Action Research methodology comparison
Who benefits from the Action Research?
1) The researcher.
Practioner researchers in particular can benefit from improvements in their practice.
2) Others around them who may then be drawn into to looking at their own practice more reflectively may benefit.
3) Participants can benefit. Their voices heard, their experience of changes given value. Ideally they may move towards co-researcher status. (This can include pupils/students/clients whose opinions would not normally be heard)
4) There is goverment money for action research in schools via the Network Learning movement. This money can help schools fund new initiatives, pay for staff training etc. so organisations may benefit.
5) Future pupils
What are the advantages of AR over other methodologies?
1) Low requirement for resources. - As well as being cheap, this also means in theory that a large number of practioner/researchers may be able to make a greater improvement on the industry as a whole than a few large scale research projects conducted by external professionals for the same cost. but can be very time consuming which is also a resource!
2) It's a powerful technique for consciously improving own practice If chosen by researcher and not imposed it is usually a subject of great interest to them and in which they are deeply involved.
3) It relies mostly on qualitative data which gives a richer picture of complex situations again referring to the above - qualitative data can take more time to analyse.
4) The spiral nature of the research means that this complex situation is constantly re-visited and reassesed.
5) It deals with 'real life' situations/problems and attempts improvement rather than study of them.
6) Less intrusive - because the researcher is known by and working amongst the people being researched rather than observing them as an outsider. Could be more prone to bias because of this.
7) By focussing on small groups or individuals, the researcher can gain a deeper insight into the experience from others point of view than they would by collecting large volumes of more superficial data from surveys.
And the disadvantages...over other methodologies
1) Results are not taken seriously by anybody except the researcher. Less support offered too.
2) Researchers can only look at things where changes are within their locus of control. This means that researchers who have little or no control in their workplace are heavily disadvantaged. So whereas a TA might usefully evaluate some aspect of the school reading policy and report back to the rest of the staff on their findings they may not be in a position to effect changes in that policy.
3) It may be seen as never having an endpoint, with constant ‘review and refine’ occurring.
4) It relies mostly on qualitative data which cannot be measured.
5) Action researchers usually have full time jobs as well.
6) It's impossible to eliminate personal bias in the action researchers' interpretations.
Who benefits from the Action Research?
1) The researcher.
Practioner researchers in particular can benefit from improvements in their practice.
2) Others around them who may then be drawn into to looking at their own practice more reflectively may benefit.
3) Participants can benefit. Their voices heard, their experience of changes given value. Ideally they may move towards co-researcher status. (This can include pupils/students/clients whose opinions would not normally be heard)
4) There is goverment money for action research in schools via the Network Learning movement. This money can help schools fund new initiatives, pay for staff training etc. so organisations may benefit.
5) Future pupils
What are the advantages of AR over other methodologies?
1) Low requirement for resources. - As well as being cheap, this also means in theory that a large number of practioner/researchers may be able to make a greater improvement on the industry as a whole than a few large scale research projects conducted by external professionals for the same cost. but can be very time consuming which is also a resource!
2) It's a powerful technique for consciously improving own practice If chosen by researcher and not imposed it is usually a subject of great interest to them and in which they are deeply involved.
3) It relies mostly on qualitative data which gives a richer picture of complex situations again referring to the above - qualitative data can take more time to analyse.
4) The spiral nature of the research means that this complex situation is constantly re-visited and reassesed.
5) It deals with 'real life' situations/problems and attempts improvement rather than study of them.
6) Less intrusive - because the researcher is known by and working amongst the people being researched rather than observing them as an outsider. Could be more prone to bias because of this.
7) By focussing on small groups or individuals, the researcher can gain a deeper insight into the experience from others point of view than they would by collecting large volumes of more superficial data from surveys.
And the disadvantages...over other methodologies
1) Results are not taken seriously by anybody except the researcher. Less support offered too.
2) Researchers can only look at things where changes are within their locus of control. This means that researchers who have little or no control in their workplace are heavily disadvantaged. So whereas a TA might usefully evaluate some aspect of the school reading policy and report back to the rest of the staff on their findings they may not be in a position to effect changes in that policy.
3) It may be seen as never having an endpoint, with constant ‘review and refine’ occurring.
4) It relies mostly on qualitative data which cannot be measured.
5) Action researchers usually have full time jobs as well.
6) It's impossible to eliminate personal bias in the action researchers' interpretations.