Search

In this case study, the action research experiences of Katrina, a mid-career grade one teacher, are described as she incorporated a webquest (see Appendix-Part A) into her science curriculum. Katrina conducted her research with a group of 25 students; 16 boys and 9 girls, whom she described as “typical, active six- and seven-year olds from diverse families and mixed socio-economic backgrounds.” While she was not part of a school-based action research team, she collaborated with two other grade one teachers from another school in the same district.

Learning spaces may be bounded in some instances, such as the walls of a classroom, but they can also assume many other forms (e.g. creating time for individual reflection or establishing a community of learning for a specific purpose). Learning spaces are created as a result of individuals’ experiences and interactions with others and the environment. This chapter provides an introduction to action research and its potential to create different types of learning spaces. It situates action research within the broader context of educational research; examines the nature of action research (definitions and theoretical underpinnings); provides a brief history of the development of action research; and describes the action research cycle.

After completing data collection, analysis, and interpretation, it is important to consider how you will share what you have learned with others. Creating a “space” for writing and identifying the “spaces” for sharing the outcomes of your research are critical. While one of the main reasons we conduct action research is to inform our current and future practice, and our understanding of that practice, it is equally important to share this knowledge with others. Cochran-Smith & Lytle (2009) describe the knowledge that practitioners generate through inquiry as local knowledge of practice. They reject the traditional notion that there are only two types of knowledge that inform our understanding of teaching - formal or professional knowledge and practical knowledge. Formal knowledge is generally considered that which is produced through conventional research by researchers; it is conceptual knowledge about education, teaching, and learning that has potential for generalization and meets the criteria for validity and reliability. Practical knowledge, in contrast, involves using one’s wisdom of teaching to make decisions and judgments in concrete situations that arise during the teaching process. This wisdom may often be tacit and not easily articulated. “Local knowledge of practice” then, is generated by action researchers working collaboratively in communities as they “theorize and construct their work” (Cochran-Smith & Lytle 2009, p. 131). It is relevant to the local context, but can also be publicly shared with many others, such as school-based colleagues, university-based educators and researchers, parents, K-12 students, and those in other professional settings. It is knowledge that can be “borrowed, interpreted, and reinvented in other local contexts” (p. 132). This chapter will discuss considerations and decisions that need to be made prior to sharing action research outcomes, as well as possible formats that may be adopted for dissemination.

In this case study, the experiences of two junior high teachers, Lana and Sonja, are described as they developed and implemented a collaborative action research project with a grade eight science class consisting of 25 students (12 females and 13 males) with varied academic ability. All students addressed prescribed science curriculum learning outcomes. Lana, an experienced teacher of 13 years, was science department head in the school of 700 junior high students (grades seven to nine). Sonya, the art teacher in the school, had been teaching for six years. Lana and Sonja worked closely with a learning resources teacher in the school to develop a curriculum unit on simple machines that integrated science and art, and implementation of the unit involved team teaching. The unit had characteristics of both fusion and interdisciplinary approaches (see Appendix-Part A); students were required to examine ideas and concepts across science and art although, for the purposes of the action research project, assessment was confined to the discipline of science. The teachers devoted a tremendous amount of time and energy to planning, and all lessons with the simple machines unit were cotaught.

Before crafting a plan for engaging in action research, you need to identify an area of focus - a concern, issue, or problem. The area of focus will define the project and shape how it will be implemented. In this chapter, you will develop an understanding of how to: a) identify an area of focus, b) examine how it relates to your beliefs and values about teaching and learning, and c) craft specific research questions based on an identified area of focus. This initial stage in the action research process fosters the development of spaces for problem-posing where you can identify and pursue questions that are relevant and meaningful to you in the context of your classroom and school.

In the previous chapter, we discussed how to identify an area of focus and develop research questions to guide your project. After identifying an area of focus, it was suggested that you engage in the process of reconnaissance; that is, exploring the topic in relation to your own beliefs and values, and interrogating the literature to find out what others know about your topic. After these initial steps in the action research process are completed, you are ready to create a plan of action to guide implementation. By developing a plan, you are more likely to move forward with your research in a systematic manner.

In this case study, five primary/elementary teachers adopted Problem-Based Learning or PBL (refer to Appendix-Part A for background information about this approach) as a way to make teaching and learning more relevant and meaningful in science. Except for Lois, who was an early-career teacher in her second year, the other four teachers (Deidre, Judi, Nancy, and Samantha) were mid- to late-career teachers with 15 to 23 years of classroom experience. All teachers developed and shared a common research question. However, their action research plans varied in response to science topics and learning outcomes targeted. While the insights of all five teachers about action research and professional learning will be shared at the end of the case, the experiences of Nancy, a grade two teacher with 23 years of teaching experience, will be highlighted.

In this case study, three school-based primary/elementary teachers adopted concept mapping in the context of their elementary science classrooms. Arlene, a latecareer teacher, worked with a class of grade five students. Lisa, also a late- career teacher, used concept maps with a group of grade five students. Ernie, a teacher with 11 years of experience at the elementary level, adopted concept mapping with a grade four class. All classes ranged in size from 20-25 students. While the insights of all three teachers will be shared in this chapter, the primary emphasis is on Ernie’s experiences as he engaged in collaborative action research.