Research Methods in Education 6th Edition

1. ACTION RESEARCH
© LOUIS COHEN, LAWRENCE
MANION & KEITH MORRISON

2. STRUCTURE OF THE CHAPTER
• Defining action research
• Principles and characteristics of action
research
• Participatory action research
• Action research as critical praxis
• Action research and complexity theory
• Procedures for action research
• Reporting action research
• Reflexivity in action research
• Some practical and theoretical matters

3. ACTION RESEARCH
• Action research is a small-scale intervention
in the functioning of the real world to address
practitioners’ own issues, and a close
examination of the effects of such an
intervention.
• Kemmis and McTaggart (1992: 10): ‘to do
action research is to plan, act, observe and
reflect more carefully, more systematically,
and more rigorously than one usually does in
everyday life’.
• Action research combines diagnosis, action
and reflection.

4. ACTION RESEARCH COMBINES
SIX NOTIONS
1. A straightforward cycle of: identifying a
problem, planning an intervention,
implementing the intervention, evaluating
the outcome;
2. Reflective practice;
3. Political emancipation;
4. Critical theory;
5. Professional development; and
6. Participatory practitioner research.

5. ELEMENTS OF ACTION RESEARCH
• It works on participants’ own problems;
• It seeks to improve practice;
• It is collaborative and participatory;
• It is problem-solving;
• It is undertaken in situ;
• It is an ongoing cycle of diagnosis, planning,
implementation and evaluation;
• It is methodologically eclectic;
• It requires reflection;
• It builds on professional development.

6. ACTION RESEARCH IS . . .
• Critical (and self-critical) collaborative inquiry by
• Reflective practitioners being
• Accountable and making results of their enquiry
public
• Self-evaluating their practice and engaged in
• Participatory problem-solving and continuing
professional development.

7. PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH
• It commences with explicit social and political
intentions that articulate with the dominated and poor
classes and groups in society;
• It involves popular participation in the research
process;
• It regards knowledge as an agent of social
transformation as a whole, constituting a critique of
those views of knowledge (theory) as separate from
practice;
• Its epistemological base is rooted in critical theory and
its critique of the subject/object relations in research;
• It engages issues of power;
• It raises the consciousness of individuals and groups;
• It is a democratic activity.

8. ACTION RESEARCH AS CRITICAL
PRAXIS
• The emancipatory interest of Habermas: to
understand and change the world
• Ideology critique and action
• People taking control of their own lives
• A challenge to the illegitimate operation of power
• A concern for equality and social justice
• Empowerment of individuals and groups

9. ACTION RESEARCH AS CRITICAL
PRAXIS
• Constructing a system of meaning;
• Understanding dominant research methods and
their effects;
• Selecting what to study;
• Acquiring a variety of research strategies;
• Making sense of information collected;
• Gaining awareness of the tacit theories and
assumptions which guide practice;
• Viewing teaching as an emancipatory, praxis-
based act.
• ‘Praxis’: action informed through reflection, with
emancipation as its goal.

10. CRITICISMS OF ACTION RESEARCH
AS CRITICAL PRAXIS
• It is utopian and unrealizable;
• It is too controlling and prescriptive;
• It adopts a narrow and particularistic view of
emancipation and action research;
• It undermines the significance of the individual
teacher-as-researcher in favour of self-critical
communities.
• It assumes that rational consensus is achievable,
that rational debate will empower all participants
(i.e. it understates the issue of power);
• It overstates the desirability of consensus-
oriented research;
• Power cannot be dispersed or rearranged simply
by rationality;

11. CRITICISMS OF ACTION RESEARCH
AS CRITICAL PRAXIS
• It is uncritical and self-contradicting;
• It will promote conformity through slavish
adherence to its orthodoxies;
• It is naïve in its understanding of groups and
celebrates groups over individuals;
• It privileges its own view of science (rejecting
objectivity) and lacks modesty;
• It privileges the authority of critical theory;
• It is elitist whilst purporting to serve egalitarianism;
• It assumes an undifferentiated view of action
research;
• It attempts to colonize and redirect action
research.

12. ACTION RESEARCH AND
COMPLEXITY THEORY
• Both accept that systems are unpredictable, open
and non-linear;
• Both concern issues of adaptation to environment;
• Action research can lead to bifurcation (i.e. when a
system moves from one point of stability to
another);
• Both celebrate the interaction of participants;
• Both require feedback and feed forward;
• Both are reflective;
• Both show an interest in ‘exceptions’ or outliers
(which can lead to major change);
• Both are less concerned with controlling variables;
• Both accept that the systems in which action takes
place are complex and dynamic.

13. IDENTIFY
PROBLEM
PLAN ACTION
ACT
EVALUATE
PROCEDURES FOR ACTION
RESEARCH

14. STEPS IN ACTION RESEARCH
(McNiff, 2002)
1. Review your current practice;
2. Identify an aspect that you wish to improve;
3. Imagine a way forward in this;
4. Try it out;
5. Monitor and reflect on what happens;
6. Modify the plan in the light of what has been
found, what has happened, and continue;
7. Evaluate the modified action;
8. Continue until you are satisfied with that
aspect of your work (e.g. repeat the cycle).

15. AN EIGHT-STAGE MODEL OF
ACTION RESEARCH
Stage One: Decide and agree one common
problem that you are experiencing or need that
must be addressed.
Stage Two: Identify some causes of the problem
(need).
Stage Three: Brainstorm a range of possible
practical solutions to the problem, to address the
real problem and the real cause(s).
Stage Four: From the range of possible practical
solutions decide one of the solutions to the
problems, perhaps what you consider to be the
most suitable or best solution to the problem. Plan
how to put the solution into practice.

16. AN EIGHT-STAGE MODEL OF
ACTION RESEARCH
Stage Five: Identify ‘success criteria’ by which you
will be able to judge whether the solution has
worked to solve the problem,
Stage Six: Put the plan into action; monitor, adjust
and evaluate what is taking place;
Stage Seven: Evaluate the outcome to see how
well it has addressed and solved the problem or
need, using the success criteria identified in Stage
Five.
Stage Eight: Review and plan what needs to be
done in light of the evaluation.

17. THE ACTION RESEARCH CYCLE
(Tripp, 2003)
Reconnaissance
(First Cycle)
F i r s t
P l a n
A c t i o n
T h e n P l a n
R e s e a r c h
F i r s t
P r o d u c e
D a t a
T h e n
A n a l y s e
D a t a
and
I m p l e m e n t
A c t i o n
M o n i t o r
A c t i o n
and
( s e p a r a t e l y
a n d t o g e t h e r )
( t o g e t h e r )
R e f l e c t
( o n A c t i o n )
R e v i e w
( R e s e a r c h )
P r o c e s s
P l a n
a c t i o n
R e s e a r c h
a c t i o n
E v a l u a t e
a c t i o n
Act
thoughtfully

18. STEPS IN EMANCIPATORY
ACTION RESEARCH
1. Strategic planning
2. Implementing the plan (action)
3. Observation, evaluation and self-evaluation
4. Critical and self-critical reflection on the
results of (1) – (3) and making decisions for
the next cycle of research.

19. IDENTIFY THE PROBLEM –
CAUSES NOT SYMPTOMS
Diagnosis:
• What actually is the real problem?
• What are the causes?

20. PLAN INTERVENTIONS
Divergent Phase:
• What actions are possible?
• What alternatives are there?
• Evaluate alternatives.
Convergent Phase:
• Which intervention will be adopted?
• Decide from amongst the alternatives.
Planning:
• How will the intervention be implemented?

21. IMPLEMENTATION
Putting the plan into action
• Initiation
• Development
• Sustenance
• Follow-up

22. EVALUATION
How successfully has the intervention
addressed the issue?
• What are the success criteria?
• How will you know if the intervention has been
successful?
• What are the outcomes of the intervention?
• What ongoing monitoring will there be?
• What will you do if the intervention is not
working?

23. INITIAL PROBLEM
PROPOSED
INTERVENTION
IMPLEMENTATION
OUTCOME
E
V
A
L
U
A
T
I
O
N

24. IDENTIFY
PROBLEM
PLAN ACTION
ACT
EVALUATE

25. ADVICE FOR NOVICE ACTION
RESEARCHERS
• Stay small, stay focused;
• Identify a clear research question;
• Be realistic about what you can do;
• Plan carefully;
• Set a realistic time scale;
• Involve others (as participants, observers, validators –
including critical friends – potential researchers);
• Ensure ethical practice;
• Concentrate on learning, not on the outcomes of action;
• The focus of the research is you, in company with
others;
• Beware of happy endings;
• Be aware of political issues.

26. REPORTING ACTION RESEARCH
Report:
• The research issue and how it came to
become a research issue in the improvement
of practice;
• The methodology of, and justification for, the
intervention, and how it was selected from
amongst other possible interventions;
• How the intervention derived from an
understanding of the situation;
• What data were collected, when, and from
whom;
• How data were collected, processed and
analyzed;

27. REPORTING ACTION RESEARCH
Report:
• How the ongoing intervention was monitored
and reviewed;
• How reflexivity was addressed;
• What were the standard and criteria for
success, and how these criteria were derived;
• How conclusions were reached and how
these were validated;
• What and how the researcher learnt as a
consequence of the action research;
• How practice was changed as a consequence
of the findings.

28. REFLEXIVITY IN ACTION RESEARCH
• A self-conscious awareness of the effects that
the participants-as-practitioners-and-
researchers are having on the research
process, how their values, attitudes,
perceptions, opinions, actions, feelings etc.
are influencing the situation being studied.
• How the researcher/practitioner may be
biasing the research.

29. MAKING ACTION RESEARCH WORK
Collegiality must be present, e.g.:
• Participatory approaches to decision-making;
• Democratic and consensual decision-making;
• Shared values, beliefs and goals;
• Equal rights of participation in discussion;
• Equal rights to determine policy;
• Equal voting rights on decisions;
• The deployment of sub-groups who are accountable
to the whole group;
• Shared responsibility and open accountability;
• An extended view of expertise;
• Judgements and decisions based on the power of the
argument rather than the positional power of the
advocates;
• Shared ownership of decisions and practices.