Chapter 2: Theories and Models in Action Research

Introduction to Theoretical Foundations

The theories and models that underpin action research provide the necessary
framework for understanding how this method functions and why it is effective. These
theories offer a structured approach to conducting research while allowing for flexibility
and adaptation to the unique needs of a given context. In this chapter, we will explore
some of the key theories and models that have shaped the field of action research,
including those developed by Kurt Lewin, Gerald Susman, Kemmis & McTaggart, and
John Elliot.

Each of these theories and models brings a different perspective to action research,
highlighting various aspects of the process such as the cyclical nature of research, the
importance of reflection, and the role of collaboration. Understanding these
foundational concepts is crucial for anyone looking to engage in action research, as
they provide the guiding principles that inform the design and implementation of
research projects.

Kurt Lewin's Model of Action Research

Kurt Lewin, a pioneering social psychologist, is often credited with developing the first
formal model of action research in the 1940s. Lewin's model was initially designed to
address social issues but quickly found applications in various fields, including
education. His model laid the groundwork for what would become the core principles
of action research.

Key Components of Lewin's Model:

1. Planning: The process begins with the identification of a problem and the
development of a plan to address it. This involves gathering preliminary
information, defining the problem, and setting objectives.
2. Action: Once the plan is in place, the next step is to implement it. This involves
putting the proposed actions into practice within the relevant context, such as
a classroom or community setting.
3. Observation: As the action is being implemented, it is crucial to observe the
outcomes closely. This step involves collecting data, monitoring progress, and
noting any unexpected developments.
4. Reflection: The final step in Lewin's model is reflection. This involves analyzing
the data collected during the observation phase, reflecting on the outcomes,
and determining whether the initial problem has been resolved or if further
action is needed.

Lewin's model is characterized by its iterative nature, meaning that the process is not
linear but cyclical. After reflecting on the outcomes, the researcher may decide to
revise the plan and begin the cycle again, continuously refining the approach until the
problem is satisfactorily resolved.

Application in Education: In an educational context, Lewin's model can be applied

to address a wide range of issues, from improving teaching methods to enhancing

1
student engagement. For example, a teacher might use this model to experiment with
different instructional strategies, observing how students respond and refining the
approach based on the results.

Critical Analysis: Lewin's model is highly regarded for its simplicity and effectiveness.
However, it has been critiqued for being somewhat rigid, particularly in contexts where
problems are complex and multifaceted. In such cases, more flexible models, such as
those developed by later theorists, may be more appropriate.

Gerald Susman's Model of Action Research

Gerald Susman expanded on Lewin's work by developing a more detailed model of

action research in the 1980s. Susman's model is often referred to as the "diagnostic-
action-feedback" model and is particularly well-suited to organizational settings,
including schools and educational institutions.

Key Components of Susman's Model:

1. Diagnosing: This step involves identifying the problem and understanding its
underlying causes. It requires a thorough analysis of the context in which the
problem occurs.
2. Action Planning: Based on the diagnosis, a detailed action plan is developed.
This plan outlines the specific steps that will be taken to address the problem.
3. Action Taking: The action plan is then implemented, with a focus on
addressing the root causes identified during the diagnosis phase.
4. Evaluating: After the action has been taken, its effectiveness is evaluated. This
involves assessing whether the problem has been resolved and whether the
desired outcomes have been achieved.
5. Learning: The final step in Susman's model is learning from the experience.
This involves reflecting on the entire process, identifying lessons learned, and
considering how these lessons can be applied to future problems.

Application in Education: Susman's model is particularly useful in educational

settings where problems may be deeply rooted in organizational structures or
practices. For example, a school might use this model to address issues related to
student behavior, with a focus on understanding the underlying causes and developing
targeted interventions.

Critical Analysis: Susman's model is praised for its comprehensive approach to

problem-solving, as it emphasizes the importance of diagnosis and evaluation.
However, it can be time-consuming and may require more resources than simpler
models like Lewin's.

2
Kemmis & McTaggart's Spiral Model

Stephen Kemmis and Robin McTaggart introduced the "spiral model" of action
research in the 1980s, building on Lewin's cyclical model. Their model emphasizes
the iterative nature of action research, with a focus on continuous improvement
through repeated cycles of planning, action, observation, and reflection.

Key Components of the Spiral Model:

1. Planning: As in Lewin's model, the process begins with the identification of a

problem and the development of a plan to address it.
2. Action: The plan is then implemented in the relevant context.
3. Observation: The outcomes of the action are observed, with data being
collected to assess its effectiveness.
4. Reflection: The results are analyzed, and reflections are made on what worked
and what didn’t.
5. Revised Planning: Based on the reflections, the plan is revised, and the cycle
begins again.

The spiral model is called such because each cycle builds on the previous one, leading
to continuous improvement over time. The model encourages researchers to remain
flexible and responsive to changing circumstances, making it particularly useful in
dynamic environments like schools.

Application in Education: The spiral model is widely used in educational research

because of its adaptability. Teachers can use it to continuously refine their teaching
practices, ensuring that they are always working towards better outcomes for their
students.

Critical Analysis: The spiral model is highly regarded for its flexibility and its
emphasis on continuous improvement. However, some critics argue that it can be
difficult to know when to stop the cycle, potentially leading to endless iterations without
achieving a final resolution.

John Elliot's Model of Action Research

John Elliot, a prominent figure in educational action research, developed a model that
emphasizes the role of reflection and professional development in the research
process. Elliot's model is particularly focused on empowering teachers to take control
of their professional learning and to use action research as a tool for personal and
professional growth.

Key Components of Elliot's Model:

1. Identifying an Area for Development: The process begins with the

identification of an area where the teacher wishes to improve their practice.
2. Planning: A plan is developed to address the identified area of development.
This plan may involve trying out new teaching strategies, developing new
materials, or engaging in professional learning.

3
 3. Action: The plan is implemented in the classroom, with the teacher actively
engaging in the new practices.
4. Observation: The teacher observes the outcomes of the action, collecting data
on its impact on student learning.
5. Reflection: The teacher reflects on the outcomes, considering what worked,
what didn’t, and how the experience has contributed to their professional
development.

Elliot’s model places a strong emphasis on the teacher as a reflective practitioner,

constantly seeking to improve their practice through ongoing cycles of action and
reflection.

Application in Education: Elliot's model is particularly suited to professional

development initiatives, where the goal is not just to solve a problem but to foster
ongoing growth and learning among educators.

Critical Analysis: Elliot's model is praised for its focus on reflection and professional
development. However, it may be less effective in contexts where the goal is to
address specific, immediate problems rather than to foster long-term development.

Comparison of Action Research Models

Each of the models discussed above offers a unique approach to action research, with
its own strengths and limitations. Below is a comparison of the key features of these
models:

Model Key Focus Strengths Limitations

Lewin's Model Iterative Simple, effective for Can be rigid, less
problem- immediate issues suited for complex
solving problems
Susman's Diagnostic and Comprehensive, Time-consuming,
Model evaluative focuses on root causes resource-intensive
Kemmis & Continuous Flexible, encourages Can lead to endless
McTaggart's improvement ongoing refinement cycles without clear
Model resolution
Elliot's Model Reflective Focuses on teacher Less effective for
practice and empowerment and addressing specific,
PD professional growth immediate problems

Conclusion

Understanding the theories and models that underpin action research is crucial for
effectively applying this method in educational settings. Each model offers a different
perspective on the research process, highlighting various aspects such as problem-
solving, collaboration, reflection, and professional development. By selecting the
model that best fits their specific context and goals, educators can ensure that their
action research projects are both effective and meaningful.

4
Critical Thinking Questions:

1. Reflect on Lewin's Model:

 How does Lewin's iterative cycle of planning, action, observation, and

reflection apply to real-world educational settings? Can you provide an
example?

2. Analyzing Susman’s Approach:

 In what situations might Susman’s diagnostic-action-feedback model be

more effective than Lewin’s simpler model? Discuss the advantages of
a more detailed, evaluative approach.

3. Spiral Model's Flexibility:

 Kemmis and McTaggart’s spiral model emphasizes continuous

improvement through iterative cycles. How does this model support
ongoing change in dynamic educational environments? Provide an
example where continuous refinement might be necessary.

4. Reflective Practice in Elliot’s Model:

 Elliot’s model focuses on the role of the teacher as a reflective

practitioner. How can this approach contribute to long-term professional
development? Discuss the potential benefits and challenges of using this
model for ongoing teacher growth.

5. Choosing the Right Model:

 Given the different strengths and limitations of Lewin’s, Susman’s,

Kemmis & McTaggart’s, and Elliot’s models, how would you decide
which model to apply in a specific educational research scenario?
Consider factors such as the nature of the problem, the context, and the
desired outcomes.

Exercises:

1. Model Application Exercise:

 Choose one of the action research models discussed in this chapter.

Develop a detailed plan for applying this model to address a specific
issue in your educational setting. Include the steps you would take, the
data you would collect, and how you would reflect on the results.

5
2. Comparative Analysis:

 Write a comparative analysis of the four action research models covered

in this chapter. Discuss how each model could be applied to a common
educational problem, such as improving student engagement. Which
model do you think would be most effective, and why?

3. Reflection and Discussion:

 Reflect on your own teaching or professional experience. Have you ever

engaged in a process that resembles one of the action research models?
If so, describe your experience and how it aligns with the model. If not,
discuss how you might incorporate an action research approach into
your practice.