RE: [xmca] CHAT and Action Research: Special Issue

["Duvall, Emily" <emily@uidaho.edu>]

Hi Carol, 
My familiarity with AR is classroom based, too. That is, the teacher identifies a 'problem' or an area of interest and frames his or her research to fit the context of the problem. An hypothesis, as it were, is usually framed around a change in what is done in the classroom. I am not so sure that 'scientists' and others are not welcome... more that they may involved as consultants to the teacher-researcher in a way that empowers the teacher to 'experiment' with change rather than telling the teacher what to change. For teacher-researchers that I have worked with, it can sometimes be more about human protection issues, offering some direction on what has already been done in other contexts, revisiting a change that didn't work as expected, following along and talking it out, and for some, even making connections to theory to help deepen the teacher-researchers understandings. Always, though, the teacher is the PI so to speak.
~em


-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Carol Macdonald
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 8:51 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] CHAT and Action Research: Special Issue

Merja and Michael
Perhaps I have not read properly,or read through the lines accurately,  but
there is a version of AR that excludes scientists entirely: this is
transformational (critical?) AR in education in which teachers alone decide
what their problems are and how other problems emerge as they are addressing
the first. "Experts" are not welcome, because they are not "insiders".
Carol

2009/1/25 Michael Glassman <MGlassman@ehe.osu.edu>

> Merja,
>
> I have been reading about Action Research for only a couple of years, but
> to me it always seems to go back to the same issue.  Whether you use the
> scientifice method from within or without.  That is, when, where and how you
> pose the problem, and how you judge the outcomes.  Interestingly enough I
> think this dovetails nicely with the fascinating discussion that Martin,
> Andy and others are having about interpretations of Marx.  Okay, anyway,
> there is my take.
>
> The scientific method from the outside is you have a scientist who is
> exploring a problem that he or she has identified in the community.  The
> scientist attempts to see what possible outcomes could occur in relation to
> this problem, and then sets up the experiment to find out if he or she can
> actually achieve that outcome.  The scientist moves through the process of
> problem, experimentation, outcome (different people define it differently)
> and eventually comes out with an outcome.  If this was the expected outcome
> all well and good, and the scientist then defines this as knowledge that
> will allow others to solve similar problems.  If the scientist does not
> achieve the outcomne either they readjust the method, or they redefine the
> problem, or unfortunately all too often redefine the mode of analysis.  The
> presumption for this type of research is that a solution can be eventually
> found and identified to the melioration of the human condition.  You write a
> book about it, everybody buys it, reads it, solves their problems, and
> everybody is happy.  At the base on this outside scientific process, I would
> say, is the belief that with the right knowledge we can control nature.
>  Scientists are constantly looking for the silver bullet that will cure
> cancer, make reading universal, make work more efficient.  A second aspect
> of this outside scientific method is that there is a one to one
> correspondence between problem solving and problems.  That is you identify a
> problem and then you work to develop strategies for dealing with that
> problem.
>
> Action research, as least I have been reading about it as it is conducted
> by Friere and Argis (two people who couldn't be more superficially
> different!) is based on an inside scientific method.  That is rather than
> identifying a problem as a scientist, the scientist becomes a member of the
> community, and a facilitator in helping the community identify their
> problem.  The scientist does not hold any pre-eminent position in the
> process, is not an expert, or even a guide, but simply a facilitator who is
> looking to transfer responsibilities for identification of the problem over
> to the community that is at risk or trying to deal with issues.  The posing
> of the problem is far more flexible, fluid, and, well, democratic, that it
> is in the scientific method.  And while the outside scientific method seems
> to put far more emphasis on the experimental methodology itself, the inside
> scientific methodology tends to put the majority of the emphasis of the
> recognizing and the posing of the problem.  Often times the problem you
> think you are dealing with is not the actual problem, but the only way to
> realize this is through democratic discussion of the stakeholders.  Once the
> problem is recognized  - through agreement rather than through history or
> proclamation, then you have to ask, all right what would be the solution for
> solving this problem?  What would occur that would actually solve this
> problem (rather than give us another step of knowledge in attempting to
> solve a more universal problem).  It is only at this point that you begin to
> design an experimental model that follows the scientific method but also is
> tailored to finding out if you have solved the problem.  Once you have an
> outcome, if it is not a solution, you have to go back to the drawing board.
>
> I probably am biased, but I see this as very much a Pragmatically
> influenced approach.  There are those who trace origins back to Lewin, but
> Gordon Allport wrote a chapter or introduction or something saying that he
> didn't think there was a dime's bit of difference between the Lewin of the
> 1940s and Dewey.  I think Phillip is right in that this is definitely a
> progressively based idea, and was really central to the progressive movement
> for a while.
>
> Anyway, I think this inside scientific method is pretty much common to most
> of the forms of Action Research I have read about it.  I do see a
> methodology here, the same methodology Hook and Martin see in Marx.
>
> Michael
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu on behalf of merja helle
> Sent: Sun 1/25/2009 5:25 AM
> To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'; mcole@weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: RE: [xmca] CHAT and Action Research: Special Issue
>
>
>
>
>
>      Colliers work is mentioned also e.g. in the following article
>      Eden, Max Chisholm, Rubert 1993 Varieties of action research:
> Introduction to the special issue Human Relations vol. 46 no 2, 121-142
>      (For a debate about what is action research see also Reason Peter 1993
> Sitting between appreciation and disappointment: A critique of the Special
> Edition of Human Relations on Action Research  Human Relations vol. 46 no
> 10, 1253-)
>      The article as well as the Handbook of action research edited by
> Reason and Bradbury raise a question what do we mean by action research as
> there seem to be quite many variations. As the following excerpts from my
> old congress paper illustrate:
>      Kemmis and McTaggart (2000) make a distinction between seven different
> applications of participatory action research.
>      1. Participatory action research, or what Brown (1993) calls the
> southern version of action research and it is often connected to social
> transformation in the third world ( Fals Borda 2001, Whyte 1991)
>      2. Critical action research focuses on broad social analysis and is
> used mostly in educational action research as opposed to the traditional
> classroom action research (Carr & Kemmis 1986, McTaggart 1997).
>      3. Action learning strives for organizational efficiency and focuses
> on management and their problems. (Pedler 1991).
>      4. Action science utilizes organizational psychology to study
> practical problems and organizational learning... The gap between espoused
> theories and theories-in-use is used to unmask thought patterns and
> behavior
> that inhibit change in individuals and creating trusting interpersonal
> relationships. (Argyris 1992, Argyris & Schön 1978, 1992, 1996)
>      5. In the Soft systems approach the researcher and participants create
> a systemic model of the situation to analyze the present and to envision
> change (Checkland 1981, Checkland &Scholes 1991).
>      6. Industrial action research dates back to work done by the Tavistock
> institute in Britain. (Trist t& Emery 1960) It is nowadays often/usually
> consultant driven process enhancement.
>      The Scandinavian version of action research, Communicative action
> research (Gustavsen& Engelstad 1986, Gustavsen 1992, 1993, 2001 Toulmin &
> Gustavsen 1996) is not included in the list by Kemmis & McTaggart. The goal
> was to create spaces for democratic communication in large organizational
> networks. This approach was influential in Norway, and Sweden and Finland
> in
> the 1990's and 1980's.
>      Or is there a generic definition? What about theoretical backgrounds?
>      Any comments??
>      Merja
>
>      Merja Helle
>      Head of Research
>      Education and Development Services
>      University of Art and Design Helsinki
>      +358 504485 111
>      Address: Hämeentie 153 B
>      00560 Helsinki, Finland
>      merja.helle@taik.fi
>
>      -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
> Behalf Of White, Phillip
> Sent: 24. tammikuuta 2009 19:52
> To: mcole@weber.ucsd.edu; eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity
> Subject: RE: [xmca] CHAT and Action Research: Special Issue
>
>      In some previous postings regarding action research, connections have
> been made to Kurt Lewin.  In my work on action research and teacher
> research, I have found that the work of John Collier predates Lewin's work.
> I found Stephen Corey's work (1953), a professor at Teachers College in the
> late 40's and later, which set me on a track of finding the historical
> roots
> of action research. Stephen M. Corey, possibly the first university level
> advocate of teacher research, preferred the term "action research",
> attributing it to John Collier since Collier "used the expression action
> research and was convinced that 'since the finding of research must be
> carried into effect by the administrator and the layman, and must be
> criticized by them through their experience, the administrator and the
> layman must themselves participate creative in the research impelled as it
> is from their own area of need'" (p. 7). Corey's citation of Collier is
> from
> an article "United States Indian Administration as a laboratory of Ethnic
> Relations" Social Research, 12:265-303, May 1945. However, K. R. Philp
> (1979) writes that John Collier had long been working in socially active
> groups before he became commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
> Beginning in 1907 when he was civic secretary for the People's Institute in
> New York City, he began a long struggle to preserve and build community
> life
> based on Gemeinschaft, of shared obligations.  These beliefs he attempted
> to
> implement within the Bureau of Indian Affairs.  As commissioner, he ordered
> the closing of numerous boarding schools.  To replace them, day schools
> that
> also served as community centers were built, and a new curriculum that
> emphasized skills connected with rural life, such as care of livestock,
> homemaking skills, and personal hygiene appeared.  From this effort came
> his
> call for action research.  Bilingual programs were implemented to improve
> Indian literacy.  He brought in anthropologists and removed missionaries.
> You can see the practices here of early 20th century educational
> progressivism that Ravich so dislikes.  Collier had a deep belief that for
> modern culture to survive the "wastage of cultures and value systems which
> ages have made, wastage of natural resources stored by the organic life of
> a
> billion years, wreckage of the web of life" (p. 160), it needs to return to
> its roots of small communities, rather than continue "a world of social
> isolates".
>
>      He was an admirer of Peter Kropotkin's Mutual Aid and the essential
> human value of primary social groups.  Collier wrote:
>
>      That thesis was that democracy - political, social, and economic
> democracy, complexly realized all together - is ancient on earth; that
> cooperation and reciprocity were the way of men through many thousands of
> generations; that the conserving and cherishing of earth and its flora and
> creature life were man's way through these long ages; that the art of
> education - the art of informing, enriching, tempering, and socializing the
> personality, and of internalizing the moral imperatives - was practiced
> triumphantly by village communities in every continent, without ceasing for
> tens of thousands of years; and that like countless flowers in a long April
> of our world, human cultures, borne by memory alone, illuminated with all
> rainbow hues the almost unimaginable thousands of little societies wherein
> immensities of personality development were achieved across the aeons of
> time.
>
>      Touched by his, what seems to me to be utopian, naïve romanticism, I
> also find myself admiring his passionate commitment to a particular vision
> of life from which he informed all of his activities.  For it is out of
> this
> belief in value of small communities that the practice of action research
> was formed, and I admire this.  It was said the Collier was the only
> commissioner of the BIA who was ever on the side of Native Americans.
>
>      Later,
>
>      phillip_______________________________________________
>      xmca mailing list
>      xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>      http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>


-- 
Visiting Researcher,
Wits School of Education
6 Andover Road
Westdene
Johannesburg 2092
011 673 9265  082 562 1050
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca