ACTION RESEARCH PRESENTATION

Group 6
HCMC University Of Pedagogy

December 2010
PURPOSE OF PRESENTATION

Action research approach is presented as a rigorous and valid form of

research.
 DEFINITION

 ‘Action research is a flexible spiral process which allows action

(change, improvement) and research (understanding, knowledge)
to be achieved at the same time. The understanding allows more
informed change and at the same time is informed by that change.
People affected by the change are usually involved in the action
research. This allows the understanding to be widely shared and
the change to be pursued with commitment’ (Dick, 2002).
 Its purpose is to help people in their understanding of a specific
situation in order to resolve the problems that confront them.
(Berg, 2004, p. 196).
 TYPES OF ACTION RESEARCH

 There are two main types of action research:

1) Practical Action Research
 Addresses a specific problem
 Primary purpose is to improve practice and inform larger issues
2) Participatory Action Research
 Empower individuals and groups to improve their lives and bring
about a social change
 Stakeholders are involved and are active in all processes
(collaborative participation)
ADVANTAGES OF ACTION RESEARCH
 It can be performed by anyone, in any type of school or
institution
 It can help to improve educational practice

 It can help education and other professionals to improve

their craft
 It can help them learn to identify problems
systematically
 It can build up a small community of research-oriented
individuals at the local level

Similarities and Differences of Types of Research are shown in Table 24.2.

Differences between
Action Research &
Formal Research
 Formal research Action research

Training needed Extensive Little

knowledge that is generalisable to a wider results for improving practice in a local

Goals
audience situation

problems currently faced or

Methods of identifying review of previous research findings and
improvements needed in a set of
problems extensions of them
classrooms or a school

some primary sources but also use of

extensive enquiry into all research previously
Literature review secondary sources plus what
conducted on this topic using primary sources
practitioners are doing in other schools

random or representative preferably with large students and/or members of the school
Sampling
populations community
flexible, quick time frame, control
Research design rigorous controls over long periods
through triangulation
inductive reasoning – observations,
deductive reasoning – theory to hypothesis to
Approach patterns, interpretations,
data to confirmation
recommendations
generally grouping of raw data using
Analysis of data tests leading to statistical significance
descriptive statistics

Applications of result theoretical significance practical significance

Elliott’s model
ACTION RESEARCH CYCLE ONE
Cycle 1
Identify initial idea:
 Implementation of new curriculum.
 Curriculum Audit.

Reconnaissance:
 Current practice in terms of writing.
 Group’s perceived needs.
 Visit to St. Patrick’s College.

General plan
Action steps:
 Action step 1: On-site training.
 Action step 2: Initial activities.
 Action step 3: Children’s perceptions of writing.
ACTION RESEARCH
Cycle 1 (continued)
Monitor implementation and effects
 Supportive-work-in-progress discussions.

 Children’s perception of writing.

 Understand the writing process.
 Implementation in the classroom.

Reconaissance

 Moved our understanding of the writing process.

 Role of modelling.
 Classroom practicalities.
 Teachers’ concerns.
 Personal side to change.

Cycle two…….
RESEARCH METHOD – WAY OF GATHERING
EVIDENCE
 Keeping a Research Diary.
 Group Interviews.

 Audio tapes.

 Video tapes.

 Portfolios of pupils’ work.

LEGITIMATION OF ACTION RESEARCH
WITHIN ACADEMY

Are the descriptions and explanations of teacher-researcher’s educational

development presented within a form and content that can be publicly
tested for validity?
THE MEANING OF VALIDITY?

Does the research do the things it claims to do, and can the reader
believe the results?
CRITERIA

 Habermas social validation.

 Winter’s six criteria of rigour.

 Living educational standards of judgement developed by

teacher in the course of the educational enquiry.
HABERMAS SOCIAL VALIDATION
Habermas (1976) states that the criteria required to judge
the legitimacy of knowledge claims are that:
 what is being said is meaningful;

 that the prepositional content of what is being said is

true;
 that the speaker is justified in saying what he or she is
saying;
 that the speaker is speaking sincerely.
VALIDATION MEETING

 Are the descriptions and explanations of the practitioner-

researcher’s learning comprehensible?
 Is there sufficient evidence to justify the claims being
made?
 Are the values that justify the enquiry as educational
clearly revealed and justified?
 Is there evidence of the practitioner-researcher’s influence
in the learning of others?
PURPOSE OF VALIDATION MEETINGS

 To test the knowledge claims within a validation group meeting. These

claims are challenged in order to strengthen claims.
 To check out the data and the way it is analysed and presented.
 To enhance claims to knowledge and make sure that evidence is
presented that supports the claims. .
 To contribute to an epistemology of practice (knowledge base).
VALIDATION MEETINGS
WHAT IS RIGOUR

the methodology which best allows the researcher to

conduct systematic inquiry in order to present a warranted
assertion – that is the methodology is fit for a given
function.
Swepson (2000)
HOW TO ENSURE RIGOUR IN ACTION
RESEARCH

 Selection and use of multiple research methods.

 Cyclical nature of action research.
 Focus on participation.
WINTER’S SIX CRITERIA OF RIGOUR
 Reflexive critique;
 Risk;

 Dialectical critique;

 Collaborative Resource;

 Plural Structure;

 Theory, Practice, Transformation.

(Winter, R., 1989)

ADDRESSING WINTER’S CRITERIA
Reflexive critique
 Action research as situational
 Specific context.
 Insights on modest claims.
 Validation through collaboration with peers.
 Others taking their own context into account, may be
able to use the findings and recommendations.
EXAMPLE OF REFLEXIVE CRITIQUE

 Situation: physical punishment for children

 Context: in different families

 Procedure:
 Assumption: Family likely to use physical punishments on
their child
 Meeting and discussing with parents

 The findings and recommendations.

 the religious families don’t use physical punishments.
 Physical punishment was not the best action for all families
WINTER’S CRITERIA OF RIGOUR

Dialectical critique/Risk Disturbance:

 Educational values not lived out in practice.
 Children’s perceptions – concern with orthodoxy.
 Living contradictions.
 Example:
 Traditional assumption: Older people should be respected by younger
people.
 In practice: The older people are just respected if they have ethics,
rational behavior,…
ADDRESSING WINTER’S CRITERIA

Theory, Practice, Transformation:

 Engaged with theories in literature.
 Own learning emerged through enquiry.
 Created own theory through practice.

 Example:
 Theory: using of GTM (Grammar Translation Method)
 Practice: Conducting lecture in classroom
 Own learning: Through grammar translation, students lacked an active role
in the classroom, often correcting their own work and strictly following the
textbook.
 Transformation:
 Direct method (DM)
 The audio-lingual method was developed in an attempt to address some
of the perceived weaknesses of the direct method.
COLLABORATIVE RESOURCE/PLURAL
STRUCTURE:

 Collaboration was central to research process.

 Participants viewpoints were considered.
 Questioning of statements and actions allowed us to gain
insights into practice.