1. Developing a robust pedagogical
action research study
Lin Norton
CHEP Visiting Professor
nortonl@hope.ac.uk
http://www.linnorton.co.uk/
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 1

2. Aims
• Brief introduction and recap
– Purpose and characteristics of PAR in a university context
– Example of a PAR study
– Consideration of what is meant by ‘robust’ and how to achieve it
– Consideration of how PAR can have a greater impact on theory
and how practice can inform theory development.
– Importance of dissemination
• Workshop
– Design a study to address the problem of disengaged students
– Report back
– Designing your own study: General Q and A
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 2

3. Purpose of Action Research
in a university context
• Action research is action and research in the same process. It has
twin aims of action for change in our teaching and assessment
practice with research to increase our knowledge and
understanding.
• The aim of action research in a university context is to modify some
aspect of teaching or assessment to improve our students’ learning
experience/performance.
• AR is not action for research (doing in order to increase
understanding), nor research for action (increasing knowledge in
order to be applied at a later time), but a coming together of two
purposes in a single project or process.
(Adapted from Hughes, 1997)
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 3

4. The key question
‘How do I improve my
(L&T) practice?
( see work of Whitehead and McNiff)
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 4

5. The process of Action Research
Many models of AR each with their own focus and purpose. Each model
has a set of actions which typically include:
1. Reviewing an area for improvement : ‘identifying a problem’
(Norton, 2009); answering the question ‘How do I improve my
practice? ‘ (Whitehead’s terms).
2. Formulating and implementing a change.
3. Using rigorous methods to consider the impact of that change.
4. Reviewing future actions in the light of what has been learnt.
(typically leads to a further cycle)
What many models fail to mention is the role of dissemination (not only
for purpose of peer scrutiny, but also to engender some impact or
influence)
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 5

6. What methods should I use?
• Action research is a broad umbrella term for a general approach
which is a way of doing research and acting to change a situation at
the same time (the interaction of practice with theory) rather than
any specific method of data collection.
• The key to choosing your method (which can be anything from
positivist experimental design to ethnography) is that it should be
based to suit your own specific context and may well include
reflexive accounts of your own enquiry and research process
• Action research differs from reflective practice by going beyond to
collecting and interpreting data and disseminating your findings
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 6

7. Example. Peer feedback: using AR to overcome
students’ reluctance to criticise (McMahon, 2010) .
Pedagogical Context: u/g programme in which students asked to give
seminar presentations and give peer feedback.
The issue : rarely any discussion among students who would look to the
tutor for his comments and feedback.
McMahon realised that he had structured his classes so that students
were acting as a ‘learning audience’ rather than a ‘learning community’
which is what he had intended, so instigated a 4 year AR study.
• Year 1 (28 students) given list of ?’s based on assessment criteria and
also asked to write comments on paper.
• Findings: Quality of feedback didn’t improve.
• Reflecting and acting: written questionnaire about students’
perceptions of peer assessment process.
• Findings: majority of students felt very uncomfortable with the idea
of ‘marking’ each other’s work and being critical- not their job to
point out errors and didn’t want to be responsible for fellow student
failing.
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 7

8. Peer feedback study (2)
Year 2 (24 students): Changes introduced after consulting with cohort 1:
– 2 dedicated feedback forms provided to lessen confusion
– Reassurance that feedback to be formative only; tutor would do
summative assessment; emphasis to be on friendly criticism to help
peers improve next time
– Ownership of forms given to students; don’t have to show to tutor if
they don’t want to
– Workshop on how to give constructive rather than hurtful feedback
• Findings (Discussion & Questionnaire): marked improvement in quality of
feedback BUT clear split with half students preferring peer feedback and
other half finding it not helpful
• Further two cycles with progressive refinements and overall conclusion
)
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch

9. Peer feedback study (3)
• McMahon was able to demonstrate that changing the peer
assessment system resulted in students seeing it as a worthwhile
learning experience in which their feedback became more critically
insightful; enhanced their own self-assessment and resulted in better
student to student discussion in the seminar.
• Two key elements to this transformation:
– Feedback was changed to formative only
– It was made clear that ownership of the comments was vested in the student
being assessed so did not have to be submitted to the tutor
• Essentially peer assessment becomes part of a self assessment
process rather than being part of teacher assessment
• He argues that AR can be very effective of developing and refining
practice in a way that engages students and is from the start a real
learning process rather than a teacher –imposed process
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 9

10. What is a robust action research study?
• One that is publishable in good quality peer reviewed journals
(and/or reputable conferences)
• Influential in influencing colleagues to change their L&T practice
• Challenges status quo and influences or at least informs policy
making
• Helps us to understand and modify our L&T practice
• Contributes to theory and knowledge in the domain of the
scholarship of learning and teaching (SOTL)
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 10

11. The link with theory
• How can we make sure that practice and change does not remain
in our immediate, local and specific context?
• Huxham (2003) talks about 5 stages in developing a conceptual
framework from action research :
1. Definition (what are you focusing on?)
2. Conceptualisation (interpreting your findings)
3. Elaboration (expanding the detail of how your findings relate
to the conceptual framework)
4. Conclusion (drawing generalisations from your findings)
5. Practicality ( highlighting how the theory might be used and
adapted by other practitioners)
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 11

12. Scaling up your small question
to a large question
?
• Theoretical explanations of student learning
– Deep or surface approaches to learning (Marton & Saljo)
– Conceptions of learning (Saljo)
– Conceptions of knowledge (Perry)
– Epistemology (Baxter-Magolda, Hofer)
– Reflective judgment (King and Kitchener)
– Metacognition (Flavell)
• Theoretical explanations of teaching
– Behaviourist (Pavlov, Skinner, Bandura)
– Cognitive (Miller, Craig & Lockart)
– Constructivist (Piaget, Vygotsky, Bruner)
– Humanist (Maslow, Rogers)
Ulster University Festival of Innovative
16/10/2012 12
Practice

13. Why dissemination is important
• Action research has the specific aim of modifying or improving
practice.
• Action research also may have the political aim of changing or
challenging the status quo.
• No matter how good your action research study is it will, like
any other project, perish unless you can disseminate it as
widely as possible.
• It is important to make your research work for you in as many
ways as possible
• Unless your action research study is opened up to peer
scrutiny and review, it is more curriculum development or
teacher reflective thinking than research.
13

14. A potential journal to target
Educational Action Research
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/09650792.asp
• “concerned with exploring the dialogue between research and
practice in educational settings.
• The considerable increase in interest in action research in recent
years has been accompanied by the development of a number of
different approaches: for example, to promote reflective practice;
professional development; empowerment; understanding of tacit
professional knowledge; curriculum development; individual,
institutional and community change; and development of
democratic management and administration.
• Proponents of all these approaches share the common aim of
ending the dislocation of research from practice, an aim which
links them with those involved in participatory research and action
inquiry.
14

15. Potential conferences to aim for
European Association for Practitioner Research on Improving
Learning (in education and professional practice) http://www.eapril.org/
EAPRIL exists to increase the impact of practice-based and applied
educational research on educational policy.
Collaborative Action Research Network.
http://www.esri.mmu.ac.uk/carnnew/index.php
CARN aims to encourage and support action research projects
(personal, local, national and international), accessible accounts of
action research projects, and contributions to the theory and
methodology of action research.
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 15

16. Workshop
In small groups, consider the
problem of ‘disengaged’
students
1. Definition: As a group
agree what the context
will be.
2. Design: Consider how you
might design an action
research study
3. Theory: What theoretical
explanations might you
need to link your findings
to?
4. Dissemination: Who do
you want to influence with
your findings?
5. Report back
13 September 2012 Ulster University CHEP launch 16