Abstract
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Altrichter, H. (2005). The role of ‘Professional Community’ in action research. Educational Action Research, 13, 11–25.
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.
Bell, P. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 797–817.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
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.
Capobianco, B. M. (2007). Science teachers’ attempts at integrating feminist pedagogy through collaborative action research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 1–32.
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.
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.
Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1995). Teachers’ professional knowledge landscapes (Vol. 15). New York: Teachers College Press.
Elliot, J. (2007). Assessing the quality of action research. Research Papers in Education, 22, 229–246.
Fazio, X., & Melville, W. (2008). Science teacher development through collaborative action research. Teacher Development, 12, 193–209.
Feldman, A., & Capobianco, B. M. (2008). Teacher learning of technology enhanced formative assessment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 82–99.
Haggarty, L., & Postlethwaite, K. (2003). Action research: A strategy for teacher change and school development? Oxford Review of Education, 29, 423–448.
Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Progressive inquiry in a computer-supported biology class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 1072–1088.
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.
Jorde, D. (2000). Knowledge integration environment: Reactions and comments. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 881–883.
Kang, N.-H. (2007). Elementary teachers’ teaching for conceptual understanding: Learning from action research. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 469–495.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Linn, M. C. (2000). Designing the knowledge integration environment. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 781–796.
Linn, M. C., & Slotta, J. D. (2000). WISE Science. Educational Leadership, 58, 29–32.
Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87, 517–538.
McDonough, K. (2006). Action research and the professional development of graduate teaching assistants. Modern Language Journal, 90, 33–47.
Nelson, T. H. (2008). Teachers’ collaborative inquiry and professional growth: Should we be optimistic? Science Education, 93, 548–580.
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.
Patton, M. C. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ponte, P. (2002). How teachers become action researchers and how teacher educators become their facilitators. Educational Action Research, 10, 399–422.
Radford, M. (2006). Researching classrooms: Complexity and chaos. British Educational Research Journal, 32, 177–190.
Rearrick, M. L., & Feldman, A. (1999). Orientations, purposes, and reflection: A framework for understanding action research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 333–349.
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.
Seale, C. (1999). The quality of qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.
Sleegers, P., & Van den Berg, R. (2000). Building innovative schools: The need for new approaches. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 801–808.
Somekh, B. (2006). Constructing intercultural knowledge and understanding through collaborative action research. Teachers and Teaching, 12, 87–106.
Tobins, K., & Tippins, D. J. (1996). Metaphors as seeds for conceptual change and the improvement of science teaching. Science Education, 80, 711–730.
Warrican, S. (2006). Action Research: A viable option for effecting change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38, 1–14.
White, R. T. (2000). The knowledge integration environment: Commentary on research. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 873–880.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Subramaniam, K. Understanding Changes in Teacher Roles Through Collaborative Action Research. J Sci Teacher Educ 21, 937–951 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-010-9217-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-010-9217-9