Aanex 2 - Qualtty Coltrol Checklist for CoEpleted Action Research

INSTRUCTION GT'IDE FOR EVAIUATORS

This instruction guide is provided to ensure that evaluators aie properly guided in evaluating
completed action research reports based on the identilied criteria namely: Credible, Contributory,
Communicable, and Conforming. These four (4) criteria were derived from the framework of
Maitensson et al. (2015) on what constitutes quality research.

Each criterion and its sub-characteristics have been defined accordingly. Evaluators sha-llexamine
hoUstically; they should use the criteria to evaluate every research in its entirety rather than
breaking it up into individual parts.

Evaluators shall note that sections of non-BERF research may be structured dillerently (e.g.
dilferent section names fi'oro r,hat ar:e indicated in the DepEd RMG)

culdc lD detcrEhlEg the tcsl€

The evaluator shall be guided with the following instructions in determining the scale for each
statement irt the given criterion:

(a) Put a check (0) mark in the box under the column NE (Not Evident) if the research, or all
relevant sections, docr lot cvldcttuy rcflcct the statements for each given criterion
(b) Put a check (01 mark in the box under the column PE (Pa'tially Evident) if the research, or
one (1) or more relevant sections docr not evideaUt ahoE the given criterion
(c) Put a check l0l mark in the box under the column FE (Fully Evident) if the research or all
relevant sections cvldcauy abor the given criterion

Note that the completed action research Eg!tl!!9!99_!LEE-!qg!!! to be eligible for acceptance
Gulde lr undcEtaDdhg each crlterloa

Research is CREDIBLE when it is rigorous, transpa-rent, and consistent, that is: (a) Riqorous -
resea-rch that is context-responsive, internally valid, and reliable; {b) IIagSDglg!]! - resea-rch whose
methods can be examined or replicated based on the researcher/ s' truthful documentation; ard
(c) Consistent - research whose components are logicalty aligned and make a coherent set of
arguments.

tt m 7 - Th. cornplct d q.tlo,tr ,.crca'.ch co',/.bl',,cs pertor^ol ,,ctlcctlon urlth ertcn@l lnslght
to ma&,a q. cornltell,,ng c.Iaa tot lntE Llgq,tlon qnd l^teflEntlotr" Research is most effective when
it contributes to a discussion of theoretical and/or practical problems. Likewise, efTective action
research (in a classroom context) creates opportunities for all involved to improve the lives of
learners and lcarn about the craft of leaming (MiIs 2014). Action researchers should be able to
reflect on a par-t of their professional practices - their area of focus - artd use these to a-rgue shy
this area offocus deserves to be the subject of research inquiry. These personal reflections may be
supplemented with insights from external sources, such as the experiences of other practitioners
or findings Aom related literature. Any edemal sources should be properly credited referencing
and citation that follows the rules ofthe researcher/ s' chosen style guide (see ltem 12). The action
researcher may also employ democratic and participatory methods (e.g., act on learners' requests)
to build a bottom-up case for conducttlg the research.

It m 2 - Tha cornpLtca, dctTo rcrc4;rc,'. u'lllte, q ncr..rfich daslgn tut l, coficct drtd
arE roprt(rte lor lni',sll'gq;tl^g t ta chor!^ qraa of tocu.r, problct4 ot lrsuc. Here, 'research
design" refers to the overall stiateg/ that the res€archer/s has/have chosen to investigate their
chosen a-rea of focus, problem, or issue, especially in gatherilg, measuring, and analyzing data.
Research designs must stdke a satisfactory balance between .equirements of ttre resedch problem
{i.e., correctness) and any constiaints faced by the res€archer (i.e. appropriateness). Action
researcher/s should demonstrate that tieir design choices are based on thoughtful .eflection on
the requiiements of their chosen aiea of focus and available resources, which may be
supplemented by insights from fellow practitioners, stakeholder inputs, or related literature.

It m 3 - Thc complct d o,.'tlo^ tcacarch dercrlbcs thc crtoa.n rcaco;'.ch dcslg^ d d rcaultl'tg
nls€(Irch pnoc.as.,s l^ q m(Innc,. th4:t ls u derst4'Ad.IbL to othat tcd.chcrs Pl4 ntn,g,lrrttldr
lntantcntlo^t d d reg,cq,tchars co dllctl'.I;g slmll.It uro'k Resea-rch is credible when its
processes are shown to be consistently replicable or repeatable (Hubbard, 2016). If findings are
shown to be consistent across multiple studies, the more likely they are to be accepted as true
Replication protects against false or misleading findings caused by Tlpe t errors (false positives),
Type 2 errors (false negatives), and fraud, among others. ltem 3 requiies that the reseaicher/s
include a description of the chosen research design and all steps in the research process that are
Annex 2 - Quallty Control Checklist for Completed Actlon Researcb

written in the plainest possible language so that they ca-Ir be scrutinDed arrd repeated by others.
Consistent with Item 4 below, the action reseaichers should also report challenges arrd setbacks
to their research, and any changes made to their previous plans as a result.

Item 4 - The corrEtlctcd dctlon resed,,-ch srrol,ls tl@t t E resedrchcr/s l@tE lolloued the
Retaect-Pla -ActObserve cgproach ln thelr rcscd'crL Quality action research must show that
the researchers have followed the four-step "spiraling" process described by scholais of action
research, summarized as Reflect-Plan-Act-Observe. First, practitioner-researchers reflect on their
professiona-l practices by analyzing available data and noting how these practices can be improved.
Second, they plar out innovations on their practices. Third, they act by implementing these
innovations. And fourth, they obscrve by cotlecting more data on their innovations that they can
then use to reflect on their practices once more, beginning the spiral anew. Action reseaichers who
follow these processes are more likely to fulfill the goals of their inquiry.

Itcm 5 - The qctlor. rcseqrch uscs quqntltdlve lstq,t'l3ltcdr) dnd,/ot quallto,titE

(t E nqttc/contznt anq.lysls, ptocess trqclAg) tools th4t dte artproprlot to the ,.esedrch
quesl,lon and deslgn to analgEc dot4. The researcher/s' choice of a quantitative, qualitative, or
mixed methods research design should reflect the nature of the research question they are
answering. Quantitative (statistical) analysis is generally used to uncover relationships between
variables {correlation/causa.tity), while qualitative methods are used to obtain deep
understandings of a research problem and establish relationships of cause and effect. Mixed
methods designs, while complex to undertake, combine the strengths of both quantitative and
qua.litative analysis. Researcher/s should justify their choice ald sequencing of methods in
relation to their context and related literature.

Item 6 - Th. d.ctlo't reseo,rch ficflects o4 lts own frn'dlrtgs ln q mq,|'',,er that ls dccurat dnd.
cortslstelt uttth thc results oJ thelr d,qtq, cnclgsls qnd ergqgcs unth E resedtcher/s'
understd'r'dl'tg o.f the arcd of toc'tts. The researcher/s' discussion of theii research findings
must primarily be based on observations that they have previously stated in their report. In the
spirit oI self-improvement associated with action research, researcher/s should also be able to
reflect these findings in a way that relates to their previous experiences with the area of focus,
external insights, or previously conducted resea-rch (the Iatter two if the researcher has chosen to
include them in their report). Action resea-rcher/s employing democratic participation may also
include the reflections of tleir stakeholders.

Resea-rch is CONTRTBUTORY 1{hen it is relevant, original, ajrld genetalizable, that is: (a) Relevant
- research that is interesting, applicable, and current; (b) Orisinal - research that has an original
idea, uses an original procedure, and produces an original result; and (c) Generalizable - reseaich
that is externally valid.

Itcm 7 - Trt co',^ tlctad actlo rescqrch qd.dresscs 'reql" a d crlstlng lssucs qnd
chalLr.gcs ldentt.fied by lb ct4r'errolders. As medtioned in ltem 1, ellective action research
creates opportunities for all involved to improve the lives of learners and learn about tlte craft of
leaming (Mills 2014). The completed action reseaich must sulficiently argue that the research
problem directly arises out of issues and challenges that staleholders face in the present and
consider in need of addressing or solving. Depending on the theoretical perspective of the action
researcher/s, they may arrive at theii choice of issues ald challenges th.ough either: a
professional determination made by the teacher-researcher, o. the democratic participation of
those involved in the resealch (Mins 201a). Moreover, the completed action research must sho$
that the research process contributes to or at least not adversely allected any progress in
addressing such issues (t.l.at is, "do no harm").

Itcm 8 - Th. cot t rletcd 4ctlo'4 reports tesatlts, knoulcdge, qrd/or co'acl,rslo'trs
thd arc ta,lslJiehle; thls lncludes '.esca,-ch 'icu,
orlgindl thEorctlcdl d,rtd. pr(Ictlcgl confrb,rflo'ts as urcll
as ut'tficattons/fels{rlc.rfions oI d.beadg exlstl'trg t Eorles dnd, p"q,ctlces. Evaluators must
be able to assess not only if the results, knowledge, and/or conclusions presented are new, but
also if these are falsiliable. Falsifiability, as a chaiacteristic of a research finding, posits that an
assumption, conclusion, or hypothesis is inherently disprovable before it can be accepted as true.
To ensure that a statement is falsifiable, check if it is written in a manner that leaves it open to
being disproved in the future, using available methods of observation. (For example, a researcher
whose hypothesis is "Al1 swars are black" has provided a falsifrable statement, because "All swans
are black'may be disproven once the researcher spots a white swan.)

Item 9 - The coritr lcted dctlo'a resea:r.ch report-s rcsults th4t cortttibrltz to the pro.fesslorl.al
dctglopmeit oj lts ptoportcrtts ot thelr peets; declslon-,'n,.lke,rs; or t E utevate oJ othet
st(Ikchold,cis. T}j,e completed action research must report results that its stakeholders can act on
to improve their welfare. Tlpes of results include the following: formulation of a new theory,
verirying or falsifying an existing theory (either as a whole or in specific contexts), expansion of
Annex 2 - Qualtty Cortrol CheckllEt for Completcd Action Research

existing theory to cover new cases, and evaluation ofan intervention, among otiers. These findings
must inform one or more of the following: practitioners' refinement of future practices;
management decisions; or other stakeholders' individual or collective actions. Evaluators may also
check if the findings obtained can contribute to decision-making by people in authority, i! either
a local or national context.

Research is COMMUNICAEILE when it is consumable and accessible, that is: (a) Consumable -
research that is structured, understandable, and readable to lhe group who is supposed to use it;
and (b) Accessible - research whose results are easily avai.lable to the group being studied.

Itarn 70 l7h2 corryta.t d. .rctlo ra'.i,fch docurncntt tha t raatch proccsa 4rtd ratults ln
(rccordq:ncc wlth t t prcsctihcd ,a,lcs.t & 77 (lha corrqtLt d dctlo rcrco;rch utlrLes
,anguqgc th.& ls drtptoprlate .,I^d, und.rtt4rtdabL to th. group H,ng studaed), The
documentation of the research process AND results must comply with all government-wide and
departmental regulations that aie relevant to the conduct of that report, depending on the fund
source, res€arch participants, and other considerations. At the minimum, the completed research
must comply with the provisions of the Data Privacy Act of 2012 {RA 10173), the DepEd Child
Protection Polcy (DO 40 s. 2012]., and the National Indigenous Peoples' Education Policy
Framework (DO 62, s. 201.1). These regulations ensure that the research is reported in a maffter
that respects its stakeholders' rights.

Research is CONFoRMING when it is atigned with regulations, is ethical, and sustaioable, that is:
(a)Alisted with Resulations - research that is compliart with current applicable regulations (e.8.,
plagiarism, data integrity); (b) Ethical - resedch tllat is morall. justifiable, open, and supports
equal opportunities; and (c) Sustainable - research that promotes further scientific inquiry and/or
sound policy/program recomBendations.

Itef,tr 72 - Th. conpLtcd actlo t crtc, ettd, (Iak'4owlcdgc. sounars 11 co4fomltg

ttt th onc stylc guld',, '.o,,.ch
r"qultcd bg g,'noth.r @tt @rlty or chor€n bg thc rasco,tchcr,
'r'/hethcr
tt roughottt t u r.*alrch pqrt"r. Quality research should be written according to rules of style
that are consistent and legible to others. This also includes spelling, gramma-r, slantax, and the
formattiig of footnotes (if the chosen style guide allows it), endnotes, and bibliographic entries.
The blending or sirnultaneous use of two or more style guides is strongly discouraged. Note that
these criterion statements do not refer to the formatting style utiliz€d in the reseaich report (e.9.
font style, font size, etc.)

Itcm 73 - Thc corn rletcd d,ctlo'tr rcscanch sccures tE lree, prlor,(Ind l4formcd
q.tcrtt/col,,c€',]t ol t tc(lrch partl'clrra Lt (d d th.tt pqtentsfi.gdl g!,irrdl4ltrs l, th.
pqt-Clclpa t arc chlldrcnl. The reseaicher/s must have obtained the Iree a-nd prior informed
consent of adult paiticipants atrd leport how this was done. "Free and prior informed consent"
meals that participants have freely agreed to participate in the res€arch bcforc it has begun ir! a
manaer free of coercion or deception. [n the case of children below l8 yea-rs of age who cannot
legally consent to paiticipating in research, the reseaicher/s must obtain assent from minor
participants aJtd consent from their" parents and/or legal guardians. Ideally, paiticipants should
provide conseot or assent by signing a written consent form. Oral consent or assent, lecorded or
unrecorded, may also be allowed to respect cultural sensitivities or protect vulnerable Sroups.

Itcm 74 - Irtclud.s a clear a',,d tcaslblc qctlo'a pr4,'^, dnd ttol,,,ts to oltPo"tu ltics tot Juare
lnt raE^tlons a;nd studlet. The completed action reseatch must provide an action plan which
describes the researcher's next planned interventions and steps the reseatcher/s will be taking to
ensure their results are disseminated and utilized by the appropriate acto.s following the
publication and/or presentation of the report. The action plan should also identify ways in which
the frndings ofthe research may be better understood and provide suggestions on further reseaich
projects or interventions.

Roferences/For Further Rcadirg:

Creswell, J. w. (2014). Educational research: planning, conductinS, and evaluating quantitative and
qualitative res€arch (P€arson Ner^r International edition, 4th edition). Peaison.

Hubbard, R. (2o16). The Importance of Replication Research - Signifrcant Sarueness. ln Hubbard, R.

Corrupt research (pp.97-132). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, tnc., doi:
10.4135/97815063O533

Martensson, Par., et al. (2015). Evaluatiog Reseaich: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Assessing

Research Practice and Quality. Elsevier B.V. http://dx.doi.or8/lO.lO16/j.respol.2o15.l1.O09
Aatrcx 2 - Quallty Control Chcclllit for Completed Acuon Rcseerch
Mills, G. E. (2014). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (sth ed.). Pearson.