Action
Research:A Strategy for Instructional Improvement
Action
Research gives teachers the skills needed to work on problems specific to their
classrooms and their schools. By using an actual research procedure,
researching teachers can resolve their own teaching challenges. They learn how
to ask a focusing question, define terms, collect relevant data, use an
analysis process that rules out bias, and includes methods that yield validity
and reliability. The findings become immediately applicable to their individual
situations. For example:
Jeremy's
third-grade teacher watched him out of the corner of her eye. Though he sat
quietly reading, she knew that he could, and often did, erupt into loud,
emotional displays. On this particular day, the eruption came just after
recess. Inexplicably, Jeremy jumped up, swept papers off his desk, and with a
loud roar, tipped the desk over. The teacher managed to get him out of the
classroom and into the safety of the nurse's office while his classmates
patiently straightened his desk and gathered his scattered belongings. Still,
in spite of their practiced efficiency, a half-hour passed before the teacher
could get the class settled and working again.
Totally frustrated with the
repeated loss of teaching time and the months it takes to complete Special
Education referrals, the teacher decided to try what she learned in an Action
Research class. She did a little Action Research project on Jeremy:
First,
the question: In this case, it was simple. What upsets Jeremy?
Next,
data collection: It was a little tougher to decide how to collect
information that might respond to the question. It was tempting to think of the
problem as originating in the home, on the playground, or within his
psychological make-up. But true as that may have been, knowing it didn't do
much for the classroom. Perplexed, the teacher decided to make brief notes
about what happened immediately before each disruption.
Then, data analysis:
Several disruptions later, the teacher spread the collected data, that is the
notes, across her desk, reading them over and over, looking for patterns.
Suddenly, she had it.
The findings:
Jeremy erupted when she passed out papers asking students to work on new
concepts.
The
action plan: Gently confronting Jeremy with the "evidence,"
led to information that earlier "interrogations" had not revealed.
Jeremy tearfully confessed that he always felt afraid he that could not do the
new assignment. Together, they worked up a plan. When the teacher passed out
work on new concepts, she promised to hand Jeremy a "fun" paper to
work on. Jeremy agreed to practice patience. Thereafter, the teacher first got
the rest of the class working well, then went to Jeremy's desk and helped him
with the new concept until they both felt that he understood what to do. And it
worked! The disruptions diminished significantly until, finally, the teacher
withdrew her recommendation for a Special Education referral.
The
same process works equally well in larger situations. For example: a middle
school teacher, sitting in her staff lounge casually thumbing through a
magazine, found an article citing research which alleged that high school
dropouts make their decision to quit school during their middle school years.
The teacher could not get the allegation out of her mind, repeatedly asking
herself, "How does that happen?" "What do we do?" She, too,
decided to implement an action research process.
First, the question: After
considerable struggle and consultation, she chose: "What can this school
do to make the transition from elementary to middle school "user friendly?"
Next,
data collection : The teacher constructed a simple survey asking about
various student experiences during students' transition time which she
administered to her own sixth grade class. Startled by the students' response,
the teacher enlisted the help of the school counselor. Together they surveyed
two schoolwide randomly selected groups, one group consisting of
"at-risk" students, the second of "average" students with
the groups matched for gender and ethnic representation
Then
data analysis: The teachers read through the surveys to find patterns in
the responses and listed rubrics for the patterns (often called themes). Then
they again read through the surveys to tally responses that fit under each
pattern , a tally they could graph.
The
findings: A significant number of students in both groups felt
overwhelmed by the social challenge of being relatively anonymous in a large
school setting.
The action plan: The
teacher, the counselor, and the principal shared the information with the faculty
who were, in turn, stunned. Student responses such as, "None of the
teachers seem to know my name," and "No one speaks to me" tugged
at their heart strings. The group not only faced up to the challenge by
developing multiple plans that responded to revealed student information, they
"commissioned" additional surveys that year and subsequent years to
check their success in responding to the findings from the initial survey.
Parents, impressed with the school's growing Action Research efforts, asked for
the school's cooperation in surveying parents about the same issue. Eventually,
other middle schools asked for information and adjusted their own transition
plans accordingly. The process works equally well for curriculum issues. For
example, two teachers, working on separate projects in different time periods
and at different levels, wanted to check the rumor that students who write down
the thought process they use when they solve math problems actually do better
in math. The elementary school teacher compared the length of time it took
specific students to master specific skills when he taught in his standard
manner, and then when he had students write out their thinking. The high school
teacher compared three different classes grouped into underachiever, average,
and advanced. The first year, he required only the underachievers to write. By
the end of the year, that class had average test scores that exceeded those of
the average group. The next year, he required all three levels to write and all
three made greater than usual progress, but the underachievers still made the
most progress. Both teachers wondered how much of the progress was due to their
ability to "see" the glitches in their students' thinking, which
allowed them to respond with appropriate pedagogy.
In another school, a first year
primary teacher, feeling confident about her spelling program and wanting to
document its success, could barely pose a pedagogical question. She was already
sure she had an effective way to teach spelling. What she did do was collect
data: lists, and charts, and spelling profiles, as well as stories and sentence
work. In January she administered a comprehensive test of the first semester's
words. To her horror, most of the children failed it! Though temporarily undone,
she resolutely pulled out her data and poured over it, finally determining that
her program led students to use a broadened vocabulary in their sentences and
their stories which was a good result, but she learned that she had more work
to do on teaching for retention.
Sometimes,
some schools actually become centers of inquiry. In one instance a new
elementary school principal, who looked so young that on his first day a
teacher asked if he had come from the local high school to tutor, faced a staff
of senior teachers. Respecting their experience and confidence, he began school
improvement through gently administered Action Research projects. For example,
one teacher coming into the lunch room after a frustrating morning sank into a
chair saying, "Why does it take so long to get those children settled down
after recess?" The principal, after a space of time and using his
youthfulness to make his response credible, replied, "That is such a good
question. Why does it take so long to get those children settled down after
recess? How could we find out?" The assembled group offered suggestions
for collecting relevant information, that is, good data sources. They analyzed
the information at the next teachers' meeting and set up an action plan based
on their findings. Changed recess procedures solved the problem. By the end of
the second year, at any given time, at least half the teachers worked on
research projects with questions ranging from, "Why don't our children
make better scores on those reading tests?" to "How can we get them
to eat their lunches?" As a side result, no one missed teachers' meetings,
or even came late. Relevant stuff was happening there!
A
local high school became a center of inquiry over a three-year period by
sending a number of teacher-leaders through Action Research coursework with
each working on separate projects. In the words of one (whose initial project
could barely be called Action Research), "You know, I'm beginning to see
the long-term effect of this. It isn't just what we learn from our projects.
It's an attitude about teaching. When we have a problem in this school, we
don't just sit around and complain about it anymore. We face up to it. We ask
the question. We collect information. We solve our problem. In a way, we've
taken control of our professional lives."
In
each of the descriptions above, teachers identified the problem, teachers chose
the question, collected and analyzed the data, and teachers developed action
plans based on findings. One huge gap in the evaluations developing around the
current drive for accountability is that it often does not allow for a process
that teachers themselves can use to solve their own problems, to evaluate the
effect of their own teaching practices. That's what Action Research, in its
current reincarnation, is intended to do. And, that is how it can be most
helpful.
Recommended
Reading:
Anderson,
G. L., Herr, K. & Nihlen, A. S. (1994). Studying your own school: An
educator's guide to qualitative practitioner research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Brooks, A. &
Watkins, K. E. (Eds.) (1994). The emerging power of action inquiry
technologies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Glesne, C. & Peshkin, A.
(1992). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction.
Urbana/Champaign: Longman.
Hubbard, Ruth Shagoury and Brenda
Miller Power. (1993). The Art of Classroom Inquiry. Portsmouth, New
Hampshire: Heinemann.
Livingston, C. & Castle S.
(1989). Teachers and research in action. Washington, DC: National
Education Association
McKernan, J. (1991).
Curriculum action research: A handbook of methods and resources for the
reflective practitioner. New York: St. Martins Press.
McLean, J. E. (1995). Improving
education through action research: A guide for administrators and teachers.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Nodie, Oja, S. & Smulyan, L.
(1989). Collaborative action research: A developmental approach. New
York: The Falmar Press.
Olson, M. W. (Ed.). (1990) Opening
the door to classroom research. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Reed, Carol. (2000). Teaching
With Power: Shared Decision-Making and Classroom Practice. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Sagor, R. (1992). How to
conduct collaborative action research. Alexandria, VA: ASDC
Whyte, W. F. (1991). Participatory
action research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
