Rarticlpantstoengage In discussion and dialogue to de,velop mutu--11y a~ pt bl d...,.. ce a e accounts escrtbtng their experlence J,. Participants learn from each othe t th h..,, a e same nme, e. ac person has an opportu_nrty to t>e heard. Facilitators and parttclpants share perspectives ' to create meanings through convers.,,-r th ....... ons.,Qge er they compare and contrast their various l,~terp1"£ltati01:"1s. Stories and analysis occur conturreritly ; wh1ch help id_entl~~ ~merg1. ng ·under. standing from early data to gulde "the ~bsequent group , d1seuss1_'. 'ns. Ongoing feedback support validation ofth8'data. generatfon process. The, rnam:them. es or construetfons fr-0mthe prevrous group session. or meeting are rtesented and,co"fll'me~ at each gathering or conver-sation. ' Acti Rg atte_n,pts, to ·addres,s the Issue ·or elrmlnate ttie problem. The participants questi0n wnat is importan t in their lfves, consider the options that ar~·availabla to , · th1rm, 1sarcry:thern o. ~_tan_djotn!lydet-erm;{ne the-worth, eff~ctlvent:. ss, appr Qpnaten~s , ard outc0me softne-;ict1~1'\S1a~en... l:\cfing rnv. olves reconstructing (e. g., "How might ,;, Wf# do things differently?':), and evaluating (e. g,, "Hpw wlll we know ~if thlngs have cn~ng~d7".,). ·wheh workil)g. Wlth multiple,groups of people focused on the same , top re, it: is imp0rtant tq',retain. both Ifie dlst1nct111e,f~<lt Ures orthetnes of each group while detei:mining recurring constructs or themes across,groµps, " ( Throughaut the took-think-act. cy-cle anq wlthi A the context of sharing multj"~le. , p. erspettives, tti. e 11urse0fitcillta\or can help :1:. Jient Yesommunity-partners address qu'est!cios oriss,ues rel/ited with posslbl~sourees,ohhepfoblern ·or gaps rn solutions ') where,. f:t>'r. example,epidemiolo-gicaf, medfca J and othel' ac:ad~J111c-pased models are need,~d to·answe:r-guestions like "Why dkl 1t happen?'' or "Why did it-net work?". 'i. '. Koch an"d. Kralik (2006; p. 30).. explain that in practice, the conceptual differences be~ween · the 'look, think anq act' elern~rits begin to dissolve and merge. The ' particfpants engage in-many, cycles of reflection on action, leam1ng about actl. on conslderlhg p 1os~Jbilltli!s i!l'ld'. the A dmlo P,ing new Informed action which in t~rn becomes· ther-toplc ·or theme of further r~ection (Wadsworth, 1998). During ,dlal. ogues; p~pie l(l~rn1new ways o. fs. e'elng,or th1nklng In the ltghtof. tt;ei~ experience, feading,to hew abtio Qsi'With p Mctlc. e, these beoam. e,the focus~f dlscus;;lon, further rerecti6n,and gt,<>UR se,lf underst. ndlng, €henge as a,re. sult·Of the 'action' ~art · ofn!the_e'xpe~leric~ does not·1:15ually happen at ~tt:ie end ofa partfdpatory action, 'lnq ulrry. ' lt,h"a·~_pe(ls,througho"1t (W~dswotth 1 1998). Duol'lg the l)B~cipatory ac:tipn p'roc~ss, lt,oft;~n 1,app\an"S'that the focus of what 11eeds to change will shfft over time as partners a!ter,thefr;i,mcferc Star:fdlrig of What·ts rea Uy lmpc0rtent to them. ,. ,..,,I ',.,,:.,... .. 113 