All group 2 members post their response by midnight on May 26 and all members respond to two others group members’ post by midnight on May 29.
Assignment Description:
Discuss similarities and difference between the two educational research approaches. Include a discussion of ethical considerations.
How likely are you to engage in either type of research in your field?
Which of the two types of research feels like the best fit for you? Why?
The post also serves as a preparation for answering a possible comprehensive exam question for this class. Comprehensive exam answers are typically 3-4 pages in length (double spaced, 12 – point font) and should demonstrate your understanding of the question both from a theoretical and practical perspective. Therefore, you post should demonstrate your familiarity and command of the content discussed in the textbook (Chapters 1, 2, and 9) and in class. Additionally, you are expected to include examples or references to your educational practice. While you will use the textbook and other resources to write your answer, it is not a referenced paper – more like an essay.
After you made your own post, you are expected to comment on the posts of at least two other class members. These comments are not simply ‘good job’ or ‘you’re wrong’ but should critically examine the poster’s data/evidence, and/or suggestions for its relevance to your teaching practice. Comments should be at least a full paragraph (approx. 100 words). More thorough and insightful comments will receive better scores.
.
Action and formal education research are both similar and different. Starting with their shared traits, they both aim to answer a relevant, educational question through a systematic process of inquiry. While, action research may be less structured, it is still carefully and thoroughly planned. Second, both require the critical analysis of an issue, meaning the researcher or teacher-researcher should approach his or her study as unbiased as possible and form conclusions based on observations and data. Finally, the process of conducting research is quite similar for both types, especially in the early stages. Both types of research involve the identification of a question, the gathering of information with a review of literature, and the development and execution of a plan for collecting and analyzing data. The research processes start to diverge after data is analyzed, as it relates to reflecting on and acting upon conclusions.
There are also many differences between formal education and action research. Starting with the stages of the research process, referenced above, the process of action research requires ongoing, cyclical reflection and also ends with the development of an action plan, both of which are not key components of formal education research. These two parts of the of the research process are what enable action research to result in immediate, strategic decision making for the individual, team, school, or district. On the other hand, formal education research findings takes longer to disseminate and their application is not always easy to pinpoint. Another difference between the two research types is the scope of the issues being addressed. Action research focuses on local issues and recommendations, while formal education research addresses issues meant for populations on a broader scale. Finally, the two types of research differ by the training required of the researcher and types of tools used in research. Action research can be initiated by teacher-researchers with little formal training, using self-created tools. Formal education research requires substantial training and employs tools developed by professionals. Characteristically, there are other similarities and differences between formal education and action research, but those I’ve addressed are what I believe to be most relevant to my personal consideration of pursuing one type of research over the other.
Ethical considerations are paramount for both formal education and action research. Yet, the quality of action research often comes under question, therefore it is especially important for teacher-researchers to hold their studies to high standards of rigor. Teachers must employ strategies, such as member checking, when conducting research in their contextualized classroom/school setting so that they can best appropriate the generalizability of their findings and minimize the bias that is inherent in their personal experiences. These same considerations of rigor, generalizability, and bias must also be considered in formal education research. Yet by nature, formal education research has more safeguards, processes, and official reviews in place to help mitigate these problems.
As a practitioner of middle school education, I am more likely to engage in action research than I am likely to engage in formal education research. I work full time in the classroom every day, therefore it makes sense for me to pursue research that can take place on-the-job and in my current educational role. Furthermore, action research also feels like the best fit for me. First, action research is an opportunity for me to be “selfish” about exactly what I want to learn about my personal pedagogy. All teachers work in unique situations, and no two classrooms are alike. I work at an independent, religiously affiliated, single-sex, K-12 school, within a seventh grade history classroom. My particular population of students is female, 12-13 years old, and largely homogeneous in race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Issues that I encounter on a daily basis are very different from my Research II classmate who works in a public pre-school with a majority underserved population. With all this in mind, I am attracted to a style of research that provides me practical and tailored insights.
Second, action research will enable me to revise and improve my teaching strategies in a much shorter time frame. Being in an independent school, I am not tied to an SOL framework. Therefore, what I teach and how I teach it can change on a year-to-year basis based on observations and reflections of my successes and failures in previous years and the nature and needs of my current students. My students deserve up-to-date improvements, and it would be unfair to delay these changes due to the time constraints associated with formal data collection and analysis.
Finally, action research is characterized by its collaborative nature, and I work in a very collaborative environment that supports professional development. My administration has a team meeting structure in place that allots time for for weekly meetings, alternating between grade level teams and department teams. These settings are a great place for brainstorming ideas for research, co-designing studies, collecting data from relevant stakeholders, and sharing findings.
In conclusion, the world of education is constantly evolving, and as educators, it is important to be lifelong learners. Both formal education and action research are valuable approaches to continuous learning, and their characteristics and pros-and-cons should be considered when seeking to learn more about a question of interest.
The field of education is dynamic and constantly evolving. For this reason, research plays a critical role in education because it helps inform practitioners on how to best navigate the evolving educational landscape. Research enables educators to make sure that their practice is effective, and if it’s not, it offers educators research-based alternatives to use instead. If it weren’t for educational research, educators would not have evidence for why the choices they make or strategies they use in their practice are sound. That being said, methods for conducting educational research are varied and broad. The two main types of educational research are known as formal educational research and action research. Both forms of research have many similarities in style and methodology, but they also have some unique characteristics that set them apart. Formal educational research is a very broad umbrella term for educational research conducted by extensively trained researchers. It usually has the goal of uncovering generalizable conclusions to support the field of education in a broad sense. Formal researchers do not need to be practitioners of education, and they do not even necessarily have to have a personal interest in their topic of study. What is most important is that they conduct their research by strictly following the research protocols of their research method, whether it be quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method research, and that they select a topic that has a goal of benefiting the field of education in some way. Action research has many similarities to formal educational research, but its main distinction is that it is conducted exclusively by practitioners of education who are not necessarily trained researchers. While formal educational researchers choose topics that they believe will be useful to the greater educational community, action researchers select topics related to their individual practice, and have the intention of using their research to then improve their practice. In formal educational research, researchers present their findings with the hope that educators will implement or benefit from their research, but they are not usually involved in the implementation of their findings. However, in action research, part of the process is for researchers to to come up with a plan for how their research will be implemented immediately. This is where the term action research comes from, because the action of implementing the research is embedded in the process itself. Additionally, unlike in formal educational research, reflection is a key component of action research and is embedded throughout the process. This is because action research is an introspective research process that requires researchers to examine their own professional process, and as a result reflection is essential. Despite these differences, both formal educational research and action research share the most important foundational characteristic of all educational research. Both types only select topics that represent a problem or unanswered question in education, and both have the ultimate goal of using the research to improve the field of education in some way, whether it be in a practitioners own practice like in action research, or in the educational community at large as in the case in most formal educational research.
As an educator, I am much more likely to conduct action research rather than formal educational research. Not only am I attracted to the fact that action research allows me to conduct research for my own benefit, but it is also much more practical than formal research. As a (future) full time teacher, there is no time to leave the classroom to conduct research unless the research is being conducted with my own students while I am actively also teaching. Action research is also less rigid than formal research, which offers me the flexibility to select or modify an appropriate research style suited to my specific environment. Additionally, I really like how act on the research. This helps ensure that the time spent researching does not become more along the lines of research for the sake of research, and is instead research for the sake of making changes or improvements now. That being said, I also see the benefits of trained educators also engaging in formal educational research. While action research can have a positive impact in a contained environment at one particular time, it is not generalizable enough to ensure much of an impact beyond that. When practicing educators are involved in formal research, they have the potential to help ensure that the most pressing topics in education are being researched and to to help the educational community at large, while also potentially inadvertently improving their practice. Unfortunately, there are not many educators who have the time or the background to conduct formal research, which is why action research is so valuable to practicing educators.
When considering these two types of research, it is also important to also consider ethical limitations. Both action research and formal research are vulnerable to pitfalls related to validity and researcher biases. While action research is equally as valuable as formal research, critics tend to scrutinize action research more harshly than formal research. This is likely because it can be seen as less formal and perhaps more biased due to the familiarity that researchers have with their participants. This is part of why reflection is so central to action research in that it enables researchers to reflect on their biases so they can be avoided as best as possible, and so that researchers can be transparent about their limitations when their findings are ultimately shared. Overall, both action research and formal educational research serve different, yet equally valuable roles in the field of education. I look forward to engaging in, as well as benefiting from both types of research in my teaching career.
There is no question that education is a difficult and complex field, and as educators we are continually making decisions about practice and implementation of policies. In the context of the school and classroom, it is essential that we recognize the necessary role that research needs to play as we conduct our work. As educational practitioners, familiarity with the different types of research will help us to better understand the value of the research we consume and help us to effectively bring research into our classrooms. The two main types of educational research are formal education research and action research. These two types of research have certain similarities, but there differences are quite significant. Looking at what they have in common, both forms of research start with questions that are theoretically important to the field of education. They both involve collecting and analyzing data, in order to draw conclusions. However, the differences between the two methods of research are present throughout. Formal education research is usually conducted by trained researchers from outside of the situation who are attempting to be objective and unbiased, with the aim of providing larger scale conclusions that are generalizable. It follows a strict scientific method, whether the research is qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-method. On the other hand, action research is research carried out by practitioners, usually in a school environment. The purpose of this research is to address local issues, and to take actions in the face of problems. This focus on action, as the name of the research suggest, is central and is at heart of its difference from formal education research. Action research is primarily about practice, and is therefore an ongoing and cyclical process. Educators involved in action research are continually in a process of evaluating and reflecting on their practice, in order to work towards the best possible outcomes within their local setting.
Ethical considerations are extremely important in both forms of research, but because action research is usually conducted in the teacher’s own classroom, it provides unique challenges. As educators we need to take the principles of research ethics very seriously, and recognize what those challenges might look like. This means being extra vigilant, and engaging in continuous reflection and self-critique of our practice.
As a teacher, I would be more likely to engage in action research. Formal education research has its place, and there may be times when it is beneficial to be involved in carrying out formal research. It is also important as an educator to be familiar with the formal research that is being carried out by others, research that brings forth significant questions and possibilities. However, as a classroom teacher, it makes more immediate sense to be engaging in action research. As a teacher, I want to be making a positive impact on students, and so the focus on praxis seems to make it a better choice for me. Action research will allow me to conduct research that will directly impact me and my students. However, this may raise the question of potential negative effects of focusing on the short term solution. Like democracy, it might distract one from looking at long term goals or significant theoretical concerns. I guess that is to say that I hope to be open to both forms of research, as well as broader philosophical discussions, even as I most would expect to be directly engaged in action research.
Research is part of the learning process, and as educators we need to be continually learning. By engaging, perhaps in different ways, with formal research and action research, we will be more likely to experience success, both ours and our students’.
In the field of education there are two approaches to research; formal educational research and action research. While there are some common characteristics between these two approaches, there are also several key differences that set them apart. It is these differences that may draw some educators towards one or the other. Educators’ attitudes towards and experiences with formal educational research and action research will determine whether they are more likely to engage in one or the other. The educator’s purpose in conducting research is also an important factor in the decision process as formal educational research and action research will have different outcomes.
While formal educational research and action research both follow a sequence of steps which mirror the scientific method, formal educational research is much more structured. Since action research is typically conducted by educators themselves within their own classrooms or schools, it is less objective. In addition, the population under study is smaller and the researcher(s) is usually a participant. This supports the goal of action research in finding solutions to local-level problems relatively quickly. Action research is a “systematic inquiry into one’s own practice.” Furthermore, action research focuses specifically on the unique characteristics of the population under study. Finally, reflection is a key component of action research as the researcher-practitioner seeks to improve their practice. Finally, there is a greater ethical risk in action research since it is more personal and thus less objective.
Ethical considerations are necessary in educational research because the research involves human participants. Often, the subjects or participants are also considered vulnerable. When comparing formal educational research and action research, there is a greater ethical risk for the later. This is a result of the more personal nature of action research as well as the fact that it is less scrutinized. There is a greater chance that researchers will be biased, and without official review, member checks, and other safeguards this could result in negative outcomes for participants. Therefore, it is especially important for practitioners conducting action research to hold to high expectations of rigor so that the research will be respected and valued.
In my work as a special educator in a public-school community I am more likely to engage in action research. I feel that action research is more practical and applicable for me regarding the time and place I am in. I am relatively new to the field and do not have a lot of time as a graduate student. Moreover, as Mertler pointed out, research findings from formal educational research are often imposed on schools without considering the unique characteristics of the school and the degree to which the findings are generalizable. I have experienced this first hand with the implementation of certain curriculum and instructional strategies for example. They are beneficial for some, but not for all. The larger context needs to be considered, along with the realization that there is not and does not have to be a single way of doing things. There are also some federal mandates that have been put into place as the result of research findings for which I have a negative perception because they overlook the significance of greatly varied student strengths and weaknesses, as well as needs. Therefore, my attitude towards formal educational research is less positive and more hesitant than that for action research.
I am aware of and personally invested in the issues facing my students, classroom, and school. As a result, I can formulate a specific question for which to focus research and develop a plan to implement the results of the action research that will be directly applicable and meaningful. Although I believe there are many important issues for which formal educational research is necessary, I personally do not feel as confident in my ability to develop a study to effectively address these larger scale issues. Finally, I do not have the desire to give of the time and effort necessary to conduct formal educational research. Rather, I desire to devote that time and energy directly to my students in the classroom each day.
Lindsey, your discussion of the similarities and differences between action research and formal educational research had a lot of similarities to mine. I also touched on the idea that when teachers are involved in research they help ensure that topics being addressed are of pressing and practical need to them. That being said, you discussed this much further than I did, and I appreciated reading your views on how formal research findings seem to often neglect context of the various environments that they intend for their to be applied to. It seems though that your feelings towards formal research are a bit more negative than mine. I truly feel that all professional domains owe a lot to research, particularly education. While action research presents an attractive alternative to formal research and has great applications, in my opinion formal research still has an important role that action research can and will never be able to fill.
The landscape of education is continuously changing. As our world evolves, educators must ensure that the content we are teaching students is relevant, authentic and meaningful. In order to do this, teachers must examine, reevaluate and question what is best for their students constantly. Research is an essential component of this process. Educational research provides proof of best practices and deeper explanation of how and why we teach. There are a variety of approaches to educational research but the two over arching approaches are formal educational research and action research. Although they have differences, these two approaches are both valuable and provide meaning and clarity to educational philosophies and questions.
Formal educational research and action research both start with a question or a problem. This is root of the research and drives the researcher to want to conduct a study and find answers to the problem or questions. While both follow a similar process, formal educational research requires one to follow a step-by-step systematic process, while action research is not as strict. Many times when conducting a formal educational research study the end result may be inconclusive or teachers are unable to apply the results directly to the classroom. While in action research, due to the teacher conducting the research, implementing the results of the study is apart of the process and is known as the action plan. The action plan is the key part of action research and during this process there could be a new problem that arises. Once that new problem surfaces the teacher develops a new plan of answering that particular problem.
When conducting any type of research, it is vital that it is ethical. There a numerous ways to make sure this happens. Although the aim is to stay objective in both approaches, in action research, it is more likely to be slightly subjective due to the teacher having prior relationships with the students and the research is impacting their teaching. This could at times affect not only the ethics of the study, but the validity as well. As educators, it is imperative that we are aware of the different ethical challenges we may come across as we conduct research. By ensuring the study is unbiased, having all participants give consent, checking numbers and coding, and making sure that the subjects are respected are all ways to help have a ethically sound study.
As a kindergarten teacher, I am more likely to engage in action-based research. I believe that it is more feasible for me to develop a problem and a research plan that directly affects me than conduct a study that involves a variety of different variables. Formal educational research is important, however I feel that as a practicing teacher it does not have a place in my educational journey currently. I am a believer that people learn best by doing. Action research will allow me to help find solutions to my every day problems and allow me to move in a meaningful direction for my students and for my pedagogy. Working in an independent school I have the freedom to try different concepts and theories and explore if they fit in my classroom. Action research can give me the ability to try new ideas that could not only benefit my classroom, but my colleagues as well.
Educational research has and continues to transform the educational system today. Formal educational research and action research have several differences, but they are equally valuable and provide strong evidence and data to help guide educators. It is important that we continue to conduct research in order to prepare our students for the future so they will meet success.
Chris, I agree completely with your thoughts on how action research is the most practical for us as teachers, but even so that doesn’t mean it is the only research we should consider. Even though we will likely not be able to conduct much formal research (if any) in our careers, I think it is still important that we are recipients of research, and are as up to date as possible on current theory. For that reason, I really like what you said about how you think it is important for teachers to be aware of research being carried out by others. That being said, in reality I wonder how much the majority of teachers are active recipients of research? We all know how important research is to the field, but how much can we really benefit from research unless teachers are actually aware of what research is telling us. I wonder how teachers can be encouraged to stay up to date on research? Should it be incorporated into professional development? I don’t really know what the best answer is, but I think it is something that should be considered.
Samantha, I think you did a great job of explaining in detail the similarities and differences between formal educational research and action research. You pointed out the important aspect of action research that it involves the researcher actually acting on their findings, which I did not address. Additionally, I think you did a better job than I in pointing out that often times practicing educators do not have the time or background necessary to conduct more formal research. Lastly, I appreciated your response to my paper because I did not realize that I was coming across as devaluing formal educational research. I do think it is important, and that without it we would be remiss both in the field of education as well as in general. That being said, I personally do not have the desire to conduct formal educational research.
Rachel, you did a wonderful job of clearly summarizing the similarities and differences between formal educational research and action research. I appreciated that you also specifically addressed the significance of ethical considerations in action research, as this seems to be an area of need. Even though the process is not as formal, and formal training is not required to conduct action research, there are still numerous ethical issues that need to be carefully thought through. This is especially the case when the topic of the study and the participants are closer to home. I feel that you did a great job in discussing of your personal alignment with action research as you talked about the differences between populations that educators work with, and how one topic of inquiry may be meaningful to one educator but not to another. Lastly, I appreciated that you discussed the collaborative nature of action research as I think this is very important and yet in reading and learning about action research and how it is based on personal educators’ interests and needs it can be easy to look at as more of an individual endeavor.
Lindsey, I thought your discussion of the types of research was clear and well stated. I particularly found your discussion of your own experience and thoughts on research interesting. I can imagine how frustrating it would be to have decisions imposed based on research that might not truly be appropriate for your situation. I do believe there is important formal research that occurs, and with which we should be formal. But, there is clearly a lot that is of little value and needs to be implemented in ways that involve listening to those actually educating the students.
Rachel, thank you for being the first to post your response.
Since, you are the first I reply to in your group, I will explain my response. I will post a reply to each of you highlighting the strongest points in your post. I also recognize that I often post longer responses to the first one or posts; therefore other posts include a strong discussion of an issue, I may not mention it in the reply to their posts.
Rachel, I particularly found your discussion of ethical issues and practical application of action research to your setting to be insightful.
Rachel, your points were all very interesting. I was especially interested in the way that your environment is very collaborative. I could imagine how this could be incredibly beneficial. It makes me wonder how easy/difficult it would be to accomplish that in an environment that was less homogeneous. I wonder what obstacles are/would be most present in a public school that sought to foster that sort of collaboration?
Samantha, your response offers a very nice description of the purposes and applicability of traditional research and action research. You also dive into a great description of the characteristics of the folks who tend to engage in these two types of research pointing out their qualifications and their quite different purpose of engaging in research.
Chris, I found your second to last paragraph very interesting! You made me curious when you described action research as producing short term solutions. One of the essential features of of action research is its cyclical nature – and therefore suggest a process of continuous improvement. Do you consider that short term? I became even more curious reading your next sentence – where I think you suggest that democracy distracts from looking at long term goals?
Lindsey, I appreciate your discussion related to the applicability of action research to your practice! I am curious about the federal mandates you describe having resulted in questionable practices for some students.
Madeline I agree that teachers who conduct action research must take ethics into consideration in order to protect their students. One side the ethical consideration is to do no harm; the other side is that teachers who have their students best interest at heart maybe can do more good that traditional researchers. Just worth considering.
The following comment is not specific to Madeline but all members in group 2:
All group members explored important aspects of traditional and action research in their responses, e.g., a broad comparison of the two types of research, ethical issues, and in depth discussion of personal preferences for either of the two types of research.
Considering this prompt could include elements of a comprehensive exam question, I would look for additional discussions in your potential comprehensive answer. Specifically, I would look for a discussion of the cyclical nature and the four stages in action research mentioned by Mertler. I would also look for discussion of quantitative and qualitative data collection and data analysis strategies. Inclusion of these elements would illustrate your understanding of the more theoretical aspects of research.
You may want to check out how members in group 1 addressed some of these elements.
Rachel, I enjoyed reading your discussion on the differences between formal educational research and action research. I appreciated how you pointed out different ethical considerations, but gave different suggestions on what to do to create an ethically sound study. After reading Article #2 this is an area that extremely important.
I agree with what your wrote on and I think action research is beneficial as a teacher. I love the idea that we can find solutions in our daily teaching through research and then implement our findings. I am also in agreement on how working at an independent school we have the opportunity to use action research to continue to develop and improve our curriculum. I think action research is a great way for you to answer your research paper question about pass fail classes! I hope you get to opportunity to gather data and share your findings with the school!
Samantha, I truly enjoyed reading your response. I appreciated that although you spoke on how action research is more beneficial to you as a teacher you touched on the importance of formal educational research, something I did not do. You are correct, action research is not generalizable and while something you changed due to your results may work for you and your class, that may not work for someone else.
After reading your response I reflected and thought about how I work at an all girls’ independent school and I have found that there are gaps in formal educational research that is applicable to all girls’ schools. I think this is an example on how we need more people to conduct formal research as well in areas they are interested in so they can share support all communities. Unfortunately, like you said teachers do not have enough time and background to do this.
Chris, you bring up a really interesting point about action research and its possibility to lead teachers to seek more short-term solutions. I had not considered this issue until reading your response, but I can see how this might occur. As a teacher, it can be easy to become consumed with your current classroom context and lose sight of changes in classroom dynamics year-over-year. An extremely frustrated teacher may jump to conduct action research on a particularly demanding group of students and lose sight of the fact that the issue under question was not so dramatic in years prior and might not be so dramatic in years to follow. Additionally, a teacher may get swept up in a current “trend” in education, especially if it is being promoted by his or her administration. This might lead the teacher to quickly design a study around the trend without fully understanding it or giving it sufficient time to take hold in his or her pedagogy.
Lindsay, being that you work in special-education, I think you bring an especially unique perspective to the benefits of action research. And, I thought you brought up an excellent point from personal experience in your special-education role, when it comes to new curriculum or behavior strategies, “one size does not fit all.” I agree with your sentiment, that a benefit of action research is that it can be leveraged to personalize or differentiate for school and student needs, avoiding the “one size” effect. Although, like Chris mentions in his post, when taking this approach to personalization/differentiation, it would be very important to avoid seeking short-term solutions. Finally, I agree with your opinion that pursuing formal education research would likely hurt your effectiveness as a classroom teacher. Having to devote so much time and mental effort to research would surely take away from your teaching impact.