Guide to Conducting Action Research in Your School

Transcription

1 Guide to Conducting Action Research in Your School February 26, 2001 Data Research Assessment Public Informing Program Evaluation Grants and Entitlements Results-Driven Instruction Office of Educational Accountability

2 Page 2 of 9 Dr. Alan Brown Superintendent of Schools Office of Educational Accountability Staff Mary Lamping General Director of Research and Evaluation lampingm@rps205.com Aaron Bolin Research Analyst bolina@rps205.com Carla Cihlar Evaluation Specialist cihlarc@rps205.com Terry Marlow Administrative Assistant marlowt@rps205.com

3 Page 3 of 9 Introduction to Action Research How do school districts decide what subjects to teach, what programs to offer, and what policies and procedures are necessary to make the system work? The answers to these questions all point to various layers of a large bureaucratic system of federal mandates, state mandates, local mandates, and administrative decisions. Sometimes, the bureaucratic systems rely on research findings to make decisions. Research findings are typically produced at large universities, federal agencies, or dedicated research centers all of which are far removed from the everyday workings of a school. This discussion is intended to highlights the fact that knowledge about education typically comes from a source that is outside of the educational setting. In other words, the individuals who decide how children should be educated usually do not have any direct contact with students or practicing educators. This system of making decisions results in an educational system that looks like a multicolored lump of play-dough: programs, policies, and curriculum are stuck together by force. Building principals and teachers who are called on to implement the educational system must then determine which aspects of the system work well together through a process of trial and error. However, the knowledge obtained about which aspects of the educational system work is rarely used to reform the educational system. Knowledge that is gained from inside the system is discounted as invalid by the bureaucracy and by researchers. The current system of managing education from the outside-in is maintained by a force known as dynamic conservatism. Dynamic conservatism is a social force that consists of unspoken rules, norms, and values that constantly pulls things back to the status quo. Despite what they may say, most people follow these unstated rules without even knowing it. Furthermore, these rules prevent people from behaving as they might consciously wish and discourage innovation and change. The results are interpersonal and system-wide processes in which many problems are concealed. At the same time, the social system prevents the problems or their existence from being mentioned. In effect, the unstated rules of the situation and the unstated assumptions people form about each other direct their interactions in both group and organizational settings. In essence, these unstated rules prevent the honest exchange of information about how the educational system can be improved. The forces of outside-in decision making and dynamic conservatism combine to create a political climate in which everyone feels powerless to make positive changes. Central office administrators feel that their hands are tied by federal, state, and local mandates, building principals feel that their hands are tied by the central office, and teachers feel that their hands are tied by the building principal. Students also feel powerless and begin to see education as something done to them rather than something that educators help them do for themselves. The action research paradigm was designed as a way to reverse the flow of information about education and make research findings more relevant and responsive to the needs

4 Page 4 of 9 educators. Action research is an empowering process that substitutes democratic validity for autocratic authority. Action research encourages principals and teachers to abandon trial-and-error implementation in favor of planned and systematic inquiry. Many principals and teachers are intimidated by the idea of conducting research. They often think the research process is difficult and highly technical, and they feel unqualified to engage in this sort of scientific endeavor; the action research model works on the assumption that if you want it done right, you might as well do it yourself. The goal of the action research process is to equip local educators with the tools necessary to both ask and answer their own research questions. It is assumed that practicing educators know an enormous amount of information about educating students in their particular settings. What is Action Research? Many different authors have tried to define Action Research. Listed below are some of the more widely accepted definitions. Action research is comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action using a process of a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a circle of planning, action, and fact-finding about the result of the action. Lewin (1946) Action research is the process by which practitioners attempt to study their problems scientifically in order to guide, correct, and evaluate their decisions and actions. Corey (1953) Action research is the systematic study of educational practice by groups of participants by means of their own practical actions and by means of their own reflection upon the effects of these actions. Action research is trying out an idea in practice with a view to improving or changing something, trying to have a real effect on the situation. Ebbutt (1985) Action research is a fancy way of saying let s study what s happening at our school and decide how to make it a better place. Calhoun (1994) Action research is a systematic, reflective, collaborative process that examines a situation for the purpose of planning, implementing, and evaluating change. To learn is to change; to change is to create; and to create is to learn. Garner (1996)

5 Page 5 of 9 All of these definitions capture some of the essential features of action research. A good summary definition of action research would go something like this: Action research is a deliberate, solution-oriented investigation that is group owned and conducted. It is characterized by spiraling cycles of problem identification, systematic data collection, reflection, analysis, data-driven action, and problem redefinition. Action researchers observe situations that are less than optimal, they identify the problem, they think about what and how to change, they make the change, they evaluate the impact of the change on the situation by systematically collecting data, and then they begin the process again. Action research aims to contribute both to the practical concerns of people in an immediate problematic situation and to further the goals of social science simultaneously. Thus, there is a dual commitment in action research to study a system and concurrently to collaborate with members of the system in changing it in a desirable direction. Accomplishing this twin goal requires active collaboration and co-learning as a primary aspect of the research process. The emphasis is on discovery and interpretation of information about a given situation. Why would you want to conduct Action Research? Action research has many positive personal and professional effects on its practitioners. Primarily, action research gives those who are closest to the situation the power to make positive changes. Action research also gives its practitioners the opportunity to gain knowledge and skill in research methods and applications and to become more aware of the options and possibilities for change. Action research participants also become more critical and reflective about their own practice. Finally, the results of action research are more applicable than mainstream research methods. Action research findings are immediately applied to make positive changes to a problem situation.

6 Page 6 of 9 How do you conduct Action Research? It should be clear from the fact that there is no universally accepted definition of action research that there is no one right way of doing action research. The specific techniques that are used will depend to a large extent on the nature of the problem being studied and the composition of the action research group. However, several features are common to the practice of action research. Stages of the Process Most authors divide the action research process into a series of stages that are repeated in a cyclical fashion. These stages are not discrete, but flow one from another in a natural progression. The five stages of the action research process as defined by Susman (1983) are: 1. Diagnosing: Identifying problems or questions to guide the research. 2. Planning: Collecting and analyzing information to answer the questions; generating alternative courses of action to take in response to the analysis. 3. Acting: Selecting and implementing action steps. 4. Evaluating: Studying the consequences of action steps. 5. Reflecting: Identifying general findings. Sharing results with others. Redefining the problem/question and starting a new cycle. Each of these steps in the action research cycle is discussed in more detail in the following section. Step 1: Diagnosing the situation. Describe your area of interest. The first step in the action research process is to determine the focus of the research. Determining the focus of the research usually begins with a general topic of interest. The topic is explored in detail by listing the factors operating in the wider contextual environment especially those factors that are believed to be producing the problems and are likely to affect the future. Items are contributed by group members and are listed without criticism and displayed on flip charts (or chalk boards) around the room. The material is discussed in greater depth (perhaps in small groups) and a consensus picture is developed that captures the essence of the system in terms of its most important features. Action research questions typically emerge from problematic areas and discrepancies between what is intended and what actually occurs. A useful technique for generating an exhaustive list of items is to ask and answer the following questions: 1. What intrigues me about this topic? 2. What do I want to know more about? Why? How? What? 3. What is the system achieving or trying to achieve? 4. Who are the Customers of this system? 5. Who are the Actors who implement the system? 6. What are the inputs to the system and how are they transformed into outputs? 7. What philosophy or World View shapes the system? 8. Who are the Owners of the system?

7 Page 7 of 9 9. Are there any Environmental Constraints to the system? 10. What are the immediate effects, target outcomes, and ideal outcomes? 11. What do you already know about the topic? 12. What are you learning about this topic through discussion? 13. Are your responses to these questions skewed by your own social and educational experience? Imprecise questions can be expected to yield imprecise answers initially. But if those imprecise answers can help to refine questions and methods, then each cycle can be a step in the direction of better action and better research. There are several things to think about as you determine the focus of your research. First, the issues you choose to explore should be important to those who will conduct the research. Second, good research questions are directly related to the issue or problem you choose to explore. Third, good research questions are answerable. After examining and describing the current situation, the group next proceeds to construct a picture of a desirable future. You design an ideal system to achieve the current system s actual or intended outcomes. Make sure to include all of the essential functions and consider long-range visions and alternative futures. It may be useful to go through the questions from step 1 when designing the ideal. Comparisons between the actual and the ideal system may identify missing pieces of the ideal or better ways of doing things. Step 2: Planning how to address the problem. Explain how the system works. Compare your ideal system to the actual system and list the differences. Use these differences to generate a set of proposal for improving the current reality. Be sure to consider environmental constraints and look for multiple opportunities. Sometimes several small changes to fine-tune the current system are more effective than one large intervention that creates a whole new way of doing things. Wild or innovative ideas should be encourages at this stage of the process. Criticism of ideas should be delayed until all ideas are listed. Once you have developed a list of possible action steps, start to plan what your actual action steps will look like. Keep your planning reasonably provisional. Be open to shifting the focus your research and to the revision of your original identification of the problem question. It might help to ask and answer the following questions about each proposed action step. 1. Is the action realistic? (starting small is usually best). 2. How long will you have to wait to see changes happening as the result of your action? 3. Can you ensure the necessary resources and people to carry out the action step? 4. How will you know if the action taken is having an effect on the problem? This last question brings up the issue of data. Data is any information that can help you to answer your research questions. A key principle of action research is: let the data decide. All participants will negotiate meaning from the data and contribute to the selection of intervention strategies. It is important to use several sources of data rather than relying on a single method for collecting and analyzing data.

8 Page 8 of 9 The following questions may be useful in determining what types of data are available: 1. What do you expect will happen as a result of your action research? How? When? 2. In what setting will you collect the data? 3. What people are involved? 4. What physical evidence is available? 5. How do you plan on managing your data gathering? 6. What resources are required to undertake the data gathering? Look for readily available information that can serve as data to answer your questions. Tallies, demographic information, surveys, test results, interviews, and documents are all viable sources of data. Even simple observations can serve as data, but it is important to record your observations somehow and keep track of them over time because remembering what you have seen is the hardest part of using observations as data. Consequently, you will either need to keep a daily research journal or make and save onthe-spot notes about your observations. Interviews or conversations with groups or individuals are another good source of data. These can be either planned or spontaneous. Tape record interviews or conversations are easier to share with the group and can allow the possibility of later making notes from the tapes or transcribing them word-for-word. You might also consider collecting student journals or other examples of their writing. Other sources of data include attendance information, test scores, or anything else that already exists and might help you to answer your questions. One useful technique of data collection that is often overlooked is to list critical incidents in which the system functioned as it was intended and critical incidents in which the system had unintended consequences. You will know that you have gathered enough information when new data bring no surprises. Researchers call this redundancy or data saturation. In practical terms, when you are no longer learning anything new about your questions, it s time to stop collecting and start analyzing. The result of your analysis of the data should be a ranking of action steps. Step 3: Acting to produce change. From your ranked list of action steps, select key action steps and delegate these to action or task groups. Task groups are charged with implementing the action steps. Action groups should: 1. Clarify the action part of the action-research. 2. Keep all concerned people informed as they progress with the research. 3. Collect evidence showing change or lack thereof. Step 4: Evaluating evidence for change. This step of the action research process takes place concurrently with each action step. At regular intervals, data that is gathered by the action group should be critically assessed to determine its usefulness. Data that is missing or further information that is needed should be identified and further research questions should begin to take shape.

9 Page 9 of 9 Questions the researchers might ask to stimulate evaluation include: What impact has this change had on the problem? On the students, teachers, and administrators? What have you learned about the subject matter? Should this change become a regular feature in this setting? How can I make this change a regular feature? Is it cost effective? What new problems have emerged that I now want to research? Step 5: Reflecting on your progress Reflecting on the process is a critical feature of action research. Once data has been collected on the various action steps that have been taken, the researchers must synthesize the data and share it in various public forms (meetings, publications, etc.). Debate about the meaning of the data and the conclusions drawn from the data should be encouraged. The reflection process should be open to new problems, directions, and revisions. Actionresearch is not a finite project because entering its spiral processes is a way of being a reflective practitioner at all times. The researchers should also be open to unintended outcomes and to mistakes or to the possibility that the status quo worked better than the change. At the end of each action research cycle ask: Is the research question the same? Will the type of data that is being collecting help answer the research question? After reflecting on the process, the action research cycle should begin anew using the information gathered in the previous cycle to refine the questions and action steps taken in subsequent cycles. Conclusions Action research is a viable way of studying and solving problems from the inside. Problems in a social setting are like a giant onion. Usually those aspects of the problem that are visible on the surface cover up problems that are closer to the real issue. Each cycle of the action research process peels away one problem and usually reveals a new one. Action research also has a natural tendency to spill over into areas one had not expected to study; research can lead to more research. Communicating with others about the research is one key feature of the action research process that should not be overlooked. Talking and writing about research forces you to organize your findings in a manner that is lucid, concise, and explicit. Writing also helps show a logical relationship between the problem, the action, the information collected and analyzed, and the evaluation of the action on the situation. Furthermore, writing leaves a permanent record of the research that can be used by others in your setting or in similar settings.