In this article we explore the development of some different traditions of
action research and provide an introductory guide to the literature.
In the literature, discussion of action research tends to fall into two
distinctive camps.
The
British tradition – especially that linked to education – tends to view
action research as research oriented toward the enhancement of direct
practice. For example, Carr and Kemmis provide a classic definition:
Action research is simply a form of self-reflective enquiry undertaken
by participants in social situations in order to improve the rationality
and justice of their own practices, their understanding of these
practices, and the situations in which the practices are carried out
(Carr and Kemmis 1986: 162).
Many people are drawn to this understanding of action research because it
is firmly located in the realm of the practitioner – it is tied to
self-reflection. As a way of working it is very close to the notion of
reflective practice coined by Donald
Schön (1983).
The second tradition, perhaps more widely approached within the social
welfare field – and most certainly the broader understanding in the USA is
of action research as ‘the systematic collection of information that is
designed to bring about social change’ (Bogdan and Biklen 1992: 223). Bogdan
and Biklen continue by saying that its practitioners marshal evidence or
data to expose unjust practices or environmental dangers and recommend
actions for change. In many respects, for them, it is linked into traditions
of citizen’s action and community organizing. The practitioner is actively
involved in the cause for which the research is conducted. For others, it is
such commitment is a necessary part of being a practitioner or member of a
community of practice. Thus, various projects designed to enhance practice
within youth work, for example, such as the detached work reported on by
Goetschius and Tash (1967) could be talked of as action research.
Origins
Kurt Lewin is generally credited
as the person who coined the term ‘action research’:
The research needed for social practice can best
be characterized as research for social management or social
engineering. It is a type of action-research, a comparative research on
the conditions and effects of various forms of social action, and
research leading to social action. Research that produces nothing but
books will not suffice (Lewin 1946, reproduced in Lewin 1948: 202-3)
His approach involves a spiral of steps, ‘each of which is composed of
a circle of planning, action and fact-finding about the result of the
action’ (ibid.: 206). The basic cycle involves the following:
This is how Lewin describes the initial cycle:
The first step then is to examine the idea
carefully in the light of the means available. Frequently more
fact-finding about the situation is required. If this first period of
planning is successful, two items emerge: namely, “an overall plan” of
how to reach the objective and secondly, a decision in regard to the
first step of action. Usually this planning has also somewhat modified
the original idea. (ibid.: 205)
The next step is ‘composed of a circle of planning, executing, and
reconnaissance or fact finding for the purpose of evaluating the results
of the second step, and preparing the rational basis for planning the
third step, and for perhaps modifying again the overall plan’ (ibid.:
206). What we can see here is an approach to research that is oriented
to problem-solving in social and organizational settings, and that has a
form that parallels Dewey’s
conception of learning from experience.
The approach, as presented, does take a fairly sequential form – and it
is open to literal interpretation. Following it can lead to practice
that is ‘correct’ rather than ‘good’ – as we will see. It can also be
argued that model itself places insufficient emphasis on analysis at key
points. Elliott (1991: 70), for example, believed that the basic model
allows those who use it to assume that the ‘general idea’ can be fixed
in advance, ‘that “reconnaissance” is merely fact-finding, and that
“implementation” is a fairly straightforward process’. As might be
expected there was some questioning as to whether this was ‘real’
research. There were questions around action research’s partisan nature
– the fact that it served particular causes.
The decline and rediscovery of action research
Action research did suffer a decline in favour during the 1960s because
of its association with radical political activism (Stringer 2007: 9).
There were, and are, questions concerning its rigour, and the training
of those undertaking it. However, as Bogdan and Biklen (1992: 223)
point out, research is a frame of mind – ‘a perspective that people take
toward objects and activities’. Once we have satisfied ourselves that
the collection of information is systematic, and that any
interpretations made have a proper regard for satisfying truth claims,
then much of the critique aimed at action research disappears. In some
of Lewin’s earlier work on action research (e.g. Lewin and Grabbe 1945)
there was a tension between providing a rational basis for change
through research, and the recognition that individuals are constrained
in their ability to change by their cultural and social perceptions, and
the systems of which they are a part. Having ‘correct knowledge’ does
not of itself lead to change, attention also needs to be paid to the
‘matrix of cultural and psychic forces’ through which the subject is
constituted (Winter 1987: 48).
Subsequently, action research has gained a significant foothold both
within the realm of community-based, and participatory action research;
and as a form of practice oriented to the improvement of educative
encounters (e.g. Carr and Kemmis 1986).
Exhibit 1: Stringer on community-based action
research
A fundamental premise of community-based action research is
that it commences with an interest in the problems of a group, a
community, or an organization. Its purpose is to assist people
in extending their understanding of their situation and thus
resolving problems that confront them….
Community-based action research is always enacted
through an explicit set of social values. In modern, democratic
social contexts, it is seen as a process of inquiry that has the
following characteristics:
• It is democratic, enabling the
participation of all people.
• It is equitable, acknowledging people’s
equality of worth.
• It is liberating, providing freedom from
oppressive, debilitating conditions.
• It is life enhancing, enabling the
expression of people’s full human potential.
(Stringer
1999: 9-10)
The action research process
works through three basic phases:
Look - building a picture and
gathering information. When evaluating we define and describe
the problem to be investigated and the context in which it is
set. We also describe what all the participants (educators,
group members, managers etc.) have been doing.
Think – interpreting and explaining. When
evaluating we analyse and interpret the situation. We reflect on
what participants have been doing. We look at areas of success
and any deficiencies, issues or problems.
Act – resolving issues and problems. In
evaluation we judge the worth, effectiveness, appropriateness,
and outcomes of those activities. We act to formulate solutions
to any problems. (Stringer
1999: 18; 43-44;160)
The use of action research to deepen and develop classroom practice has grown
into a strong tradition of practice (one of the first examples being the work of
Stephen Corey in 1949). For some there is an insistence that action research
must be collaborative and entail groupwork.
Action research is a form of collective
self-reflective enquiry undertaken by participants in social situations
in order to improve the rationality and justice of their own social or
educational practices, as well as their understanding of those practices
and the situations in which the practices are carried out… The approach
is only action research when it is collaborative, though it is important
to realise that action research of the group is achieved through the
critically examined action of individual group members. (Kemmis and
McTaggart 1988: 5-6)
Just why it must be collective is open to some question and debate
(Webb 1996), but there is an important point here concerning the
commitments and orientations of those involved in action research.
Conclusion
One of the legacies Kurt Lewin left us is the ‘action research spiral’
– and with it there is the danger that action research becomes little
more than a procedure. It is a mistake, according to McTaggart (1996:
248) to think that following the action research spiral constitutes
‘doing action research’. He continues, ‘Action research is not a
‘method’ or a ‘procedure’ for research but a series of commitments to
observe and problematize through practice a series of principles for
conducting social enquiry’. It is his argument that Lewin has been
misunderstood or, rather, misused. When set in historical context, while
Lewin does talk about action research as a method, he is stressing a
contrast between this form of interpretative practice and more
traditional empirical-analytic research. The notion of a spiral may be a
useful teaching device – but it is all too easily to slip into using it
as the
template for practice (McTaggart 1996: 249).
Further reading
This select, annotated, bibliography has been designed to give a flavour
of the possibilities of action research and includes some useful guides to
practice. As ever, if you have suggestions about areas or specific texts for
inclusion, I’d like to hear from you.
Explorations of action research
Atweh, B., Kemmis, S. and Weeks, P. (eds.) (1998) Action Research
in Practice: Partnership for Social Justice in Education, London:
Routledge. Presents a collection of stories from action research
projects in schools and a university. The book begins with theme
chapters discussing action research, social justice and partnerships in
research. The case study chapters cover topics such as: school
environment – how to make a school a healthier place to be; parents –
how to involve them more in decision-making; students as action
researchers; gender – how to promote gender equity in schools; writing
up action research projects.
Carr, W. and Kemmis, S. (1986) Becoming Critical. Education, knowledge
and action research, Lewes: Falmer. Influential book that provides a
good account of ‘action research’ in education. Chapters on teachers,
researchers and curriculum; the natural scientific view of educational
theory and practice; the interpretative view of educational theory and
practice; theory and practice – redefining the problem; a critical approach
to theory and practice; towards a critical educational science; action
research as critical education science; educational research, educational
reform and the role of the profession.
Carson, T. R. and Sumara, D. J. (ed.) (1997) Action Research as a
Living Practice, New York: Peter Lang. 140 pages. Book draws on a wide
range of sources to develop an understanding of action research. Explores
action research as a lived practice, ‘that asks the researcher to not only
investigate the subject at hand but, as well, to provide some account of the
way in which the investigation both shapes and is shaped by the
investigator.
Dadds, M. (1995) Passionate Enquiry and School Development. A story
about action research, London: Falmer. 192 + ix pages. Examines three
action research studies undertaken by a teacher and how they related to work
in school – how she did the research, the problems she experienced, her
feelings, the impact on her feelings and ideas, and some of the outcomes. In
his introduction, John Elliot comments that the book is ‘the most readable,
thoughtful, and detailed study of the potential of action-research in
professional education that I have read’.
Ghaye, T. and Wakefield, P. (eds.) CARN Critical Conversations. Book
one: the role of the self in action, Bournemouth: Hyde Publications.
146 + xiii pages. Collection of five pieces from the Classroom Action
Research Network. Chapters on: dialectical forms; graduate medical education
- research’s outer limits; democratic education; managing action research;
writing up.
McNiff, J. (1993) Teaching as Learning: An Action Research Approach,
London: Routledge. Argues that educational knowledge is created by
individual teachers as they attempt to express their own values in their
professional lives. Sets out familiar action research model: identifying a
problem, devising, implementing and evaluating a solution and modifying
practice. Includes advice on how working in this way can aid the
professional development of action researcher and practitioner.
Quigley, B. A. and Kuhne, G. W. (eds.) (1997)Creating Practical
Knowledge Through Action Research, San Fransisco: Jossey Bass.Guide to
action research that outlines the action research process, provides a
project planner, and presents examples to show how action research can yield
improvements in six different settings, including a hospital, a university
and a literacy education program.
Plummer, G. and Edwards, G. (eds.) CARN Critical Conversations. Book
two: dimensions of action research – people, practice and power,
Bournemouth: Hyde Publications. 142 + xvii pages. Collection of five pieces
from the Classroom Action Research Network. Chapters on: exchanging letters
and collaborative research; diary writing; personal and professional
learning – on teaching and self knowledge; anti-racist approaches;
psychodynamic group theory in action research.
Whyte, W. F. (ed.) (1991) Participatory Action Research, Newbury
Park: Sage. 247 pages. Chapters explore the development of participatory
action research and its relation with action science; and examines its
usages in various agricultural and industrial settings
Zuber-Skerritt, O. (ed.) (1996) New Directions in Action Research,
London; Falmer Press. 266 + xii pages. Useful collection that explores
principles and procedures for critical action research; problems and
suggested solutions; and postmodernism and critical action research.
Action research guides
Coghlan, D. and Brannick, D. (2000) Doing Action Research in your
own Organization, London: Sage. 128 pages. Popular introduction.
Part one covers the basics of action research including the action
research cycle, the role of the ‘insider’ action researcher and the
complexities of undertaking action research within your own
organisation. Part two looks at the implementation of the action
research project (including managing internal politics and the ethics
and politics of action research). New edition due late 2004.
Elliot, J. (1991) Action Research for Educational Change,
Buckingham: Open University Press. 163 + x pages Collection of various
articles written by Elliot in which he develops his own particular
interpretation of action research as a form of teacher professional
development. In some ways close to a form of ‘reflective practice’.
Chapter 6, ‘A practical guide to action research’ – builds a staged
model on Lewin’s work and on developments by writers such as Kemmis.
Johnson, A. P. (2007) A short guide to action research 3e. Allyn and
Bacon. Popular step by step guide for master’s work.
Macintyre, C. (2002) The Art of the Action Research in the Classroom,
London: David Fulton. 138 pages. Includes sections on action research, the
role of literature, formulating a research question, gathering data,
analysing data and writing a dissertation. Useful and readable guide for
students.
McNiff, J., Whitehead, J., Lomax, P. (2003) You and Your Action
Research Project, London: Routledge. Practical guidance on doing an
action research project.Takes the practitioner-researcher through the
various stages of a project. Each section of the book is supported by case
studies
Stringer, E. T. (2007) Action Research: A handbook for practitioners
3e, Newbury Park, ca.: Sage. 304 pages. Sets community-based action
research in context and develops a model. Chapters on information gathering,
interpretation, resolving issues; legitimacy etc. See, also Stringer’s
(2003) Action Research in Education, Prentice Hall.
Winter, R. (1989) Learning From Experience. Principles and practice in
action research, Lewes: Falmer Press. 200 + 10 pages. Introduces the
idea of action research; the basic process; theoretical issues; and provides
six principles for the conduct of action research. Includes examples of
action research. Further chapters on from principles to practice; the
learner’s experience; and research topics and personal interests.
Action research in informal education
Usher, R., Bryant, I. and Johnston, R. (1997) Adult Education and the
Postmodern Challenge. Learning beyond the limits, London: Routledge.
248 + xvi pages. Has some interesting chapters that relate to action
research: on reflective practice; changing paradigms and traditions of
research; new approaches to research; writing and learning about research.
Other references
Bogdan, R. and Biklen, S. K. (1992) Qualitative Research For
Education, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Goetschius, G. and Tash, J. (1967) Working with the Unattached,
London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Acknowledgements: The picture is of a scupture by Desiree
Hope/flickr – some rights reserved/ creative commons: attribution,
non-commercial, no derivs. 2.0
How to cite this article: Smith, M. K. (1996;
2001, 2007) ‘Action research’, the encyclopedia of informal education,
www.infed.org/research/b-actres.htm. Last updated:
April 11, 2008.
© Mark K.
Smith
1996; 2001, 2007
ik ben XYZ niet, maar gezien de reacties denken anderen dat wellicht.
