Journal of Science Teacher Education

, Volume 21, Issue 8, pp 937–951 | Cite as

Understanding Changes in Teacher Roles Through Collaborative Action Research

  • Karthigeyan SubramaniamEmail author


The purpose of this article is to present the design and findings of a collaborative action research study that involved five secondary science teachers as action researchers and me, as facilitator, collectively articulating the teachers’ changing teaching roles when the teachers taught with computer technology. Data included interviews, observations, and focus group discussions. Data analysis entailed thematic analysis of data to identify initial and changes in teachers’ roles. Collaborative action research context helped the teachers to perceive their changing teaching roles through collective negotiation. Implications for facilitators of action research include the need to articulate their theoretical orientation prior to the onset of facilitating action research projects and to acknowledge and accept action researchers as fellow active knowledge producers.


Collaborative action research Computer technology Facilitator Teacher roles 


  1. Altrichter, H. (2005). The role of ‘Professional Community’ in action research. Educational Action Research, 13, 11–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ardac, D., & Akaygum, S. (2004). Effectiveness of multimedia-based instruction that emphasizes molecular representations on students’ understanding of chemical change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 317–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bell, P. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 797–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  6. Cain, T., Holmes, M., Larrett, A., & Mattock, J. (2007). Literature-informed, one-turn action research: Three cases and a commentary. British Educational Research Journal, 33, 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Capobianco, B. M. (2007). Science teachers’ attempts at integrating feminist pedagogy through collaborative action research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Capobianco, B. M., & Feldman, A. (2006). Promoting quality for teacher action research: Lessons learned from science teachers’ action research. Educational Action Research, 14, 497–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Capobianco, B. M., Lincoln, S., Canuel-Browne, D., & Trimarchi, R. (2006). Examining the experiences of three generations of teacher researchers through collaborative science teacher inquiry. Teacher Education Quarterly, 33, 61–78.Google Scholar
  10. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1995). Teachers’ professional knowledge landscapes (Vol. 15). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  11. Elliot, J. (2007). Assessing the quality of action research. Research Papers in Education, 22, 229–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fazio, X., & Melville, W. (2008). Science teacher development through collaborative action research. Teacher Development, 12, 193–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Feldman, A., & Capobianco, B. M. (2008). Teacher learning of technology enhanced formative assessment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 82–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haggarty, L., & Postlethwaite, K. (2003). Action research: A strategy for teacher change and school development? Oxford Review of Education, 29, 423–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Progressive inquiry in a computer-supported biology class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 1072–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hickey, D. T., Kindfield, A. C. H., Horwitz, P., & Christie, M. A. T. (2003). Integrating curriculum, instruction, assessment, and evaluation in a technology-supported genetics learning environment. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 495–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jorde, D. (2000). Knowledge integration environment: Reactions and comments. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 881–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kang, N.-H. (2007). Elementary teachers’ teaching for conceptual understanding: Learning from action research. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 469–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kerr, S. T. (1996a). Toward a sociology of educational technology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 143–169). New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Kerr, S. T. (1996b). Visions of sugarplums: The future of technology, education, and the schools. In S. T. Kerr (Ed.), Technology and the future of schooling (pp. 1–25). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  21. Kerr, S. T. (2005). Why we all want it to work: Toward a culturally based model for technology and educational change. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(6), 1005–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Linn, M. C. (1998). The impact of technology on science instruction: Historical trends and current opportunities. In: Fraser, B. J., & Tobin, K. G. (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 265–293). Great Britain: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  23. Linn, M. C. (2000). Designing the knowledge integration environment. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 781–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Linn, M. C., & Slotta, J. D. (2000). WISE Science. Educational Leadership, 58, 29–32.Google Scholar
  25. Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87, 517–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McDonough, K. (2006). Action research and the professional development of graduate teaching assistants. Modern Language Journal, 90, 33–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nelson, T. H. (2008). Teachers’ collaborative inquiry and professional growth: Should we be optimistic? Science Education, 93, 548–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nelson, T. H., Perkins, M., & Hathorn, T. (2008). A culture of collaborative inquiry: Learning to develop and support professional learning communities. Teachers College Record, 110, 1269–1303.Google Scholar
  29. Patton, M. C. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Ponte, P. (2002). How teachers become action researchers and how teacher educators become their facilitators. Educational Action Research, 10, 399–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Radford, M. (2006). Researching classrooms: Complexity and chaos. British Educational Research Journal, 32, 177–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rearrick, M. L., & Feldman, A. (1999). Orientations, purposes, and reflection: A framework for understanding action research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 333–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Russell, D. W., Lucas, K. B., & McRobbie, C. J. (2004). Role of the microcomputer-based laboratory display in supporting the construction of new understandings in thermal physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 165–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Seale, C. (1999). The quality of qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  35. Sleegers, P., & Van den Berg, R. (2000). Building innovative schools: The need for new approaches. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 801–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Somekh, B. (2006). Constructing intercultural knowledge and understanding through collaborative action research. Teachers and Teaching, 12, 87–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tobins, K., & Tippins, D. J. (1996). Metaphors as seeds for conceptual change and the improvement of science teaching. Science Education, 80, 711–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Warrican, S. (2006). Action Research: A viable option for effecting change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. White, R. T. (2000). The knowledge integration environment: Commentary on research. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 873–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association for Science Teacher Education, USA 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Teacher Education and Administration, College of EducationUniversity of North TexasDentonUSA

Personalised recommendations