ACTION RESEARCH

MARIA SHIELA CANTONJOS-MAGLENTE

MA in Science Education
 Action Research
Robert Jackson

Conducted by one or more individuals

or groups for the purpose of solving a problem
or obtaining information in order to inform local
practice.
 Types of Action Research

 Practical action research

• is intended to address a specific
problem within a classroom, [Add a graphic that provides
school, or other “community.” evidence of what you learned]
Its primary purpose is to
improve practice in the short
term as well as to inform larger
issues.
 Types of Action Research

 Participatory Action Research

• Collaborative and community based
research [Add a graphic that provides
• Contributes to emancipation or change evidence of what you learned]
• Addresses the social problems that
constrain and repress the lives of
students and educators
 Action Research is based on the following
assumptions:
Assumption Example

Teachers and other education A team of teachers, after discussions with the school
professionals have the authority to administration, decides to meet weekly to revise the
make decisions. mathematics curriculum to make it more relevant to low
achieving students.

Teachers and other education A group of teachers decides to observe each other on a weekly
professionals want to improve their basis and then discuss ways to improve their teaching.
practice.
 Action Research is based on the following
assumptions:
Assumption
Teachers and other education
professionals are committed to
continual professional development
Teachers and other education
professionals will and can engage in
systematic research.
Example
The entire staff—administration, teachers, counselors, and
clerical staff—of an elementary school goes on a retreat to plan
ways to improve the attendance and discipline policies for the
school.
Following up on the example just listed above, the staff decides
to collect data by reviewing the attendance records of chronic
absentees over the past year, to interview a random sample of
attendees and absentees to determine why they differ, to hold
a series of after-school roundtable sessions between discipline
prone students and faculty to identify problems and discuss ways
to resolve issues of contention, and to establish a mentoring
system in which selected students can serve as counselors to
students needing help with their assigned work.
Steps in Action Research
4
1. Identifying the research
problem or question
3
2. Obtaining the necessary information
to answer the question(s) 2

3. Analyzing and interpreting the

1
information that has been gathered

4. developing a plan of action

 Steps in Action Research

In Participatory Research,
every effort is made to involve all
those who have a vested interest in the
outcomes of the study—the stakeholders.
1. Identify a Problem Area
1. Identify a Problem Area
2. Gather Data
2. Gather Data
3. Interpret Data
4. Act on Evidence
5. Evaluate Results
6. Next Steps
Guide Questions
Action Research Cycle
LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION
IN ACTION RESEARCH

• Participation can range from giving

information to increasingly greater
involvement in the various aspects of the
study.
Similarities and Differences
Between Action Research and Formal Quantitative and Qualitative
Research
Similarities and Differences
Between Action Research and Formal Quantitative and Qualitative
Research
 Advantages Treats to Internal Treats to External
of AR Validity of AR Validity and AR

It can be done by just about

anyone, in any type of school or Action research
studies suffer Action research
other institution, to investigate just
about any kind of problem or issue. especially from the studies are weak in
It can help to improve educational possibility of data external validity.
practice. collector bias, Replication is,
 It can help education and other
implementation,
therefore,
professionals to improve their craft. essential in these
 It can help them learn to identify and attitudinal
threats. Most others studies.
problems systematically.
Finally, it can build up a small can be controlled to
community of research-oriented a considerable
individuals at the local level degree.
RESEARCH TIPS

Things to Consider
When Doing
In-School Research
 Things to Consider When Doing
In-School Research

 Check the clarity of purpose and definitions

with others.
 Give attention to obtaining and describing your
sample in a way that is clear to others and, it is
hoped, permits generalization of results.
 If appropriate, use existing instruments; if it is
necessary to develop your own,
 Things to Consider When Doing
In-School Research

 Make an effort to check the reliability and validity of your

measures.
 Give thought to each of the threats to internal validity.
Take steps to reduce these threats as much as possibl Use
statistics where appropriate to clarify data. Use inferential
statistics only when justified—or as rough guides.
 Be clear about the population to which you are entitled to
generalize. It may be only those you actually include in your
study (i.e., your sample). It may be that you can provide a
rationale for broader generalization.
A PUBLISHED EXAMPLE OF ACTION
RESEARCH
Introduction
Introduction
Action Research Context
Action Research Context
Action Research Context
Data Sources and Analysis
Data Sources and Analysis
Results and Discussion
Results and Discussion
Results and Discussion
Conclusion
Conclusion
References
 Analysis of the Study

PURPOSE

The purpose was to “explore how integrating the

Arts in social studies education can increase
student participation and motivation, and
impact student achievement.”
 Justification consists of a
rationale combining research
findings and author opinion, the
distinction not always made
clear.
Identified as “action
research” by the authors, the
study had a broader purpose of
getting students “more actively
involved in their learning.”
Reference to its placement in “a
professional development school”
and “a collaborative effort”
implies the intention to improve
practice within this setting.
There appear to be no
problems regarding risk,
confidentiality, or deception.
 DEFINITIONS

Terms are not explicitly defined. “Student participation” is operationally

defined as ratings made by the student teacher based on observations during
each of 20 lessons.

The explanation of these is weakened by the

ambiguous terms “fully engaged” and “obviously
motivated.” Student achievement was operationally
defined as term grades.

“Art activities” is not clarified except with the

examples of “pictures, music or drama.”
HYPOTHESES

None is stated, but it is clearly implied

that art integrating activities will result
in higher participation, motivation, and
achievement—a directional hypothesis
SAMPLE

The sample comprised four sixth-grade

social studies classes taught by the same
teacher. The number of students is not
given. School and some student
demographics are given.
 INSTRUMENTATION

Participation was assessed by student teacher (lesson

teacher) ratings after each of 20 lessons given to each
of four classes.
Additional information derived from observations and conversations
with students was recorded in a reflective teaching journal and was
used to modify subsequent lessons.
 No reliability or validity evidence is included. It
seems that class participation could have been independently
observed by the regular teacher, providing data on observer
agreement.

Judging the “content” validity of the participation

measure is hindered by the lack of clarity of definitions.
 PROCEDURES/INTERNAL VALIDITY

Procedures for data collection are well described. The study

design compares the 14 “Arts” lessons with six “traditional” lessons,
both types described in some detail.

“Subject characteristics” is not a threat, because each student

should have received both “Art” and “non- Art” lessons “loss of
subjects” for particular lessons should not have introduced a bias.

Location, instrumentation, history, maturation,

and regression are well controlled by the design.
 Data collector bias is possible
because the (only) data collector for “participation”
clearly knew which type of lesson she was observing.

An implementation threat is possible if the teacher behaved

differently during the “Arts” lessons in ways not
integral to the enrichment, such as being more enthusiastic
or accessible.
 DATA ANALYSIS/RESULTS

Data analysis used appropriate descriptive statistics. The

results show quite clearly that students liked the “Arts”
lessons better and that this was accompanied by higher
levels of rated participation.

This conclusion would be more persuasive if there had

been more than six “traditional” lessons. The differences in
student grades seems to us, in the absence of standard
deviations, to be too small to be of importance. A number of
other “results” are discussed, but without specific evidence.
 DATA ANALYSIS/RESULTS
Whether these results support the hypothesis
depends on the validity of the measures.
Although we wish for greater clarity, it appears
that the participation rating swould measure
participation.
We are bothered by the statement (page 608)
that students rated as having high participation
were “obviously motivated,” which appears to
mix both intended outcomes in the same rating.
More information should have been
provided to enable the reader to judge
the validity of inferences from the daily
log and conversations with students.
DATA ANALYSIS/RESULTS

We do not think the data presented justify the emphasis

given to student “choice.” It appears that all “Arts”
lessons included choice, in which case it can’t be separated
out.
If some Art lessons did not involve choice,
these could have been compared with those that did.
If this emphasis is based on other information such as
student comments, this information should have been
included.
DATA ANALYSIS/RESULTS

It is clear that the student teacher/researcher found

the study rewarding in several ways. It seems likely
that both she and the regular teacher (and perhaps other
colleagues) will incorporate the findings and methods
into their future teaching—a goal of action research. We
think many of the conclusions, although agreeable to us,
are not supported by the findings of this study. Recommendations
for generalizing are not justified from this
study alone.
 References

1. T. J. Mendenhall and W. J. Doherty (2007). Partners in diabetes: Action research in a primary care setting. Action Research, 5(12): 378–406.
2. S. B. Collins (2005). An understanding of poverty from those who are poor. Action Research, 3(3): 9–31.
3. E. G. Foldy (2005). Claiming a voice on race. Action Research, 3(93): 33–54.
4. R. Bourke (2008). First graders and fairy tales: One teacher’s action research of critical literacy. The ReadingTeacher; 62(4): 304–312.
5. J. Kitchen and D. Stevens. (2008). Action research in teacher education: Two teacher-educators practice action research as they introduce action research to pre-service teachers.
Action Research, 6(3): 7–28.
6. X. Fazio (2009). Development of a community of science teachers: Participation in a collaborative action research project. School Science and Mathematics, 109(2): 95.
7. J. Kwok (2009). Boys and reading: An action research project report. Library Media Connection, 27(4): 20.
8. G. E. Mills (2000). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
9. Ibid., p. 6.
10. B. L. Berg (2001). Qualitative methods for the social sciences. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, p. 180.
11. E. T. Stringer (1999). Action research, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cited in Berg, op. cit., p. 183.
12. Berg, op. cit., p. 182.
13. D. DeMaria (1990). A study of the effect of relaxation exercises on a class of learning-disabled students. Master’s thesis. San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA.
Thank you!