Differences between Fundamental Research and Action Research

Differences between Fundamental Research and Action ResearchAction Research

The Indian Educational Scenario

Indian educational system has undergone big changes in past few decades. From shifting the focus to more vocational educational to use of better methods and techniques in the teaching learning process, it has come a long way through. However, with the changes made, the developments and improvements done so far, there are still few problems which remain unsolved like problems related to discipline or absenteeism or fatigue or boredom related to particular subjects like History, Science or Mathematics. Well these are not mysterious problems which can’t be solved. But, it’s very true that in every class no matter how efficient a teacher is, a few such cases are found which are difficult to understand.

Traditionally such students are referred to as back benchers or failures or the anti class elements. But, giving a funny name to such students and putting them into a certain category does not bring an end to the duties and responsibilities of the teacher.

Why do we need a Research?

Generally in India, a curriculum is set up and given to the teachers to follow in their teaching learning process during a year. This curriculum is based on constant researches and studies going on in the field of education. Such researches are fundamental researches which add to the existing facts in a certain field. The problems related to syllabus, teaching methods, adjustment of students, etc are few such areas which can be taken up for fundamental researches.

But, for the minor problems like I discussed above, which an individual teacher faces in her classroom, these researches do not prove to be important.

They say a teacher is an artist to mould his students into the shape he likes. So being an artist it is the utmost duty of the teacher to see and check why he is unable to shape those special category students.

The action which a teacher can take up to study the probable causes of an existing problem and thereby providing suggestions to eradicate the problem is called Action Research.

Meaning of Action Research

Action Research is a kind of classroom research taken up by the class teacher or subject teachers with a view to find out what action can be taken to solve a certain problem in the shortest possible time.

For instance, a student who performs very well in written exams fails to give oral answers or a group of students constantly miss a particular subject period. There may be some reasons to all such problems, all that is required is a certain more effort on the part of the teachers to get involved and ask why, what and how.

Action Research is that one way which gives an opportunity to the teachers to get involved in solving their problems. No other researcher can help a teacher solve such practical problems faced by him in his daily classroom transactions, but the teacher himself.

Action Research is not concerned merely with solving problems in a class but can also be conducted to verify the consequences of new educational decisions, teaching and leadership strategies, and many more.

Differences between Fundamental Research and Action Research

To better understand the concept of Action Research, it would be better to differentiate between fundamental and action research. These differences can be summarized as under:

1. Objectives:

Fundamental Research-Develop & test educational theories.

Action Research: Find solutions to specific problems in a situation.

2.Training:

Fundamental Research- Superior training is required in Research Methodology.

Action Research:Limited training is required.

3.Selection of a Problem:

Fundamental Research-Wide study is done to select a problem

Action Research:Problems are identified by teachers in teaching learning process.

4.Hypothesis:

Fundamental Research:Highly specific hypotheses is formed

Action Research: Action Hypotheses are developed

5.Review of Literature:

Fundamental Research: Extensive & thorough study of literature.

Action Research:No such thorough review is needed.

6.Sample:

Fundamental Research: Large sample size is required.

Action Research:Teacher takes the students of a class as sample.

7.Analysis of Data:

Fundamental Research: Complex analysis is done.

Action Research:Very simple analysis is done.

8.Conclusions:

Fundamental Research:In form of developing theories or generalizations.

Action Research:In form of specific results.

9.Application of Results:

Fundamental Research: Generalizations have broad applicability.

Action Research: Results are implemented in classroom situations to see the outcome

Wikipedia

Action research

For the British charity formerly named Action Research, see Action Medical Research.

Action research or participatory action research – is a reflective process of progressive problem solving led by individuals working with others in teams or as part of a "community of practice" to improve the way they address issues and solve problems. Action research is done simply by action, hence the name. Action research can also be undertaken by larger organizations or institutions, assisted or guided by professional researchers, with the aim of improving their strategies, practices, and knowledge of the environments within which they practice. As designers and stakeholders, researchers work with others to propose a new course of action to help their community improve its work practices. Kurt Lewin, then a professor at MIT, first coined the term “action research” in about 1944. In his 1946 paper “Action Research and Minority Problems” he described action research as “a comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action” that uses “a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a circle of planning, action, and fact-finding about the result of the action”.

Overview

Action research is an interactive inquiry process that balances problem solving actions implemented in a collaborative context with data-driven collaborative analysis or research to understand underlying causes enabling future predictions about personal and organizational change (Reason & Bradbury, 2002). After six decades of action research development, many methods have evolved that adjust the balance to focus more on the actions taken or more on the research that results from the reflective understanding of the actions. This tension exists between

1. those who are more driven by the researcher’s agenda and those more driven by participants;
2. those who are motivated primarily by instrumental goal attainment and those motivated primarily by the aim of personal, organizational, or societal transformation; and
3. 1st-, to 2nd-, to 3rd-person research, that is, my research on my own action, aimed primarily at personal change; our research on our group (family/team), aimed primarily at improving the group; and ‘scholarly’ research aimed primarily at theoretical generalization and/or large scale change.

Action research challenges traditional social science, by moving beyond reflective knowledge created by outside experts sampling variables to an active moment-to-moment theorizing, data collecting, and inquiry occurring in the midst of emergent structure. “Knowledge is always gained through action and for action. From this starting point, to question the validity of social knowledge is to question, not how to develop a reflective science about action, but how to develop genuinely well-informed action — how to conduct an action science” (Torbert 2002). In short, performing action research is the same as performing an experiment, thus it is an empirical process.

 Major Theories

Chris Argyris' Action Science

Main article: Action Science

Chris Argyris' Action Science begins with the study of how human beings design their actions in difficult situations. Humans design their actions to achieve intended consequences and are governed by a set of environment variables. How those governing variables are treated in designing actions are the key differences between single loop learning and double loop learning. When actions are designed to achieve the intended consequences and to suppress conflict about the governing variables, a single loop learning cycle usually ensues. On the other hand, when actions are taken, not only to achieve the intended consequences, but also to openly inquire about conflict and to possibly transform the governing variables, both single loop and double loop learning cycles usually ensue. (Argyris applies single loop and double loop learning concepts not only to personal behaviors but also to organizational behaviors in his models.) This is different from experimental research in which environmental variables are controlled and researchers try to find out cause and effect in an isolated environment.

[edit] John Heron and Peter Reason's Cooperative Inquiry

Main article: Cooperative Inquiry

Cooperative inquiry, also known as collaborative inquiry was first proposed by John Heron in 1971 and later expanded with Peter Reason. The major idea of cooperative inquiry is to “research ‘with’ rather than ‘on’ people.” It emphasizes that all active participants are fully involved in research decisions as co-researchers. Cooperative inquiry creates a research cycle among four different types of knowledge: propositional knowing (as in contemporary science), practical knowing (the knowledge that comes with actually doing what you propose), experiential knowing (the feedback we get in real time about our interaction with the larger world) and presentational knowing (the artistic rehearsal process through which we craft new practices). The research process includes these four stages at each cycle with deepening experience and knowledge of the initial proposition, or of new propositions, at every cycle.

[edit] Paulo Freire's Participatory Action Research (PAR)

Main article: Participatory action research

Participatory action research has emerged in recent years as a significant methodology for intervention, development and change within communities and groups. It is now promoted and implemented by many international development agencies and university programs, as well as countless local community organizations around the world. PAR builds on the critical pedagogy put forward by Paulo Freire as a response to the traditional formal models of education where the “teacher” stands at the front and “imparts” information to the “students” who are passive recipients. This was further developed in "adult education" models throughout Latin America.

Orlando Fals-Borda (1925–2008) Colombian sociologist and political activist, was one of principal promoters of "participatory action research" (IAP in Spanish) in Latin America. Published "double history of the coast", book that compare the official "history" and the non official "story" of the north coast of Colombia

William Torbert’s Developmental Action Inquiry

The Developmental Action Inquiry is a “way of simultaneously conducting action and inquiry as a disciplined leadership practice that increases the wider effectiveness of our actions. Such action helps individuals, teams, organizations become more capable of self-transformation and thus more creative, more aware, more just and more sustainable” (Torbert, 2004). Action Inquiry challenges our attention to span four different territories of experience (at the personal, group, or organizational scales) in the midst of actions. This practice promotes timeliness – learning with moment to moment intentional awareness – among individuals and with regard to the outside world of nature and human institutions. It studies the “pre-constituted internalized and externalized universe in the present, both as it resonates with and departs from the past, and as it resonates with and potentiates the future” (Torbert, 2001).

Jack Whitehead's Living Theory and Jean McNiff's Action Research approaches

In generating a living educational theory, most recently explained in Whitehead and McNiff (2006), individuals generate explanations of their educational influences in their own learning, in the learning of others and in the learning of social formations. They generate the explanations from experiencing themselves as living contradictions in enquiries of the kind, 'How do I improve what I am doing?' They use action reflection cycles of expressing concerns, (saying why you are concerned in relation to values), imagining possibilities in developing action plans, acting and gathering data, evaluating the influences of action, modifying concerns, ideas and action in the light of the evaluations. The explanations include life-affirming, energy-flowing values as explanatory principles.

Action research in organization development

Wendell L. French and Cecil Bell define organization development (OD) at one point as "organization improvement through action research". If one idea can be said to summarize OD's underlying philosophy, it would be action research as it was conceptualized by Kurt Lewin and later elaborated and expanded on by other behavioral scientists. Concerned with social change and, more particularly, with effective, permanent social change, Lewin believed that the motivation to change was strongly related to action: If people are active in decisions affecting them, they are more likely to adopt new ways. "Rational social management", he said, "proceeds in a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a circle of planning, action, and fact-finding about the result of action".

Lewin's description of the process of change involves three steps: Unfreezing: Faced with a dilemma or disconfirmation, the individual or group becomes aware of a need to change. Changing: The situation is diagnosed and new models of behavior are explored and tested. Refreezing: Application of new behavior is evaluated, and if reinforcing, adopted.Figure 1 summarizes the steps and processes involved in planned change through action research. Action research is depicted as a cyclical process of change. The cycle begins with a series of planning actions initiated by the client and the change agent working together. The principal elements of this stage include a preliminary diagnosis, data gathering, feedback of results, and joint action planning. In the language of systems theory, this is the input phase, in which the client system becomes aware of problems as yet unidentified, realizes it may need outside help to effect changes, and shares with the consultant the process of problem diagnosis. The second stage of action research is the action, or transformation, phase. This stage includes actions relating to learning processes (perhaps in the form of role analysis) and to planning and executing behavioral changes in the client organization. As shown in Figure 1, feedback at this stage would move via Feedback Loop A and would have the effect of altering previous planning to bring the learning activities of the client system into better alignment with change objectives. Included in this stage is action-planning activity carried out jointly by the consultant and members of the client system. Following the workshop or learning sessions, these action steps are carried out on the job as part of the transformation stage.The third stage of action research is the output, or results, phase. This stage includes actual changes in behavior (if any) resulting from corrective action steps taken following the second stage. Data are again gathered from the client system so that progress can be determined and necessary adjustments in learning activities can be made. Minor adjustments of this nature can be made in learning activities via Feedback Loop B (see Figure 1). Major adjustments and reevaluations would return the OD project to the first, or planning, stage for basic changes in the program. The action-research model shown in Figure 1 closely follows Lewin's repetitive cycle of planning, action, and measuring results. It also illustrates other aspects of Lewin's general model of change. As indicated in the diagram, the planning stage is a period of unfreezing, or problem awareness. The action stage is a period of changing, that is, trying out new forms of behavior in an effort to understand and cope with the system's problems. (There is inevitable overlap between the stages, since the boundaries are not clear-cut and cannot be in a continuous process). The results stage is a period of refreezing, in which new behaviors are tried out on the job and, if successful and reinforcing, become a part of the system's repertoire of problem-solving behavior. Action research is problem centered, client centered, and action oriented. It involves the client system in a diagnostic, active-learning, problem-finding, and problem-solving process. Data are not simply returned in the form of a written report but instead are fed back in open joint sessions, and the client and the change agent collaborate in identifying and ranking specific problems, in devising methods for finding their real causes, and in developing plans for coping with them realistically and practically. Scientific method in the form of data gathering, forming hypotheses, testing hypotheses, and measuring results, although not pursued as rigorously as in the laboratory, is nevertheless an integral part of the process. Action research also sets in motion a long-range, cyclical, self-correcting mechanism for maintaining and enhancing the effectiveness of the client's system by leaving the system with practical and useful tools for self-analysis and self-renewal.

Participatory video

Participatory video is a set of techniques that involve a group or community in shaping and creating their own film, in order to explore, solve and communicate their issues. It started in 1967 by Canadian advocate Don Snowden, who changed the lives of Newfoundland's Fogo Islanders. Then Director of the Extension Department at Memorial University of Newfoundland, Snowden worked with filmmaker Colin Low as part of the National Film Board of Canada's Challenge for Change program. By watching each other’s films, the different villagers on the island came to realise that they shared many of the same problems and that by working together they could solve some of them. The films were also shown to politicians who lived too far away and were too busy to actually visit the island. As a result of this dialogue, government policies and actions were changed. The techniques developed by Snowden became known as the Fogo process. Its chief power is that the video is edited by its participants