Preliminary Area of Focus. [WLO: 3][CLO: 1, 5]

Sunshine2016

1understandingresearchbook.docx

Home >Education homework help >Preliminary Area of Focus. [WLO: 3][CLO: 1, 5]

1 Understanding Action Research

After reading this chapter you should be able to:

1. 1.1 Describe the goal of educational research and the different approaches researchers use.

2. 1.2 Define action research.

3. 1.3 Describe the origins of action research.

4. 1.4 Identify the similarities and differences between critical and practical theories of action research.

5. 1.5 Describe the goals of and rationale for action research.

6. 1.6 Describe the justifications for action research and steps you can take to make it part of your daily teaching practice.

7. 1.7 Describe the four steps of the action research process.

This chapter introduces action research by providing an example of an action research project from a real teacher researcher, anexploration of the historical and theoretical foundations of action research, a discussion of the goals and justification for action research,and an explanation of the action research process.

What Motivates Unmotivated Students?

Deborah South

Deborah South, a teacher in a rural Oregon high school, was a participant in an action research class. She shares the challengesshe faced when, owing to a last-minute teaching assignment, she found herself working with a group of “unmotivated” students.Deborah’s story illustrates the wide variety of factors that can influence students’ learning and a teacher’s willingness to criticallyexamine her teaching methods and how they affected the children in her classroom. Although Deborah’s interpretation of theresults of her study did not validate her practice, it did provide data that Deborah and the school’s principal could use to makechanges to the existing curriculum for unmotivated students.

Teaching students who are unmotivated and apathetic can be a difficult challenge for any teacher to overcome. These students typicallycan be disruptive and negative and often require an extraordinary amount of teacher time to manage their behavior. My concern withteaching unmotivated students has existed almost since I began teaching 5 years ago. As an educator, one tries all kinds of possiblestrategies to encourage students to be successful. However, these strategies do not work with unmotivated students who are apathetic andexhibit unacceptable behavior. Eventually the patience runs out and, as ashamed as I am to admit it, I stop trying to find ways to reach theseparticular students. It soon becomes enough that they stay in their seats, be quiet, and do not disturb anyone.

However, last term my attitude was forced to change. I was given a study skills group of 20 of the lowest achieving eighth graders in theschool. This new class consisted of 16 boys and 4 girls. My task was to somehow take these students and miraculously make themmotivated, achieving students. I was trained in a study skills program before the term started and I thought that I was prepared: I had thestudents, I had the curriculum, and I had the help of an outstanding aide.

Within a week, I sensed we were in trouble. My 20 students often showed up with no supplies. Their behavior was atrocious. They calledeach other names, threw various items around the room, and walked around the classroom when they felt like it. Their attitudes toward mewere negative. I became concerned about teaching these students. In part, I felt bad that they were so disillusioned with school and theirfuture; I also felt bad because the thought of teaching in this environment every day for another 14 weeks made me wish summer vacationwere here.

Given this situation, I decided to do some reading about how other teachers motivate unmotivated students and to formulate some ideasabout the variables that contribute to a student’s success in school. Variables I investigated included adult approval, peer influence, andsuccess in such subjects as math, science, language arts, and social studies, as well as self-esteem and students’ views of their academicabilities.

I collected the majority of the data through surveys, interviews, and report card/attendance records in an effort to answer the followingquestions:

· How does attendance affect student performance?

· How are students influenced by their friends in completing schoolwork?

· How do adults (parents, teachers) affect the success of students?

· What levels of self-esteem do these students have?

As a result of this investigation, I learned many things. For example, for this group of students attendance does not appear to be a factor—with the exception of one student, school attendance was regular. Not surprisingly, peer groups did affect student performance. Seventy-three percent of my students reported that their friends never encouraged doing homework or putting any effort into homework.

Another surprising result was the lack of impact of a teacher’s approval on student achievement. Ninety-four percent of my studentsindicated that they never or seldom do their homework to receive teacher approval. Alternatively, 57 percent indicated that they often oralways do their homework so that their families will be proud of them.

One of the most interesting findings of this study was the realization that most of my students misbehave out of frustration at their own lackof abilities. They are being obnoxious not to gain attention, but to divert attention from the fact that they do not know how to complete theassigned work.

When I looked at report cards and compared grades over three quarters, I noticed a trend. Between the first and second quarters, studentperformance had increased. That is, most students were doing better than they had during the first quarter. Between the second and thirdquarters, however, grades dropped dramatically. I tried to determine why that drop occurred, and the only experience these 20 studentsshared was that they had been moved into my class at the beginning of the third quarter.

When I presented my project to the action research class during our end-of-term “celebration,” I was convinced that the “cause” of thestudents’ unmotivated behavior was my teaching. I had concluded through my data analysis and interpretation that the one experiencethese 20 children had in common was participation in my study skills class. This conclusion, however, was not readily accepted by my criticalfriends and colleagues in the action research class, who urged me to consider other interpretations of the data. For example, perhaps thecritical mass of negativity present in one classroom provided the children with a catalyst to act out against the teacher. After all, this was theonly class shared exclusively by these 20 students. Afterward, I shared the findings of my study with my school principal. As a result, shedecided not to group these students together homogeneously for a study skills class the following year.

As you can see, action research is a “wonderfully uncomfortable” (Lytle, 1997) place to be—once we start our journey of investigation, wehave no way of knowing in advance where we will end up. Action research, like any other problem-solving process, is an ongoing creativeactivity that exposes us to surprises along the way. What appears to matter in the planning stages of an action research investigation mayprovide us with only a hint, a scratching of the surface, of what is really the focus for our investigations. How we deal with the uncertaintyof the journey positions us as learners of our own craft, an attitude that is critical to our success. This text attempts to foster an openness inthe spirit of inquiry guided by action research.

1.1 A Brief Overview of Educational Research

When you hear the phrase scientific research, you probably think of a scientist in a white lab coat (usually a balding, middle-age man with apocket full of pens!) mixing chemicals or doing experiments involving white mice. Traditional scientists, like the one pictured in this rathertrite image, proceed with their research under the assumption that “all behaviors and events are orderly” and that all events “havediscoverable causes” (Mills & Gay, 2016, p. 5). This traditional belief that natural phenomena can be explained in an orderly way usingempirical sciences is sometimes called positivism.

Human beings, however, are very complicated organisms, and compared with chemicals—and mice, for that matter—their behavior can bedisorderly and fairly unpredictable. This presents a challenge to educational researchers, who are concerned with gaining insight intohuman behavior in educational environments such as schools and classrooms.

The goal of traditional educational research is “to explain, predict, and/or control educational phenomena” (Mills & Gay, 2016, p. 5). To dothis, researchers try to manipulate and control certain variables (the factors that might affect the outcomes of a particular study) to test a hypothesis (a statement the researcher makes that predicts what will happen or explains what the outcome of the study will be).Educational researchers focus on the manipulation of an independent variable and its impact on the dependent variable. Anindependent variable is a behavior or characteristic under the control of the researcher and believed to influence some other behavior orcharacteristic. A dependent variable is the change or difference in a behavior or characteristic that occurs as a result of the independentvariable. The word control is not used here in a negative sense; rather, it describes one of the characteristics of traditional, quantitativelyoriented research, in which the researcher must control the environment to be able to draw cause-effect relationship conclusions. Thiscannot occur unless the researcher is able to control the variables in the study that might affect a causal relationship.

For example, researchers might be interested in studying the effects of a certain phonics program (the independent variable) on the rate atwhich children learn to read (the dependent variable). The researchers may hypothesize that using this phonics program will shorten thetime it takes for students to learn to read. To confirm or reject this hypothesis, they might study the reading progress of one group ofchildren who were taught using the phonics program (the experimental group) and compare it with the reading progress of anothergroup of children (the control group) who were taught reading without the phonics program. Children would be randomly assigned toeither the experimental or the control group as a way to reduce the differences that might exist in naturally occurring groups. At the end ofthe experiment, the researchers would compare the progress of each group and decide whether the hypothesis could be accepted orrejected with a predetermined level of statistical significance (e.g., that the difference between the mean for the control group and themean for the experimental group is large, compared with the standard error). Finally, the researchers would present the findings of thestudy at a conference and perhaps publish the results.

This process may sound very straightforward. In classroom and school settings, however, controlling all the factors that affect the outcomesof our teaching without disrupting the natural classroom environment can be difficult. For example, how do we know that the phonicsprogram is the only variable affecting the rate at which students learn to read? Perhaps some students are read to at home by theirparents; perhaps one teacher is more effective than another; perhaps one group of students gets to read more exciting books than theother; perhaps one group of children has difficulty concentrating on their reading because they all skipped breakfast!

Action researchers acknowledge and embrace these complications as a natural part of classroom life and typically use research approachesthat do not require them to randomly assign students in their classes to control and experimental groups. Teacher researchers studyingtheir own practices also differ from traditional educational researchers (studying something other than their own practices) because theyare committed to taking action and effecting positive educational change in their own classrooms and schools based on their findings.Traditional educational researchers may not be able to impact the subjects of their studies because they are outside of their locus ofcontrol. That is, traditional educational researchers can share the conclusions of their studies, but it is up to the subjects to determinewhether they will take action on the findings. Another difference is that whereas educational research has historically been done byuniversity professors, scholars, and graduate students on children, teachers, and principals, action researchers are often the schoolteachersand principals who were formerly the subjects of educational research. As such, they participate in their own inquiries, acting as bothteacher and researcher at the same time. We should note, however, that traditional educational researchers can also collaborate withteacher researchers in collaborative action research efforts. As Hendricks (2017) states, “The goal of this type of research is to utilize theexpertise of the collaborators and to foster sustained dialogue among educational stakeholders in different settings” (p. 7).

Research is also categorized by the methods the researchers use. Simply put, different research problems require different researchdesigns. These designs to educational research are often classified as either quantitative or qualitative research. Quantitative research isthe collection and analysis of numerical data to describe, explain, predict, or control phenomena of interest. However, a quantitativeresearch approach entails more than just the use of numerical data. At the outset of a study, quantitative researchers state the hypothesesto be examined and specify the research procedures that will be used to carry out the study. They also maintain control over contextualfactors that may interfere with the data collection and identify a sample of participants large enough to provide statistically meaningful data.Many quantitative researchers have little personal interaction with the participants they study because they frequently collect data usingpaper-and-pencil, noninteractive instruments. Underlying quantitative research methods is the philosophical belief or assumption that weinhabit a relatively stable, uniform, and coherent world that we can measure, understand, and generalize about. This view, adopted from thenatural sciences, implies that the world and the laws that govern it are somewhat predictable and can be understood by scientific researchand examination. In this quantitative perspective, claims about the world are not considered meaningful unless they can be verified throughdirect observation. By comparison, qualitative research uses narrative, descriptive approaches to data collection to understand the waythings are and what the research means from the perspectives of the participants in the study. Qualitative approaches might include, forexample, conducting face-to-face interviews, making observations, and video recording interactions.

Table 1–1 provides an overview of quantitative and qualitative research characteristics. Despite the differences between quantitative andqualitative research, you should not consider them to be oppositional. Taken together, they represent the full range of educational researchmethods.

table 1–1 Overview of Qualitative and Quantitative Research Characteristics

	Quantitative Research	Qualitative Research
Type of datacollected	Numerical data	Nonnumerical narrative and visual data
Researchproblem	Hypothesis and research procedures statedbefore beginning the study	Research problems and methods evolve as understanding oftopic deepens
Manipulationof context	Yes	No
Sample size	Larger	Smaller
Researchprocedures	Relies on statistical procedures	Relies on categorizing and organizing data into patterns toproduce a descriptive, narrative synthesis
Participantinteraction	Little interaction	Extensive interaction
Underlyingbelief	We live in a stable and predictable worldthat we can measure, understand, andgeneralize about.	Meaning is situated in a particular perspective or context thatis different for people and groups; therefore, the world hasmany meanings.

Source: Gay, Lorraine R., Mills, Geoffrey E.; Airasian, Peter W., Educational Research: Competencies for analysis and applications,loose-leaf version, 10th Ed., © 2012. Reprinted and electronically reproduced by permission of Pearson Education, Inc., NewYork, NY.

Although quantitative and qualitative research designs need not be considered mutually exclusive, a study might incorporate bothquantitative and qualitative techniques. Studies that combine the collection of quantitative and qualitative data in a single study are called mixed-methods research designs. Mixed-methods research designs combine quantitative and qualitative approaches by including bothquantitative and qualitative data in a single study. The purpose of mixed-methods research is to build on the synergy and strength that existbetween quantitative and qualitative research methods to understand a phenomenon more fully than is possible using either method alone.Although this approach to research may appear obvious (i.e., of course we want a complete understanding of any phenomenon worthy ofinvestigation), it requires a thorough understanding of both quantitative and qualitative research. Table 1–2 provides a summary of the keycharacteristics of mixed-methods research and an example of how it might be applied to an action research study.

table 1–2 Mixed-Methods Research Summary

Definition	Mixed-methods research combines quantitative and qualitative approaches by including both quantitative andqualitative data in a single study. The purpose of mixed-methods research is to build on the synergy andstrength that exist between quantitative and qualitative research methods to understand a phenomenonmore fully than is possible using either quantitative or qualitative methods alone.
Design(s)	There are three common, basic types of mixed-methods research design: · Explanatory sequential (also known as the QUAN–>qual) design · Exploratory sequential (also known as the QUAL–>quan) design · Convergent parallel (also known as the QUAN+QUAL) design The method in uppercase letters is weighted more heavily than that in lowercase, and when both methodsare in uppercase, they are in balance. Three advanced types of mixed-methods research designs are also frequently used: · Experimental design · Social justice design · Multistage evaluation design
Types ofappropriateresearchquestions	Questions that involve quantitative and qualitative approaches in order to better understand thephenomenon under investigation.
Keycharacteristics	The differences among the basic designs are related to the priority given to the following areas: · The weight given to the type of data collected (i.e., qualitative and quantitative data are of equal weight, orone type of data has greater weight than the other) · The sequence of data collection (i.e., both types of data are collected during the same time period, or onetype of data is collected in each sequential phase of the project) · The analysis techniques (i.e., either an analysis that combines the data or one that keeps the two types ofdata separate)
Steps in theprocess	1. Identify the purpose of the research. 2. State research questions that require both quantitative and qualitative data collection strategies. 3. Determine the priority to be given to the type of data collected. 4. Determine the sequence of data collection (and hence the appropriate mixed-methods design). 5. Data collection. 6. Conduct data analysis that combines both kinds of data. 7. Write a report that is balanced in terms of qualitative and quantitative approaches.
Potentialchallenges	· Few researchers possess all the knowledge and skills to master the full range of research techniquesencompassed in quantitative and qualitative research approaches. · Researchers who undertake a mixed-methods study must have the considerable time and resourcesneeded to implement such a comprehensive approach to research. · Analyzing quantitative and qualitative data sources concurrently or in sequence and attempting to findpoints of intersection as well as discrepancies requires a high level of skill.
Example	Nguyen (2007) investigated the factors that support Black male students’ achievement in the MadisonMetropolitan School District (MMSD). Nguyen’s study used MMSD databases for information about thesuccess rates of high school Black males and discovered interesting patterns about minority studentachievement. Based on these quantitative patterns, Nguyen followed up with interviews of a sample of youngBlack men whose standardized test scores indicated potential for academic success. Nguyen’s mixed-methods action research resulted in the identification of strategies teachers can use to be more intentional intheir efforts to connect with their Black male students.

Source: Mills, Geoffrey E.; Gay, Lorraine R., Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications, Loose-Leaf Version,11th Ed., © 2016. Reprinted and electronically reproduced by permission of Pearson Education, Inc., New York, NY.

Quantitative research designs also include; survey research, correlational research, causal-comparative research, experimental research,and single-subject experimental research (Mills & Gay, 2016). In the field of special education, it is common for action researchers to utilizea single-subject experimental research design. Single-subject experimental research designs (also referred to as single-case experimentaldesigns) are designs that can be applied when the sample size is one or when a number of individuals are considered as one group. Thesedesigns are typically used to study the behavior change an individual exhibits as a result of some treatment. In single-subject designs, eachparticipant serves as his or her own control. In general, the participant is exposed to a nontreatment and a treatment phase, andperformance is measured during each phase. The nontreatment phase is symbolized as A, and the treatment phase is symbolized as B. Forexample, if we (1) observed and recorded a student’s out-of-seat behavior on five occasions, (2) applied a behavior modification procedureand observed behavior on five more occasions, and (3) stopped the behavior modification procedure and observed behavior five moretimes, our design would be symbolized as A-B-A. Although single-subject designs have their roots in clinical psychology and psychiatry, theyare useful in many educational settings, particularly those involving studies of students with disabilities. Table 1–3 provides a summary ofthe key characteristics of single-subject experimental research designs and an example of how it might be applied to an action researchstudy.

table 1–3 Single-Subject Experimental Research Summary

Definition	Single-subject experimental research designs are designs that can be applied when the sample size is one orwhen a number of individuals are considered as one group.
Design(s)	Single-subject designs are classified into three major categories: A-B-A withdrawal, multiple-baseline, andalternating treatment designs.
Types ofappropriateresearchquestions	These designs are typically used to study the behavior change an individual exhibits as a result of sometreatment. Although single-subject designs have their roots in clinical psychology and psychiatry, they areuseful in many educational settings, particularly those involving studies of students with disabilities.
Keycharacteristics	· Study includes a sample size of one, or the study considers a number of individuals as one group. · In single-subject designs, each participant serves as his or her own control. · In general, the participant is exposed to a nontreatment and treatment phase, and performance ismeasured during each phase. · Single-subject designs are applied most frequently in clinical settings where the primary emphasis is ontherapeutic impact, not contribution to a research base.
Steps in theprocess	1. Select and define a problem. 2. Select participants and measuring instruments. 3. Prepare a research plan, including selection of the appropriate single-subject research design (A-B-Awithdrawal, multiple-baseline, and alternating treatment). 4. Execute procedures. 5. Analyze the data. 6. Formulate conclusions.
Potentialchallenges	A major criticism of single-subject research studies is that they suffer from low external validity; in otherwords, results cannot be generalized to a population of interest.
Example	What is the impact of a functional mobility curriculum on five elementary-age students with severe, multipledisabilities?

It is important to note that the area of focus or research question identified by the action researcher will determine the most appropriateresearch design (quantitative and/or qualitative) to use. While most published action research studies use narrative, descriptive methods,some studies are more quantitatively oriented and use survey and quasi-experimental research designs, mixed-methods research designs,and single-subject experimental research designs. Therefore, while this text emphasizes the use of qualitative research designs, datacollection, and data analysis, it also includes quantitative research designs, data collection, and analysis (using descriptive statistics).

1.2 Defining Action Research

Over the past decade, the typical “required” research course in many schools, colleges, and departments of teacher education has changed from a traditional survey class on research methods to a more practical research course that either focuses on or includes the topic of action research. But what is action research, and why has it captured the attention of teachers, administrators, and policymakers?

Action research is any systematic inquiry conducted by teacher researchers, principals, school counselors, or other stakeholders in the teaching/learning environment to gather information about how their particular schools operate, how they teach, and how well their students learn. This information is gathered with the goals of gaining insight, developing reflective practice, effecting positive changes in the school environment (and educational practices in general), and improving student outcomes and the lives of those involved.

Action research is research done by teachers for themselves; it is not imposed on them by someone else. Action research engages teachers in a four-step process:

Identify an area of focus.

Collect data.

Analyze and interpret data.

Develop an action plan.

KEY CONCEPTS BOX 1–1: A Summary of Action Research

What? Action research.

Who? Conducted by teachers and principals on children in their care.

Where? In schools and classrooms.

How? Using a variety of research designs to match the study’s area of focus, including qualitative methods to describe what is happening and to understand the effects of some educational intervention, quantitative methods to test hypotheses that rely on numerical analyses, and mixed-methods designs that combine quantitative and qualitative approaches to data collection in a single study.

Why? To take action and effect positive educational change in the specific school environment that was studied.

Before we elaborate on these four steps, however, we will explore the historical antecedents of action research and the theoretical foundations of current action research practices. As you read these descriptions, consider which philosophy best fits your beliefs about action research, teaching, and learning. Then consider how you might incorporate action research into your professional life. Key Concepts Box 1–1 provides a summary of action research.

1.3 Origins of Action Research

The history of action research has been well documented and debated (cf. Adelman, 1993; Gunz, 1996; Kemmis, 1988; Noffke, 1994). KurtLewin (1890–1947) is often credited with coining the term action research around 1934. After a series of practical experiences in the early1940s, he came to view action research as a process that “gives credence to the development of powers of reflective thought, discussion,decision and action by ordinary people participating in collective research on ‘private troubles’ that they have in common” (Adelman, 1993,p. 8).

The many “descendants” of early action researchers follow different schools of action research thought, including the American actionresearch group, with its roots in the progressive education movement, particularly in the work of John Dewey (Noffke, 1994); the efforts inthe United Kingdom toward curriculum reform and greater professionalism in teaching (Elliott, 1991); and Australian efforts located withina broad-ranging movement toward collaborative curriculum planning (Kemmis, 1988).

As is evident, the geographical locations and sociopolitical contexts in which action research efforts continue to evolve vary greatly. Theprimary focus of all these efforts, however, regardless of the context, is on enhancing the lives of students. As Noffke (1994) reminds us,reading the accounts of action research written by people housed in universities does little to illuminate the classroom experiences ofteachers and what they hope to gain from participating in action research activities. Therefore, this text focuses on teachers examiningissues related to the education of children and on partnering with teachers, administrators, counselors, and parents in the action researchprocess.

1.4 Theoretical Foundations of Action Research

The theoretical perspectives and philosophies that inform the practices of today’s teacher researchers are as varied as the historical roots for action research. The following sections briefly review the two main theories of action research: critical (or theory based) and practical.

Critical Action Research

Critical action research is also known as emancipatory action research because of its goal of liberation through knowledge gathering. Critical action research derives its name from the body of critical theory on which it is based, not because this type of action research is critical, as in “faultfinding” or “important,” although it may certainly be both! The rationale for critical action research is provided by critical theory in the social sciences and humanities and by theories of postmodernism.

Critical theory in action research shares several fundamental purposes with critical theory in the social sciences and humanities (Kemmis, 1988). These similar interests or “commonalities of intent” include the following:

A shared interest in processes for enlightenment.

A shared interest in liberating individuals from the dictates of tradition, habit, and bureaucracy.

A commitment to participatory democratic processes for reform.

In addition to its roots in the critical theory of the social sciences and humanities, critical action research also draws heavily from a body of theory called postmodernism, which challenges the notions of truth and objectivity on which the traditional scientific method relies. Instead of claiming the incontrovertibility of fact, postmodernists argue that truth is relative, conditional, and situational and that knowledge is always an outgrowth of previous experience. For example, historically there has been little or no connection between research and practice in education—an apparent failure of research to affect teaching. This is not news for teachers! Research has been viewed as something done on them, not for them. According to Kennedy (1997), the lack of influence of research on practice has been attributed to the following qualities of educational research:

It is not persuasive and has lacked the qualities of being compelling to teachers.

It has not been relevant to teachers’ daily practices—it has lacked practicality.

It has not been expressed in ways that are accessible to teachers.

The postmodern perspective addresses many of these concerns by advocating for research that challenges the taken-for-granted assumptions of daily classroom life and presenting truths that are relative, conditional, situational, and based on previous experience. So, although research may provide insights into promising practices (from research conducted in other teachers’ classrooms and schools), action research conducted in one’s own classroom/school is more likely to be persuasive and relevant and to offer findings expressed in ways that are meaningful for teachers themselves.

Postmodern theory dissects and examines the mechanisms of knowledge production and questions many of the basic assumptions on which modern life is based. Thus, it inspires us “to examine the ordinary, everyday, taken-for-granted ways in which we organize and carry out our private, social, and professional activities” (Stringer, 1996, p. 156). Action research gives us a means by which we can undertake this examination and represent the classroom teachers’ experiences that are contextually and politically constructed.

The values of critical action research dictate that all educational research should be socially responsive and exhibit other important characteristics:

Democratic—Enabling participation of people.

Participatory—Building a community of learners.

Empowering—Providing freedom from oppressive, debilitating conditions.

Life enhancing—Enabling the expression of people’s full human potential. (Stringer, 2004, p. 31)

Although this critical theory-based approach has been criticized by some for lack of practical feasibility (Hammersley, 1993), it is nonetheless important to consider because it provides a helpful heuristic, or problem-solving, approach, for teachers committed to investigate through action research the taken-for-granted relationships and practices in their professional lives. Key Concepts Box 1–2 summarizes the most important components of a critical perspective of action research.

KEY CONCEPTS BOX 1–2: Components of a Critical Perspective of Action Research

Key Concept Example

Action research is participatory and democratic. You have identified an area in your teaching that you believe can be improved (based on data from your students). You decide to investigate the impact of your intervention and to monitor whether it makes a difference.

Action research is socially responsive and takes place in context. You are concerned that minority children (e.g., ESL [English as a Second Language] students) in your classroom are not being presented with curriculum and teaching strategies that are culturally sensitive. You decide to learn more about how best to teach ESL children and to implement some of these strategies.

Action research helps teacher researchers examine the everyday, taken-for-granted ways in which they carry out professional practice. You have adopted a new mathematics problem-solving curriculum and decide to monitor its impact on student performance on open-ended problem-solving questions and students’ attitudes toward mathematics in general.

Knowledge gained through action research can liberate students, teachers, and administrators and enhance learning, teaching, and policy making. Your school has a high incidence of student absenteeism in spite of a newly adopted district-wide policy on absenteeism. You investigate the perceptions of colleagues, children, and parents toward absenteeism to more fully understand why the existing policy is not having the desired outcome. Based on what you learn, you implement a new policy and systematically monitor its impact on absenteeism levels and students’ attitudes toward school.

Practical Action Research

Practical action research places more emphasis on the “how-to” approach to the processes of action research and has a less “philosophical” bent. It assumes, to some degree, that individual teachers or teams of teachers are autonomous and can determine the nature of the investigation to be undertaken. It also assumes that teacher researchers are committed to continued professional development and school improvement and that teacher researchers want to systematically reflect on their practices. Finally, the practical action research perspective assumes that as decision makers, teacher researchers will choose their own areas of focus, determine their data collection techniques, analyze and interpret their data, and develop action plans based on their findings. These beliefs are summarized in Key Concepts Box 1–3.

Voices from the Field

Critical Action Research

In this video, we see a teacher researcher embrace many of the principles that underlie critical action research. For example, the teacher researcher is willing to challenge the taken-for-granted assumptions about the implementation of technology in her classroom and acknowledges that knowledge about the “best effective strategies” will be developed through her own action research focused on student growth. In this way, the teacher researcher is living a commitment to a participatory research process that provides “liberation” through knowledge creation that is relative, conditional, situational, and an outgrowth of previous experience in her classroom.

KEY CONCEPTS BOX 1–3: Components of a Practical Perspective of Action Research

Key Concept Example

Teacher researchers have decision-making authority. Your school has adopted a school-based decision-making approach that provides teachers with the authority to make decisions that most directly impact teaching and learning. Given this decision-making authority, you decide as part of your continued professional development to investigate the effectiveness of a newly adopted science curriculum on students’ process skills and attitudes.

Teacher researchers are committed to continued professional development and school improvement. Based on the results of statewide assessment tests and classroom observations, the teachers and principal at your school determine that reading comprehension skills are weak. Collaboratively, the staff determines the focus for a school improvement effort and identifies the necessary professional development that will be offered to change the ways teachers teach reading.

Teacher researchers want to reflect on their practices. You are a successful classroom teacher who regularly reflects on your daily teaching and what areas could be improved. You believe that part of being a professional teacher is the willingness to continually examine your teaching effectiveness.

Teacher researchers will use a systematic approach for reflecting on their practice. Given a schoolwide reading comprehension focus, you have decided to monitor the effectiveness of a new reading curriculum and teaching strategies by video recording a reading lesson (once per month), administering reading comprehension “probes” (once per week), interviewing children in your classroom (once per term), and administering statewide assessment tests (at the end of the school year).

Teacher researchers will choose an area of focus, determine data collection techniques, analyze and interpret data, and develop action plans. To continue the example presented earlier, you have focused on the effectiveness of a new reading curriculum and teaching strategies. You have decided to collect data using video recordings of lessons, regular “probes,” interviews, and statewide assessment tests. During the year, you try to interpret the data you are collecting and decide what these data suggest about the effectiveness of the new curriculum and teaching strategies. When all of the data have been collected and analyzed, you decide what action needs to be taken to refine, improve, or maintain the reading comprehension curriculum and teaching strategies.

1.5 Goals and Rationale for Action Research

Although the critical and practical theories of action research draw on vastly different worldviews, these two distinctly differentphilosophies are united by common goals that go a long way toward bridging whatever philosophical, historical, social, and regionalvariations exist.

Action research carried out according to both philosophies creates opportunities for all involved to improve the lives of children and tolearn about the craft of teaching. All action researchers, regardless of their particular school of thought or theoretical position, arecommitted to a critical examination of classroom teaching principles and the effects that teachers’ actions have on the children in their care.The reality of classroom life is that teachers are constantly confronted with practical and critical challenges, and it is up to the individualaction researcher to seek out approaches that provide both practical solutions and empowerment to address the critical social and culturalissues of classrooms today.

By now it should be evident that educational change that enhances the lives of children is a main goal of action research. But action researchcan also enhance the lives of professionals.

Osterman and Kottkamp (1993) provide a wonderful rationale for action research as a professional growth opportunity in their “credo forreflective practice”:

1. Everyone needs professional growth opportunities.

2. All professionals want to improve.

3. All professionals can learn.

4. All professionals are capable of assuming responsibility for their own professional growth and development.

5. People need and want information about their own performance.

6. Collaboration enriches professional development. (p. 46)

Action research is largely about developing the professional disposition of teachers, that is, encouraging teachers to be continuous learners—in their classrooms and in their practice. Although action research is not a universal panacea for the intractability of educational reform,it is an important component of the professional disposition of teachers because it provides teachers with the opportunity to model fortheir students how knowledge is created.

Action research is also about incorporating into the daily teaching routine a reflective stance—the willingness to critically examine one’steaching in order to improve or enhance it. It is about a commitment to the principle that as a teacher one is always far from the ideal but isstriving toward it anyway—it’s the very nature of education! Action research significantly contributes to the professional stance thatteachers adopt because it encourages them to examine the dynamics of their classrooms, ponder the actions and interactions of students, validate and challenge existing practices, and take risks in the process. When teachers gain new understandings about both their own andtheir students’ behaviors through action research, they are empowered to improve teaching in several ways:

· Make informed decisions about what to change and what not to change.

· Link prior knowledge to new information.

· Learn from experience (even failures).

· Ask questions and systematically find answers. (Fueyo & Koorland, 1997)

The goal of teachers and principals to be professional problem solvers committed to improving both their own practice and studentoutcomes provides a powerful reason to practice action research.

1.6 Justifying Action Research: The Impact of Action Research on Practice

At the beginning of a course on action research, I often ask teachers to reflect on what they do in their schools and classrooms; that is, whatare the assumptions they take for granted in their schools and what are the origins of those practices? Often the responses include thefollowing:

· In elementary grades, it is important to do the “skill” subjects in the morning and the “social” subjects in the afternoon because that iswhen young children can concentrate better and learn more.

· The best way to do whole-group instruction with young children (grades K–3) is to have them sit on the “mat” in a circle. That way, theyare close to the teacher and pay more attention to what is being said.

· In high schools, the optimal time for a learning period is 43 minutes. Anything longer than that, and the students get restless and loseconcentration. Therefore, I think that the proposal for “block scheduling” is just an attempt to make us more like elementary schoolteachers.

· If you simply share scoring guides with children, they will automatically do better on the test. There’s no need to change instructionalapproaches.

· In a science laboratory, if children spend less time collecting data, they will develop a deeper understanding of the science conceptsbeing taught.

Although these are real examples of just a few of the naïve theories about teaching and learning that I have heard, they also indicate the gapthat has existed between research and practice in the field of education. To what extent has teaching practice been informed by research? Isteaching informed by folklore? Do teachers acquire the culture of teaching through years of participation and observation, first as studentsand then as neophyte teachers? How did teachers get to be the way they are? Are some of the derogatory Hollywood portrayals of teachersand teaching (as characterized, e.g., in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off or Mr. Holland’s Opus) really warranted? What is it about research that makesteachers, in general, snicker at the thought that it can in some way improve practice? What is the potential for this discussion to put actioninto action research efforts?

According to Kennedy (1997), studies of the connection between research and practice and the apparent failure of research to affectteaching has provided the following insights:

· Teachers do not find research persuasive or authoritative.

· Research has not been relevant to practice and has not addressed teachers’ questions.

· Research findings have not been expressed in ways that are comprehensible to teachers.

· The education system itself is unable to change, or, conversely, it is inherently unstable and susceptible to fads.

Many teacher researchers may consider Kennedy’s hypotheses to be statements of the obvious; however, these statements provide yetanother rationale for why many teachers have chosen to be reflective practitioners: to address the intractability of the educational system.These hypotheses also speak to the desire to put action into ongoing action research efforts.

Action Research Is Persuasive and Authoritative

Research done by teachers for teachers involves collection of persuasive data. These data are persuasive because teachers are invested inthe legitimacy of the data collection; that is, they have identified data sources that provide persuasive insights into the impact of anintervention on student outcomes. Similarly, the findings of action research and the actions recommended by these findings areauthoritative for teacher researchers. In doing action research, teacher researchers have developed solutions to their own problems.Teachers—not outside “experts”—are the authorities on what works in their classrooms.

Action Research Is Relevant

The relevance of published research to the real world of teachers is perhaps the most common concern raised by teachers when askedabout the practical applications of educational research—either the problems investigated by researchers are not the problems teachersreally have or the schools or classrooms in which the research was conducted are vastly different from their own school environment. Inreviewing the past two decades of research on schools and teaching, however, Kennedy (1997) cites the seminal works of Jackson’s (1968) Life in Classrooms and Lortie’s (1975) Schoolteacher as ways to illustrate the relevance of the findings of these studies. Kennedy’s reviewfound that classroom life was characterized by crowds, power, praise, and uncertainty:

· Crowds—Students are always grouped with 20 or 30 others, which means that they must wait in line, wait to be called on, and wait forhelp.

· Power—Teachers control most actions and events and decide what the group will do.

· Praise—Teachers give and withhold praise, so students know which of their classmates are favored by the teacher.

· Uncertainty—The presence of 20 to 30 children in a single classroom means there are many possibilities for an interruption in one’swork.

Kennedy (1997) argues that one of the aims of research is to increase certainty by creating predictability within the classroom because“routines increase predictability and decrease anxiety for both teachers and students” (p. 6).

One of the outcomes of action research is that it satisfies the desire of all teachers to increase the predictability of what happens in theirclassrooms—in particular, to increase the likelihood that a given curriculum, instructional strategy, or use of technology will positively affectstudent outcomes. And although these desirable outcomes come at the initial expense of predictability—that is, they have emerged from theimplementation of a new intervention or innovation—the findings of your action research inquiries will, over time, contribute to thepredictability of your teaching environments.

Voices from the Field Action Research Is Relevant

In this video, the teacher researcher talks about the important role action research plays in keeping her focused on making sure that thestudents in her classroom are learning. Using an action research process, the teacher is able to satisfy her desire for predictability in herclassroom knowing that when issues arise in her teaching related to the implementation of curriculum and instructional strategies, she isable to have confidence in her research findings. This knowledge is relevant to her classroom setting and contributes to herunderstanding of “best practices” in her classroom and their positive impact on student outcomes.

Action Research Allows Teachers Access to Research Findings

Kennedy (1997) also hypothesizes that the apparent lack of connection between research and practice is due to teachers’ poor access toresearch findings. This apparent lack of impact of research on teaching is, in part, credited to teachers’ prior beliefs and values and therealization that teachers’ practices cannot be changed simply by informing them of the results of a study. After all, if we reflect on how wecurrently teach and what we hold to be sacred teaching practices, we are likely to find that our beliefs and values stem from how we weretaught as children (“It worked for me and I’m successful. I’m a teacher.”) and how we have had teaching modeled for us through ourteaching apprenticeships (student teaching).

Simply informing teachers about research is unlikely to bring about change. Therein lies the beauty, power, and potential of action researchto positively affect practice. As a teacher researcher, you challenge your taken-for-granted assumptions about teaching and learning. Yourresearch findings are meaningful to you because you have identified the area of focus. You have been willing to challenge the conventionalcraft culture. In short, your willingness to reflect on and change your thinking about your teaching practices has led you to become asuccessful and productive member of the professional community.

Action Research Challenges the Intractability of Reform of the Educational System

Kennedy’s final hypothesis is that the lack of connection between research and practice can be attributed to the educational system itself,not the research. Kennedy (1997) characterizes the American educational system as follows:

· It has no consensus on goals and guiding principles.

· It has no central authority to settle disputes.

· It is continually bombarded with new fads and fancies.

· It provides limited evidence to support or refute any particular idea.

· It encourages reforms that run at cross-purposes to each other.

· It gives teachers less time than most other countries do to develop curricula and daily lessons.

Given this characterization, it is little wonder that the more things change, the more they stay the same! Again, action research gives teacherresearchers the opportunity to embrace a problem-solving philosophy and practice as an integral part of the culture of their schools andtheir professional disposition and to challenge the intractability of educational reform by making action research a part of the systemrather than just another fad.

Action Research Is Not a Fad

One insight that Kennedy does not address when discussing the apparent failure of research to affect teachers’ practices is the belief ofmany classroom teachers that researchers tend to investigate trendy fads and are interested only in the curricular approach orinstructional method du jour. Therefore, it is not surprising to hear critics of action research say, “Why bother? This is just another fad that,like other fads in education, will eventually pass if I can wait it out!” But action research is decidedly not a fad for one simple reason: Goodteachers have always systematically looked at the effects of their teaching on student learning. They may not have called this practice actionresearch, and they may not have thought their reflection was formal enough to be labeled research, but action research it was!

1.7 Making Action Research a Part of Daily Teaching Practices

The first step in making action research a part of daily teaching practices is to become familiar with the process and recognize how muchaction research is already a part of your daily life as a classroom teacher. Consider this analogy that reveals how similar the act of teachingis to the act of doing action research. In any individual lesson, you plan, implement, and evaluate your teaching, just as a teacher researcherdoes when undertaking action research. You develop a list of objectives (a focus area), implement the lesson, reflect on whether thechildren achieved the objectives through summative evaluation statements (data collection), spend time at the end of a lesson reflecting onwhat happened (data analysis and interpretation), and spend time at the end of the day considering how today’s lesson will affecttomorrow’s lesson (action planning). Like action research, the act of teaching is largely an intuitive process carried out idiosyncratically byboth experienced and novice teachers.

I was recently reminded by a teacher enrolled in one of my action research classes that in my fervor and enthusiasm to illustrate dataanalysis and interpretation in practice (based on some of my own research), I had unwittingly made her feel that research was somethingthat could realistically be done only by a full-time researcher who did not have a “real” job to contend with—namely, teaching 28 very livelyfirst graders! The teacher felt that action research was so difficult and time consuming that it was unreasonable to expect a mere mortal toundertake the activity. She felt as if she needed “Super Teacher” to burst into the classroom and take over business! Not so. If the process ofaction research cannot be done without adversely affecting the fundamental work of teaching, then it ought not to be done at all.

Throughout this text, we will explore practical, realistic ways in which action research can become a normative part of the teaching-learningprocess. There will be an initial commitment of time and energy as one learns the process, but that time is an investment in enriching theeducation of students. To realistically incorporate the process of action research into daily teaching practices, a few things need to happen:

· Try the process and be convinced that the investment of time and energy is worth the outcomes. First, undertake an action research projectthat is meaningful to you and addresses the needs of your students. Once the project is completed, you will see the contribution thatyour new understanding of the subject will make to your teaching or your students’ learning (or, ideally, both!). Only then will you befully confident that action research is a worthwhile investment of your time and energy. Your beliefs and attitudes about action researchwill be changed after you have tried it for yourself.

· Know that action research is a process that can be undertaken without having a negative impact on your personal and professional life. Forexample, action research, as it is described in this text, is not intended to be just “one more thing” for you to do. Teachers already havetoo much to do and not enough time in which to do it! The action research process advocated in this text is intended to provide you witha systematic framework that can be applied to your daily teaching routines. The investment of time as you learn how to do actionresearch will be worth the outcomes. The process may also produce unexpected positive outcomes by providing opportunities forcollaborative efforts with colleagues who share a common area of focus. This text provides strategies you can use to develop your reflective practice utilizing many of the existing data sources in your classroom and school. It will provide you with a model that can beshared with like-minded colleagues who also are committed to improving the teaching-learning process in their classrooms.

· Ask your professional colleagues for support with implementation. Although such strategies as studying theory, observing demonstrations,and practicing with feedback enable most teachers to develop their skills to the point that they can use a model fluidly, skillsdevelopment by itself does not ensure that skills transfer. Relatively few persons who learn new approaches to teaching will integratetheir skills into regular practice unless they receive coaching (Joyce, Hersh, & McKibben, 1983). That is why seeking support andguidance from other teacher researchers is critical to your success as an action researcher. These suggestions are summarized in Research in Action Checklist 1–1.

1.8 The Process of Action Research

Now that we have defined action research, described its historical and theoretical foundations, and explained why teachers do it, let’s explore the process of action research. Many guidelines and models have been provided over the years for teacher researchers to follow:

Kurt Lewin (1952) described a “spiraling” cyclical process that included planning, execution, and reconnaissance.

Stephen Kemmis (1988) created a well-known representation of the action research “spiral” that includes the essential characteristics of Lewin’s model. Kemmis’s model includes reconnaissance, planning, first action step, monitoring, reflecting, rethinking, and evaluation.

Emily Calhoun (1994) described an Action Research Cycle that includes selecting an area or problem of collective interest, collecting data, organizing data, analyzing and interpreting data, and taking action.

Gordon Wells (1994) described what he calls an Idealized Model of the Action Research Cycle, that includes observing, interpreting, planning change, acting, and “the practitioner’s personal theory” (p. 27), which informs and is informed by the action research cycle.

Ernest Stringer (2004) described an Action Research Helix that includes looking, thinking, and acting as “phases of the research [are] repeated over time” (p. 10).

John Creswell (2015) described action research as a dynamic, flexible process that involves the following steps: determining if action research is the best design to use, identifying a problem to study, locating resources to help address the problem, identifying necessary information, implementing the data collection, analyzing the data, developing a plan for action, and implementing the plan and reflecting on whether it makes a difference.

Richard Sagor (2005) described a four-step process that includes clarifying vision, articulating theories, implementing action and collecting data, and reflecting and planning informed action.

Cher Hendricks (2017) described an action research process that follows the principle of “systematic inquiry based on ongoing reflection” (p. 2), that is heavily influenced by the work of Lawrence Stenhouse (1981) from the Center for Applied Research in Education at the University of East Anglia in England.

Research in Action Checklist 1–1

Making Action Research a Part of Your Daily Teaching Practice

_________Actually try the process to convince yourself that the investments of time and energy are worth the outcomes.

_________Recognize that action research is a process that can be undertaken without negatively affecting your personal and professional life.

_________Seek support from your professional colleagues.

Voices from the Field

Making Action Research a Part of Daily Teaching Practices

This teacher researcher states a strong case for embedding action research as a natural part of the teaching and learning process. In particular, she links action research (and teaching) to a clear focus (parallel to a learning objective) and the ongoing data collection that occurs as part of teaching: keeping records, daily charts, student observations, teacher-made checklists, and so on. And in the same way that teachers “monitor and adjust” their teaching, action researchers sometimes experience the need for a new area of focus based on their data collection, analysis, and interpretation. This vignette makes it clear that action research can be embedded in daily teaching practices, especially given a clear focus and with the support of like-minded colleagues.

All these models have enjoyed varying degrees of popularity, depending on the context in which they have been applied. For example, these action research models have been applied to agriculture, health care, social work, factory work, and community development in isolated areas.

Clearly, these action research models share some common elements: a sense of purpose based on a “problem” or “area of focus” (identification of an area of focus), observation or monitoring of practice (collection of data), synthesis of information gathered (analysis and interpretation of data), and some form of “action” that invariably “spirals” the researcher back into the process repeatedly (development of an action plan).

These shared elements are what we will focus on in this text. The following chapters will address in detail how to proceed with an action research process that includes the four elements just mentioned: identifying an area of focus, collecting data, analyzing and interpreting data, and developing an action plan.

Key Concepts Box 1–4 illustrates the action research process used by Deborah South, described at the beginning of this chapter.

This four-step process, which I have termed the Dialectic Action Research Spiral, is illustrated in Figure 1–1. It provides teacher researchers with a practical guide and illustrates how to proceed with inquiries. It is a model for research done by teachers and for teachers and students, not research done on them, and as such is a dynamic and responsive model that can be adapted to different contexts and purposes. It was designed to provide teacher researchers with “provocative and constructive ways” of thinking about their work (Wolcott, 1989, p. 137).

figure 1–1 The Dialectic Action Research Spiral

Voices from the Field

The Process of Action Research

This teacher researcher provides a clear illustration of the action research process: developing an area of focus, collecting data, analyzing and interpreting data, and action planning through his discussion of studying student interests and engagement. The teacher researcher asserts that most teachers are already doing action research as a part of their normal teaching practice given their commitment to implementing and monitoring best practices. “Meticulous data collection” speaks to the teacher’s need to understand what works and what doesn’t work with different groups of students and, based on implementing the cyclical action research process, to better understand the best practices for his own classroom setting.

KEY CONCEPTS BOX 1–4: Steps in the Action Research Process Based on Deborah South’s Example of “Unmotivated” Students

Key Concept Example

Identifying an area of focus The purpose of this study was to describe the effects of a “study skills” curriculum on student outcomes. In particular, the study focused on the variables of student attendance, peer influence, adult influence, and students’ self-esteem.

Collecting data Data were collected through surveys, interviews, and report card/attendance records.

Analyzing and interpreting the data Attendance did not appear to be an issue—children attended school regularly. Peer groups did affect performance. Students encouraged each other not to complete homework assignments. Teacher approval of student work appeared to have little effect on students’ work habits, whereas about half the children indicated that they were motivated to complete their homework to receive parental approval. On average, student grades had dropped dramatically during the term in which they were enrolled in the study skills class. Interpretation: The study skills class was having a negative impact on student outcomes, behavior, and attitudes.

Developing an action plan It was determined that students would not be homogeneously grouped for a study skills class the following year because of a “critical mass of negativity” that appeared to emerge from the students as they fed off each other’s lack of motivation. The study skills curriculum would continue to be used and monitored with a heterogeneous grouping of students.

SUMMARY

A Brief Overview of Educational Research

1. The goal of traditional educational research is “to explain, predict, and/or control educational phenomena” (Mills & Gay, 2016, p. 5). Todo this, researchers try to manipulate and control certain variables (the factors that might affect the outcomes of a particular study) totest a hypothesis (a statement the researcher makes that predicts what will happen or explains what the outcome of the study will be).

2. Positivism is the belief that natural phenomena can be explained in an orderly way using empirical sciences.

3. At the end of an experiment, researchers would compare the progress of each group in the study and decide whether the hypothesiscould be accepted or rejected with a predetermined level of statistical significance (e.g., that the difference between the mean for thecontrol group and the mean for the experimental group is large, compared with the standard error).

4. Collaborative action research utilizes the expertise of the collaborators and fosters sustained dialogue among educational stakeholdersin different settings (Hendricks, 2017, p. 7).

5. Quantitative research focuses on controlling a small number of variables to determine cause-effect relationships and/or the strength ofthose relationships. This type of research uses numbers to quantify the cause-effect relationship.

6. Qualitative research uses narrative, descriptive approaches to data collection to understand the way things are and what the researchmeans from the perspectives of the participants in the study. Qualitative approaches might include, for example, conducting face-to-faceinterviews, making observations, and video recording interactions.

7. Studies that combine the collection of quantitative and qualitative data in a single study are called mixed-methods research designs. Thepurpose of mixed-methods research is to build on the synergy and strength that exists between quantitative and qualitative researchmethods to understand a phenomenon more fully than is possible using either method alone.

8. Single-subject experimental research designs (also referred to as single-case experimental designs) are designs that can be appliedwhen the sample size is one or when a number of individuals are considered as one group. These designs are typically used to study thebehavior change an individual exhibits as a result of some treatment. In single-subject designs, each participant serves as his or her owncontrol. In general, the participant is exposed to a nontreatment and a treatment phase, and performance is measured during eachphase.

9. The area of focus or research question identified by the action researcher will determine the most appropriate approach (quantitativeand/or qualitative) to use.

Defining Action Research

10. Action research is any systematic inquiry conducted by teacher researchers, principals, school counselors, or other stakeholders in theteaching/learning environment to gather information about how their particular schools operate, how they teach, and how well theirstudents learn.

11. Action research engages teacher researchers in a four-step process (referred to in this text as the Dialectic Action Research Spiral):

1. Identify an area of focus.

2. Collect data.

3. Analyze and interpret data.

4. Develop an action plan.

Origins of Action Research

12. Kurt Lewin (1890–1947) is often credited with coining the term action research around 1934.

13. The many “descendants” of early action researchers follow different schools of action research thought, including the American actionresearch group with its roots in the progressive education movement, particularly the work of John Dewey (Noffke, 1994); the efforts inthe United Kingdom toward curriculum reform and greater professionalism in teaching (Elliott, 1991); and Australian efforts locatedwithin a broad-ranging movement toward collaborative curriculum planning (Kemmis, 1988).

Theoretical Foundations of Action Research

14. Critical action research is also known as emancipatory action research because of its goal of liberation through knowledge gathering.Critical action research derives its name from the body of critical theory on which it is based, not because this type of action research iscritical, as in “faultfinding” or “important,” although it may certainly be both!

15. Postmodernism challenges the notions of truth and objectivity on which the traditional scientific method relies. Instead of claiming theincontrovertibility of fact, postmodernists argue that truth is relative, conditional, and situational and that knowledge is always anoutgrowth of previous experience.

16. The values of critical action research dictate that all educational research should be socially responsive and have the followingcharacteristics:

1. Democratic

2. Participatory

3. Empowering

4. Life enhancing

17. Practical action research places more emphasis on the “how-to” approach to the processes of action research and has a less“philosophical” bent.

18. It assumes, to some degree, that individual teachers or teams of teachers are autonomous and can determine the nature of theinvestigation to be undertaken.

Goals and Rationale for Action Research

19. Action research carried out according to both philosophies creates opportunities for all involved to improve the lives of children and tolearn about the craft of teaching. All action researchers, regardless of their particular school of thought or theoretical position, arecommitted to a critical examination of classroom teaching principles and the effects teachers’ actions have on the children in their care.

20. The goal of teachers to be professional problem solvers committed to improving both their own practice and student outcomesprovides a powerful reason to practice action research.

Justifying Action Research: The Impact of Action Research on Practice

21. Action research is persuasive and authoritative.

22. Action research is relevant.

23. Action research allows teachers access to research findings.

24. Action research challenges the intractability of reform of the educational system.

25. Action research is not a fad.

Making Action Research a Part of Daily Teaching Practices

26. The first step in making action research a part of daily teaching practices is to become familiar with the process and recognize howmuch action research is already a part of your daily life as a classroom teacher.

27. Try the process and be convinced that the investment of time and energy is worth the outcomes.

28. Know that action research is a process that can be undertaken without having a negative impact on your personal and professional life.

29. Ask your professional colleagues for support with implementation.

The Process of Action Research

30. The Dialectic Action Research Spiral includes the following four elements:

1. Identifying an area of focus

2. Collecting data

3. Analyzing and interpreting data

4. Developing an action plan