Action Research in Education: A Practical Guide
276
Action Research in Education: A Practical Guide
276Paperback(Second Edition)
-
PICK UP IN STORECheck Availability at Nearby Stores
Available within 2 business hours
Related collections and offers
Overview
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9781462541614 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Guilford Publications, Inc. |
| Publication date: | 12/11/2019 |
| Edition description: | Second Edition |
| Pages: | 276 |
| Sales rank: | 1,018,091 |
| Product dimensions: | 7.30(w) x 9.10(h) x 0.60(d) |
About the Author
Ruth Ravid, PhD, is Professor Emerita of Education at National Louis University. Her areas of interest include educational research, action research, assessment, and school-university collaboration. Dr. Ravid is the author of several books, including Practical Statistics for Educators.
Read an Excerpt
CHAPTER 1
Introduction to Action Research
Ann, a third-grade teacher, is frustrated. Several of her students fail to do their homework assignments on a regular basis and seem to view homework as an option, rather than a requirement. Being aware of the important contributions of homework to students' achievements, Ann experiments with different kinds of homework, but to no avail. Finally, she seeks the help of the district curriculum coordinator who directs her to a well-known research article about how to help students develop positive attitudes toward homework. Ann is impressed by the article, but realizes that the recommendations offered are not relevant to her particular setting. The situation in her class is more complex and the article does not address the unique challenges presented by her students. She understands that before implementing any new strategy in her classroom, she needs to gain a better understanding of the underlying causes for the homework problems in her class. Ann also concludes that she needs to educate herself by reading more about different approaches to homework.
Armed with the new information she has gathered, she can now design and implement appropriate strategies to improve her students' attitudes toward homework and increase their homework completion rate. She also decides to systematically analyze the results of her new teaching strategies and determine the effectiveness of her new approach. Based on the outcomes of her assessment, Ann will decide whether to continue, modify, or change the new strategies she has been using.
Ann's story illustrates a situation in which teachers face challenging pedagogical issues. Rather than trying to solve the problem haphazardly or blindly following strategies proposed by outside experts, Ann conceptualized a different approach tailored to her unique situation and the needs of her students. She decided that to improve her students' performance, a systematic approach was needed. Ann designed a new approach to homework assignments and improved her students' learning by following several steps: (1) gaining a better understanding of the reasons for her students' reluctance to complete the homework assignments, (2) increasing her knowledge of the topic of homework, (3) implementing new instructional strategies, (4) collecting and interpreting data, and (5) assessing the effectiveness of her research-based actions. In fact, Ann was engaged in an action research study.
Action research is usually defined as an inquiry conducted by educators in their own settings in order to advance their practice and improve their students' learning (e.g., Anderson, Herr, & Nihlen, 2007; Burton & Bartlett, 2005; Menter, Eliot, Hulme, & Lewin, 2011; Mertler, 2017). In education, the terms action research and practitioner research are often used interchangeably because both types of research emphasize the role of practitioners in conducting investigations in their classrooms and schools. You probably have come across several other labels that describe this type of study, among them teacher research, classroom research, and teacher as researcher. In this book, when we describe action research done by practitioners, we do not refer to teachers only — rather, we include other school members, such as administrators, specialists, counselors, tutors, aides, and others who are involved in education. A growing number of these practitioners have embraced action research and view it as a viable model for modifying, changing, and improving the teaching–learning process. They feel that action research enhances their ability to grow professionally, become self-evaluative, and take responsibility for their own practice. Thus, action research provides educators with a powerful strategy for being active partners in leading school improvement (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009; Hopkins, 2008; Mertler, 2017; Sagor & Williams, 2017).
We start this chapter with a discussion of educational research and compare traditional and action research, highlighting the important role of educational practitioners as researchers in their own settings. Next, a brief historical perspective of action research is presented, followed by an explanation of the unique characteristics of action research. We end the chapter with a discussion about collaborative and participatory research.
What Is Educational Research
Before we explore action research, let's examine what we mean by research and specifically, educational research. Research is an intentional, systematic, and purposeful inquiry. Using an organized process of collecting and analyzing information, the researcher seeks to answer a question, solve a problem, or understand a phenomenon (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2014; McMillan & Schumacher, 2014).
Educational research is usually focused on studying the process of teaching and learning. Traditional educational research is often conducted by university-based researchers who carry out an investigation of others in the school setting. The ultimate goal of this type of educational research is to develop universal theories and to discover generalized principles and best strategies that ultimately improve the quality of education.
To ensure that the results of traditional educational research extend beyond the local population and are applicable in a wide variety of settings, investigations are typically conducted on a carefully selected sample that represents the population of interest. The researcher is usually an outsider, external to the particular context being studied, and puts an emphasis on being uninvolved, objective, and unbiased (Mertler & Charles, 2011).
From this perspective, educational changes are mostly planned top-down in a hierarchical process. The teachers and other school practitioners are seen as recipients and consumers of knowledge produced by outside experts; their role is to effectively implement the research findings in their schools and classrooms. Thus, according to traditional educational research, there is a separation between theory and action and between research and practice (Mertler, 2017).
Practitioners as Researchers
For many years, school practitioners have recognized the value of traditional educational research and the contributions it has made to the field of education. Much of our understanding of the process of teaching and learning draws on studies done by researchers in the field of education, psychology, and other social sciences. As practitioners, we long for scientifically proven solutions when we encounter the problems that school life presents. When we confront an unruly group of students or are frustrated by countless efforts to motivate an individual student, we wish we had a foolproof method that would allow us to solve our problems. As practitioners, we also realize the limitations of implementing generalized principles and the shortcomings of applying universal theories to our practice. We recognize that for strategies to be uniformly applicable, all students must be viewed as essentially similar. However, the uniqueness of each student and the particular historical, social, economic, and cultural context of each setting belie this viewpoint. As educators, we know from our experience in the complex dynamics of classrooms, with their unpredictable interactions, that there is no single solution that will produce consistently successful results. What is effective in one situation may not be productive in a different situation, and what works with one student may fail with another (Elliott & Norris, 2012).
Practitioners have grown to recognize the distinctiveness and validity of their own knowledge and have realized that there is no substitute for their familiarity with a particular setting. Understanding students' social and historical circumstances and knowing their past and present successes and failures, fears, and dreams enable practitioners to gain insight into their students' worlds. This subjective insight provides practitioners with opportunities to explore systematically, and with care, multiple options for action, with sensitivity to the "here and now." Thus, action research offers a new relationship among the areas of practice, theory, and research that blurs the boundaries between each of them.
In action research, teachers and other school personnel take on the role of researcher and study their own practice within their classrooms and schools. The research questions arise from events, problems, or professional interests that the educators deem important. Practitioners carry out their investigations systematically, reflectively, and critically using strategies that are appropriate for their practice. Being insiders who are intimately involved and familiar with the context, practitioners are inherently subjective and directly engaged. They are not concerned with whether the knowledge gained through their studies is applicable and replicable in other settings. Their goal is to improve their practice and foster their professional growth by understanding their students, solving problems, or developing new skills. They put their newly emerging theories into practice and carefully examine the resulting changes. From this perspective, changes in education occur in a bottom-up, democratic process, led by practitioners who are self-directed, knowledge-generating professionals (McNiff, 2017). Table 1.1 presents a comparison of traditional research and action research.
Historical Perspectives
The idea of action research in education is not new. The theoretical roots can be traced to progressive educational leaders from the early part of the 20th century who lauded the role of practitioners as intellectual leaders, and encouraged them to conduct research in their own settings (Noffke, 1997). John Dewey (1929/1984) recognized the central position of teachers in reforming education. He was critical of the separation between knowledge and action and argued that educators need to test their ideas and put their emerging theories into action. He encouraged teachers to become reflective practitioners and to make autonomous pedagogical judgments based on interrogating and examining their practice.
John Collier coined the term action research (Holly, Arhar, & Kasten, 2009). Collier, a commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs from 1933 to 1945, initiated community education projects on Indian reservations in the United States (Noffke, 1997). Criticizing government policies that assumed that Native American tribes all have the same needs, he described a form of research that emphasized the specific local needs of each community (Hinchey, 2008). Kurt Lewin, a social psychologist, however, is most often credited as the founder of action research. An immigrant who fled from Nazi Germany, Lewin developed the methodology of action research in the 1930s and 1940s as a means for democratic social change (Anderson et al., 2007; Somekh & Zeichner, 2009). He argued that action research should be conducted with the participation of the members of the social group who are part of the situation to be changed. The action research model he developed was based on a cyclical process of fact finding, planning, action, and evaluation of the results of the action (Lewin, 1946).
Stephen Corey introduced action research to the field of education in the 1950s. He was a dean and professor of education at Teachers College and worked with schools on studies that involved teachers, parents, and students. In his seminal book Action Research to Improve School Practices (1953), Corey contended that educational change will not take place unless practitioners are involved in developing curriculum and instructional practices, drawing on the experiential knowledge they gain through inquiry. However, in the decade that followed, when the emphasis was placed on top-down education, action research was pushed into the background and teachers were again seen as merely conduits of curriculum designed by outside experts (Hinchey, 2008; Noffke, 1997).
In the 1970s, Lawrence Stenhouse, a professor of education in the United Kingdom, coined the phrase practitioner researcher to describe teachers who were engaged in action research to improve their practice. Stenhouse (1975) rejected the way in which curriculum materials were typically created by experts and handed down to teachers who were then blamed for the failure of these curricula. He claimed that practitioners should be involved in examining the suitability of the new innovations to their specific students and in modifying materials as necessary. Stenhouse initiated the Humanities Curriculum Project, which encouraged teachers to be researchers who would be engaged in a systematic self-analysis of their school settings, their classrooms, and their teaching (Elliot, 1991/2002; Feldman, Altrichter, Posch, & Somekh, 2018).
Stenhouse's work inspired action research networks, and action research has been growing in popularity since the 1980s in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009; Hendricks, 2017). In the United States, the movement has been aligned with the teacher-empowerment movement, and action researchers facilitated the redefinition of teachers as professionals. Practitioners challenged the underlying hierarchical assumptions attached to traditional educational research and insisted that inquiry validates their knowledge and empowers them to become leaders who are involved in the process of making decisions about their classrooms and schools (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009).
The Unique Characteristics of Action Research
Action research is a distinct kind of research that is different from other traditional educational research. It is constructivist, situational, practical, systematic, and cyclical.
> Constructivist. Action researchers are perceived as generators of knowledge rather than receivers and enactors of knowledge produced by outside experts. From this perspective, practitioners are professionals who are capable of making informed decisions based on their own inquiries and able to assume responsibility for their own research-based actions (Atweh, Kemmis, & Weeks, 2002; Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009; Hendricks, 2017; Pine, 2009).
> Situational. Action researchers aim to understand the unique context of their studies and the participants involved. The conclusions of these inquiries should be understood within the complexities, ambiguities, and nuances of the particular settings in which their studies were conducted (Anderson et al., 2007; Baumfield, Hall, & Wall, 2013; Holly et al., 2009; Mertler, 2017).
> Practical. Action researchers choose the questions that they plan to investigate based on their own concerns and professional areas of interests. The results of their studies are immediately relevant to the improvement of their practice (Bauer & Brazer, 2012; Dana & Yendol-Hoppey, 2014; Feldman et al., 2018; Marzano, 2003).
> Systematic. Action research is intentional, thoughtfully planned, systematic, and methodical. The research process has to be systematic in order to produce trustworthy and meaningful results (Burns, 2007; Burton, Brundrett, & Jones, 2014; McNiff & Whitehead, 2010; Stringer, 2014).
> Cyclical. Action research starts with a research question and ends with the application of the knowledge gained that leads to new questions and a new cycle of research (Johnson, 2011; Mertler, 2017; Mills, 2017; Sagor & Williams, 2017; Stringer, 2014). Following is a description of the six steps involved in carrying out a full cycle of action research and an illustration of the cyclical steps (see Figure 1.1).
* Step 1: Identify an issue or problem the practitioner wants to explore.
* Step 2: Gather background information through a review of appropriate literature and existing research on the topic.
* Step 3: Design the study and plan the methods of collecting data.
* Step 4: Collect data.
* Step 5: Analyze and interpret the data.
* Step 6: Write, share, and implement the findings.
In reality, action research is much more dynamic, fluid, and — at times — messier than is implied by the linear description of the process presented inFigure 1.1. Nevertheless, to clarify the research procedures and enable you to undertake an action research project, we divided this book into distinct and sequential steps. Additionally, the research-cycle process often does not end with the implementation of findings. When the study's results are put into action, you may need to assess the outcomes and determine whether the desired changes have occurred or other strategies are required. Thus, the cyclical process continues from one study to the next as your practice improves incrementally.
(Continues…)
Excerpted from "Action Research in Education"
by .
Copyright © 2020 The Guilford Press.
Excerpted by permission of The Guilford Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 2. Choosing and Learning about Your Research Topic 3. Approaches to Action Research 4. Developing a Plan of Action 5. Data Collection Tools 6. Using Assessment Data in Action Research 7. Data Analysis and Interpretation 8. Writing, Implementing, and Sharing the Research Findings References Author Index Subject IndexInterviews
Graduate students in teacher education and educational administration programs; practicing teachers, administrators, and other PreK–12 school practitioners. Serves as a text in such courses as Action Research, Teacher Research, Practitioner Research, Educational Research for Administrators, and School Research Methods.