ACTION RESEARCH ... ACTION RESEARCH “Action research is characterized as research that is done...

Click here to load reader

  • date post

    07-Apr-2020
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    10
  • download

    1

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of ACTION RESEARCH ... ACTION RESEARCH “Action research is characterized as research that is done...

  • ACTION RESEARCH

    Trudy Thorson & Kendra Beliveau

    ED 800

    November 19th, 2012

  • ACTION RESEARCH

     “Action research is characterized as research that

    is done by teachers for themselves”

    (Mertler, 2009).

     Teachers examine their own

    classrooms, instructional strategies, assessment

    procedures, and interactions with student learners

    in order to improve their quality and effectiveness.

  • WHAT ACTION RESEARCH IS AND IS NOT

    What it is… What it is not…

    • A process that improves

    education through change

    • Problem-solving

    • Collaborative • Doing research on or about

    people

    • Cyclical • Linear

    • Practical and relevant • Conclusive

    • Within context of teacher’s

    environment

    • Generalizing to larger

    populations

    • How we can do things better • Why we do certain things

    • Explores, discovers and seeks

    to find creative solutions

    • The implementation of

    predetermined answers

    • A way to improve instructional

    practice by observing, revising,

    and reflecting

    • A fad

  • VIDEO: ACTION RESEARCH MADE SIMPLE

     Action Research Made Simple

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg83f72_6Gw

    Key Characteristics

     Addresses Real Life Problems

     Constructs Knowledge

     Promotes Change

     Collaborative / Participatory

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg83f72_6Gw

  • A BRIEF HISTORY OF ACTION RESEARCH FERRANCE (2000)

     Kurt Lewin, a social psychologist and educator, first

    formulated the idea of performing research in a “natural”

    setting in the 1940s.

     No distinction between the research study and the

    problem to be solved.

     Proposed that research should be cyclical rather than

    linear.

     Stephen Corey was among the first to use action

    research in education and he stated the following:

    We are convinced that the disposition to study…the

    consequences of our teaching is more likely to change

    and improve our practices than is reading about what

    someone else has discovered of his teaching (Corey,

    1953, p. 70).

  • MODELS AND TYPES OF

    ACTION RESEARCH

  • MODELS OF ACTION RESEARCH

     Many models exist but all share the same basic

    principles which are:

     A central problem or topic

     Observation or monitoring takes place

     Collection and synthesis of data

     Some type of action is taken

     Next stage of action research (varies)

  • ACTION RESEARCH INTERACTING SPIRAL ERNEST STRINGER (2007)

  • LEWIN’S ACTION RESEARCH SPIRAL (MERTLER, 2009)

  • CALHOUN’S ACTION RESEARCH CYCLE (MERTLER, 2009)

  • BACHMAN’S ACTION RESEARCH CYCLE MERTLER (2009)

  • RIEL’S ACTION RESEARCH MODEL (MERTLER, 2009)

  • PIGGOT-IRVINE’S ACTION RESEARCH MODEL MERTLER (2009)

  • TYPES OF ACTION RESEARCH (FERRANCE, 2000)

  • STEPS IN ACTION RESEARCH

  • STEPS IN ACTION RESEARCH (FERRANCE, 2000)

  • STEPS IN ACTION RESEARCH FERRANCE (2000)

     Identify a problem area

     Meaningful, attainable and within teacher’s influence

     Higher order question that is specific and concise

     Collection and organization of data

     Portfolios, interviews, photos, diaries, field notes, videos, journals, case studies, checklists, surveys

     Appropriate, easy to collect, and readily available

     Triangulate data (i.e. use three or more sources)

     Organize to identify themes; can be arranged by gender, classroom, school, grade level, age, etc.

     Interpretation of data

     Analyze and identify major themes

     Quantitative or qualitative

  • STEPS IN ACTION RESEARCH

     Action based on data

     Use the data collected complemented by current

    research to develop a plan of action

     Alter only one variable

     Document and collect data during action phase

     Reflection

     Evaluate the results

     Was the intervention successful? Can the positive

    results be directly attributed to the variable addressed?

     If unsuccessful, what could be done in subsequent

    attempts to elicit more favorable results?

  • UNDERSTANDING OUR LEARNERS AND DEVELOPING

    REFLECTIVE PRACTICE: CONDUCTING ACTION RESEARCH

    WITH ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

    SOWA (2009)

     The study outlined action research projects of six

    graduate student teachers in an ESL Methods Course.

    Three projects are described in the paper and we will

    outline one of these to show how it reflects the steps of

    action research.

     Identify the Problem

     Students were not able to make “connections between

    the sound symbol relationships necessary for word

    decoding in reading and spelling” (Sowa, 2009, p.

    1029).

    http://www.sciencedirect.com.libproxy.uregina.ca:2048/science/article/pii/S0742051X09000985

  • UNDERSTANDING OUR LEARNERS AND DEVELOPING

    REFLECTIVE PRACTICE: CONDUCTING ACTION RESEARCH

    WITH ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

    SOWA (2009)

     Gather Data

     Reading assessment: Pre- and Post-Tests

     Work Samples

     Interpret Data

    A reading pre-test was used as a baseline

    Student samples showed beginning writing and spelling

    strategies

  • UNDERSTANDING OUR LEARNERS AND DEVELOPING

    REFLECTIVE PRACTICE: CONDUCTING ACTION RESEARCH

    WITH ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

    SOWA (2009)

     Act on Evidence

     Re-teach phonemic awareness to try to improve ELLs

    reading, writing and spelling skills.

     Taught phonics in context

     Worked on spelling strategies including letter-sound

    relationships and letter-sound combinations

     Evaluate Results

     Work samples indicated an improvement in spelling and

    reading but only a slight growth in reading.

     The reading post-test showed improvement amongst

    students to decode words and recognize miscues.

  • ACTION RESEARCH: USING WORDLES FOR

    TEACHING FOREIGN LANGUAGE WRITING BARALT, PENNESTRI, & SELVANDIN (2011)

     Used Mackey and Gass’s (2005) explanation of action research as framework for study.

     A very comprehensive research report which includes three sections:

    1. Explanation of data visualization as a learning tool (creates a rationale for the research study)

    2. The action research report conducted by the authors using Wordle

    3. The outcome of the project and suggestions for how educators can use word clouds in foreign language classrooms

     Context: 18 students in an intermediate-level Spanish FL class at a private research university who met for 50 minutes three times a week. Four compositions were to be written during the semester and students were expected to be able to: present information formally with an introduction, provide supporting paragraphs and a conclusion; use accurate grammar; and use instructors’ feedback in their writing. The expectations were clearly communicated to the students.

    http://llt.msu.edu/issues/june2011/actionresearch.pdf

  • ACTION RESEARCH: USING WORDLES FOR

    TEACHING FOREIGN LANGUAGE WRITING BARALT, PENNESTRI, & SELVANDIN (2011)

     Identify the Problem

     Two main issues in students’ writing:

    1. Continuous repetition of errors

    2. Reliance on high frequency words without attempting

    to use new vocabulary in writing

     Data Collection

     Word frequency counts from students’ compositions and

    a whole-class-based word cloud.

     Teaching reflection about the class discussion

     Instructor asked students about their perceptions of the

    use of Wordle in the writing process

     This procedure was used for all four compositions.

  • ACTION RESEARCH: USING WORDLES FOR

    TEACHING FOREIGN LANGUAGE WRITING BARALT, PENNESTRI, & SELVANDIN (2011)

     Act on Evidence

     Wordles helped to show students’ progress

     Students used more vocabulary in their compositions

     Facilitated class discussions about the writing process

     Evaluate Results

     Both the students and instructor agreed that using

    Wordles created excitement about writing.

     Effective, novel, and enjoyable.

     Students incorporated more varied vocabulary, used

    grammar more accurately, and had more content in their

    writing.

     Workshop days became more student-centered

  • ACTION RESEARCH: USING WORDLES FOR

    TEACHING FOREIGN LANGUAGE WRITING BARALT, PENNESTRI, & SELVANDIN (2011)

     Limitations

     Lack of generalizability

     Findings of action research are typically only

    relevant to the specific classroom being

    investigated, its students and its own uniq