Download Introduction To Action Research and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Computer science in PDF only on Docsity!
Introduction to Action Research
C H A P T E R 1
Educational Research
Traditional Educational Research
Action Research
Seek answers through scientific method
Qualitative (inductive) versus quantitative (deductive) methods
Nonexperimental versus experimental research designs
Mixed-methods research designs
Alignment with reflective teaching
Various models of action research exist
Importance
- Connecting theory to practice
- Improvement of educational practice
- Connection to school improvement
- Teacher empowerment
- Professional growth
Applications
- Identifying problems
- Developing and testing solutions
- Preservice teacher education
- In-service professional growth
Chapter 1 Organizer
Research: Think about it for a few moments. What types of images come to mind? For many people, the term research tends to evoke images of scientists in white laboratory coats coax- ing mice through a maze, observing their every move, action, and reaction. They closely monitor stopwatches, recording the amount of time that passes as the mice reach each stage of the maze. Further images called to mind might include chemists (yes, also wearing white lab coats!) with beakers, flasks, and Bunsen burners conducting experiments that involve mixing chemicals in order to make new solutions or to further study the properties of those solutions. Another visualization could involve medical researchers who work with animals or directly with human “subjects” to investigate possible cures for devastating diseases. Still others may envision research as something done by college or university professors as a regular aspect of their work. For quite some time, research has been conducted primarily by professionals whose principal education included training in the conduct of research studies. Admittedly, much research continues to be conducted by professionals, such as those described in the four examples above. However, more and more research is being con- ducted by practitioners —people whose primary education and training is not in research methodology. The specific procedures for conducting this type of research are somewhat different from those that serve as the foundation for more formal types of research, but the guiding principles are the same. It is this type of practitioner-based research—known as action research— upon which we will focus our attention in this book.
What Is Action Research?
Over the last decade, action research has begun to capture the attention of teachers, administrators, and policymakers around the country (Mills, 2011). Educators at a variety of levels have embraced it as something that makes conducting research a more “manageable” task and that brings about results that are more informative and have immediate and direct application. But just what is action research? What does it look like? What does it purport to accomplish? Action research is defined as any systematic inquiry conducted by teachers, adminis- trators, counselors, or others with a vested interest in the teaching and learning process or environment for the purpose of gathering information about how their particular schools operate, how they teach, and how their students learn (Mills, 2011). More important, action research is characterized as research that is done by teachers for themselves. It is truly a sys- tematic inquiry into one’s own practice (Johnson, 2008). Action research allows teachers to study their own classrooms—for example, their own instructional methods, their own students, and their own assessments—in order to better understand them and to be able to improve their quality or effectiveness. It focuses specifically on the unique characteristics of the population with whom a practice is employed or with whom some action must be taken. This, in turn, results in increased utility and effectiveness for the practitioner (Parsons & Brown, 2002). The basic process of conducting action research consists of four steps:
4 P A RT I “ W H AT I S A C T I O N R E S E A R C H? ”
for answering questions. While human reasoning has gotten our global culture far through- out history, it is most reliant on dependable information. If information that we collect in order to help us make common-sense decisions is of substandard quality or accuracy, our common-sense decisions will reflect those various deficiencies. The main problem with these familiar sources of information is that they have a ten- dency to provide unreliable information. This is largely due to the fact that answers based on tradition, authority, and common sense use information that is biased to some degree. This bias occurs primarily because the information was collected in an unsystematic and subjective manner. In order for the answers we seek to be accurate and of high quality, we must obtain information that is both valid and reliable. This is best accomplished by using the scientific method. The scientific method is a specific strategy used to answer ques- tions and resolve problems. You may recall the scientific method from a junior or senior high school science course when you may have been required to complete some sort of science fair project. What makes the scientific method such a useful strategy is that it is a very systematic, step-by-step set of procedures. In 1938, American philosopher John Dewey described the scientific method as a procedure for thinking more objectively (Mertler & Charles, 2011). He presented the procedure as a series of the following steps:
- Clarify the main question inherent in the problem.
- State a hypothesis (a possible answer to the question).
- Collect, analyze, and interpret information related to the question, such that it will permit you to answer the question.
- Form conclusions derived from your analyses.
- Use the conclusions to verify or reject the hypothesis.
It would be misleading to assume that all researchers—and therefore all research studies— follow these steps exactly. For example, it may not be necessary to formally state a hypoth- esis in some studies. Although not all research studies conduct the procedure exactly as described above, they do have one important thing in common. Collecting, analyzing, and interpreting information (Step 3 above) is always done in research. It is the result of this step that provides the necessary impetus that allows us to answer our initial questions. How, then, is the scientific method related to research in the broad field of education? There is a great deal of similarity between the two. Simply put, educational research involves the application of the scientific method to educational topics, phenomena, or questions in search of answers. Educational research is typically carried out in the following manner:
- Specify the topic about which a concern exists.
- Clarify the specific problem on which the research will focus.
6 P A RT I “ W H AT I S A C T I O N R E S E A R C H? ”
beliefs determine perceptions
- Formulate research questions and/or hypotheses concerning the main problem.
- Carry out procedures by which data (a more appropriate term for “information”) are collected, analyzed, and interpreted.
- State the findings determined as a result of the data analysis.
- Draw conclusions related to the original research questions and/or hypotheses. (Mertler & Charles, 2011)
Note the similarities between Dewey’s list of steps in the scientific method and those used to conduct educational research. The major components are common to both lists. In either case, it is important to remember that in practice these steps do not always occur as neatly as presented here, nor do they always follow the sequence listed. Johnson (2008) also reminds us that, as consumers of research as well as potential researchers, we must be aware of the differences between science and pseudoscience. Science—that is, the use of the scientific method for inquiry—uses perceived reality (typi- cally in the form of collected data) to determine beliefs. In other words, data are collected and analyzed in order to determine what is believed:
Chapter 1 Introduction to Action Research 7
perceptions (data) determine beliefs
An example of scientific inquiry is the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (or TIMSS). TIMSS resulted from the American education community’s need for reli- able and timely data on the mathematics and science achievement of our students com- pared to that of students in other countries. Since 1995, TIMSS has provided trend data on students’ mathematics and science achievement from an international perspective. TIMSS uses standardized achievement tests, administered and scored in identical fashion, as the means of collecting student data. The tests are similar in content, form, and length in order to allow for comparisons. What makes this study “science” is the standardization and objec- tivity incorporated into the research design. In contrast, pseudoscience uses beliefs to determine perceived reality. One begins with a strong belief and then looks for data to support that belief (Johnson, 2008):
Pseudoscience is often used as a marketing tool by companies to sell products or by groups or individuals in an attempt to demonstrate that their ideas, methods, or products are the best or most effective. Clearly, this approach is not systematic, nor is it objective; it does not utilize the scientific method. Therefore, it is not science, and it is not research.
That topic would then be narrowed down to more specific hypotheses that could be tested. This process of narrowing down goes even further when data are collected in order to address the hypotheses. Finally, the data are analyzed, and conclusions about the hypotheses are drawn—this allows for a confirmation (or not) of the original theory. On the other hand, qualitative research methods typically use an inductive approach to reasoning. Inductive reasoning works in the exact opposite direction when compared to deductive reasoning. Using a “bottom-up” approach (see Figure 1.2), inductive reasoning begins with specific observations and concludes with broader generalizations and theories (Trochim, 2002a). One begins with specific observations (data), notes any patterns in those data, formulates one or more tentative hypotheses, and finally develops general conclusions and theories. It is important to note that, in some cases, the purpose of qualitative research is not to analyze data in order to form hypotheses or theories. Rather, in these cases, the pur- pose may simply be to provide a “thick description” of what is going on in the particular setting being studied. You will read more about deductive and inductive reasoning, as they relate to data analysis, in Chapter 6. It is important to note that both quantitative and qualitative approaches to conducting educational research are guided by several sets of philosophical assumptions. These philo- sophical assumptions are composed primarily of several basic underlying beliefs about the world itself and how best to discover or uncover its true reality. The underlying beliefs held
Chapter 1 Introduction to Action Research 9
Source : Adapted from Trochim, 2002a.
Tentative Hypothesis
Theory
Patterns
Observations
Figure 1.2 Process of Inductive Reasoning as Applied to Research
by quantitative researchers differ substantially from those held by qualitative researchers. It is my conviction that an understanding of these beliefs is not requisite to understanding or being able to successfully conduct an action research study. This is largely due to the fact that action research, as we will view it throughout this text, typifies a grassroots effort to find answers to important questions or to foster change. It is entirely practical—and not neces- sarily philosophical—in its application. Mills (2011) refers to this as “practical action research” (p. 7), which he contrasts with the more philosophically based critical action research. The focus of this particular textbook is on the former; in-depth discussions of more philosophically based forms of action research are beyond the scope of this book. If the reader is interested in learning more about these various underlying philosophical assumptions and their connection to action research, several excellent resources include Johnson (2008), McMillan (2004), and Mills (2011). Recall that the goal of quantitative research is to describe or otherwise understand edu- cational phenomena. To accomplish this, researchers collect data by measuring variables (factors that may affect the outcome of a study or characteristics that are central to the topic about which the researcher wishes to draw conclusions) and then analyze those data in order to test hypotheses (predicted outcomes of the study) or to answer research questions. For example, a quantitative research study might involve collecting data on elementary school discipline referrals and absenteeism (numerical variables) in order to answer the question: Are there differences in the rates of disciplinary problems and absenteeism in schools with a K–8 grade span versus those with other grade span configurations (e.g., K–5, K–6)? The type of research design employed by the researcher refers to the plan that will be used to carry out the study. Research designs may be either nonexperimental or experimen- tal. In nonexperimental research, the researcher has no direct control over any variable in the study, either because it has already occurred or because it is not possible for it to be influ- enced. In other words, in nonexperimental research, variables cannot be controlled or manipulated by the researcher. The previous illustration of a study of school discipline and absenteeism problems is an example of a nonexperimental study, as the type of grade con- figuration, the number of discipline referrals, and the number of absences cannot be con- trolled or influenced by the researcher. The fact that variables cannot be controlled in nonexperimental studies is an important distinction between nonexperimental research and experimental research, especially when it comes to drawing conclusions at the end of a study. This usually means that conclusions to nonexperimental studies can describe only variables or relationships between variables. Some examples of nonexperimental research designs include descriptive , comparative , correlational , and causal-comparative research (McMillan, 2004). Descriptive studies simply report information about the frequency or amount of something (e.g., What percentage of the time do teachers use performance-based assessments in their classrooms?). Comparative studies characteristically build on descriptive studies by comparing two or more groups to that which is measured (e.g., Is there a significant difference between elementary and secondary teachers’ use of performance-based assessments?).
10 P A RT I “ W H AT I S A C T I O N R E S E A R C H? ”
deviation, correlations, and standardized scores. Inferential statistics are more complex and permit researchers to test the statistical significance of the difference between two or more groups or to test the degree of correlation between two variables. Statistical signif- icance refers to a decision made from the results of statistical procedures that enable researchers to conclude that the findings of a given study (e.g., the size of the difference between two groups or the strength of the relationship between two variables) are large enough in the sample studied in order to represent a meaningful difference or relationship in the population from which the sample was drawn. Whereas quantitative research studies focus on a relatively small number of variables, qualitative research studies utilize a much broader, more holistic approach to data collec- tion. Qualitative research designs use systematic observation in order to gain knowledge, reach understanding, and answer research questions. There is no attempt to control or manipulate any variable in a qualitative study; researchers simply take the world as it exists and as they find it (Johnson, 2008). Qualitative research tends to emphasize the importance of multiple measures and observations (Trochim, 2002b). Therefore, guiding research questions tend to be more broad and open-ended. This allows the researcher to collect a wide variety of data for the purpose of getting a more holistic picture of the phenomenon under investigation. This also permits the researcher to engage in triangulation. Triangulation is a process of relating multiple sources of data in order to establish their trustworthiness or verification of the consistency of the facts while trying to account for their inherent biases (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Glesne, 2006). It is important to note that “triangulation” does not necessarily mean that the researcher is using three (as in “tri-”) sources of data; it simply means that there is more than one source of data—perhaps, a more appropriate term would be “ polyangulation ” (since the prefix “ poly- ” is defined as “more than one or many”). Ultimately, this enables the researcher to try to get a better handle on what is happening in reality and to have greater confidence in research findings (Glesne, 2006). For example, in a qualitative study, one might collect data through firsthand observations, videotaped observations, and interviews. Triangulating these sources of data would involve examina- tion in order to determine, for example, if the behaviors exhibited and comments made by participants are consistent regardless of the type of data representing them. In other words, did a specific person act the same way he said he acted, or did he verbally portray his behavior differently from his actual behavior? Similar to quantitative research, there are a variety of qualitative research designs. These include phenomenology, ethnography, grounded theory, and case studies (McMillan, 2004). Phenomenological studies engage the researcher in a long process of individual interviews in an attempt to fully understand a phenomenon (e.g., What characteristics of teachers are needed in order for them to be viewed as compassionate by their students?). Ethnographic research attempts to describe social interactions between people in group settings (e.g., What meaning does the teachers’ lounge have for the staff at Main Street Elementary School?). Grounded theory research studies attempt to discover a theory that
12 P A RT I “ W H AT I S A C T I O N R E S E A R C H? ”
relates to a particular environment (e.g., What types of personal and school characteristics serve to motivate teachers?). Finally, case studies are in-depth studies of individual pro- grams, activities, people, or groups (e.g., What is the nature of the school culture at Washington Middle School?). Data collected during a qualitative research study may be quite diverse. Recall that qual- itative data are typically narrative and consist primarily of observations, interviews, and existing documents and reports (McMillan, 2004). Resulting qualitative data are analyzed by means of a process known as logico-inductive analysis, a thought process that uses logic to make sense of patterns and trends in the data (Mertler & Charles, 2011). Although quantitative and qualitative approaches to conducting research are quite dif- ferent on a variety of levels, they need not be considered mutually exclusive. It is not uncom- mon to see research studies that employ both types of research data. These types of studies are often referred to as mixed-methods research designs. The combination of both types of data tends to provide a better understanding of a research problem than one type of data in isolation. In other words, these types of studies capitalize on the relative strengths of both quantitative and qualitative data. Creswell (2005) considers action research studies to be most similar to mixed-methods designs, since they often utilize both quantitative and qual- itative data. The only real difference between the two is the underlying purpose for the research. The main goal of mixed-methods studies is more traditional (i.e., to better under- stand and explain a research problem); the main goal of action research is to address local- level problems with the anticipation of finding immediate solutions.
Overview of Action Research
For decades, there has been pressure from both public and governmental sources for improvement in our schools. The public, fueled by the mass media, has criticized schools for low levels of achievement in math, science, reading, writing, and history (Schmuck, 1997). Business leaders fault schools for not preparing students for the workforce. Although teachers are on the receiving end of the brunt of this criticism, it is my firm belief that teach- ers in the United States have been doing—and continue to do—an outstanding job in the classroom. However, that being said, I also believe that true school improvement must begin from within the proverbial “four walls of the classroom.” Teachers must be able and will- ing to critically examine their own practice as well as how students (both collectively and individually) learn best. Often, school improvement leaders look toward the enormous body of educational research literature as a means of guiding their improvement efforts. However, many prac- titioners do not find that either formal or applied academic research is very helpful (Anderson, 2002). This is largely due to the fact that traditional educational researchers have a tendency to impose abstract research findings on schools and teachers with little or no attention paid to local variation (i.e., not all schools are the same) and required adaptations
Chapter 1 Introduction to Action Research 13
central problem or topic. They involve some observation or monitoring of current practice, followed by the collection and synthesis of information and data. Finally, some sort of action is taken, which then serves as the basis for the next stage of action research (Mills, 2011). In addition, some models are simple in their design, while others appear relatively complex. This range of complexity—from simpler to more complex—can be seen in the following examples:
- Stringer (2007), in his action research interacting spiral, describes action research as a “simple, yet powerful framework” consisting of a “look, think, and act” routine (p. 8). During each stage, participants observe, reflect, and then take some sort of action. This action leads them into the next stage (see Figure 1.3).
Chapter 1 Introduction to Action Research 15
Look
Act
Think
Look
Act
Think
Look
Act
Think
Figure 1.3 Stringer’s Action Research Interacting Spiral
- Kurt Lewin (Smith, 2007)—who, by the way, is credited with coining the term “action research”—also depicts an action research spiral, which includes fact finding, planning, taking action, evaluating, and amending the plan, before moving into a second action step (see Figure 1.4).
- Calhoun’s (1994) action research cycle, while not appearing as a “spiral,” still represents a process that is built around a cyclical notion. As she describes, the solid lines indicate the primary direction of the action research cycle through the phases, in numerical order. The dotted lines indicate backward and forward movement within the cycle as refinement or clarification of information is warranted (see Figure 1.5).
Source : Adapted from Action Research (p. 9), by Ernest T. Stringer, 2007, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Copyright 2007 by Sage. Reprinted with permission of the publisher. All rights reserved.
16 P A RT I “ W H AT I S A C T I O N R E S E A R C H? ”
Planning
Identifying a General or Initial Idea Reconnaissance or Fact Finding Take First Action Step
Take Second Action Step...
Evaluate
Amended Plan
Figure 1.4 Lewin’s Action Research Spiral
Source : Adapted from Encyclopedia of Informal Education (www.infed.org). Copyright 2007. Reprinted with permission of the publisher. All rights reserved.
- Bachman’s (2001) action research spiral continues this notion of the cyclical nature of action research (see Figure 1.6). His downward spiral suggests that participants gather information, plan actions, observe and evaluate those actions, and then reflect and plan for a new cycle of the spiral, based on the insights that were gained in the previous cycle.
- Riel’s (2007) progressive problem solving through action research model takes the participant through four steps in each cycle: planning, taking action, collecting evidence, and reflecting (see Figure 1.7).
- Piggot-Irvine’s (2006) action research model continues to depict this spiraling nature of the action research process. In her upward spiral, she shows these similar steps—planning, acting, and reflecting—through three subsequent action research cycles (see Figure 1.8).
- Hendricks’s (2009) action research model is shown in Figure 1.9. In her model, which she has placed in a school-based context, she focuses on acting, evaluating, and reflecting.
Depending on the nature of a given action research project, there may never be a clear end to the study—teachers may continue to go through subsequent cycles of planning, acting and observing, developing a new plan, and reflecting, which seemingly spiral from 1 year
18 P A RT I “ W H AT I S A C T I O N R E S E A R C H? ”
Actand
Obs
erv
e
Actand
Obs
erv
e
Plan
Revised Plan
Ref
lect
Ref
lect
Figure 1.6 Bachman’s Action Research Spiral
Source : Adapted from “Review of the Agricultural Knowledge System in Fiji: Opportunities and Limitations of Participatory Methods and Platforms to Promote Innovation Development” (unpublished dissertation), by Lorenz Bachman, 2001, Berlin, Germany: Humboldt University to Berlin. Copyright 2001. Retrieved January 17, 2008, from http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/dissertationen/bachmann-lorenz-b-r-2000–12–21/HTML/bachmann-ch3.html. Reprinted with permission of the author.
into the next (Mertler & Charles, 2011). You will learn more about the specific steps in con- ducting action research in Chapter 2.
Characteristics of Action Research: What It Is and What It Is Not
Although action research can be a fairly straightforward process, it is sometimes misun- derstood by educational practitioners (Mertler & Charles, 2011). There are many aspects of this methodology that characterize its uniqueness as an approach to conducting educational research. It is imperative for educators to have a sound, foundational understanding of just what action research is and is not. The following list, compiled from several sources (Johnson, 2008; Mertler & Charles, 2011; Mills, 2011; Schmuck, 1997), is an attempt to describe what action research is:
- Action research is a process that improves education, in general, by incorporating change.
Chapter 1 Introduction to Action Research 19
Progressive Problem Solving With Action Research
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3
Take Action
Study and Plan
Collect and Analyze Evidence
Reflect
Take Action
Study and Plan
Collect and Analyze Evidence
Reflect
Take Action
Study and Plan
Collect and Analyze Evidence
Reflect
Figure 1.7 Riel’s Action Research Model
Source : Adapted from Understanding Action Research , by Margaret Riel. Retrieved January 17, 2008, from http://cadres.pepperdine.edu/ccar/define.html. Copyright 2007 by the Center for Collaborative Action Research, Pepperdine University. Reprinted with permission of the author.
- Action research is participative, since educators are integral members—not disinterested outsiders—of the research process.
- Action research is practical and relevant to classroom teachers, since it allows them direct access to research findings.
- Action research is developing critical reflection about one’s teaching.
- Action research is a planned, systematic approach to understanding the learning process.
Chapter 1 Introduction to Action Research 21
My students focus on decoding rather than comprehending when they read. How do I get my students to understand what they read?
A colleague told me about “Reader’s Workshop,” and what I’ve read about this method makes me think it would work well in my class. I will implement this strategy with my students.
Start Here
All data sources indicate that student interest and motivation for reading have increased, but students are still struggling with comprehension.
Ev
alu
at
e
Reflect
Ac (^) t
Ev
alu
ate
Reflect Ac t
At this point the action researcher evaluates the effectiveness of the new strategies and think-alouds and then continues the cycle.
I will observe and interview students, keep a reflective journal, analyze samples of students’ work, and ask a colleague to observe my teaching and my students.
I will model more strategies and take more time to teach the strategies. I will use think- alouds so my students will know what I’m doing as I read.
Figure 1.9 Hendricks’s Action Research Process
Source : Adapted from Improving Schools Through Action Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Educators (p. 9), by Cher Hendricks, 2009, Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
- Action research is a process that requires us to “test” our ideas about education.
- Action research is open-minded.
- Action research is a critical analysis of educational places of work.
- Action research is a cyclical process of planning, acting, developing, and reflecting.
- Action research is a justification of one’s teaching practices.
Of equal importance is that educators understand what action research is not (Johnson, 2008; Mertler & Charles, 2011; Mills, 2011; Schmuck, 1997):
- Action research is not the usual thing that teachers do when thinking about teaching; it is more systematic and more collaborative.
- Action research is not simply problem solving; it involves the specification of a problem, the development of something new (in most cases), and critical reflection on its effectiveness.
- Action research is not done “to” or “by” other people; it is research done by particular educators, on their own work, with students and colleagues.
- Action research is not the simple implementation of predetermined answers to educational questions; it explores, discovers, and works to find creative solutions to educational problems.
- Action research is not conclusive; the results of action research are neither right nor wrong but rather tentative solutions that are based on observations and other data collection and that require monitoring and evaluation in order to identify strengths and limitations.
- Action research is not a fad; good teaching has always involved the systematic examination of the instructional process and its effects on student learning. Teachers are always looking for ways to improve instructional practice, and although teachers seldom have referred to this process of observation, revision, and reflection as research, that is exactly what it is.
The Importance of Action Research
At this point, you may find yourself asking a basic—albeit legitimate—question: Why should I become involved in an action research project, especially with all the demands and responsibilities placed on me as an educator today? Mertler and Charles (2011) have pro- vided at least some partial answers to this question:
22 P A RT I “ W H AT I S A C T I O N R E S E A R C H? ”
