questionsreflection.docx

Who Does Action Research, and Why Do They Do It? Stories From the Field

The following accounts provide but a few examples of the many ways in which action research provides the means for people to work collaboratively to solve significant problems in their work, education, or community life. Each is distinctive in its own way but describes how systematic, participatory processes of investigation enabled participants to achieve outcomes that resolved significant problems in the social environment in which they were placed.

Education2

2. A full description of this project may be found in Stringer (2007).

A teacher in an eighth-grade language arts class engaged the students in a voluntary research project concerning a school issue. In doing so she wished to cover a range of skills relevant to the state-mandated curriculum. A preliminary discussion with a group of girls identified sexual harassment as the number one issue facing them at school on a daily basis. It was a pervasive fact of life that was played out in classrooms, locker rooms, hallways, the cafeteria, and school buses, with one girl indicating that “nowhere is safe at school.”

In following sessions the girls extended their understanding of their experience of sexual harassment, detailing ways and places that it happened and describing particular incidents that illustrated their concerns. They also reviewed literature from magazines and other sources, discovering that it was a widespread issue across the nation. The group wrote letters to their parents, asking their permission to participate, and to the school administration, explaining the nature of their study.

The group investigations, in which each of them and other students and adults were interviewed individually, revealed the many ways harassment had occurred, including some incidents that were quite shocking to them all. Conversations with the school counselor indicated he dealt with issues of sexual harassment on a daily basis and was concerned that lack of student awareness of what constituted sexual harassment led many to feel confused.

At the end of the year the girls decided to write a performance piece titled “Speaking Out,” based on the key elements emerging from their investigations, to bring the issue to the attention of students and teachers. The script included information about ways to protect oneself when harassed and how to contact help when needed. They also constructed a triptych, a three-paneled piece where students could write down their ideas after the performance. They also wrote an article for the school newsletter that went to all students and their parents, checking with the school administration that it was OK to do this.

When “Speaking Out” was performed at the school’s Student Forum, there was a standing ovation, and the three panels of the triptych were covered with statements of strengths and affirmation. In the following months, the School Police Officer reported that sexual harassment complaints had fallen from four to five per week to one every two weeks, a testimony to the power of the action research in which the teacher and the girls had been involved.

Business/Health

Barbara Horner, an experienced health professional, engaged the Senior Management Team (SMT) of an aged care community as partners in an action research project that would assist their plans for redevelopment of the facility. Over a period of 2 years the outcomes of her research were integrated into the SMT’s plan for the changes required to take account of changing circumstances of aged care funding. A particular concern of the SMT was that the need for changes to their operations resulting largely from financial concerns should not negatively impact on the well-being or quality of life of residents.

The study included two cycles of an action research process based largely on qualitative methods—participatory observation and semistructured interviews—as well as additional data from two quality of service surveys for residents and a staff satisfaction survey. One of the major purposes of the action research process was to communicate and explain the processes of change to residents and to monitor and manage the impact of changes on their well-being.

An initial review of literature related to the social and organizational dynamics of aged care revealed many issues to be addressed by the SMT as they planned the changes to their organization. This was complemented by a review of relevant documents and records that provided further information related to the operation of the facility. This assisted the research team to clarify the broader arena of aged care and the key issues to be taken into consideration as they moved forward. At this stage the research facilitator also attended meetings of the SMT, gaining an understanding of the facility’s history, current situation and its challenges, issues and aspirations. In addition a period of reconnaissance also enabled the research facilitator to develop positive relationships with other staff and with residents.

In order to understand how residents were feeling about the impending changes, the facilitator engaged in interviews with a sample of residents from the low- and high-care centers and the independent living units. These interviews provided guidance for the development of a survey that explored issues related to administration services; village services such as assistance, security, and maintenance; and contracted services such as medical, podiatry, pharmacy, and hairdressing. Other questions sought to determine the levels of satisfaction with lifestyle services and facilities and with dissemination of information.

The study proved a great success, providing a continuing body of information that assisted the SMT to take into account a wide range of issues emerging from the study. These not only provided a resource for this facility but also suggested actions that might benefit other institutions and facilities affected by changing policies and circumstances of aged care. The positive impact of the study was also demonstrated by the formation of a Resident’s Advisory Council that maintained an ongoing forum for residents to interact with the facility’s management.

Economic Development

Jeremy Prince worked with a group of Pacific Island villagers who were concerned about the ongoing depletion of fish stocks that threatened their livelihoods. He first listened to their stories that told of times when there were plenty of fish, including those highly valued that were now in exceedingly short supply. He continued to gather information from them about their current fishing habits and discovered that where as the villagers had previously fished mainly for larger fish that at one time were highly valued, they now talked of smaller fish as being more available and “sweeter.”

With their help, he then started collecting data about the results of their fishing, the analysis revealing that the smaller fish making the major part of their catch were caught before they reached reproductive age. When this analysis emerged, it became easy for the villagers to understand that soon there would be no fish to catch. They then developed a plan to limit the size that fishermen could catch and the season when they could be caught.

This project became so successful that Jeremy was asked to extend his work to other villages and islands, working with each group to provide them with the methods of gathering and analyzing data related to their fishing activities.

The Practitioner Researcher—A New Way of Working

We conclude the chapter with some thoughts on the implications of these key action research ideas on the roles of academic or professional practitioners, which necessarily become more facilitative and less directive. Research is often assumed to be the province of academic or professional practitioners with specialized training that qualifies them to engage in the functions associated with a commonly accepted definition of the term “research.” This aligns with common perceptions that professionals have levels of expertise in fields associated with their roles that provide the technical capacities to operate the services and programs in which they are employed. Clients exist in a relationship in which the professional-as-expert provides a diagnosis and treatment of problems and issues experienced by a client/student/customer. Treatments, care plans, learning activities, and so on often are determined within a set of procedures or practices prescribed by the organization, agency, school, clinic, or business. The assumption in these circumstances is that experts are in a better position to devise interventions or other activities than their clients.

This is unproblematic in many cases—well-trained and experienced professionals providing services that resolve issues and provide people with services that maintain their continued well-being. We all enjoy the services of schools and teachers that enable students to enjoy their education and progress scholastically; doctors and nurses that heal our wounds and combat illness; police who maintain peace in our towns and neighborhoods; and so on.

There are circumstances, however, when this common mode of operation does not achieve the outcomes required of the service, something that is often especially noticeable in contexts where cultural, racial, gender, socioeconomic diversity exists. Many of these circumstances are notable for the continuing failure of programs and services to achieve outcomes that are required to maintain the health and well-being of these populations. Professional practitioners and the agencies and organization in which they work have limited understanding of the social and cultural realities of the people they serve and continue to implement ineffective practices. In many such contexts, the planned operations often prove ineffective and, in some cases, are quite damaging.

General

Reflection 1.12: Ernie—Accommodating Diversity

In Australia, the federal government in recent years determined that welfare services in rural and remote locations could more efficiently be served through telephone conversations between agency staff and their clients. Many clients in these settings are Aboriginal, have limited understanding of English, the only language employed by the agency, and in consequence are unable to communicate effectively. The end result has been that many have had badly needed services denied to them and some communities have experienced increased levels of poverty as a result.

In order to develop effective programs and services, therefore, or seek to solve problems that threaten the efficacy of services for which they are responsible, practitioners need to take into account the impacts of those developments and solutions on the lives of the people they serve. These are not merely technical issues, however, since the impact of the obdurate decisions of an unfeeling bureaucracy is deeply felt by the people concerned. For many years, marginalized people in sometimes dire circumstances have indicated the need to modify and adapt programs and services to take into account the social and cultural realities of the contexts in which they live. For some decades, Aboriginal people in Australia have through their own organizations and agencies requested governments to consult with them more effectively to overcome the rather dismal statistics that continue to haunt the nation (First Nations National Constitution Convention: Uluru Statement From the Heart, 2017).

Professional practitioners are currently becoming more aware of the limitations of their expertise, however, and there is an increasing tendency to engage clients, patients, consumers, and students in decision-making processes. We have also become more sensitive to the view that an army of experts is unlikely to be able to meet people’s needs if the people themselves remain merely passive recipients of services. As practitioners in many fields now realize, unless people come to understand procedures and practices by participating in their development, any program or service is likely to have limited effects on their lives. Patients who fail to maintain appropriate health practices, passive and disinterested students, recalcitrant welfare recipients, disorderly youth, and families in crisis will often not respond to the authoritative dictates of the “experts” whose task it is to “solve” their problems.

With action research, knowledge acquisition or production proceeds as a collective process, engaging people who have previously been the “subjects” of research in the process of defining and redefining the corpus of understanding on which their community or organizational life is based. As they collectively investigate their own situation, stakeholders build a consensual vision of their life-world. Action research results not only in a collective vision but also in a sense of community that operates at social, cultural, political, and emotional levels.

Action research is a collaborative approach to inquiry that seeks to build positive working relationships and productive communicative styles. Its intent is to provide a climate that enables disparate groups of people to work harmoniously and productively to achieve a set of goals. It links groups that potentially are in conflict so that they may attain viable, sustainable, and effective solutions to problems that affect their work or community lives through dialogue and negotiation. To think and act this way, however, requires us to challenge existing dichotomies such as expert and nonexpert, academic/practitioner, and researcher/researched; to get all people involved and for primary stakeholders to work in participatory relationships with those who have previously been designated the “experts.” In other words, we negotiate relationships over time in which we come to see each other as co-participants taking action to improve situations and learn together.

Action research therefore changes the social, organizational, and personal dynamics of the research so that all who participate not only have significant inputs into the processes of research, but also benefit from its outcomes.

Questions:

Which of the ideas presented in this chapter did you particularly like, find relevant, or even find puzzling?

How were these ideas different from what you already knew about research before reading the chapter? Note these for further discussion.

The accounts presented in the “Who Does Action Research, and Why Do They Do It? “Stories From the Field” section provided a few simple examples of action research projects. Comment on aspects of these stories that appealed to you. Comment on aspects that you found puzzling or that seemed to contradict your own experience or perspective of research.

Action research differs in significant ways from standard approaches to research. From your current understanding, how does action research differ from other approaches to research?

Does the Look–Think–Act routine(below) seem relevant to your personal, professional, or organizational reality? Does it resemble anything you currently do?

General

Box 1.1 A Basic Action Research Routine in Relation to a Specified Issue or Problem

Look

Observe what is going on (Observe).

Gather relevant information (Gather data).

Describe the situation (Define and describe).

Think

Explore and analyze: What is happening here? (Analyze).

Interpret and explain: How or why are things as they are? (Theorize).

Act

Define a course of action based on analysis and interpretation (Plan).

Implement the plan (Implement).

Assess the effectiveness of actions taken (Evaluate).