Upload
ad-nor-azli
View
222
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
1/22
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
2/22
At this point there is no need to comment further on any of the arguments put
forward and it could be accepted that an opportunity to let off steam and have a'good moan' maybe something we should all do once in a while. Research that was
solely about understanding situations might be content to pursue the contextualanalyses indicated in the anecdote. Action researchers will also go through such a
phase but ultimately they would have to ask themselves
What can I do, given that the situation does not look very promising?
AR begins when professionals begin to ask themselves this and similar
questions. As you might imagine this has caused something of a split in those
who claim to promote AR.
Carr and Kemmis [1986] define AR as follows:
"Action Research is a form of self-reflective enquiry undertaken by the
participants [teachers, students or principals, for example] in social [including
educational] situations in order to improve the rationality and justice of [a]
their own social or educational practices, [b] their understanding of these
practices, and [c] the situations [and institutions] in which these practices are
carried out."
Not all action researchers agree with this definition. There is widespread
agreement that the participants undertake the research themselves. There is
less agreement about the use of the terms 'rationality and justice' and about[c]. It is [c] which opens up the 'big' questions which have a tendency to divert
research away from the work place and from the developmental possibilities
as it did with the teachers I described above. One solution might be that action
researchers should look at the 'big' questions and at their workplace. It has to
be said that the central focus in AR is on improving practice.
Professor John Elliott, (at the time of writing) Dean of the School of Education
at UEA, and a very influential figure, has defined AR as:
"the study of a social situation with a view to improving the quality of actionwithin it." [Elliott, 1982]
Bridget Somekh [in McBride, 1989] has built upon this definition to derive a
more inclusive one. She sees AR as:
"The study of a social situation, involving the participants themselves as
researchers, with a view to improving the quality of action within it."
This last definition will inform this volume rather than any other. Definitions
and uses of AR have been commented upon by a large number of academics inmany fields. While it may appear to be a form of navel gazing, on this course
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
3/22
we have to scratch surfaces more than we might normally, just as some
academics have done with these definitions. We have to attempt to gain a
deeper and more profound understanding of the uses of terms and ideas. It
means that to some extent we have to make some terms, that are used in an
everyday way, problematical - meanings have to be questioned. The same is
true of some forms of authority, which are often exercised unreflectively. It is
no coincidence that John Elliott has written widely about the problems of
centralised control of education. Indeed, he has maintained that by engaging
in AR teachers are taking an anti-bureaucratic position through which they
become aware of the greater contextual framework. This is certainly a
credible view though it would be surprising if some practitioners had not come
to AR after being critical of national policy, i.e. concerned with 'big' questions
first.
Action researchers are usually anxious to assert that their work seeks tonarrow the gap between theory and practice. That is to say they have no
interest in theory which is not grounded in practice nor practice which is not
reflected upon and theorised about. In this way theory and practice interact.
We can also conclude from Somekh's definition that AR is not carried out by
the archetypal scientist in a white coat who is detached from the 'objects' he
[as it usually is] is studying. To some extent the researcher is an 'insider' who
changes the social situation by virtue of studying it. When conducting an
interview, for example, it is more than likely that practitioners will have had
thoughts and ideas which otherwise would not have emerged had an interview
not taken place. Yet it sometimes becomes clear that an action researcher canbecome something of an 'outsider' simply by collecting data. In this sense
knowledge is power and the knowledge is held by the researcher. It is likely
that the action researcher will balance uncomfortably between the insider and
outsider positions during the course of her project.
While the research is taking place it is not unusual for an action researcher to
have a 'critical friend', i.e. someone who is often an academic and who acts as
a sounding board for discussion, comments upon conclusions that might be
drawn and/or action about to be taken. Those engaging in AR are expected tocollect data more formally than classroom teachers would normally . This
implies an understanding of the methodologies of data gathering - another role
the critical friend might play. In general, the task of the critical friend is to
support the work of the action researcher without taking over.
Figure 1, below, illustrates that AR is not only about research but
about action too. For recruits to AR, the very thought of carrying out a formal
interview can seem daunting. Taking action can be more frightening still and
even act as a bar to trying AR at all. We might call the teacher starting out on
AR as an enquiring teacher who does the research part of AR but puts theaction part on hold. It has been argued that attempts to 'educate' without
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
4/22
paying attention to action is not education at all. Readers will find that it
maybe easier to begin acting in a small way in, say, your own classroom. More
ambitious action may affect others or call upon others to make decisions about
their own action. In this case it is important that these people have some stake
and/or say in both the research and the action that follows. More will be said
about this below.
B. DOING ACTION RESEARCH - THE PROCESS
Figure 1 adapted from Somekh in McBride [1989].
We can now consider each of these steps to see what each entails.
C. IDENTIFYING A FOCUS OF INTEREST OR A PROBLEM [step 1]
For those new to AR this step can be the most difficult. It is likely that you will
have to go through a period of reflection about your own practice or maybe
even observe a colleague at work.
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
5/22
Some teachers may have a child that they feel they would like to understand
better; there maybe an area where you think you are failing; or a part of the
curriculum which feels inadequate; a topic about which you would like to
know more; a topic which could add something to your teaching and so on.
Other professionals say in business, or the caring professions generally, may
be concerned about the quality of decision maing in a particular department
or team. There may be concerns about communication structures, particularly
in multi-professional agencies, between agencies and between geographically
dispersed sites. Doubts may be expressed concerning management structures,
the distributions of responsibilities and duties leading to the possibility of role
conflict and role strain. There may be suspicions that quality assurance
procedures are inadequate or consultative procedures too narrow in focus.
And so on.
We all, to some extent, relish the comfort of what we are used to and
concluding that part of our work is not as good as it might be can create
discomfort. One ploy for getting into posing some problems is to discuss your
work with your colleagues and clients. A colleague may be prepared to run a
critical eye over activities. Whether you try these steps or some others, you will
have to think imaginatively. The first steps towards making changes are the
worst and if you concentrate too much on the finer details you will rarely find
any incentive to do anything at all. Talk yourself up and be perepared to fly by
the seat of your pants a little. This is not to suggest that should be reckless
rather that you should override the fears you might have and be prepared tosort out difficulties only if they arise. Many problems do not actually arise and
when they do you can soon solve many of them. More often than not, you will
find your colleagues remarkably resilient. Another alternative is to do nothing.
Of course to write all of this is a little risky. But in our experience change and
improvement only comes about when people take risks. It is also our
experience that as the AR process is worked through action researchers do not
look back. Rather they develop a confidence about their study and, more
generally, adopt a resourceful and flexible approach to their practice. In short
they are empowered and independent.
D. COLLECTING DATA AND MAKING REPRESENTATIONS [step 2]
In a sense problem [or interest] posing is, or can be, a first step in collecting
dat a but the reader might feel that this step is more of a starting point. It may
be added that a supportive colleague or 'buddy' in your place of work can be a
great help in data collecting, as in other steps in process.
Let us first clarify what data is. Data can take any form. It can be:
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
6/22
documents produced in the ordinary course of affairs: in running a school or classroom, e.g., pupil work, registers, wall
charts, pupil files/records, notes from parents, lesson plans/notes,
school brochures, policy statements etc.
in running a business, e.g., memos, minutes of meetings, projectplans, budgets, documentation relating to product campaigns,
specifications of roles and relationships, mission statements
in running a hospital, ward, general practice, e.g., care plans,client files, memos, registers, rostas, noticeboard leaflets etc
photographs, of say, graffiti, wall pictures, professional/clientinteraction, blackboard etc.
self-report diaries (this provides evidence of how the professional orclient reported some event, rather than of the event itself. Such a report
has to be set alongside other sources of data)
video and audio memories
Each of these have their associated strengths and weaknesses. Consequently,
researchers do not simply depend upon one kind of data but try to obtain as
great a variety as the situation will allow.
There are no hard and fast rules about how to collect data, but there are some
guidelines which can be borne in mind. Although 'having an open mind' in the
collection of data may seem to be some sort of 'objective' ideal, it is hardly
possible. Every researcher is interested, or curious about something -otherwise why research? It is this curiosity through which questions are
formed, and patterns are identified. In order to know more about something,
one has to observe more closely, and collect more data. So,
follow your own natural curiosities and interests, making a note of themas they arise. Eventually, you will be able to refine your research
question(s), or choose which course of research will be the most
rewarding for you.
share your interests and curiosities with others. This is a good way ofrefining ideas. It also encourages a community approach to action
research.
We might advise you, then, to 'immerse' yourself in the situation, if you are
not already. Once the guiding curiosities and interests are made sufficiently
explicit. It becomes easier to know what data to collect and how. You may
decide, for example:
to create a portrait of 'everyday life in ....'
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
7/22
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
8/22
Qualitative researchers, particularly those influenced by phenomenology, are
aware of the need to suspend their own taken for granted values, interests and
beliefs. No one can do research with an 'open mind', or clear of prejudice.
That is not what is being asked for here. What is being asked for is the
recognition that we all operate in everyday life with taken for granted beliefs
about the world. What is taken for granted as real, true, holy and common
sense in one culture and sub-culture will not be considered to be so in others.
Research is largely about uncovering our own prejudices. As such it can be
very threatening.
It is important that we be on guard to discriminate between judgements about
'data', interpretations of 'data', summaries of 'data' and 'data'. At a
philosophical level it can be argued that all data is a form of judgement.
Qualitative sociologists continually investigate the 'social construction' of
'data'. It is difficult to maintain the argument that some things are'facts' andare not socially constructed. For example, it can be said that a 'tree' is a 'fact'
of nature. However, the concepts of 'tree' and 'nature' are not quite the same
in mythological systems of thought as distinct from the systems of thought
constructed by current scientific practices. Each concept takes its meaning
within a given context of thought and practice; and these contexts can differ
over time and between speakers. In this way the concepts are socially
constructed by the speakers and practitioners within the context of their use.
A scientists may give priority to the scientif definitions of tree and nature.
However, does this mean to say that the mythological definitions are 'wrong','inferior'? Our answers to this question can reveal our prejudices. The
qualitative researcher will suspend judgement at this point and will inquire
into the different kinds of meanings and practices associated with each
context. If a judgement is to be made it will be made at the end of the research
not at the point of data collection. This judgement, if it is made, will be
accompanied by a rationale in defence of the judgement, based upon the data
as an evidence base. For this reason it is very important that prejudices are
not built into the data base itself otherwise the data-base will be biased and the
findings falisified. The data base must be a fair or unbiased representation ofthe case itself. Thus the principles and procedures adopted by the researcher
to do this must be made clear.
In developing the data base from which to make a representation you will be
involved primarily in: observation, interviewing and the collection of
documents and artifacts. These three will be briefly outlined in turn.
1. Observation
Observation is more than just looking and seeing. The task of observation is to
be able to represent a social scene in a way which is recognisable to the actorsinvolved, is considered valid and a true representation of their action. The
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
9/22
problem here is the issue of what is meant by valid and true. It is a truism that
different people make different judgements upon what they see. Observation
cannot be separated from the different meanings that actors place upon their
action, the actions of others, the 'stage' upon which they act and the 'props'
they use. Thus, in making a representative description of observable
characters, events, 'stages' and 'props', it is important to subject that
description in some way to the interpretations of the actors involved. This can
be done, for example, by:
allowing the actors to read the representation, seeking occasions when one's understanding of the meaning of a
situation can be tested say by asking actors if the interpretation or
understanding is 'correct'.
engaging actors in reflection upon a recording and asking for theirinterpretations of it, e.g., re-playing a video recording to pupils
By carrying out such 'tests' on a frequent basis, the researcher can ensure that
his or her understandings of what is being observed do not differ significantly
from those of the actors. However, rather than one interpretation, the
researcher will collect many interpretations of a given observation,
particularly when what is being observed involves an 'us' and 'them' situation.
Thus, observation goes hand in hand with interviewing.
2. Interviewing
Much of your data will probably be collected by interview. The interview is arecord of the other's voice. The voice is something very personal. When I
speak, it is my voice and not someone else's, my words, expressing my feelings,
my point of view. However, to what extent is this actually true?
How much of what I believe or know to be true is actually something that is
second or third hand, bequeathed to me by television, parents or a school
teacher? How much of what I speak is actually derived from the voices of
others, powerful others, those who were significant in my life? Anyway, does
my poor little voice actually count in this world? Many people feel they do not
have a voice in their own organisation, family or life in general.
Interviewing involves wrestling with questions and issues like these. In
representing the voices of others am I not also committing the same kind of
theft of their voice by replacing it with my own. What am I doing when I speak
on behalf of another? when I represent their voices? Am I not really
contributing to the social construction of their silence, their voicelessness in
society? How can I create a data record that truly represents the voices of
others without censorship, without reinforcing the structures of power which
continually deny a means of expression to their voices?
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
10/22
For this reason, questionnaires are not a good strategy to uncover the voices of
participants. Questionnaires, in their search for 'objectivity' are pre-
structured according to an agenda of interests closer to that of the researcher
than the researched. Thus, if you are working in your own place of work it is
probably not a good idea to be tempted to pass around questionnaires. Some
people, doing AR for the first time, have been known to use questionnaires on
their colleagues because they do not have the courage to carry out interviews.
Resist the temptation. There is barely a better starting point than conducting
an interview in order to identify the agenda of others. You might decide to use
a questionnaire if you want to talk to a large number of people at a later stage
to get a broad picture or to find out how widespread your conclusions apply.
Bear in mind the issues associated with quantification [covered in chapter 2],
and be careful about generalising.
Remembering the need for 'immersion' and the value of an early interview,start collecting data early on. Steps 1 and 2 as outlined here, should not be
considered as necessarily distinct. When you begin you may feel that you have
a poor grasp of the area you are studying but this should not prevent you
conducting an open ended interview in which you may say little a learn a great
deal.
Often we are asked how many interviews a researcher should carry out. There
is no simple answer to this question. We could say that you need to carry out
as many interviews as you need to in order to clarify or establish one case or
another. You will probably find that in a remarkably short period you willhave a substantial volume of data and this may begin to frighten you. Indeed,
too much data can become very difficult to make sense of. Try and collect data
from the various viewpoints that there appears to be and then have a pause
and try and make sense of what you have. You can then decide in which
direction your study might go. You might wish to reinterview some people or
change the focus completely. As you acquire a sense of what is happening you
may well be able to categorise data as you collect it, into 'important',
'peripheral', 'not sure' or whatever. In this way you can keep a finger on the
pulse of your study.
One classification of interviewing style regards it as resting on a continuum
between formal to informal. The most formal kind of interviewing would be
similar to the researcher reading a questionnaire to the interviewee. The
interviewer's task would be to ensure a correct interpretation by the
interviewee of the interview schedule.
In a less formal interview the interviewer would have a list of broad questions
but would follow up 'interesting' issues raised by the interviewee in reponse to
the questions. Informal interviews try to engage the interviewee in'conversations'. The intention is to allow the interviewees to address their own
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
11/22
agenda of concerns and interests without imposition by the interviewer. The
interviewer may begin with a simple "Can you tell me something about 'x'?
Typically, the interviewee then makes the points perceived as significant, tying
them together in a way he or she sees as 'rational'. Informal interviewing may
take place under formally agreed conditions; or, it may be simply a passing
conversation. In the latter case the researcher has to consider the ethical
questions associated with using this information.
[a] The 'rules' of informal interviewing
Informal interviewing is more an art form than a 'science'. There are no hard
and fast rules. However, there are possible problems that
the interviewer needs to be aware of:
imposing one's own agenda on the interviewee closing down the interviewees options giving opinions rather than asking questions begging the question failing to ask for concrete examples: the 'stories', anecdotes, descriptive
accounts
being threatening [e.g., adult v. child; teacher v. pupil]; thus thenecessity of engaging in threat reducing strategies, and trust enhancing
talking too much revealing one's interests in a way that the interviewee 'gives you what
you want to hear'.
using an audio recorder without consulting the interviewee[b] Strategies for informal interviewing
Again there are no recipes. Everyone develops their own style according to
their personality. Acting out of character is easily detected. Thus, it is best to
learn by trial, error, discussion and reflection what works and what does not.
The following describe a number of interviewing styles that we have seen
colleagues adopt.
[ i ] The provocative style. Some people have what may be called a provocative
style. It is almost an 'attack'. Its advantage is that it gets to the central issues
very quickly by provokes responses. It can, however, also set up a distrust, a
nervousness which closes down the interviewees responses.
[i i] The 'I 'm on your side' style. Here the interviewer dresses and speaks to
copy the image of the interviewee. This has the advantage of establishing an
initial favourable response. However, an unconvincing interviewer may get
'found out'.
[i ii ] The ' laid back' style. The style is casual, 'cool', almost clumsy, clearly nothreat to anyone. It requires a certain attitude of mind which is non-
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
12/22
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
13/22
onto the blackboard/whiteboard/flipchart which can be recorded as
'documentary' evidence of the work of a committee, or classroom. Then there
are the artifacts [models, artwork, craftwork etc] and other 'props' [e.g.,
furniture, pictures and other background objects which can either be
functional or have aesthetic or symbolic value] and tools of the day-to-day
work of the organisation. Each of these hold a meaning for the actors which
need to be discovered. In order to uncover the social meaning of documents
and artifacts questions such as the following can be asked of oneself or of
others to direct observation and analysis:
how are the documents used? on what occasions are they used? in which places are they used? who uses them? are they used with others? what typical patterns of behaviour, and/or rituals accompany their use? What kinds of things are said about them? How do individuals and groups feel about them? How do they judge
them?
The researcher may also establish who wrote a document and what they
intended to achieve by writing it. By exploring wording, illustration, examples
used, general format and presentation, anticipated audience f rom the wri ter 's
point of view, important issues maybe established.
Remember to hoard and collect any paperwork which might be relevant and a
small note which can serve as a diary can produce valuable data. Diaries have
the added advantage of soon becoming reflective, that is you will find yourself
writing down private thoughts which can be enormously illuminative about
your own understandings and biases. It is not unusual to find that a diary will
at least provide a useful record of your activities. At best it will become a
reflective account of your activities and a major source of data.
As a diverse range of material begins to be collected - in the form of audio or
video tape recordings, diaries, documents etc - the next major question is how
to put it into an order which can be easily accessed and to make sense of it all.
E. ANALYZING DATA AND GENERATING HYPOTHESES [step 3]
Just as C and D above need not be separate, you may feel that step E is taking
place while you are doing C and D. Note first of all that generating hypotheses
takes place some time after you have begun to immerse yourself in your study.
Central to your research will be trying to discern new understandings about
your practice and other people are vital for this. Early hypotheses tend to lack
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
14/22
understanding and familiarity. What might be called 'mature hypotheses'
have a firmer basis. An example may help here.
One student set out to experiment with more participative classroom
techniques. She had just returned to work after bringing up two children and,
having had the opportunity to contemplate, she thought she would try what
she had lacked the confidence to do before. Before long she found that while
her classes were beginning to appreciate the new approach her major
difficulty was the teacher in the class next door who was unhappy about
children walking down the corridor during lessons on their way to the library
and other places. Comments were being passed in the staffroom. Gradually
the teacher's study became concerned not only with changing her own
classroom but making these changes with the opposition of her colleague.
Change in the school became as important as change in her class. The original
hypothesis grew into a more relevant mature hypothesis.
Making sense of data is partly a matter of intuition and partly a matter of
being systematic. The intuitive part is about seeing themes, patterns, make
guesses, make arguments, ask further questions about the data. In this respect
you may find that being familiar with the literature may help you decide what
are the important themes, though you will need to test out your own ideas too.
As patterns, arguments and questions arise the data begins to be transformed
from a pile of notes, transcripts, documents and other recordings
into 'evidence'
However, you do not have to wait for the inspired hunch or flash of genius.
Much of the work of making sense of data requires a systematic ordering of
data. This is largely a process of analysis which can be broken down into a
remarkably simple set of routines:
label the individual documents, transcripts, etc. Commonsensical labelswork best: name of person interviewed or observed, date, title(s) of
event(s) watched.
number pages, paragraphs and any other obvious sub-unit of thetranscript or document.
index the various documents, transcripts etc. So for example, if youwanted to know where the themes of 'control', or 'democratic values' or
'gender issues' or 'attitudes to work' and so on had been expressed in
the data files you would be referred to all the places in the records
where any particular theme had cropped up: e.g., 'control' is mentioned
in interviews file A, page 3 section 2, page 15 section 7, and so on.
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
15/22
continually ask the question, what is this data of? So, for example, thenote found in an obnservational record 'the client entered the room with
a sad expression on his face ....' is not data about the state of mind of the
client but is data concerning a judgement made by the observer i.e., that
the expression was one of sadness. Similarly, in an interview if the
interviewee says 'Jo is a schizophrenic', this is not data bout Jo, but data
about the categorisation system used by the interviewee.
If you store data upon a computer, there is an added bonus. Most
wordprocessors will have a 'search' and 'find' facility. This can be used as a
simple way of organizing data. By placing key words at the head of sections,
the computer can be made to find these one after another, thus helping to
quickly trace important passages.
For example:
Interview with a Houseteacher
*discipline*
*building relationships*
*trust*
*being an individual*
*institutional roles*
as a house master I'm expected to discipline kids who have misbehaved forother people ... and whom I might be getting on very well with ... apart from
that. Now I have got to try and build a relationship which allows that situation
to exist. I've got to try and ... kinds have got to understand - I try and teach
kids that it's my, part of my job sometimes to be nasty to them even though
they've not done anything personally to me. Um, and in that sense they've got
to identify me with the institution. And when they hurt the institution they
hurt me kind of situation. Having said that, I also personally want them to see
me ... as somebody that they can trust and somebody that they can uh have
relationship with as a person, as an individual. I don't want to be just part of
the institution.
By instructing the computer to find the key word *trust* it will go to all
sections, one after another, which have been labeled with the stars in this way.
Thus it will not go to every single instance of the non-asterisked 'trust'. With
more sophisticated data handling programmes such as hypertext, or
hypercard, this process can be made very much more sophisticated.
While you are organising your data it is likely that you will find yourself deep
in thought during odd moments, thinking about interviews or something saidin your class. In short, you will have begun to analyse your data. If you have
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
16/22
audio or video tapes, go through them without necessarily transcribing at first.
Get a feel for them. If you have notes read them.Begin to tidy up your notes
and use a highlighter pen to pick out the parts you believe are important. Do
the same with documents and papers.
Gradually you will become aware of themes which begin to be emerging. By
this is meant several teachers may allude to, say, the behaviour of a certain
class or the learning of a group of children or the actions of the headteacher.
These then become themes that you will pay special attention to. You may find
yourself progressively focussing upon them while, of course, not ignoring other
matters. As you go further you might see relationships between the themes.
You will have to be careful that the relationships you see are not merely
through your own eyes and biases. A second round of interviews maybe
needed to ascertain that you are not misrepresenting those you have
interviewed. During the course of your study, the relationships which cementyour themes together will become your theories.
Take great care. It is neither essential nor good practice to create theories
which are not accurate. Data used to support a theory should come from a
range of sources, that is, it should be triangulated. Data used in this way is
called evidence. Remember too, that it is not unusual for some data to be 'left
over' as it were. In other words it may not fit neatly into a theory. This data
should not automatically be discarded. It could be the most important data of
all. You will have to judge, in association with your respondents. You will
probably find out that people make their decisions according to slightlydifferent logics and what is rational to you may not be to them and vice-versa.
F. PLANNING ACTION STEPS [step 4]
A common notion in all of qualitative research is that if the planning of action
is rooted in the data collected from those who have to take action, there will be
a good chance that the action will actually take place. If you are doing AR in
your own classroom there are a number of temptations. One is to do nothing
and nobody else will know. This route, in my experience is rarely taken.
Action researchers are often, by this stage, heavily involved in their work and
cannot wait to try something. The questions then are whether to try and make
great or small changes or, possibly, the action researcher will have a half
hearted attempt.
Ultimately the sorts of changes that come about will depend upon the people
and the issues that are involved and the on-the-ground judgement of the
researcher will be a major factor of determining what happens.
When AR includes other people the decisions that have to be made are quitedifferent. The importance of the first line of this section may well then be
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
17/22
apparent. If you are trying to assess children differently as a department, for
example, you may need to have several meetings. You may find it helpful to
have representatives from other departments at your meetings so they can see
what you are doing. Members of the Senior Management Team may have a
role to play. I have known a small minority in a group who do not want to
alter their practice. It is usually better to leave them alone than antagonise
them. If the changes you plan work well, they may fall in at a later stage.
While we are formulating and planning the process of building theory is also
going on. It is a many layered process. The issue of theory was alluded to in
the previous section [D] and part 1, 'Building Theory', which follows, could
just as easily have been included in D. But to demonstrate that it is ongoing, it
is included here.
1. Building TheoryA theory is an explanation which links together elements of the data that you
have collected. We all have and also make theories about the world all the
time. Research allows us the chance to develop and then to test some of these
theories in practice. If a teacher says "little Billy is just plain naughty' as a
reason for bad behaviour, this can be tested out by examining the contexts in
which Billy acts. We may find that he is always labeled naughty in some,
sometimes naughty in others and never naughty elsewhere. This would be
enough to suggest that the 'plain naughty' theory is at least insufficient and
perhaps is wrong. Perhaps, the new theory, depending upon evidence would be
'Little Billy tends to be labeled naughty in excessively authoritariansituations', or alternatively, 'in insecure situations'. Such a reformulation no
longer postulates the problem as residing in 'little Billy' but in an interaction
between 'little Billy and certain social structures'. Furthermore, as repeatedly
pointed out, to label someone as naughty is data not about the person so
labeled but about the person who is doing the labelling. It is data bout the
system of labels employed by a professional in given contexts of use.
Thus, one may go even further and begin to inquire into the meaning of
'naughtiness'. We may find that teachers A, B, C and D all have quite different
definitions of 'naughtiness'. Or, we may find that all teachers in the school
have broadly similar definitions, but the parents, social workers, and other
social groups do not. We would then be led again to the view that whatever
'naughtiness' is, it is not an innate characteristic but is rather something that
is defined by particular people. That is, it is socially constructed. It only exists
when groups of people makeit exist by continually referring to certain
behaviours or to certain people as being 'naughty'.
Slowly, we are beginning to build a theory about naughtiness by constantly
referring to our evidence of what people say it is, and what people do indifferent situations.
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
18/22
In building theories therefore we can ask ourselves such questions as:
Do people who are in a similar social position (e.g. all teachers) give thesame kinds of explanations e.g., 'boys will be boys'?
Do people who are in contrasting social positions give the same ordifferent kinds of explanation? E.g., do the working class and the upper
class explain wealth differences similarly or differently?
Do events observed in one context persist in order contexts? E.g., Sarahmay be observed to be inarticulate when told to explain things to a
teacher. Is she also similarly inarticulate when she is explaining equally
difficult things to a friend in the playground? If she is not then
conjectures may be made about the different social settings having an
influence upon Sarah's competence to explain things to others. If similarphenomena are found with other girls then it is important to compare
with groups of boys. It is also important to take into consideration other
factors such as age, social class and so on. In this way a theory might be
built about behaviour in groups in relation to social context.
These comparisons and contrasts between individuals, groups, and social
contexts will begin to show what persists and what changes over time and in
different situations and with different group composition. This process of
constant contrast and comparison is often referred to by the term theoretical
sampling.
In this process we have begun to examine not only the beliefs of others but also
of ourselves. These beliefs and practices have been challenged and perhaps
changed by listening to and observing a very much wider group of people than
we would be able to do in ordinary conversation and observation. The
principles outlined in the ethics section of this document have ensured that we
accord each person equal status and rights to have a voice in the research.
Typically, children have low status in a group which contains adults.
Research, by listening to children seriously, can add a new and important
dimension to the classroom and to our understanding of the world of children,the way they interpret and act upon their experiences of the classroom.
Theory and action are inter-related in that we act, develop theory, act and so
on. When we build poor theory our actions often produce outcomes that are
different or even contrary to what we expect. It is often said by scientists that
there is nothing more practical than a good theory. Insofar as theory is a basis
for action we have to develop it carefully and keep it constant review.
Social theory is often thought of as vague. However, the behaviours of millions
of people are routinely co-ordinated by theoretical constructs everyday.
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
19/22
Transport timetables, school timetables, calenders, dances, polite exchanges
between strangers - all these in their different ways systematically co-ordinate
the behaviour of people. We are very good and often very precise in our
techniques of behaviour co-ordination. However, none of this is done in a
mindless way. Unlike the materials manipulated by chemists or engineers,
people can object to being manipulated, or can choose alternative actions. The
timetables that organize our lives in schools, businesses and social life only
work if we choose to make them work. Choice is the key.
By identifying and generating alternatives, choices can be made and action
taken. The final major step in the process of action research is to
formulate action plans.
2. Action Plans
We can distinguish two broadly different kinds of action plan:
[a] the first seeks only to change the details of existing ways of doing things;
or, to solve certain problems in the execution of a plan without changing the
overall plan.
[b] the second seeks to replace the existing way of doing things with a different
way of doing things.
The first occurs when through discussion members of a group are convinced
that their current practices are basically desirable but that certain problemsstill need to be ironed out.
The second occurs when through discussion members of a group become
convinced that the current practices are less useful - or even no longer
defensible - in comparison with another way of doing things identified through
the research and observation carried out.
In either case the proposal for action should include the following:
a statement of the aims of the proposed action, a statement of the reasons for this action, a statement of:
i. the new routines,ii. the new activities,
iii. the new materials,iv. the new forms of group organisation,v. the new concepts and philosophies which provide the rationale for
the changes
a statement of the means of monitoring changes,
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
20/22
a statement of the formative and evaluative changes. Formativeevaluation occurs throughout the period of the implementation and can
be used to provide feedback and so guide and shape the action.
Summative evaluation occurs at the end of the period of implementation
and provides a picture of the action project as a whole so that people
have a basis upon which to make decisions about what has happened
and what to do next.
a statement of the necessary resources, equipment, time .... etc.By following guidelines such as these and adapting them to specific purposes,
action research can be a continuous process of professional self and staff
development.
As qualitative and indeed other forms of research have come to stress action
there has been a developing and increasingly influential literatureabout change. Fullan [1982], Holt [1987], Fullan and Stiegebauer [1991] and
Fullan and Hargreaves [1992] are some examples though the reader may be
best advised to read Changing the Curriculum by MacDonald and Walker
[1974] for a good theoretical basis. Even a cursory read of these pages will
suggest to the reader that our values suggest that change is more likely to be a
process than an event. More importantly it is unlikely to be successful if
teachers are told to implement somebody else's design.
For us, change occurs following consultation and debate and endeavours to
incorporate the wishes of those involved. Of course this is not always possibleand can be arduous but not always so. It is not necessary for managers, for
example, to have long drawn out, formal debates with their colleagues.
Sometimes a brief corridor word will suffice. People who work closely together
find ways of discussing their work without too many formal meetings and
develop an understanding for each others preferences and views. In collegial
institutions teachers and others develop a culture which incorporates ways of
understanding and working with each other. In such institutions chnage is
decided by the body politic and while not everybody accepts all changes most
professionals can find a way through. Dictatorial managers rarely have their
fiats accepted in practice though people may give them the impression that all
is well by being 'creatively compliant'. In qualitative research our focus is on
what actually happens rather than what appears to be the case.
G. IMPLEMENTING ACTION STEPS [step 5]
If you are working largely alone you are faced with the same sorts of choices
outlined in 4, above. When all is said and done everything rests on a simple
decision. "To do or not to do?" As I have suggested above, there has to come a
time when you have to just go for it. This is the flying by the seat of your pantsbit.
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
21/22
If you have colleagues involved, you will need to talk to each other but
ultimately, as above, change rests upon somebody actually deciding to do
something. There are often more reasons for not doing than doing. And it is in
the nature of things that all change involves a risk. If you wait for no risk you
will have a long wait. If you have collected and analysed your data carefully
and attempted to ensure yourself that you have some people willing to
participate, you at least have a chance.
The leading action researcher , enabler or critical friend will need to get
colleagues to give accounts of what each is doing. We all learn a great deal
from simple stories. And these have to be honest, warts and all. Those with
doubts are often strengthened by hearing about the failures of others. This is
not necessarily a question of being unkind but rather allowing others to realise
that they are not the only one who is finding the path a rocky one. They can
find fresh heart from commiserating with others, and having the confidence toshare their own failures. Of course it does not have to be, and indeed, usually
is not, a negative business. It is wonderfully exciting when colleagues express
what they see to be success and show they have, then, the enthusiasm to see a
new round of possibilities before the current ones are finished.
H. COLLECTING DATA TO MONITOR CHANGE, ANALYSING AND
EVALUATING [steps 6 & 7]
The first stage is to carry out what Elliott has called 'reconnaisance'. This
involves the action researcher in first describingthe situation following thefirst action steps and then beginning to explain the situation. Taking these
actions implies that the action researcher is now setting out on another stage of
the action research 'spiral'. Indeed the process is seen as a never ending spiral
which looks like a coil.
Yet there is a variation in this rather neat picture. Sometimes during the
course of carrying out action research the researcher comes across a piece of
data, or has a new thought or for some other reason realises that there is a new
and different perspective upon all that has been done. In this case the entire
new coil is separate from the original. So, for example, an art teacher who was
exploring whether children draw better from pictures or objects concluded
that what was more important was the way she taught and the children
learned drawing. She also found that a small group in her class could not and
were not interested in drawing at all and she was better off finding different
art activities for them to do. Having reconnoitred, the researcher may then be
in a position to form a more mature hypothesis or at least to collect some data
so that the study can proceed.
I. TO CONCLUDE
8/14/2019 Somekh Model
22/22
If you are feeling apprehensive, as many do, it is a good idea to jump in early
to feel the water. There are usually difficulties in collecting data, and
sometimes more substantial problems as you analyse, collect more data, put
forward your findings and so on. Many practitioners return to study having
not been on a long course for a number of years. The greatest difficulties are,
in our experience, encountered by those who leave too much to the later stages.
You cannot progress very far without data, so go and collect some.
Return to contents page.
http://www.enquirylearning.net/ELU/Issues/Research/Res1Cont.htmlhttp://www.enquirylearning.net/ELU/Issues/Research/Res1Cont.htmlhttp://www.enquirylearning.net/ELU/Issues/Research/Res1Cont.html