Tweet

Insights into Action Research: What Change Matters Most?

Download PDF Version

I have been investigating the action research process for years. My research breathes life into my work, improves my practice and keeps me in learner stance. My questions and insights energize me and create an excitement that translates to the educators with whom I work. With each group that I support through the action research cycle, my view of the process changes, precisely because I engage in the process along with them. For years, I studied my own practice, asking questions about how to best help teachers design questions, analyze data, collaborate and reflect. Over time I shifted to asking questions about the learner and have, more recently, been living with the following questions:

  1. What is the nature of change that educators in my action research programs experience? Is change evident in the practical aspects of teaching (pedagogy), in content understanding (discipline), in approaches to being a teacher-researcher (process), and in underlying values or ethics?
  2. What kind of change has the greatest potential to impact students in positive ways?
  3. What change matters most?

Over the years, I’ve seen, firsthand, what much of the literature on action research describes – the action research process can transform teacher practices and teacher identity when there is a supportive, collaborative culture that values reflection and risk taking.  In fact, the potential for action research to promote reflective thinking is a primary argument for embedding action research experiences into both professional development programs (NSDC 2008, Kemmis 2007, Bransford et al. 2000, Glanz 1998) and in teacher preparation programs (Cochran Smith & Demers 2008, Smith and Sela 2005, Ponte, Beijard & Ax 2004, Auger & Wideman 2000). While researchers agree that action research promotes reflective practice, they describe the nature of change resulting from reflection differently. Some studies describe changes in pedagogy, others in understanding of content and still others in values and beliefs about teaching.

The Study

In an effort to examine the nature of change resulting from my work with educators, I decided to study 50 educators from the Byram Hills School District who had engaged in the action research process for a full year. I designed the district program, titled “Investigators of Practice” (IOP), five years ago. It is shaped to allow teachers to engage in personally meaningful inquiry around their practice, while also learning about the key processes required by action researchers (questioning, data collection, data analysis, reflection). In the Fall of 2013, Assistant Superintendent, Dr. Tim Kaltenecker, and I collaborated to blend some of my questions with some of his.

The following questions guided the study:

  1. What is the nature of change that teachers in the program experience?
  2. After a formal experience with action research, to what extent do teachers continue to use a) new learning related to the focus of their study and b) action research skills, strategies and processes?
  3. How has teacher learning from the program impacted student learning?
  4. How has teacher learning from the program impacted teachers’ ability to address student needs?
  5. What conditions do participants cite as supportive of the action research process?

In addition to designing a twenty-question survey with both closed and open-ended questions, I examined the written reports from the educators who engaged in action research over the previous 3 years. I analyzed the survey results and used the reports to further investigate the themes revealed in survey responses. The analysis revealed four strong themes and has left me with additional insights, as well as new questions. 

Process Trumps Content

Educators who participated in the Investigators of Practice Program believe that the program positively impacted their knowledge, practices and beliefs. The specific responses reveal that the topic of study is far less important than the professional practices embedded in the experience. Educators reported:

  • being more reflective
  • questioning their practice and/or student learning
  • having a deep understanding of the action research process
  • using data more effectively to better understand their teaching and student learning
  • using outside research and best practices to inform their work, and
  • reaching out to colleagues to seek other perspectives and ideas.

While every teacher explored a specific topic, they consistently pointed to the processes embedded in their experience as being the most important. For example,

“I’m more reflective as a teacher. True, good teachers do this, however, I think the acts of logging and analyzing data in a formal way make the experience richer.”

“The IOP program provided me with a framework that I use daily in my professional practice to move slowly, question thoughtfully, and think deeply about concerns to better understand to improve my skill set."

“I now find myself asking more questions after a lesson, reflecting on certain aspects that I feel I’d like to improve upon.”

We can conclude that the design of the program had great influence – there is space for reflection, explicit teaching around crafting questions, teaching and modeling of data collection and analysis, and a requirement to use other research to ground investigations. These professional practices were valued in the program and ultimately valued by participants. However, I still wonder, Are these elements sufficient, in and of themselves, to foster deep learning, or are they dependent upon conditions and culture?

Questions Drive Results

While much of the survey data was encouraging, the survey findings related to student learning were perplexing for me. Even though teachers stated that the process definitely impacted student learning, when asked to give specific examples of impact on student learning, the teachers spoke more to their own learning and practice: only one third of the respondents specifically described student learning, while the other two-thirds described changes in their own practices that allowed them to better meet student needs or stay “close” to students. More specifically, teachers spoke to their ability to observe students, use data and reflect on their practice as allowing them to use more learner-centered approaches, such as differentiation of instruction/interventions, individual feedback and self-regulation strategies.

“I am a better observer of student behavior. I am better at assessing student comments and collecting data. This allows me to refine my lessons continuously and alter my approach for each group of students.”

What teachers said was not necessarily bad. However, I did expect (and hope) that more would emerge about specific student learning. And so, to better understand these findings, I examined the action research write-ups to look for further evidence of student learning. After examining and categorizing the questions that guided the educators, I found that two-thirds of the questions that drove the inquiry teachers engaged in were exploratory in nature, meaning that teachers were learning about and examining the research related to their topic. In other words, they weren’t yet taking action, and so it would be premature to look for student learning. The other one-third of the questions were action oriented, meaning that teachers were implementing and studying new practices. However, of these 12 action-oriented questions, 3 embedded impact on teacher practice in the questions and 8 embedded impact on student learning in the question.

While I’ve always known that the inquiry questions in action research are vitally important (they drive action, data collection and analysis), this analysis of questions revealed for me that there are three different types of questions (not two as I have been thinking). Only those that explicitly embed impact on student learning in the question will force researchers to examine student learning data. For me, this means that if there is an express interest in linking teacher inquiry to student learning, inquiry questions need to be crafted accordingly. During the planning phase of any inquiry project, educators need to think specifically about their goals and craft questions accordingly.

While we may want to connect professional development to student learning, we need to also keep in mind that changing teacher practice takes time. Moving from exploratory questions to questions focused on practice and then to questions focused on student learning, honors the time it takes to change teacher practice. In fact, my own journey has followed this path. Overtime, I’ve shifted from examining my practice to examining the learners, which of course, leads me back to my practice.

Action Research Question Categories:

Exploratory: “What methods of collaboration are most effective and engaging for students?”

Action-oriented (focused on improving teacher practice): “How will the use of student interviews as a diagnostic and formative assessment tool impact teacher selection of interventions?”

Action-oriented (focused on improving student learning): “How can I use qualitative feedback to improve the writing of my AP History students?”

Identity Changes

The final theme from the study may reveal the deepest type of change. After formal participation in the action research program, educators report remaining in the stance of “investigator” and describe behavior that reveals them as researchers and learners. One teacher wrote, “I am a ‘teacher as learner’ vs. ‘teacher as teacher’. I can't help but think of myself as a student alongside my students. I also find myself "coding" data constantly, whereas I never did so in the past.” Another wrote, “I have developed a deep appreciation for the value of data. I use data, and develop data collection instruments, in my work with flexible support for students. I also use it on an individual basis with students when we collaborate to develop goals and strategies to improve academic engagement.” And another, “I never thought of myself as a researcher…now I’m able to collect data and analyze it and use it…”

This finding may be the most exciting, as it speaks to the potential for the action research process to be a catalyst for not only re-visioning practice, but re-visioning oneself. And, it is this theme that brings my back to my essential question, What change matters most?

What Change Matters Most?

A return to this question requires consideration of ultimate goals. If we seek to identify the most important changes needed - in ourselves, our students, our schools, or our learning organizations - we must to filter our thinking through our values, goals and missions. As a staff developer, fostering reflective practice emerges as my highest priority and impacting students is a goal for professional learning. I believe that a reflective educator, one who thoughtfully and systematically examines what is at hand, raising questions to pursue deeper understanding, is essential to fostering student learning.  And so, the power of the inquiry process to transform identity, to move educators to seeing themselves as researchers, holds great promise for me. I will, no doubt, dig further. My biggest question now is this: If the process can change educator identity, what power might it have to change students’ views of themselves?

Resource links

Planning to begin an action research project? Access our Quality Inquiry Planning Checklist here.

Explore Diane’s detailed, authentic Action Research tool, published by ASCD.

LCI’s new trifold publication, A Practical Guide to Inquiry, will be available Summer 2015. Contact us for more information.

About the Author

Diane Cunningham designs and facilitates long-term staff development programs related to standards-based curriculum, instruction, assessment, and facilitating adult learning. Her works also includes building organizational capacity in school and districts, and coaching educators who work in leadership roles. For the past 3 years, Diane has also supported the design of blended curriculum for a virtual high school in New York. She is excited by the authentic possibilities that teaching in a blended environment provides.

A strong advocate of collegial inquiry and action research, Diane has developed expertise in guiding educators through the process of planning and carrying out collaborative and individual inquiry that is rigorous and grounded in classroom practices. She can be reached at dianec@lciltd.org.