Self-Study Through Action Research

  • Allan Feldman
  • Patricia Paugh
  • Geoff Mills
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE, volume 12)

Abstract

This chapter discusses the ways in which action research is and is not related to self-study. The many approaches to action research are outlined through comparing and contrasting the nature of action research with that of self-study of teacher education practices. The authors argue that what distinguishes self-study from action research is its methodology rather than the methods used. They suggest three methodological features that would be present in self-studies: 1) A self-study would bring to the forefront the importance of self; 2) it would make the experience of teacher educators a resource for research; and 3) it would urge those who engage in self-study to be critical of themselves and their roles as researchers and teacher educators. The authors explore these features through an analysis of the stories of their own journey to self-study and an analysis of three self-study reports.

Keywords

Metaphor Ethos Lewin 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. AHD. (1992). American heritage dictionary of the English language (Third ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
  2. Allender, J. S. (2001). Teacher staff: The practice of humanistic education. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Altrichter, H., Posch, P., & Somekh, B. (1993). Teachers investigate their own work: An introduction to the methods of action research. NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Aristotle. (1985). Aristotle’s nichomachean ethics (T. Irwin, Trans.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  5. Atwell, N. (1987). In the middle: Writing, reading, and learning with adolescents. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton∖Cook.Google Scholar
  6. BAWP. (1979). Bay Area writing project/California writing project/National writing project: An overview (ERIC Document No. ED184123). Berkeley, CA: University of California.Google Scholar
  7. Buber, M. (1937). I and thou (R. G. Smith, Trans.). Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.Google Scholar
  8. Bullough, R. V., & Pinnegar, S. (2001). Guidelines for quality in autobiographical forms of self-study. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Calhoun, E. (1994a). Action research: Three approaches. Educational L eadership, 51(2), 62–65.Google Scholar
  10. Calhoun, E. (1994b). How to use action research in the self-renewing school. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  11. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. London: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  12. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  13. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1990). Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19(5), 2–14.Google Scholar
  14. Corey, S. (1953). Action research to improve school practices. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  15. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  16. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books.Google Scholar
  17. Duckworth, E. (1987). The having of wonderful ideas. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  18. Elliott, J. (1988). Educational research and outside-insider relations. Qualitative Studies in Education, 1(2), 133–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Elliott, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Feldman, A. (1993a). Erzberger’s dilemma: Validity in action research and science teachers’ need to know. Science Education, 78(1), 83–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Feldman, A. (1993b). Promoting equitable collaboration between university researchers and school teachers. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 6(4), 341–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Feldman, A. (1995). The Institutionalization of action research: The California “100 Schools”. In R. Stevenson (Ed.), Educational action research: Becoming practically critical (pp. 180–196). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  23. Feldman, A. (1996). Enhancing the practice of physics teachers: Mechanisms for the generation and sharing of knowledge and understanding in collaborative action research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(5), 513–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Feldman, A. (1997). Varieties of wisdom in the practice of teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(7), 757–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Feldman, A. (2002a). Beco(o/a)aming a teacher educator. In C. Kosnik, A. Freese, & A. P. Samaras (Eds.), Making a difference in teacher education through self-study. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference of the Self-Study of Teacher Education Practices, Herstmonceux, East Sussex, England. (Vol. 1, pp. 66–70). Toronto, Ontario: OISE, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  26. Feldman, A. (2002b). Existential approaches to action research. Educational Action Research, 10(2), 233–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Feldman, A. (2002c, April). Teachers, responsibility and action research. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  28. Feldman, A. (2002d, April). W hat do we know and how do we know it? Validity and value in self-study of teacher education practices. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  29. Fine, M. (1994). Working the hyphens: Reinventing self and other in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 70–82). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Gage, N. L. (1989). The paradigm wars and their aftermath: A ”historical” sketch of research on teaching since 1989. Educational Researcher, 18(7), 4–10.Google Scholar
  31. Gallo-Fox, J., Paugh, P., & O’Day, P. (2002, April). L earning to teach ... again: From elementary education to teacher education – new uncertainties, complexities, and expectations. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  32. Goodson, I. (1992). Studying teachers’ lives. New York: Teachers College Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Goswami, D., & Stillman, P. R. (Eds.). (1987). Reclaiming the classroom: Teacher research as an agency for change. Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton∖Cook.Google Scholar
  34. Greene, M. (Ed.). (1967). Existential encounters for teachers. NY: Random House.Google Scholar
  35. Greene, M. (1973). Teacher as stranger: Educational philosophy for the modern age. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  36. Greene, M. (1978). Teaching: The question of personal reality. Teachers College Record, 80(1), 23–35.Google Scholar
  37. Greene, M. (1988). The dialectic of freedom. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  38. Greene, M. (1989, June). Educational philosophy and teacher empowerment. Paper presented at the National Forum of the Association of Independent Liberal Arts Colleges for Teacher Education, Indianapolis, IN.Google Scholar
  39. Greenwood, D. J., & Levin, M. (1998). Introduction to action research: Social research for social change. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  40. Grundy, S. (1987). Curriculum: Product or praxis. New York: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  41. Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and human interests (J. Shapiro, Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  42. Hamilton, M. L., with Pinnegar, S., Russell, T., Loughran, J., & Laboskey, V. (Eds.). (1998). Reconcep-tualizing teaching practice: Developing competence through self-study. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  43. Harding, S. (1989). Is there a feminist method? In N. Tuana (Ed.), Feminism and science (pp. 18–32). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Henderson, B. A. (2002, April). Reconstructing constructivist methods in a cultural light: Is it possible? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  45. Johnson, J. M., & Kotarba, J. A. (2002). Postmodern existentialism. In J. A. Kotarba & J. M. Johnson (Eds.), Postmodern existential sociology (pp. 3–14). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  46. Kosnik, C. (2001). The effects of an inquiry-oriented teacher education program on a faculty member: Some critical incidents and my journey. Reflective Practice, 2(1), 65–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lawrence-Lightfoot, S. (1994). I’ve known rivers: Lives of loss and liberation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  48. McKernan, J. (1988). The countenance of curriculum action research: Traditional, collaborative, and emancipatory-critical conceptions. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 3(3), 173–200.Google Scholar
  49. Mills, G. E. (2000). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.Google Scholar
  50. Montecinos, C., Cnuddea, V., Owa, M., Solísa, M. C., Suzukia, E., & Rivero, M. (2002). Relearning the meaning and practice of student teaching supervision through collaborative self-study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(7), 781–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Noffke, S. E. (1997). Professional, personal, and political dimensions of action research. Review of Research in Education, 22, 305–343.Google Scholar
  52. Oja, S., & Smulyan, L. (1989). Collaborative action research: A developmental approach. New York: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  53. Paley, V. G. (1986). On listening to what the children say. Harvard Educational Review, 56(2), 122–131.Google Scholar
  54. Paugh, P. C. (2002). Collaborative conversations: A systematic inquiry into students who struggle in school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Boston College, Boston.Google Scholar
  55. Richardson, V. (Ed.). (2001). Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  56. Roth, W.-M., & Tobin, K. G. (2001). At the elbow of another: L earning to teach by coteaching. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
  57. Rudduck, J. (1985). Teacher research and research-based teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 11(3), 281–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sartre, J.-P. (1956). Being and nothingness (H. Barnes, Trans.). New York: Philosophical Library.Google Scholar
  59. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in practice. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  60. Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  61. Schwab, J. (1978). Education and the structure of the disciplines. In N. Wilkof (Ed.), Science, curriculum, and liberal education: Selected essays [of Joseph J. Schwab] (pp.229–272). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  62. Stengel, B. (1996, April). Teaching epistemology through cell reproduction: A narrative exploration. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  63. Stenhouse, L. (1981). What counts as research? British Journal of Educational Studies, 29(2), 103–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Stringer, E. T. (1996). Action research: A handbook for practitioners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  65. Tikunoff, W., Ward, B., & Griffn, G. (1979). Interactive research and development on teaching: Final report (No. IR&DT-79-11). San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.Google Scholar
  66. Tobin, K., & McRobbie, C. (1996). Cultural myths as constraints to the enacted science curriculum. Science Education, 80(2), 223–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Van Manen, M. J. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6(3), 205–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Whitehead, J. (1989). Creating a living educational theory from questions of the kind, ”How do I improve my practice?” Cambridge Journal of Education, 19(1), 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Zeichner, K. M., & Noffke, S. E. (2001). Practitioner research. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 298–332).Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Allan Feldman
    • 1
  • Patricia Paugh
    • 1
  • Geoff Mills
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Massachusetts AmherstUSA
  2. 2.Southern Oregon UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations