“If you want it done right, you may as well do it yourself.

” This aphorism may seem appropriate

if you are a picky housekeeper, but more and more people are beginning to realize it can also
apply to large corporations, community development projects, and even national governments.
Such entities exist increasingly in an interdependent world, and are relying on Action Research
as a means of coming to grips with their constantly changing and turbulent environments.
This paper will answer the question “What is Action Research?”, giving an overview of its
processes and principles, stating when it is appropriate to use, and situating it within a praxis
research paradigm. The evolution of the approach will be described, including the various kinds
of action research being used today. The role of the action researcher will be briefly mentioned,
and some ethical considerations discussed. The tools of the action researcher, particularly that of
the use of search conferences, will be explained. Finally three case studies will be briefly
described, two of which pertain to action research projects involving information technology, a
promising area needing further research.

What is Action Research?

Definition
Action research is known by many other names, including participatory research, collaborative
inquiry, emancipatory research, action learning, and contextural action research, but all are
variations on a theme. Put simply, action research is “learning by doing” - a group of people
identify a problem, do something to resolve it, see how successful their efforts were, and if not
satisfied, try again. While this is the essence of the approach, there are other key attributes of
action research that differentiate it from common problem-solving activities that we all engage in
every day. A more succinct definition is,
"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 what is together regarded as a desirable direction.
Accomplishing this twin goal requires the active collaboration of researcher and client, and thus
it stresses the importance of co-learning as a primary aspect of the research process."[i]
What separates this type of research from general professional practices, consulting, or daily
problem-solving is the emphasis on scientific study, which is to say the researcher studies the
problem systematically and ensures the intervention is informed by theoretical considerations.
Much of the researcher’s time is spent on refining the methodological tools to suit the exigencies
of the situation, and on collecting, analyzing, and presenting data on an ongoing, cyclical basis.
Several attributes separate action research from other types of research. Primary is its focus on
turning the people involved into researchers, too - people learn best, and more willingly apply
what they have learned, when they do it themselves. It also has a social dimension - the research
takes place in real-world situations, and aims to solve real problems. Finally, the initiating
researcher, unlike in other disciplines, makes no attempt to remain objective, but openly
acknowledges their bias to the other participants.
[i] Thomas Gilmore, Jim Krantz and Rafael Ramirez, "Action Based Modes of Inquiry and the
Host-Researcher Relationship," Consultation 5.3 (Fall 1986): 161.
Action research is a systematic form of inquiry that is collective, collaborative, self-reflective, critical, and
undertaken by the participants of the inquiry [McCutcheon, G. & Jung, B. (1990). Alternative perspectives on action
research. Theory into Practice 29 (3): 144-151]. Action research, sometimes called "practitioner research," is a
reflective investigation of a personal interest, problem or challenge. The process begins with the development of
questions, which may be answered by the collection of data. Action implies that the practitioner will be acting as the
collector of data, the analyst, and the interpreter of results.
__

These two scenarios describe the concept of action research. Action research or practice-based
research, as it is sometimes called, is a form of applied research that helps change practices in
teaching and learning where the instructor is actually the researcher. Simply put, action research
is the study of a social situation with a view of improving the quality of action within it.
Action research was based on some earlier ideas in the 1940’s and 1950’s, developed by Kurt
Lewin and his colleagues as a collection of problem-solving cycles for improving organizations.
This term “action” captured the notion of a disciplined inquiry in the context of focussing efforts
to improve the quality of an organization and its performance. Even today, the idea of action
research remains a powerful tool for improving the practice of any given educational setting. For
literacy instructors, action research promises progress in professionalization. The process allows
them to experience problem-solving and to model it for their learners. As discussed in the next
section, practitioners carefully collect data to diagnose problems, search for solutions, take
actions on promising possibilities and monitor whether and how well the action worked. The
cycle can repeat itself many times, focussing on the same problem or on another issue. This
process can help develop a professional problem-solving ethos much needed in the field of
literacy.
[Link]

collecting data

There are four basic strategies to consider when collecting data and these include
collecting existing evidence; observing and documenting situations; interviewing; and
questionnaires. So that the reader has a sense of what these strategies entail, a short
description follows.
1. Collecting existing evidence
Instructors have access to a variety of existing information which can be used as data.
This material can provide evidence of past events relevant to a research question and can
be collected in a portfolio. A portfolio is a purposeful file of everything that may seem
relevant to an issue that can later be reviewed. Written evidence is useful in trying to
establish a baseline of what has happened in the past and can be invaluable for comparing
a new approach to a past approach. Some examples that can be used are: learner papers,
exercises or notes, grades, staff minutes, research articles, correspondance, notices,
progress reports, letters of complaint, lesson plans, attendance sheets, drop out rates,
budget information, operational policies, safety procedures, accident reports, repair costs
and expense claims. Examples of unwritten evidence are the appearance of a classroom or
learning centre after the students have left, state of repair on equipment, cover designs of
books, wear and tear on furniture or binding of books and photos of graffiti.
2. Observing and documenting situations
Observing. Direct contact in a setting for an extended period of time provides an opportunity to
gain other data presented in the form of personal histories, stories, feelings and experience. It
also provides an opportunity to see conflicts and miscommunications which might have not been
recognized in other information gathering methods. The two roles an observer can take on are
onlooker or participant observer. Observation can be structured with guideline questions. In such
a case the recording process is structured. After the observation is over, the researcher creates a
picture of the setting. Structured observations rely on instruments and procedures for observing
and include questions like: who talks to whom, how many interactions were initiated by the
person, how many times did the person leave his/her desk. For the onlooker the purpose is to
move “where the action is.” Most observational designs will be of the “onlooker” variety and are
biaised with “being there.” Not interrupting the natural setting is a key requirement in
understanding the physical and social environment. Exercise 3 provides some useful tips in
recording observations.
Documenting situations. Kuhne and Quigley (1997) describe a number of data collection
techniques that are useful in documenting a situation. For example, anecdotal records are written
descriptive accounts of incidents that are typically used to note a particular or repeating
occurrence with a group or individual. Field notes are similar to anecdotal records, but the
researcher’s impressions and interpretations are recorded at the same time. They are typically
written at the site of the event. Logs are careful records of recurring activities that are often
numerical such as records of attendance, the number of times learners do certain things, or how
groups allocate their time.
3. Interviewing
Interviews allow for interaction and are often categorized into three types. Structured interviews
are useful when seeking specific information on specific topics. This type leaves little room for
discussion beyond the given questions. If the interviewee begins to stray, the interviewer should
bring him or her directly back to the questions. Semi-structured interviews involves asking more
open-ended questions of several participants but allows the interviewee to go further than the
precise question with opinions, thoughts, and questions.
Often written “probes” are used. These are reminders on the interview schedule of opening
questions the interviewer can use to go to specific related aspects of the question after the first
response. Open interviews encourage open discussion and wide-ranging opinion, with very little
direction on the interviewer’s part. Exercise 4 provides some helpful suggestions for improving
your interviewing skills.
4. Questionnaires
There are basically two types of questionnaires. Open questionnaires ask for opinions or
information in the participants’ own words. These types of open-ended questions are especially
useful for exploratory or subjective reactions. Closed questionnaires may require multiple-choice
or direct short-answer responses. They seek specific information, with little room for the
respondent’s interpretations and are especially useful for collecting specific information.
Developing questions for data gathering. Certain questions enhance conversation. For
instance, questions beginning with “what,” “why,” “where,” and “how,” facilitate the thought
process. Questions beginning with “are you,” “when are,” and “where is,” lead to very simple
answers, elicit yes/no responses, and limit discussion. In improving participation in question
asking, certain types of questions are more appropriate. Let’s look at three different types of
questions:
High level (thinking) vs. low level (rote) questions.
The level of questions refers to how the question evokes thinking. High level questions
require individuals to think rather than simply recall, paraphrase, or summarize. Low
level questions are those asking the individual to merely recall, repeat, summarize or
paraphrase what has already been stated or written down.
Divergent (many answers) vs. convergent (few answers) questions.
The number of possible right answers indicates a question’s divergence. Divergent
questions are those for which there can be a number of “correct” or discussible answers.
Convergent questions imply that there is one right answer.
Structured vs. unstructured questions.
Certain questions are more structured than others. Structured questions provide
background information, specify or narrow the focus, and otherwise orient the respondent
to the question and its aims. Unstructured questions are wide open and amorphous.

Step 5 – Analyzing Data

There are many ways of making sense of the collected data. For the purpose of this
project, the constructive method of data analysis was used because of its practicality.
There are four aspects to this method.
Reading data —data are read or closely scrutinized in order to recall the events and
experiences that they represent. What was done? What was said? What really
happened?
Selecting data —important factors are separated from unimportant ones, similar
factors are grouped, complex details are sorted and simplified.
Presenting the data —the selected data are presented in a form that is easy to take in at
a glance.
Interpretating data and drawing conclusions — Relationships are explained and a
practical model constructed to fit the situation which has been researched.
Once a decision has been made to end simultaneous data collection and analysis, the
information must be organized so that the analysis can begin. All of this material is called
the study data base and needs to be organized in some fashion so that information is easily
retrievable. Developing the study data base involves fairly simple sorting of all the data.
The goal is to be able to locate specific information during analysis. The data therefore
needs to be organized according to some scheme that makes sense to the investigator and
then indexed accordingly.
&
Data analysis is the process of making sense out of one’s data. All of the information that
has been gathered together and organized topically or chronologically should be read
through several times from beginning to end. While reading, the investigator jots down
notes, comments, observations and queries in the margins. At this stage the researcher is
virtually holding a conversation with the data, asking questions of it, making comments,
and so on. These notes serve to isolate the most striking aspects of the data. The notes are
developed into a preliminary outline or system of classifications into which data are sorted
initially. The outline begins with a search for regularities —things that happen frequently
with groups of people. Patterns and regularities then are transformed into categories into
which subsequent items are sorted. These categories or patterns are discovered from the
data.

At this beginning stage of analysis, most experts suggest unitizing the data —identifying “units of
information that will, sooner or later, serve as the basis for defining categories. Units come from
interview transcripts, observation notes, or documents. A unit can be a phrase, a sentence, a
paragraph. Each unit of information can be put onto a separate index card and coded according to
any number of categories ranging from situational factors (who, what, when, where) to
categories representing emerging themes or concepts.
Developing categories. In addition to coding units of data by obvious factors such as who, what,
when, and where, analysis involves the development of conceptual categories that interpret the
data for the reader. Devising categories is largely an intuitive process, but it is also systematic
and informed by the study’s purpose, the investigator’s orientation and knowledge. Developing
categories or themes involves looking for recurring regularities in the data. Which units of
information go with each other? It is a task of comparing one unit of information with the next.
Devising categories involves convergent thinking. Convergence is determining what things fit
together — which pieces of data converge on a single category or theme. The categories that one
constructs should be internally homogeneous. That is, all items in a single category ought to be
similar. The number of categories one constructs depends on the data and the focus of the
research. In any case, the number should be manageable.
There should be a minimum of unassignable data items, as well as relative freedom from
ambiguity of classification. Moreover, the set of categories should seem plausible given the data
from which they emerge, causing independent investigators to agree that the categories make
sense in light of the data. Much of the work in category construction is a form of content
analysis.
There are three guidelines by which to judge the efficacy of categories derived from content
analysis. The first guideline is looking at the content of the data in developing categories. The
categories should reflect the purpose of the research. Care should be taken to ensure that
categories are congruent with research goals and questions. The second is that the categories
should be exhaustive — that is, all relevant items in the sample of documents under study must
be capable of being placed into a category. The third is that the categories should be mutually
exclusive — no single unit of material should be placed in more than one category.
Step 6 – Developing Action Strategies and Putting Them into Practice
Where do we look to find suitable action strategies? The most important source is our new
understanding gained from analysis of the situation. Understanding an issue, by uncovering the
network of interrelationships, not only leads to a new awareness of the situation, but also offers a
wealth of ideas about possible action. A second important source is the actual process of data
collection. Simply finding out learners’ attitudes may be enough to suggest possible solutions. A
third important source is our own aims, objectives and values as instructors. In the course of
problem analysis and data collection, the researcher’s aims become more practical and realistic
as they are better informed by knowledge of the situation. As well, ideas and suggestions for
suitable action strategies may come from external sources such as from conversations with
colleagues, information about how other people have coped with similar situations, and ideas in
books and articles. Exercise 5 provides a method for checking your action strategy.
Monitoring action strategies. In order to learn as much as possible from trying out the new
strategy, it is important to consider in advance how to monitor the situation. A time plan may
help you to think through and prepare the task of co-ordinating research activities with different
action strategies. To check the results of action strategies, you need to define your own criteria of
success. When can you say an action strategy was successful?
if it has resulted in an improvement of the situation,
if it has not also caused unintended, negative side-effects which detracted from the main,
positive effects, and
if the ‘improvement ’is not short-term.
What is considered to be an improvement depends also on who is making the judgement, and
there are four voices which can be used to evaluate improvements.
The voice of the individual instructor / researcher.
Instructors try to improve a situation; in doing so their personal values are uppermost in
defining what may be considered as improvement.
The voice of other people concerned.
Who counts as a person concerned cannot be definitely and finally settled in advance.
Certainly, all the participants in the situation that is being researched, and all those who
will be affected in any way by the action strategies being implemented, must be included.
The professional voice.
A characteristic of professionalism is that the practice of an individual member of the
profession should be open to scrutiny by professional colleagues. This professional
evaluation begins when instructors voice their knowledge, experience and professional
values in conversations about their teaching.
The voice of the community.
The community as a whole, including various interest groups, has a stake in the
evaluation of instructors’ practice.
An example of how to plan out all of the steps for your action research project appears in
Exercise 6.

Step 7 – Formulating and Sharing Instructor Knowledge

One of the primary concerns of action research is to promote the sharing of knowledge and
experiences of the practitioner- researchers who engage in it in order to improve and further
develop programs.
Preparing to report the experiences and outcomes of action research involves further reflection
and analysis which sharpen initial interpretations and give rise to additional insights. In analysing
your own experiences and reporting them, you make it clearer to others where you stand and
why.
When deciding what method to use in reporting the new instructor knowledge consider these
three interrelated questions.
1. What: What should be included — descriptions, research methods, analysis of findings,
action strategies?
2. To whom: Who are your audiences?
3. How: What method of reporting do you want to use?