Investigations into multi-agency discourse during the course of investigating

effective learning environments in a new British international curriculum

School (within a Saudi religious context) in The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Research and Development Study submitted to the University of Oxford in part

fulfillment of the degree of MSc. Learning and Teaching

A I Ashraf
Chapter 2 Literature review

If we traveled back to 1900s, what would we see? A teacher standing at the front

teaching, students sitting in rows taking notes, with some interaction between the

students and the teacher, but not so much between students. As we widen an

understanding of the many rudiments that influence learning and work to organize

those elements in ways that progress learning, what does teaching and learning look

like?

As long as teachers have taught and students have learned, people have thought

about learning spaces. Where do people go to learn? What do those places look

like? How does the arrangement of a learning space add to or detract from the task

of education?

The chance to participate in learning should not be limited by the design of the

learning spaces, and the learning space should to be at the heart of the educational

undertaking. The expression-learning environment encompasses learning resources

and technology, means and modes of teaching and learning, and includes human

behavioral and cultural dimensions, requiring us to examine and sometimes adjust

the roles of teachers and students.

There is a necessity to rethink not just the buildings in which learning is housed but

every element that makes up the learning environment and ensure that we continue

to afford innovative solutions intended to improve the learning experience. The future

of learning environments demands that all stakeholders in the education process

work together to decipher both up-and-coming educational trends and day-to-day

exchanges into spaces, products and systems that support learning.

2|Page
This literature review, explores specific themes of Activity theory (AT), the

developments, usefulness and as well as ATs limitations. Part two reviews, school

design in the 21st century and the use of space in the construction of new schools

2.1 What is Activity Theory?

AT examines human beings and their social systems in their normal environments

during the study of their activities (Kaptelinin and Nardi, 2006), and was proposed by

Leontiev. Human activity is understood as a triangular relation linking a subject, the

object of its activity and the mediating tools involved in the activity (Fig. 1)

Fig. 1

An activity is defined as the engagement of a subject towards a certain goal or

objective (Luria, 1981), and mediated by tools (artefacts) in collaboration with others.

The structure of the activity is constrained by cultural factors including conventions

(rules) and social strata (division of labor) (Engestrm 1994), See Fig. 2

Fig 2
Engestrom's activity theory
diagram (Engestrom,
1987: 78)

3|Page
Kuutti (1996) suggests AT provides a notional basis for studying different forms of

human practices as developmental processes, with both individual and social levels

interlinked, whilst Uden, Valderas et al. (2008) suggest it best provides a basis for

comprehending 'regularly patterned' human activity.

Leontiev pointed out that people partake in actions that do not gratify a need in itself,

but rather contribute towards the ultimate fulfillment of a need, leading to a distinction

between activities that gratify a need and the actions that make up the activities.

Kaptelinin notes that Engestrm proposed a structure of activity unlike Leontievs and

includes three interacting entities:

1. The individual

2. The object

3. The community

Instead of the two proposed by Leontiev' (Kaptelinin 1996, p. 57).

1. The individual

2. The object

Vygotsky accepted that all human action is shaped by what we know, we do not

solely act on the world, but do so in line with how we can make sense of it. For

Vygotsky the vital tool was language, as it carries the meanings that matter in the

societies in which we dwell and so offer a quick look into our minds and these

societies.

The approach taken by the investors is clearly in line with Vygotsky, in that their

approach to school establishment is from what they know, which is finance. All their

decisions are based on financial returns, for example, returns per square metre of

4|Page
space being allocated to the project or the return on capital employed. This is their

world and background and hence the baseline they return to when making a

decision.

Leontievs research interrelated motives, goals and social conditions, he argued that

society produces the activity of the individuals forming it (1978: 7); Leontiev (1978)

suggests an activity has a hierarchical structure with three unique levels;

The activity level

The action level

The operation level

Fig 3
(Leontiev, 1981)

Activities consist of actions, which in turn include operations and indicate the distinct

conditions necessary to realize goals. An activity will use a number of actions, each

of which may use many operations and an action may be used in more than one

activity, and equally an operation may be used in distinctive actions (Lewis, 1997).

This hierarchical study of human action emphasizes that activity simultaneously

takes place at different levels and not necessarily sequentially. (Bertelsen & Bodkaer,

2003). Through the process of internalization, activities may change into actions and

actions in turn change into operations (Jonassen & Ronrer-Murphy, 1999). Kuutti

5|Page
(1996) reinterprets the three levels of activity as motive (activity), goals (action) and

conditions (operation).

According to Vygotsky, the association between the human agent and the object is

mediated by cultural means and not as a direct response to the situation. The unit of

analysis in studying human mediated activity is an activity system with a community

of actors who have a common object of activity (Engestrm 1987, Cole & Engestrm

1994).

Engestrm (2001) depicts the development of AT as three distinct generations:

1. First generation representation on Vygotsky's (1978) concept of mediation (Fig.

4). The triangle represents the way in which Vygotsky brought together cultural

artefacts with human actions in order to dispense with the individual / social

dualism.

Fig 4

2. Second generation: Engestrm advocates the study of artefacts as integral and

inseparable components of human functioning, however, argues that the heart of

the study of mediation ought to be on its relationship with the other components

of an activity system (Engestrm 1999) p.29. (Fig. 5).

6|Page
 Fig 5

3. Third generation understands dialogues, multiple perspectives and networks of

interacting activity systems adopting joint practice as unit of analysis (Fig. 6)

Fig 6

Two interacting activity systems as minimal model for third generation of AT

(Engestrom 1999)

7|Page
Engestrm (1999) suggests that AT may be summarized with the help of five

principles:

1. A shared, artefact-mediated and object-oriented activity system, seen in its

network relations to other activity systems, taken as the primary unit of

analysis.

2. An activity system is always a community of multiple points of view, customs

and interest.

3. Activity systems take shape and are transformed over extended periods.

4. The fundamental role of contradictions as sources of change and

development.

5. As the contradictions of an activity system are aggravated, some individual

participants begin to question and depart from established norms escalating

into collaborative envisioning and a conscious combined change effort.

AT helps, understand the viewpoint of a community diagrammatically, outlining the

key elements and their interaction. Figure 7 shows the standard AT researchers use

to present what they view as the critical apparatus of every activity system.

Fig. 7 Activity System

8|Page
AT is used to illustrate actions in a socio-technical system via six connected

elements:

1. Object

2. Subject (or internalization)

3. Community (or externalization)

4. Tools (or tool mediation)

5. Division of labor

6. Rules

2.2 How are parts of an Activity System related? (Fig. 8)

The Subject of an activity system is the person who is directly participating in the

activity under examination and provides a point of view for studying the activity. The

Motives direct the subjects activities and includes the Object of the activity and the

Outcome. The Subject uses Tools to complete the Objectives and attain the intended

Outcomes. The subject is motivated to use these tools because it will realize

something and the tools will help do so.

Fig 8
(based on Mwanzas (2001)
Eight-Step-Model)

9|Page
 Kain &ofWardle
The terms at the base of the triangle, Rules, Community, and Division Labor,3

Activity
make up whatsystems are also(1999)
Engestrm constrained by divisions
refers to as theof labor andbasis
social by rules.
of In theactivity
the university, for
system or
instance, the labor is divided among the participantsstudents are responsible for completing
theassignments;
influences that structure
instructors the activity.
are responsible for grading assignments; administrators are responsible for
making sure grades appear on students transcripts. In the university, we also operate with a set of rules
for participating in classroom and laboratory learning. The rules in many respects are our mutual
The Community
agreement is the
about how theactivity
largerwill
grouping
be carriedthat
out sothe subject
we can is a toward
all progress part oftheand fromofwhich
outcome
learning.
participants take their cues and the way the activity is formed. The Division of Labor
One way that activity theory helps you more fully understand the context of a community and its
describes
tools is byhow tasks
providing are spread
a diagram inside
outlining the activity
the important system.
elements Whilst
and their RulesFigure
relationships. are a1 way
showsof
the conventions activity theory researchers use to present what they view as the critical components of
attempting to diminish, difference within activity systems and structure the interaction
every activity system. The nodes in the system are the points on the trianglethink of these as the
of specific
subject andoftools
aspects with that
a context theactivity
object. These
theory rules
can help you change as fully.
consider more otherThe
aspects of the
arrows indicate
the reciprocal relationships among these various aspects. The labels weve provided to describe some of
system transform, or as the rules are questioned or resisted. (Fig. 9)
the components of each node in the system.

Tools
Physical objects and systems of symbols
(like language, mathematics) that people
Fig 9
use to accomplish the activity

Motives
Purposes, reasons
for the activity

Subject Object Outcome

Person or people engaged in Immediate Long-terms
activity who are the focus of a goals of goals of
study on activity. The point of activity activity
view used to focus on the
activity.

Rules Division of Labor

Community:
Laws, codes, conventions, How the work in the activity
People and groups whose
customs, and agreements is divided among
knowledge, interests,
that people adhere to while participants in the activity
stakes, and goals shape
engaging in the activity the activity

Figure 1: Activity System

Building on the idea of mediation, Leontiev (1978, 1981) conceptualized activity as

composed of three different units of analysis (activity, actions, and operations).

Wertsch (1981) gives an elucidation of Leontievs units as a hierarchical structure,

10 | P a g e
the top of the structure consists of activities, which are directed to achieve combined

motives, the middle are actions, which are directed to realize individual goals, and at

the bottom are operations, which are recognized by the conditions under which they

are undertaken.

One of the key differences between Vygotsky and Leontiev generations is the

boundary of shared and individual unit of analysis, according to Daniels (2004) the

individual-collective dichotomy that distinguished previous units of analysis is

progressed with Engestrms (1987) extended activity system.

Engestrms development added the components of community, division of labour,

and rules to the Vygotskian triangular in order to:-

Enable an examination ...of macro-level of the collective and the community

in preference to a micro-level concentration on the individual actor or agent

operating with tools. This expansion... aims to represent the social/collective

elements in an activity system...while emphasizing the importance of

analysing their interactions (Daniels, 2004, p 123).

11 | P a g e
 2.3 Activity System for this project

Fig 10 below depicts the activity system for this research project.

Fig. 10

Tools
(Design tools
Financial Models)

Motives

Subject
(Investors
Architects
Educationalist) Object
(Production of Outcome
school design for (Highest quality
the new school) educational curriculum,
Improved educational
standards & school
designed for 21st Century)

Rules Division of Labour

Saudi Education Rules Community (Managers / Staff
Engineering Standards (Learners Investors /Architects
Saudi Design Rules Teachers Investors / educationalists)
UK Curriculum rules from Community
the awarding bodies Min of education)
Architects code of conduct
Saudi financial regulations
Saudi facilities regulations

12 | P a g e
In this project, the clear overall objective is the design and build of a new school that

will lead to improved outcomes in educational standards, and behaviour for the

children attending the school. The rules dictating the design and build emanate from

the official governmental rules via the many governmental agencies, which are clear

in their application. The rules on design, construction, and safety standards are well

known and will be adhered to as per the law.

The difficulty arises in the interpretation and understanding of some of the rules of

the Ministry of education (MED) of Saudi Arabia in curriculum content, composition

and execution. Also some areas are unclear and can be interpreted in various ways,

which can be acceptable until someone interprets them in a different way, when

problems arise. For this reason, two representatives from the ministry of education

will be present in this design and build. Although, they will not be officially present

from the Ministry of education, they are officials who hold senior positions in the MED

and are present as consultants.

Although the community comprises of various individuals, unfortunately due to many

reasons, only the researcher, and two principal designates will represent the

community. This is adequate from an educators perspective; however, there is a

clear lack of input from learners in the project.

13 | P a g e
2.4 How do Activity Systems change?

Activity systems consist of the relationships between all of the factors that come to

bear on an activity at a given point in time. Cole and Engestrm (1994) propose that

the association between the factors in an activity system is a distribution of

cognition, or a sharing of knowledge and work across the elements in the system.

Activity systems are dynamic and, as Russell explains, best viewed as complex

formations (1997 p.9), where change is the quality making them dynamic.

Toomela (2000, 2008) critically assessed AT and identified what he considered as

five critical faults in AT:

1. Reliance on unidirectional view of culture-individual interaction

2. Focusing on analyses of activities and not taking into account the individual

involved in the activity

3. Underestimating the role of signs and on sign meaning

4. Not understanding the holistic nature of minds

5. Not suitable for understanding emerging phenomena

Toomelas evidence clearly does not pertain to what activity theorists are doing, how

they are applying and developing their theory. AT is a theory of object-driven activity,

where the objects are concerns and generators and foci of attention, motivation,

effort and meaning. Through their activities people incessantly change and create

new objects. The new objects are often not deliberate products of a single activity but

inadvertent consequences of multiple activities. The societal significance and impact

of AT depend on our ability to seize the shifting nature of objects. The components of

activity systems are not static components existing in isolation, but are dynamic and

always work together with the other components through which they define the

activity system as a whole.

14 | P a g e
2.5 School Design

Schools, the socio-cultural, intellectual, institutional and physical environment in

which learning takes place, have altered and are steadily altering with growing public

expectations (Whittle, 2006; Wagner, 2003). Evidence suggests a precise link

between the physical characteristics of school buildings, and the spaces within them

and educational outcomes. Every effort should therefore be made in the design stage

to create the best environment for learning to take place.

2.5.1 How can designers create the ideal learning environment?

It is virtually impossible to present an exact answer to this question since learning

environments are planned to support a particular pedagogy, curriculum design,

climate and learning theory.

2.5.2 How People Learn

Learning is the gaining of skills, knowledge, values, wisdom and understanding,

learning may be viewed as a process, rather than a collection of accurate and

procedural knowledge (Schacter, Gilbert & Wegner (2009, 2011), there are

numerous theories explaining how learning occurs.

Behaviorism considered the mind as a blank slate that learned behavior through

positive and negative reinforcement (Squires and McDougall, 1994) evidenced by a

change in actions. Learning environments are lecture-based, teacher-focused, and

structured, with physical learning environments typically fenced in single multi-storey

building, with learners located at one end and moved through until they come out as

graduates at the other end (Bennett and LeCompte, 1990).

15 | P a g e
Cognitivism focused on mental processes in order to explain learning (Gagne, 1984),

the learning environments encouraged curiosity, provided inquiry-oriented projects

and presented knowledge in staged scaffolding. Schools built were single or two

storey buildings, arranged like campuses and connected by walkways providing

opportunities for students to interact with the outdoors. The classroom buildings were

arranged in sequence, consisting of long corridors with classrooms on either side.

Constructivism considers the learners social, cultural and contextual conditions

(Boyle, 1994) and suggests that learner constructs knowledge through experience

and in accord with their level of cognitive development (Boyle, 1997). Learning

environments designed are student-centered, collaborative, co-operative, and

experiential with teachers serving as facilitators rather than instructors.

2.5.3 Creating the Optimal Learning Environment

Learning theories do not provide sufficient description of their physical context,

requiring designers and architects to respond to a program of spatial requirements

and relationships when creating a physical context for learning environments.

Standardized designs only undermine the goals of a school system; a holistic

approach is necessary to create places of learning and not just spaces for learning.

Designers need to engage in timeless design, taking cognizance of a schools

context, the communitys history, heritage, values and identity.

The OECD (2006) defines educational spaces as

a physical space that supports multiple and diverse teaching and learning

programmes and pedagogies, including current technologies; one that

demonstrates optimal, cost-effective building performance and operation over

time; one that respects and is in harmony with the environment; and one that

16 | P a g e
 encourages social participation, providing a healthy, comfortable, safe,

secure and stimulating setting for its occupants.

A physical learning environment is seen as a conventional classroom and, in its

widest sense, as a combination of formal and informal education systems where

learning takes place both inside and outside of schools (Manninen et al., 2007).

The notion of the physical learning environment in relation to physical structures

relates to spaces, equipment and tools within the school. Lehtinen (1997, p. 21)

suggests that the idea has evolved into an even more complex structure including

teaching equipment, sources of information and events external to the school where

students can partake in the learning process. Internet has brought about momentous

changes in schools, with the quantity of information available and easy access to

social networks having weakened the link between schools and learning, and

changed the time honored teacher student picture. Manninen (2007, p. 27)

categorizes learning into five contexts: physical, local, social, technological and

didactic.

In order to plan and construct effective physical learning environments technical

specifications and qualitative aspects need to be considered (Nuikkinen 2009, p. 64).

The concept of quality design relates to school construction as well as defining a

quality physical learning environment, measuring it and analyzing the results (OECD,

2006). Nuikkinen (2009, p. 278) argues that users expectations and the theoretical

concept of what makes a good school building do not match up. School designs

cannot be imposed nor bought offthe-shelf, success lies in users being able to

articulate a distinctive vision for their school and then working with designers and

architects to create integrated solutions.

17 | P a g e
It is essential for the stakeholders in the project to be clear on their vision for the

school, and the way they plan for learning to take place in this new school, in order to

design a learning space to meet that vision. A purely financial approach will not be

appropriate for such a project. The project needs to be lead by educationalists,

specialists working collaboratively to clarify the educational expectations and

approach to learning. This in turn needs to be clearly explained to the designers, in

order to ensure an environment is created which meets the vision of the stakeholders

and satisfies the needs of the pupils and parents of this new school.

There is growing research that there is a relationship between student achievement

and the conditions of school buildings (Buckley, Schneider, & Shang, 2004a;

Earthman, 2002; Lemasters, 1997; Lewis, 2000; Filardo, 2008 Hunter, 2006; Jago &

Tanner, 1999; Schneider, 2003b). Hale (2002) found that students in classrooms with

large windows, natural lighting, and well-designed skylights performed 19 to 26%

better than their peers in classrooms without these features did. Hunter (2006) found

that the environmental conditions in schools, which included the inoperative heating

system, inadequate ventilation, and poor lighting, affected the health and learning as

well as the morale of students and the staff. Olson and Kellum (2003) found

sustainable schools and the good qualities of lighting, site planning, indoor air quality,

acoustics, healthy building materials, and the use of renewable energy benefited

student achievement. Bullock (2007) discovered that overall building condition, the

age of the building, and the windows in the instructional areas were positively linked

to student achievement.

It has been pointed out that typical school buildings and classroom layouts vary

between countries in ways that are related to understandings and philosophies of

education as well as to material resources (Alexander, 2000). Alexander reports

some interesting consistencies such as the much more elaborate displays of

18 | P a g e
childrens finished work in the American and British schools (op.cit.,p.184); the

arrangement of the children in rows of individuals in India, rows of pairs in Russia

and around work centres in the USA (p.333-334); and the contrast of a great deal of

light in all the Russian classrooms with some British and American classrooms so

inadequately fenestrated that they required artificial light throughout the day. (p.185).

Dudek (2000) and Clark (2002) recommend the genuine participation of students and

teachers in the design process.

'There is sufficient research to state without equivocation that the building in

which students spends a good deal of their time learning does in fact

influence how well they learn' (Earthman, G 2004:18).

Earthman (2004) rates temperature, heating and air quality as the most important

individual elements for student achievement. In relation to student achievement it is

argued that day lighting offers the most positive effect (Earthman, 2004; Heschong

Mahone Group, 2003) as daylight produces biological effects on the human body

(Wurtman, 1975). Benya (2001) suggested that for lighting to be effective, daylight

must be supplemented by automatically controlled electric lighting that dims in

response to daylight levels. (2001, p.1). Barnitt (2003) suggests that good lighting

can only be achieved by a combination of direct and indirect lighting.

This new design must ensure that the physical environment is suitable for the

geographical location the school is in, in terms of catering for the climate, and also

the physical location in the city (see map below Fig 11 Red box indicates location).

19 | P a g e
 !

Fig 11

The new school will be very close to the seacoast, where according to the National

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2013), Jeddah retains its warm

temperature in winter, which can range from 15C at dawn to 28C in the afternoon.

Summer temperatures are extremely hot, often breaking the 43C mark in the

afternoon and dropping to 30C in the evening. Rainfall in Jeddah is sparse, and

usually occurs in small amounts in November and December. Heavy thunderstorms

are common in winter, with dust storms coming from the Arabian Peninsula's deserts

and North Africa.

Desirable designs include having 'friendly and agreeable' entrance areas, supervised

private places for students, as well as public spaces that foster a sense of

community, with particular attention to the colour used (Fisher, K 2000 in McGregor,

J 2004:2). Today's schools must create spaces that students want to go to, similar to

the way cafes attract people, rather than the space being purely functional (Bunting,

A 2004).

20 | P a g e
Engelbrecht argues that we have a basic, biological reaction to colour and that the

psychological reaction to colour does not preclude the basic biological reaction that

stems from human evolution. (2003). Depending on the age of children, different

colours are considered stimulating; younger children prefer bright colours and

patterns while adolescents prefer more subdued colours (Engelbrecht, 2003).

Different preferences for colours have been found between the genders (Rosenstein,

1985; Read et al., 1999; Khouw, 1995).

Read et al (1999) consider that both colour and ceiling height affects childrens

cooperative behaviour. Engelbrecht argues that the colour of walls in the classroom

affects productivity and accuracy while Brubaker (1998) argues that cool colours

permit concentration. It is essential in this design to ensure a colour scheme is

relevant to the different age groups of the school, and not just one for the entire

school.

There is much research that suggests 'less attentive and less successful pupils are

particularly affected by the desk arrangement, with their on-task behaviour increasing

very significantly when seated in rows instead of tables' (Higgins et al 2005:26).

There is an embarrassment of research that examines the result of the physical

conditions of teaching spaces on students' engagement, attainment, attendance and

wellbeing (Higgins et al 2005; Lackney & Jacobs, 2004; Gump 1987; McGuffey 1982;

Earthman 2004; Sundstrom 1987; McNamara & Waugh 1993; and Weinstein 1979).

In order for this new school to have the best behaved and highest achieving pupils,

the physical factors must be conducive, although they will not be the sole factors.

Ensuring that the external factors are ideal to effect positive behaviour and the

physical environment ideal in encouraging the pupils to learn will go in some way to

positively affect the goals of the school.

21 | P a g e
Some interesting contentions about the physical aspects of learning spaces include:

Temperature, heating and air quality are the most important individual

elements for student achievement (Earthman, 2004: 1116)

Chronic noise exposure impairs cognitive functioning, with numbers of studies

finding noise-related reading problems, deficiencies in pre-reading skills, and

more general cognitive deficits. (Higgins et al, 2004:18)

'Colour remains the topic of some of the most optimistic claims about morale

and efficiency' (Sundstrom, 1987:751)

Looking at learning space is about the social relationships within the space and not

simply the structures of the space. Space can be conceptualized as being an

interaction between physical and social spaces. McGregor claims that the space is

'made' by the social aspects (McGregor, J 2004:2).

2.5.4 What does an effective learning environment look like?

There is no prescription for how the components of a learning environment should be

assembled for maximum benefit, the variables are many, and combinations that work

well in one setting will not be ideal at other institutions. The fact that technologies and

teaching methods will continue to evolve means that the job of creating effective

learning environments is a journey, not a destination. What is clear is that we must

begin to think in environmental terms about the factors that influence learning and

strive to understand, test, measure, and evaluate how they work together as an

interrelated system, an ecology of learning.

The design of learning environments of the future should be, flexible with individual

spaces and the configuration of buildings being adaptable for flexible use as models

22 | P a g e
of learning evolve. They should be inspiring to those learning, working and visiting;

supportive of effective teaching and learning. The environment should not constrain

or inhibit learning, from interior and detailed design to space configuration. It should

accommodate a wide range of experiences and activities and also support a diversity

of learners.

23 | P a g e
Chapter 3 Methodology

3.1 Introduction

Chapter 3 is divided into the following sections describing the methodology employed

in this research study.

1. The first section provides a rationale for the selection of action research as

the chosen methodology in this study

2. The second section examines the research procedure & Data Collection

3. This section outlines the focus of the current research

4. Overview of Action research Cycles

5. The third section considers ethical matters relating to the study

6. The fourth section briefly outlines a number of limitations associated with the

methodology selected for this study

24 | P a g e
3.2 Research Methodology / Selection of methodology

In this research study, an action research method approach was adopted. The

origins of this methodology are to be found in the work of Kurt Lewin (McFarland and

Stansell, 1993) and McNiff (1988), Ferrance (2000) and Reason and Bradbury

(2001) articulate the usefulness of action research in the field of education. Ebutt

(1985, p.156) defines action research as the methodical study combining action and

research with the intention of improving practice.

In terms of my research, this means having the discussions with the various

stakeholders within the project, analyzing the discourse (from the viewpoint of the

various agents), and providing feedback in order to change their perspectives /

change the position of the different agents. The advantage of action research is that

it is participative, qualitative and practical. Action research involves people as co-

researchers, shaping their inquiry as the group moves between action and reflection,

exploring and evaluating ways of improving their practice; it also has the potential to

provide a supportive, learning environment for the group as a whole and for the

individuals within it.

Rather than a traditional researcher-studying people as passive subjects, action

research involves people as active agents, co-researchers in a community of inquiry

(Heron & Reason, 2001).

Action research has been viewed as cyclical in nature, where each cycle has four

phases:

1. Defining the issue

2. Planning the intervention

3. Taking action

4. Reflection on the intervention

25 | P a g e
The teacher may continue to go through subsequent cycles of implementation,

evaluation, and revision (Mertler & Charles, 2011).

Figure 12 depicts the four phases of action research.

Fig 12 (Ref: State of NSW, Department of Education and Training)

26 | P a g e
 us that these steps are meant to serve as guidelines in conducting action research projects.
They must be adapted to a particular research problem or topic. Furthermore, the steps
themselves should not necessarily be seen as cast in stone. If and where appropriate,
teacher-researchers may find themselves skipping steps, rearranging their order, or repeat-
ingprocess
The some steps
of more
actionthan once (Johnson,
research, with its 2008). Action
cyclical and research
spiralingcan take on
nature, is many forms,in
portrayed

Figure 13 below.
Figure 2.2 The Process of Action Research

Stage 2
Acting

Stage 1 Stage 3
Cycle 1
Planning Developing

Stage 4
Reflecting

Stage 2
Acting

Stage 1 Stage 3
Cycle 2
Planning Developing

Stage 4
Reflecting

Cyclical process of action research continues . . .

Fig 13
Source: Adapted from Mertler and Charles, 2011.
(The ongoing, cyclical process of action research (from Mertler, 2012b, p. 38)

A variety of forms of action research have evolved (Carr & Kemmis, 1986), all

adopting a methodical, iterative approach embracing problem identification, action

planning, implementation, evaluation, and reflection. The insights gained from the

27 | P a g e
initial cycle feed into planning of the second cycle, for which the action plan is

modified and the research process repeated (Figure 14 below).

Fig 14 (Based on: Hudson, Owen, & van Veen (2006, p.581))

Source: Carr & Kemmis, 1986

Action research as a methodology is considered particularly appropriate where

collaborative research is being undertaken (Fine, 2008). Given the collaborative,

participatory and cyclical nature of the proposed research, action research was

selected as the most appropriate methodology with other methods being

incorporated into the study where appropriate.

In this project, the process began with discussions and collaboration between the

owners representatives followed by a 2-stage cycle. The requirements of the owners

were noted and clarified, all parameters were clearly defined. Meetings were held

between the different groups involved in the project, in order to determine an

understanding of each participants ideas and requirements.

Once the input of the various parties was obtained, dialogue ensued between the

different agents in the project to clarify and to come to an agreed standpoint, which

was then feedback to the representatives of the owners / investors in order to gain

final sign off. This cycle was repeated 2 times, until agreement was reached between

the owners and the different parties involved in the project.

28 | P a g e
Throughout the course of this action cycle, collaboration was undertaken with other

agents in this multi-agency discourse, namely external schools and government

bodies, ensuring the design requirements met all necessary regulations. How action

was incorporated into this research project, see Fig 15 below:

!

Fig 15 - The 2 cycles in the action research cycle for this project

29 | P a g e
An action research design was utilized in this study for various reasons. Edwards

and Talbot (1994) suggest that this type of design has certain advantages, for

example it allows for in-depth focusing on shifting relationships.

Whilst action research designs have many advantages it is also necessary to be

aware of any limitations that this research design may have. The major

disadvantages are to do with time management and data collection (Edwards and

Talbot, 1994). The research will be situation and time bound, and therefore the

results not widely generalised. In order to obtain the most in- depth or rich data set

many pieces of data will need to be collected so that the clearest picture of the

impact of an intervention can be ascertained.

30 | P a g e
3.3 Focus of this Research

The review of literature in Chapter 2 has assisted in narrowing the focus of this study

to answer the following emergent questions:

1. What is the most effective learning environment for a school in the 21st

century?

2. What is the most effective learning environment for a nursery school in the

21st century in Saudi Arabia?

3. How do you meet the legal requirements of the Saudi Ministry of Education

and yet deliver an effective UK curriculum?

31 | P a g e
3.4 Methods

3.4.1 Overview of Action Research Cycles

Two meetings were held between the project owners, the representatives of the

owners / investors, involved in this project in order to finalise the form the research

project would take. The project has two cycles, the first focusing on the requirements

of the project and its boundaries, and the second involving the application / execution

of this to produce a final design for the school and its various sections, i.e. Nursery,

primary, middle and secondary schools, and the final cycle involving the

implementation of the design produced.

Formulate
Plan
What Will I do in the
next session ?
What techniques can I
utilise to facilitate
Provide re;lection
Feedback

Re5lect Act
What is happening
in the dialogue
Researcher Intervenen to
suggest / input into
How are the parties (Supportive the dialogue
re;lecting on it
How can I facilitate Guide) Utilise strategies to
facilitate re;lection
that re;lection?

Provide Seek Feedback

Feedback Observe
View dialogue
between various
agents & direct
interaction with
the various
stakeholders

Fig 16 ( )

32 | P a g e
 !
!
This action cycle was repeated two times, focusing on the requirements of the project

and its boundaries, very much in the format of Fig 17 below

Fig 17 [The iterative nature of action research (Source: Damme 1998)]

Due to time constraints, the second cycle is on going and will eventually conclude

with the production of the final design, which will then lead to the execution of cycle

three, the final cycle.

33 | P a g e