ACTION RESEARCH

McNiff
Introduction to Action Research
Action research is a practical inquiry method that allows individuals to investigate,
evaluate, and improve their practices across various domains such as education, healthcare,
business, and personal life. Unlike traditional research, where external researchers study
subjects, action research involves insider researchers who are active participants in the
context they are investigating. This approach aims to improve practices while simultaneously
generating knowledge.
The chapter introduces action research through four key areas:
1. What action research is and is not.
2. Different approaches to action research.
3. The purposes of action research.
4. When and when not to use action research.
1. What Action Research Is and Is Not
What It Is
 Practical Inquiry: A structured process that involves asking reflective questions like:
o What am I doing?
o Do I need to improve anything?
o How do I improve it?
o Why should I improve it?
 Improving Practices: Practitioners actively engage in improving their work by
evaluating their practices and generating evidence of progress.
 Empowering: Encourages individuals to align their work with personal and social
values, enabling liberation and professional growth.
 Collective and Individual Efforts: Practitioners can conduct both individual and
group action research to investigate and improve practices collaboratively.
 Dynamic and Practical Theory Generation: Unlike traditional research, action
research produces theories that evolve with practice and are communicated through
actions and words.
What It Is Not
 It does not rely on spectator research, where external researchers study "subjects"
from the outside. Traditional research questions include:
o "What is the relationship between nurses’ practice-based knowledge and
patient care?"
 o "Does management style influence productivity?"
 Instead, action research focuses on insider questions like:
o "How do I study my nursing practice for the benefit of patients?"
o "How do I improve my management style to enhance productivity?"

2. Different Approaches to Action Research

Variety of Models
Action research is diverse, offering multiple frameworks and models. Researchers adopt
different "positionalities" (perspectives) based on their approach. Common frameworks
include:
 Notional Action Plans: Heuristic tools for exploring topics.
 Action–Reflection Cycles: Continuous, iterative processes to reflect, act, evaluate,
and modify practices.
3. Purposes of Action Research
 Improvement: It aims to refine and enhance practices in both individual and
collective contexts.
 Empowerment: Provides tools for personal and professional growth by enabling
practitioners to take control of their learning and development.
 Knowledge Generation: Encourages the creation of actionable theories rooted in
practice.
 Inclusivity: Welcomes diverse groups—teachers, students, managers, or even
plumbers—to engage in research for self-improvement.
4. When and When Not to Use Action Research
Appropriate Scenarios
 When improvement in personal or collective practices is desired.
 When the researcher is a practitioner within the context.
 When dynamic, evolving solutions are needed.
Inappropriate Scenarios
 When external, objective observations are required.
 When researchers cannot immerse themselves in the context.

Steps in Action Research

A typical action plan includes:
 1. Take stock of the current situation.
2. Identify a concern or issue.
3. Think of possible solutions.
4. Try out the solution.
5. Monitor actions by gathering data.
6. Evaluate progress by assessing the data.
7. Test the validity of findings.
8. Modify practices based on evaluation.
9. Repeat the cycle for continued improvement.
This iterative process ensures ongoing learning and adaptation, often visualized as an action-
reflection cycle, with stages like:
 Observe → Reflect → Act → Evaluate → Modify → Move in new directions.

Examples of Action Research

1. Educational Reform in Kazakhstan: Colleen McLaughlin and Nazipa Ayubayeva
used action research to support educational reforms.
2. Museum-Education Integration in the UK: Andrew Townsend and Pat Thomson
worked with educators and artists to improve teaching practices using art installations.
3. Improving Math Proficiency in Qatar: Anbarah Al-Abdallah focused on helping
students enhance their math skills.
4. Fostering Community Relationships in South Africa: Mzuzile Mpondwana aimed
to improve interpersonal relationships in townships.
5. Healthcare Transition in Denmark: Susanne Winther studied ways to ensure
smoother patient transitions from intensive care to general wards.

Key Features of Action Research

 Collaborative Inquiry: Practitioners work with peers, students, or communities to
identify and address real-world concerns.
 Context-Specific Solutions: Focuses on tailored interventions that work within
specific settings rather than general theories.
 Evidence-Based: Involves collecting and analyzing data to validate claims and assess
progress.
 Reflective Practice: Encourages self-assessment and modification of practices based
on findings.
Action Research Approaches
Action research is an evolving field with various perspectives, practices, and terminologies.
While it consistently focuses on improving practice (action) and generating knowledge
(research), its implementation varies depending on context, goals, and philosophical
underpinnings. Below is a detailed overview with examples:

Core Principles and Aims

Action research integrates two main objectives:
1. Action: To improve practices or resolve problems in real-life contexts.
2. Research: To produce knowledge about those practices, making them more effective
and relevant.
This dual focus distinguishes action research from traditional research. While traditional
research often separates theory from practice, action research encourages the integration of
practice and theory, with practitioners actively theorizing their actions.

Types of Action Research

1. First-Person Research
Focuses on individual inquiry, reflection, and self-study.
o Example: A teacher experimenting with new classroom techniques while
reflecting on their effectiveness and impact on student engagement.
2. Second-Person Research
Collaborative and participatory, involving small groups or teams working together to
improve shared practices.
o Example: A group of nurses researching ways to reduce patient anxiety during
hospital stays through collaborative workshops.
3. Third-Person Research
Aims for systemic change, often involving large-scale organizational or community
improvements.
o Example: A government-led initiative to improve rural healthcare systems
through participatory research with health workers and local communities.
Forms and Perspectives
The diversity of action research is reflected in the terminologies and methodologies used
across disciplines:
1. Participatory Action Research (PAR):
PAR emphasizes collaboration with marginalized communities, focusing on
empowerment and social change.
 o Example: Inspired by Paulo Freire, PAR might involve working with rural
farmers to improve sustainable agricultural practices while addressing socio-
economic challenges.
2. Feminist Action Research:
Explores gendered power dynamics and prioritizes inclusive, equity-based research
practices.
o Example: Research on workplace harassment, engaging employees in
dialogues and interventions to promote a safe working environment.
3. Reflective Practice:
Focuses on reflection to understand and improve one's professional actions.
o Example: A social worker keeping a reflective journal to assess their
effectiveness in engaging with vulnerable clients.
4. Action Learning:
Centers on workplace learning through real-world problem-solving.
o Example: A corporate team collaboratively researching ways to streamline
operations while improving employee satisfaction.
5. Action Science:
Investigates causal relationships in organizational settings.
o Example: A company studying the link between leadership styles and
employee motivation using action-oriented approaches.

Tensions and Debates

Several key debates shape the practice and understanding of action research:
1. Balancing Action and Research:
o Some approaches emphasize practical outcomes (e.g., Reflective Practice),
while others stress generating generalizable knowledge (e.g., Action Science).
2. Practitioner vs. Researcher Roles:
o Early forms of action research separated practitioners (actors) from
researchers (theorists). Contemporary approaches, however, highlight the
capacity of practitioners to reflect on and theorize their actions.
3. Politics of Knowledge:
o A critical issue is determining whose knowledge is valued and how power
dynamics affect the research process. Participatory Action Research challenges
traditional hierarchies, promoting co-created knowledge.
4. Terminological Diversity:
 o The field includes varied terms like "action inquiry," "practical inquiry," and
"collaborative inquiry," which can confuse beginners. Researchers are
encouraged to critically analyze these terminologies.

Real-Life Example: Pen Green Centre

The Pen Green Centre, a UK-based early childhood education and care institution,
exemplifies effective action research.
 Context: The center integrates action research into its educational framework,
combining it with parenting and community engagement.
 Approach: Practitioners (teachers, parents, and community members) work
collaboratively to reflect on practices, such as enhancing children’s learning
environments.
 Impact: By respecting personal experiences and fostering cooperative learning, the
Pen Green Centre promotes social change, improved childcare practices, and active
community involvement.
Key Takeaways
1. Social Justice Focus: Action research often aims to create a more just and equitable
world.
2. Collaborative Processes: It prioritizes partnerships and co-created knowledge over
top-down approaches.
3. Diverse Applications: From classroom practices to systemic organizational changes,
action research is adaptable to multiple contexts.
Purposes of Action Research
Action research is a dynamic, reflective methodology that seeks to improve practices while
generating knowledge that contributes to sustainable personal, social, and global well-being.
The purposes, key elements, and appropriate contexts for its use are discussed below:

Core Purpose of Action Research

1. Generate New Knowledge
o Like all research, action research aims to generate new knowledge. However,
the knowledge it produces is practical, actionable, and directly tied to
improving real-world practices.
o Example: A teacher might say, "I now know how collaborative learning
affects my students’ engagement," demonstrating their improved
understanding and ability to theorize their actions.
2. Bridge Theory and Practice
 o Action research combines "action" (improving practices) with "research"
(offering descriptions and explanations of those practices, also called
"theory").
o Example: A manager reflecting on improved team dynamics can articulate
why specific actions were effective and describe the changes implemented to
achieve those results.
3. Make Knowledge Claims
o Action research allows practitioners to make knowledge claims, such as:
 "I have improved my teaching practice and can explain why these
methods are effective."
 "I have enhanced my management skills and can describe the changes I
made to foster better outcomes."

Types of Knowledge Produced

1. Personal Knowledge:
o Reflecting on and improving one's practices while understanding their impact
on oneself and others.
o Example: A social worker realizes the importance of empathetic
communication and applies it in sessions with clients, leading to better
outcomes.
2. Collective Knowledge:
o Collaboratively developing shared understandings and practices.
o Example: A school staff works together to implement inclusive pedagogy,
reflecting on its success and refining it based on collective insights.
3. Planetary Knowledge:
o Contributing to global sustainability and well-being through systemic change.
o Example: An environmentalist develops community-based initiatives to
reduce plastic waste and shares insights with a broader audience through
media and literature.

Key Features of Action Research

1. Dynamic Personal Theories:
o Practitioners develop personal theories of practice by asking reflective
questions such as:
 "What am I doing?"
  "How can I improve my practice?"
 "How do I incorporate ideas from literature into action?"
o These theories are flexible, evolving as the practitioner gains more insights
and experiences.
2. Integration of Values:
o Action researchers often align their actions with their personal and social
values, using them as benchmarks for success.
o Example: Sally Aston and Maria James (St Mary’s University) aligned their
research with educational values, striving for congruence between their ideals
and professional practice.
3. Focus on Improvement:
o Action research inherently involves improvement, be it personal, social, or
systemic.
o Example: A teacher notices long patient waiting times in a hospital and takes
action to understand the causes and propose solutions.

When to Use Action Research

Action research is appropriate when:
1. For Personal Growth:
o To evaluate and improve one’s own learning or actions.
o Example: A teacher reflecting on why students achieve high scores (e.g.,
teaching methods, environment) and modifying practices accordingly.
2. For Collective Understanding:
o To help others gain clarity or improve practices.
o Example: A manager learning how to foster a positive attitude among
employees to enhance workplace morale.
3. For Broader Impact:
o To contribute to global thinking and inspire change.
o Example: Advocating for inclusive pedagogies in education through
workshops or publications.

When Not to Use Action Research

Action research is unsuitable for:
 1. Comparative or Statistical Studies:
o If the goal is to compare groups or establish cause-and-effect relationships.
o Example: Observing whether adults with children are more likely to wait at
pedestrian crossings is better suited to traditional observational studies.
2. Descriptive Research:
o If the aim is solely to collect data without reflecting on or improving practices.
o Example: Analyzing employee motivation using interviews without aiming
for organizational improvement is outside the scope of action research.

Blending "What" and "How" Questions

Action research often starts with descriptive "What is happening here?" questions to gather
facts, followed by reflective "How do I improve?" questions to guide action.
 Example:
o Step 1: "What is happening?" (e.g., Why do students in one class outperform
others?)
o Step 2: "How do I improve it?" (e.g., Implement and assess new teaching
strategies based on insights).

Philosophical Foundations
Prominent thinkers have highlighted the transformative potential of action research:
1. Hannah Arendt (1958):
o Defined action as the highest human achievement, emphasizing the active and
reflective nature of democracy.
2. John Dewey (1933):
o Advocated for active thinking and reflective inquiry as cornerstones of
educational and societal improvement.
3. Emerging Discourses:
o Recent work focuses on ecoliteracy (Sinclair, 2017) and sustainable
improvement (Sterling, 2001), aligning action research with planetary well-
being.

Examples of Action Research in Practice

1. Education:
 o Teachers articulating educational values and aligning teaching methods to
those values (e.g., applying for the Values-Based Education International
Kitemark).
2. Healthcare:
o Addressing long patient waiting times by researching bottlenecks and
implementing new scheduling strategies.
3. Community Work:
o Developing inclusive pedagogies by engaging diverse stakeholders in dialogue
and co-creation.

MODELS
The section "Early Influences: The Work of John Collier and Kurt Lewin" from Jean
McNiff's "Action Research: Principles and Practice" discusses the foundational ideas and
key contributors to the development of action research. The chapter outlines the
contributions of John Collier and Kurt Lewin, who helped shape the core concepts of action
research as we understand it today.
Here’s a detailed summary with accompanying diagrams to illustrate the key ideas:

1. John Collier’s Influence

John Collier was the Commissioner of Indian Affairs in the United States from 1933 to
1945. He is credited with laying the foundation for action research through his efforts in
working with Native American communities. Collier focused on using democratic
principles to promote community-building, particularly in the educational and social
contexts of Native American communities. His approach was centered around creating
opportunities for self-determination through responsible participation in democracy.
 Collier’s Focus:
o Developing community through democratic participation.
o Community-building for self-determination.

2. Kurt Lewin’s Contributions to Action Research

Kurt Lewin, a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, had a significant impact on the
development of action research. He shared similar goals with Collier but worked more in
industrial contexts, focusing on the importance of participation in decision-making to
improve productivity. Lewin’s main contribution was the development of a spiral model for
action research, known as the Action-Reflection Cycle, which forms the basis for most
contemporary action research frameworks.
  Lewin’s Approach:
o Emphasized democratic practices for self-determination and social
engineering.
o Introduced the Action-Reflection Cycle as a method for continuous
improvement.

3. The Action-Reflection Cycle (Lewin's Model)

The Action-Reflection Cycle introduced by Lewin is central to the practice of action
research. This iterative process is a series of cyclic steps that involve planning, acting,
observing, and reflecting. It’s a method of problem-solving that leads to action while
simultaneously encouraging learning and reflection at each step. This cycle allows
practitioners to continuously adapt their actions and plans based on real-world observations
and feedback.
Lewin’s Action-Reflection Cycle
1. Planning: Identifying the problem and making a plan.
2. Acting: Taking action based on the plan.
3. Observing: Gathering data and observing the results of the action.
4. Reflecting: Reflecting on the results to understand what worked and what didn’t, and
then revising the plan.
The cycle is recursive, meaning it is continually repeated, with each cycle building on the
knowledge from the previous one.
Diagram: Lewin's Action-Reflection Cycle
sql
CopyEdit
+--------------------+
| Planning |
+--------------------+
|
v
+--------------------+
| Action |
+--------------------+
|
v
 +--------------------+
| Observation |
+--------------------+
|
v
+--------------------+
| Reflection |
+--------------------+
|
v
(Cycle repeats)

4. Sequences of Action-Reflection Cycles

As action research progresses, practitioners may find that after each cycle of planning, acting,
observing, and reflecting, new ideas and areas for improvement emerge. This leads to a
continuous cycle of re-planning and re-acting, with each cycle contributing to better and
more informed practice.
Example: Communication Manager in a Firm
 Planning: The manager decides to improve communication by issuing weekly
information sheets.
 Acting: The manager issues the information sheets.
 Observing: Staff reports they are more aware of issues.
 Reflecting: The manager wonders if the staff’s awareness is genuine and seeks
feedback.
The cycle continues with further actions, adjustments, and refinements, creating an ongoing
process of improvement.
Diagram: Sequences of Action-Reflection Cycles (Evolving)
sql
CopyEdit
+--------------------+
| Planning |
 +--------------------+
|
v
+--------------------+
| Action |
+--------------------+
|
v
+--------------------+
| Observation |
+--------------------+
|
v
+--------------------+
| Reflection |
+--------------------+
|
v
(Cycle continues with learning from reflection)
|
v
+--------------------+
| Planning |
+--------------------+
(Revised plan based on feedback)
5. Influence on Education and Social Contexts
The action-reflection cycle, though originally developed in industrial settings, had a
profound impact on education and social research. Lewin’s methods were applied to
education, particularly in the USA, where they were used to foster teacher reflection and
improve educational practices.
 Influence in Education:
o The ideas were applied in teacher education to encourage teachers to reflect
on their own practices.
o Stephen Corey’s Action Research to Improve School Practices (1953)
popularized the use of action research in schools.
The Work of Lawrence Stenhouse and Its Contribution to Action Research
Lawrence Stenhouse's Approach: In Britain, Lawrence Stenhouse made significant
contributions to the field of action research, particularly in the context of education. He
emphasized the role of teachers as researchers, advocating for a close relationship between
teaching and research. According to Stenhouse, teachers should critically and systematically
reflect on their practices to improve their curriculum and teaching methods. This reflection,
he argued, could lead to the development of new insights into the educational process.
Stenhouse's central tenet was that teachers are the best judges of their own practice. He
proposed that teachers could systematically examine how they influence educational
outcomes by becoming reflective practitioners. This was a shift from traditional top-down
approaches, which often disregarded the insights teachers could provide regarding the
classroom experience.
Key Ideas:
 Teacher as Researcher: Teachers should be responsible for their own work, using
reflection and critical thinking to improve their practice. They should examine how
their teaching influences educational processes.
  Curriculum Research: Stenhouse emphasized that all well-founded curriculum
research, whether done by individual teachers or in collaboration with external
researchers, should be based on the study of classrooms and the practice of teachers.
 Extended Professionalism: Teachers should aim to be "extended professionals,"
engaging in continuous self-questioning and theory testing to improve their teaching
practices. This requires teachers to acquire skills for systematic self-study and the
ability to question educational theories through their own classroom experiences.
 Collaboration with Researchers: Stenhouse advocated for the support of teachers by
higher education personnel and full-time researchers. However, these external
researchers should not overpower the teachers but should support and guide them in
their research and reflective practices.
Stenhouse's work highlighted the importance of reflective practice in education and the need
for teachers to become researchers of their own teaching methods. His contributions laid the
foundation for collaborative and participatory forms of action research in education.
The Seminal Work of Stephen Kemmis and John Elliott
Stephen Kemmis and John Elliott’s Contributions: The work of Stephen Kemmis and
John Elliott further expanded upon the ideas of Stenhouse, particularly in the context of
collaborative action research. Their work in the Ford Teaching Project (1973-1976), based
at the Centre for Applied Research in Education at the University of East Anglia, was crucial
in revitalizing interest in educational action research.
This project involved teachers in collaborative inquiry into their own teaching practices,
particularly focused on inquiry/discovery approaches to learning and teaching. Their model
emphasized the importance of self-monitoring teachers who engaged in reflection and
continuous improvement of their practices.
Key Ideas:
 Collaborative Action Research: Kemmis and Elliott promoted a collaborative
approach where teachers, in partnership with researchers, engaged in action research
to explore and improve their own practices.
 Self-Monitoring Teachers: Drawing on Stenhouse's concept of the teacher as a
researcher, they developed the idea of the "self-monitoring teacher," who continually
reflects on and evaluates their own teaching methods.
 Objectives vs. Process View of Curriculum: Elliott further developed Stenhouse's
ideas by introducing a process view of curriculum, which focuses on how the
curriculum is experienced by both teachers and students, in contrast to a traditional
objectives view which focuses on predefined learning outcomes.
 Social Processes in Teaching: Both Kemmis and Elliott emphasized the social
dimensions of teaching, recognizing that educational practices are shaped by the
interactions and relationships between teachers, students, and the broader social
context.
Their work solidified action research as an established educational tradition, with a focus on
teacher autonomy, collaboration, and critical reflection. Other researchers who collaborated
with Stenhouse, such as David Hamilton, Barry MacDonald, and Jean Rudduck, also
contributed to the development of action research as a means of enhancing educational
practice.
Summary of Key Contributions of Stephen Kemmis and John Elliott in Action Research
Stephen Kemmis:
Stephen Kemmis builds on Kurt Lewin’s conceptualization of action research, emphasizing
its socially and politically constructed nature. His work focuses on the practical process of
action research in education, particularly the interaction between theory and practice.
1. Action Research Cycle: Kemmis proposes a spiral of self-reflective inquiry that
includes planning, acting, observing, reflecting, and re-planning. This cycle serves as
a framework for teachers and practitioners to improve their educational practices
through ongoing reflection and action. His model underlines the iterative nature of
this process, highlighting that action research is a dynamic, evolving approach to
educational improvement.
2. Educational Action Research: Along with Wilf Carr, Kemmis popularized the term
"educational action research," distinguishing it as a methodology that focuses on
understanding and transforming educational practices through collaborative inquiry.
This framework has become central to contemporary educational action research.
3. Practical Examples: Kemmis's model was illustrated with examples, such as teachers
adjusting their methods to make classroom materials more relevant to students. In
these examples, teachers engage in the cycle of planning, acting, observing, and
reflecting, continually refining their approach to improve educational outcomes.
4. Critique of Kemmis's Model: Despite the success of Kemmis’s model, critics point
out its linear and structured approach, which doesn’t fully account for the spontaneity
and complexity of real-world practice. Issues often arise unexpectedly, and the model
may not always offer solutions for these side concerns.
John Elliott:
John Elliott extends the ideas of action research, particularly in curriculum development and
educational practices. His work emphasizes the importance of process over fixed objectives
in curriculum theory and action research.
1. Critique of Lewin’s Model: Elliott agrees with the basic action–reflection cycle but
offers a critique of Lewin’s traditional model. He suggests that the "general idea" of
the action research should be allowed to evolve rather than remain fixed from the
beginning. Furthermore, reconnaissance (the initial analysis phase) should be more
than fact-finding and occur throughout the action research process. Elliott also
emphasizes that implementation is often not straightforward and should be carefully
monitored before evaluating its effects.
 2. Model for Action Research: Elliott introduces a revised model that reflects his
critique of Lewin’s original framework. His model places a greater emphasis on the
ongoing evolution of the research process, rather than treating it as a linear
progression. This includes re-evaluating the research steps and making adjustments as
new insights emerge.
Criticisms of Kemmis and Elliott’s Work:
1. Ebbutt’s Critique: David Ebbutt challenges the way Kemmis and Elliott present the
action research process, particularly the spiral model. He argues that while the spiral
is useful, it may not always be the most effective way to conceptualize the action–
reflection process. He also differentiates between the practical "maxims" or rules of
thumb developed by practitioners and the underlying "logic" that guides action
research. According to Ebbutt, the logic of action research, which governs the
practice, should not be confused with the rules that practitioners follow based on
empirical success.
2. The Operationalization of Action Research: Ebbutt further distinguishes between
theorizing about systems and putting those theories into practice in real-world
settings. He questions the assumption that Elliott’s logic and Kemmis’s maxims
always align perfectly, suggesting that they are different aspects of action research.
The maxims are derived from practical experience, while the logic provides the
theoretical underpinning for the approach.
The passage you provided delves into the perspectives of several influential scholars who
have shaped the field of action research, specifically in the context of educational practice
and research methodologies. Below is a detailed summary of the key points:
1. James McKernan
McKernan links action research with curriculum development and research, advocating for a
methodical approach. In his work Curriculum Action Research (1991), he views research
primarily as a method. His approach emphasizes flexibility, noting that problems should not
become fixed but should evolve through iterative cycles. His model proposes a sequential
process with multiple cycles, where action steps are continuously revised based on findings.
The key feature of his model is the ability to make adjustments, allowing for shifts in focus
and innovative episodes during the research process. The spirals in the process help reflect on
the implementation and adapt the plan in light of new information or failures.
2. Ortrun Zuber-Skerritt
Zuber-Skerritt approaches action research from a critical theoretical perspective and links it
with professional learning and organizational development, particularly in higher education.
She developed the CRASP model, which stands for:
 Critical and self-critical collaborative inquiry
 Reflective practitioners
 Accountability and public dissemination of findings
 Self-evaluation of practice
 Participatory problem-solving and continuous professional development
Her work emphasizes the integration of critical reflection into action research,
encouraging practitioners to engage in self-assessment and collaborative problem-
solving. While her models are rich in diagrams and process-oriented structures, the
practical impact and realization of these processes are questioned, with some concerns
about their applicability in real-world settings.
3. Critique of Action Research Models
A central critique in the text revolves around the prescriptiveness and sociological bias of
many action research models. These models often present reality in a linear and sequential
fashion, which doesn’t align with the unpredictability and complexity of real-life educational
practice.
Bourdieu critiques the prescriptive nature of models, noting that they can lead to a “synoptic
illusion,” where models are mistakenly seen as universal truths. These models often fail to
represent the messiness and unpredictability of actual practice. Additionally, they can be seen
as rigid guidelines rather than flexible frameworks for understanding practice, potentially
distorting practitioners' lived experiences.
Agnes Higgins and Con Ó Muimhneacháin further critique the assumption that action
research will unfold in a controlled, predictable manner. They emphasize that real-life
practice often deviates from such linear trajectories and that models should account for these
deviations rather than impose fixed structures.
4. Values and Educational Practice
The critique extends to the disregard of the values base in practice. In many educational and
sociological models, the values that underpin practices are often overlooked. The text
suggests that understanding educational practice requires more than external sociological
analysis—it demands an understanding of the values, intentions, and purposes behind those
practices. For action research to be meaningful, it must engage practitioners in a reflective
process that considers these personal and professional values. The focus should be on how
individuals live out their values in practice, not just how they perform tasks according to
prescriptive standards.
5. William Torbert’s Critique
William Torbert (1981) addresses the gap between educational theory and practice,
questioning why educational research hasn’t led to better educational practice. He argues that
both current educational practices and research rely on a model of reality that emphasizes
unilateral control, which doesn’t help practitioners move toward “good educational practice.”
Action research, in contrast, is about researching one's own learning and practice, ensuring
that all involved in the research process have an opportunity to grow and improve.
6. Jack Whitehead and Living Educational Theories
Jack Whitehead’s approach to action research is grounded in the notion of "living educational
theories." Unlike the propositional theories of social science, which aim to objectively study
and describe situations, Whitehead's educational theory is deeply personal and reflective. His
model is based on the idea of “I-systems of knowledge,” where practitioners generate their
own theories of practice through reflection, inquiry, and collaboration. Whitehead's approach
allows practitioners to engage in personal educational inquiries to improve their practices,
with a focus on developing values-based theories. This approach goes beyond external
analysis and involves practitioners in actively shaping their own educational realities.
Whitehead’s inquiry is driven by the central question: "How do I improve my practice?" This
self-reflective process highlights the contradictions between the values educators hold and
their actions, and overcoming these contradictions is central to their development as
practitioners.
6. Generative and Transformational Approaches
The text concludes with a focus on developing generative and transformational approaches to
educational inquiry. These approaches are seen as dynamic and capable of evolving over
time, accommodating new forms of understanding. The theory itself must be flexible and
generative, capable of growing and transforming in life-enhancing directions. The author
shares a personal reflection on how life experiences of instability and unpredictability have
informed their understanding of educational inquiry, emphasizing the need for a theory that
reflects these challenges and transformations.
Key Themes:
 Prescriptiveness vs. Real-Life Complexity: Many action research models are
criticized for presenting practice as linear and controlled, while real-life practice is
often unpredictable and messy.
 Values in Practice: Educational research must account for practitioners' personal and
professional values and intentions, not just technical tasks.
  Reflection and Growth: True educational research and practice involve self-
reflection, growth, and improvement, both for the practitioner and the community.
 Living Theories: Whitehead’s work focuses on the personal, reflective nature of
educational theories, highlighting the importance of practitioners generating their own
theories based on their lived experiences.
In essence, the passage critiques traditional models of action research for being overly
prescriptive and disconnected from the realities of practice, advocating for more flexible,
reflective, and value-based approaches.