Content uploaded by Lesley Wood
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Lesley Wood on Jul 31, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
From rhetoric to reality: the role of Living Theory Action
Research in transforming education
Lesley A Wood
Faculty of Education, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
Lesley Wood (D Ed) is a senior lecturer in the Faculty of Education, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan
University (NMMU), South Mrica. Her research interests lie in the promotion of mental health
and wellness in schools, HIV
&
AIDS in education, action research and academic development of
both staff and students. She has published nationally and internationally in these fields.
Tulsidas Morar
Faculty of Education, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
An educationist, Tulsidas Morar is actively involved in teacher development. He has managed large
scale Government funded mathematics and science projects in the rural areas of the Eastern Cape
and is currently the Off-Campus Manager at NMMU.
Linda Mostert
Centre for Teaching, Learning and Media, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan
University
Linda Mostert (Linda Ann Strang) has a SA Honours in English and a Postgraduate Certificate in
Higher Education. She taught English for Academic Purposes at the NMMU from 2001 to 2006;
she has since been appointed as a writing consultant at this University. Her interests include
academic development, action research, and teaching creative writing. Her poetry is published
internationally.
Abstract
Transformation, based on the values of social justice, inclusion and respect for human dignity,
is currently a repeated refrain in the corridors of Higher Education and Training Institutions
(HETIs) in South Africa. The Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University is no exception and espouses
transformation as a core value. However, there is a danger that transformation and its accompanying
values will remain empty rhetoric unless they are incorporated into everyday practice at micro-
levels. In this article, we pose the question, "How can we ensure that our institutional values (that
promote transformation) are incorporated into our teaching practices?" We contend that action
research provides an ideal opportunity to realise these values, thereby ensuring that transformation
does take place at ground level. We make a case that self-study practitioner enquiry has a vital
role to play in the development of new theories ofpractice which will contribute to the transformation
of the epistemology of educational enquiry in the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University.
Key words: action research; higher education transformation; values based practice.
67
Introduction and educational concerns
In the current South African context, the concept of transformation is high on the agenda of
Higher Education and Training Institutions (HETIs). As early as 2000, the Council on Higher
Education report recommended that universities transform by adopting core principles and values,
such as equity and redress, democracy and social justice (Council on Higher Education, 2000).
In response to this, the interim mission statement of the newly merged Nelson Mandela Metropolitan
University (NMMU) is based on values that reflect equality and democracy (transformation for
equity and fairness, respect for diversity, people-centredness, engagement, and the principle of
providing an "accessible and affirming" environment for students), as well as quality (excellence,
innovation, integrity) (NMMU, 2005). There is no doubt that the values are laudable and very
necessary in order to actively respond to past inequities, but the real challenge will be to integrate
these values in all aspects of the functioning of the institution, particularly in the culture of
teaching and learning.
Engaging an institution in a transformation process requires a very serious commitment from all
the role players. Transformation necessitates the restructuring of values and 'old' ways of thinking
and being, in order to find ways that uphold more progressive values. It is human nature to want
to preserve the very values that afforded some individuals privileges over others. There is, therefore,
a very real danger that the values underpinning transformation - social justice, inclusion, democracy
and respect for diversity and human dignity - may remain empty rhetoric unless management,
academics, administrative staff and students not only accept, but also live out these values in their
daily activities.
We are particularly concerned with how we as academics can begin to change our teaching and
learning practices to make them more representative of transformative values and principles. We
believe that teaching must be a transformative process and practice, in keeping with the notion
of quality as transformation, as required by the Higher Education Quality Committee of the
Council on HE (2003). This approach is based on the assumption that "if Higher Education
Institutions provide transformative learning experiences for students, graduates will in turn become
change agents in society" (Council on Higher Education, 2003:4).
We contend that sustainable transformation can only take place at the micro level. In order to
provide a transformative teaching and learning experience for students, we academics need to
interrogate our own practices to ensure that they are representative of the values espoused by the
university. If we accept that teaching is an historically and socially constructed practice (McLaren,
1988:xix), then we need to explore and question what we do in this light in order for transformation
to take place. Action research also provides the ideal platform to realize transformative values,
while simultaneously increasing research output. Education, and educators, can thus be transformed
through research.
Action research as basis for transformation
Values-based practitioner self-study
Action research is hardly a new concept. Its origins have been traced back to the work of Collier
in the 1940s (McNiff
&
Whitehead, 2003:40). According to McNiff and Whitehead (2005:1), action
research has increased in popularity worldwide. As it has evolved, several different trends have
68
become discernable, trends that are based on various philosophies, ideologies and methodologies.
We contend that the kind of action research that embraces self-study practitioner enquiry, as
espoused by McNiff and Whitehead (2003), is necessary if transformation is to take place in
institutions where democracy is valued. We conceptualise action research as a means of enquiry
whereby academics investigate, interrogate and evaluate their everyday practice in a quest to
improve their own work and influence the learning of others.
Action research is distinctive from the more traditional forms of research, in that it not only asks
questions about external social issues or situations, but also focuses on personal experiences. All
research questions stem from an 'insider' view. For example, one of the researchers was concerned
about the fact that very few students actually prepared for class, despite being repeatedly reminded
of how important pre-reading and preparation was. Instead of formulating the research problem
along the lines of
'Why do students not prepare for class?'
she asked herself
'How can I adapt my
teaching to encourage students to prepare for class?'
Action research therefore involves taking
personal initiative in the testing out in practice of ideas for improvement, and as such is an ideal
way to contribute to improvement and change in education. By changing and improving our own
teaching and learning practices, we are contributing to the process of transformation in our
immediate environment.
Questions that we individually and collectively ask ourselves as we engage in the process of
transformation include:
• Do I treat every student with the same respect and dignity?
• Do I treat colleagues with respect and dignity?
• Are my classrooms emancipatory?
• What do I do in my teaching to contribute to the myth of student powerlessness?
• How do my values/cultural background benefit/disadvantage my students?
• Do I acknowledge and encourage diverse opinions?
• Do I provide for educational self-determination?
• Do I take into account student diversity and individual differences?
• Am I providing a quality education?
Such questions enable us to interrogate our everyday practices and take action to ensure affirmative
responses will uphold the NMMU'stransformative values and principles. Action research also keeps
the focus on improving the relevance and quality of education in keeping with a specific context.
This is important in times of mergers and government pressure for universities to increase
throughput and be cost-effective, when there is a real danger of the 'business' discourse taking
precedence over education and learning. We have personally experienced that merger issues
currently tend to dominate our thinking and activities, at the expense of our teaching and learning.
The questions we pose ourselves in our action research help to keep us in a process of continual
reflection and ensure our teaching is supportive of the values on which the university is basing
its transformation.
The point of departure for action research is therefore a concern, or a 'problem' that the practitioner
experiences. Unlike traditional research, however, the research problem is not externalized, but
is fully owned by the researcher and therefore regarded as something that can be improved by a
change in practice, approach or attitude. This necessitates a shift from using research to impose
69
changes from without, towards improving the environment and human practices from within.
Transformation takes place when our usual "assumptions, strategies and habits are challenged"
(Reason
&
Torbert, 2001:1).
Because action research stems from an 'insider' view, it has a strong
value
base. The concern that
becomes the 'research question' usually arises when the educator experiences cognitive dissonance
due to one or more educational values being denied. This denial can lead to the educator experiencing
him/herself as a living contradiction (Whitehead, 1989) and is the basis for the interrogation of
his/her own practice in a quest to bring practice more into line with educational values. For
example, the educational values of democracy, inclusion and social justice are negated if the
majority of students in the class are second or third language English speakers, and the teaching
practices are not altered to make allowance for this. Because of their language problems, these
students may not be afforded the same opportunity to understand and communicate that
understanding as first language English speakers.
70
Ontological commitment
In order to transform social constructs, people need to do more than just acknowledge diverse
perspectives and multiple voices - they also need to commit to working with them to create a
mutually acceptable reality which is suitable for the specific context in that specific time (Reason
&
Torbert, 2001:6). The enquiry process does not remain an impersonal reflection - it becomes
an emotional and intellectual process carried out in the midst of everyday practice. Values have a
How we understand ourselves in relation to one another and to our environment (our ontology)
determines how we interact with others. The ontological value underlying action research is that,
although we see ourselves as individuals, we recognize that we live with others in a shared
environment. However, rather than trying to change or improve others, action research focuses
on self-transformation in an attempt to work together for sustained development, on both a
personal and collective level. This implies accountability and acceptance of personal responsibility
for all we do.
Action research involves the practitioner making an ontological commitment to improving their
practice. Presumably, people teach because they believe in certain educational values, which their
teaching should reflect, otherwise they will experience themselves as a "living contradiction"
(Whitehead, 1989:2). In South African educational institutions today, such values (e.g. fairness
and equality) are often negated due to the under-resourced nature of many institutions and the
inequities that still prevail.
We have a considerable number of Chinese students studying at the NMMU,and this poses challenges
for teaching, in terms of language, since the majority struggle to understand and be understood
in the classroom.
A!;
action researchers we accept that we need to adapt our teaching to ensure
that these students have equal opportunity to learn and perform academically. This has led to the
introduction of strategies such as pairing a Chinese student with another student, who acts as a
"mentor" and assists in explaining tasks; letting Chinese students group together to discuss the
work in their own language and then assisting them in translating their ideas; and introducing
glossaries into the study guide. Transformation for equality and fairness must obviously start with
the teaching and learning practices of each individual.
strong emotive component and this emotion contributes to the passion which the actors have to
experience in order to be effective action researchers. The commitment to self-transformation
becomes the driving force behind everyday practice, and in this way organisational transformation
is attained from within.
We therefore transform ourselves by trying to live out our values in our everyday interaction with
colleagues, students and management. Action research has universal human well-being as its base
value and communicative action (Habermas, 1975) as a method of realizing it (McNiff, 2005b:l).
However, action research is not carried out merely for the purpose of personal and collective
transformation. It also aims to generate theory. As Marshall and Reason (1994, p.1l8) wrote:
All good research is
for me, for us, and for them;
it speaks to three audiences ... It is
for them
to the extent that it produces some kind of generalizable ideas and outcomes It is
for us
to the extent that it responds to concerns for our praxis, is relevant and timely for those
who are struggling with problems in their field of action. It is
for me
to the extent that the
processes and outcomes respond directly to the individual researcher's being-in-the-world.
Theory generation
Whitehead (1989:42) explains the difference between traditional research and action research in
terms of theory generation. Traditional research generates theory by means of propositions which
determine relationships between variables. For example, an increase in student motivation is
positively related to student performance. Such theory is necessary in order to understand what
affects student performance, but it does not contribute in itself to a higher pass rate. What is
missing is the
action
component -
'What can I do to increase student motivation in the class in
order to improve their learning?'
Whitehead (1989:42) argues that educationalists should take responsibility for the generation of
a "living educational theory", created from descriptions and explanations of their own practices.
He states:
I am arguing that the propositional form is masking the living form and content of an
educational theory which can generate valid descriptions and explanations for the educational
development of individuals. This is not to deny the importance of propositional forms of
understanding. I am arguing for a reconstruction of educational theory into a living form of
question and answer which includes propositional contributions from the traditional disciplines
of education.
The research process followed in action research is similar to Schon's (1996) notion of the reflective
practitioner. The researcher follows a repetitive cycle of observe - analyse - act to change - evaluate.
In times of relative stability, Schon (1996) claimed that knowledge is static and problems can be
solved using previous experience and proven solutions. In times of change, such as those Higher
Education is currently experiencing in the merger context, past experience cannot be relied on
to provide solutions, and there is a much greater need for critical and creative thinking in order
to provide solutions to dilemmas. There is also a need for people to change their frames of reference
and be open to diverse opinions and differing forms of knowledge. Real reflection on this level
therefore involves analyses not only of practice, but also of frames of reference and hitherto accepted
philosophies. It necessitates collaborating with others within our social context, discussing and
71
sharing our insights and mutually influencing each other in order to arrive at transformed practices
which are mutually beneficial to all.
In
the NMMUcontext, the change in campus sites for specific programmes has caused much upset
among students and staff alike. Many of us feel that the process of site allocation has transgressed
the transformational values of democracy and transparency. The feelings and opinions of the people
concerned have been discounted. It has been assumed that students who live in the townships of
Port Elizabeth will prefer to go to the Vista campus, which is situated in such a township, adjoining
a squatter camp. However, the majority of black students and staff have not been happy with this
assumption. An action research project has been initiated around this issue to determine how the
situation and concerns about the negation of transformational values can best be handled, so that
all parties can come to an acceptable agreement. Bywriting up this project, the researchers involved
will generate theory on introducing change in institutions, which may help those involved in
similar situations in the future.
Exerting an educative influence
Action research also requires the practitioner to disseminate accounts of this reflective cycle in
order to influence the learning of others. This 'educative influence' (Whitehead, 1989:1) can have
positive effects on the entire academic system - changes that the academic makes in teaching and
learning practices will influence not only students, but also colleagues and the academy in general.
The Action Research for Education group at the NMMUhas attracted the interest of at least twenty
academics, who are now actively interrogating their own practice and their educative values. We
have established links with groups in London, Ireland and Bath in the UK and are busy setting up
links with academics at Oldenburg in Germany. We are all linked via e-mail and regularly share
our work and ideas with each other.
As practitioners interrogate their practice, they also interrogate the assumptions behind their
actions and this can result in the emergence of new assumptions and practices. One of our team
assumed her practices were student-centred, because that was one of the basic principles on which
her programme was based. However, when she interrogated the concept of 'student-centred', she
realized that the teaching and learning practices hitherto accepted by all as such, were lacking in
some of the basic criteria. She initiated discussion on this with her colleagues and this resulted
in changes being made to how the modules were taught. As action researchers, we critique not
only our own practices, but by sharing this critique initiate debate on institutional practices and
assumptions, thus opening the door for transformation.
Democratising research
Action research can also encourage research by those who do not normally perceive themselves
to be "researchers". Anyone who teaches can become a researcher through regular and systematic
reflection on, and generating and testing evidence about, his/her work. Action research abolishes
the traditional power relationships between researcher and those being researched, and replaces
them with a more equal partnership where both parties challenge and support each other in a
mutual quest to improve their work (McNiff
&
Whitehead, 2005:22). It allows educators to be
"transformative intellectuals" (Giroux, 1988:1), who critique their own practice and try to create
theories which are more in tune with accepted transformative values. Our action research group
72
at the NMMUis evidence of this, since the participants range from fairly newly appointed lecturers
to full professors and the Dean of the faculty.
In terms of the issue of transformation and equity among the academic staff in HETIs, action
research shifts the power from the few well-established academics to the broader base of all involved
in the research. It allows educators to become "theorists in their own right", rather than
"implementers of external researchers' theories" (McNiff
&
Collins, 1994). This may threaten
traditional ideas and existing power bases, but the political component of action research as an
approach is what makes it so suitable to contributing to the transformation of education. This
participation in the research process is, according to Reason and Torbert (2001:6), "... a political
as well as an epistemological imperative which affirms the basic human right of persons to
contribute to decisions which affect them and to knowledge which concerns them and purports
to be about them".
The language used in our narrative sense of action research strives to communicate theory in
everyday language and helps to dispel the exclusionary discourses of academia: it opens up research
to anyone willing to subject their everyday practice to critical enquiry and to make that enquiry
explicit. Although action research is developing its own discourse, this discourse is being told by
practitioners and not a few select academics. If knowledge is power and language is the key to
knowledge (Foucault, 1980), this more accessible discourse grants a certain authority to the
practitioner who feels able to share his/her reflections in a language understandable by all.
This form of research conforms to the value of democracy, since inquiries must of necessity involve
those engaged in the teaching process - lecturers, learners and colleagues. The latter two are
important in terms of validating the research process and their feedback helps to create a 'living
educational theory' (Whitehead (1989:41). Inclusivity and people-centred ness are the values which
underline this form of theory-generation. Self-reflection calls for open-mindedness, respect for
diverse ideas and the willingness to collaborate with others in forming new theories of practice.
Sustained development
Research has been conducted into almost every aspect of education. Years of research output have
resulted in changes to curricula, methodology, and educational approaches, yet how often are the
findings implemented in practice? If one looks at outcomes based education (OBE) and its influence
on the National Curriculum Statement (NCS), the principles on which it is based make good
educational sense. In theory, OBE is sound educational practice, but how is it being implemented
in reality? How many educators at all levels of education practise it as intended by NCS or the
HEQC? Elliott (2004:4) claims that 'external policy discourse' takes precedence over the 'practical
thinking' of teachers and thus exercises a form of 'epistemic sovereignty.' Teachers therefore focus
on meeting outcomes at all costs, at the expense of implementing more learner-centred teaching
methods (Whitehead, 2004:4).
We argue that sustained and real change can only take place when people 'buy into it', because it
stems from a personal theory, created and evaluated by themselves. This is not to say that OBE
should be discarded and educators should 'do their own thing', rather that if they were to actively
research their own practices as they attempt to implement OBE, they would then be able to generate
their own theories of how to improve their practice and would therefore be more likely to implement
73
the principles and practices of OBE in a way that could be sustained under their unique circumstances.
By sharing the findings generated by their inquiries, a professional body of knowledge can be
created, forming what Schon (1995) termed a "new epistemology" for the "new scholarship".
For example, one of the researchers found that there is a mismatch in some rural teachers' thinking
in terms of their teaching practice. These rural teachers, while they believe they have 'bought into'
OBE, are still using traditional teaching approaches, where their learners sit in small groups in
their classes with little or no interaction between them. Whilst he has previously conducted research
on
teachers and interpreted what is happening in their classes
through his perspective,
engaging
these rural teachers in action research empowers them to generate their own theory and in this
way contribute to the new scholarship (Schon, 1995).
Instead of resenting the powers that be who dictate to them what they should be doing, educators
at higher education level, through action research, can negotiate more democratic ways ofworking
and abolish existing and traditional power relationships (McNiff
&
Whitehead, 2005:5). They no
longer need to take directions from the 'experts', but can become experts themselves, as they create
ways to improve their teaching and learning practices. Such critical engagement involves debate
about the "uses oftheory for social control or emancipation". (McNiff,2005:1). This type of approach
will have a ripple effect on the whole institution as people find ways to interact, so as to create and
sustain an acceptable and effective learning environment.
Action research underpins change
Action research is grounded in critical theory in that it encourages critique of the status quo and
suggests how to make improvements, but it goes further than critical theory. It also suggests ways
to implement the improvements on a practical level and generate and test theory in terms of the
learning of the participants. McNiff (2003:34) explains:
While critical theorists say what ought to be done to right wrongs, they do not show how it
can be done or what needs to be done to realize the potentialities of their theories to turn them
into living realities. Further, they believe that it is sufficient to critique other people but they
seldom critique themselves ...
Reason and Torbert (2001:2) also argue that action research requires "an action turn" toward self-
study
in action
in relation to others. According to these authors there are certain key features of
action research - the importance of practical knowing, participative relationships, experiential
grounding and normative theory (ibid., 2).
The purpose of action research is not to make abstract knowledge available to a select few (academia),
but to encourage practical knowing embodied in everyday action. This practical knowing is
participative, since it is gleaned from interaction with others and by sharing in the experiential
presence of others in their worlds. The whole process is based on a normative theory of what
constitutes appropriate action in the current context.
Susman and Evered (1978:583) claim that action research must be future-oriented, collaborative,
contribute towards the development of the whole system, generate theory from practice and be
contextualised to specific situations. In education we are dealing with social practices which are
played out in certain contexts by actors with diverse needs and perspectives - there can therefore
74
be no one reality as proposed by positivistic methods of enquiry. Action research bears similarities
to the constructivist
I
interpretivist approach, in that they are both reflective, but action research
requires an action to follow the reflection. As Reason and Torbert (2001:5) state:
since all human persons are participating actors in their world, the purpose of inquiry is not
simply or even primarily to contribute to the fund of knowledge in a field, to deconstruct taken-
for-granted realities, or even to develop emancipatory theory, but rather to forge a more direct
link between intellectual knowledge and moment-to moment personal and social action, so
that inquiry contributes directly to the flourishing of human persons, their communities, and
the ecosystems of which they are part.
Empirical research aims at validating data to create testable truths; action research aims at "timely,
voluntary, mutual, validity-testing, transformative action at all moments of living" (Reason
&
Torbert, 2001:5). It is a move from thinking about action to critical inquiry in action - how am I
acting in the here and now with others and hoU;can I improve my interaction in order to more
fully live out my educational values? Transformation occurs as we examine our own practices in
light of our values and engage in dialogue with others to reach a shared consensus of how we
should. interact for the common good.
In their particular type of action research, McNiff and Whitehead attempt to show how wrongs can
be put right through critiquing one's own values and practice, and taking action to improve learning
and future action. The type of action research espoused by McNiff and Whitehead has some points
in common with both postmodernism, and its argument that no particular perspective should be
privileged above others, and feminist research, which values the researcher's personal perspective
(Lentin 2005:3). Equity, gender issues and the inclusion of indigenous knowledge and African
values are high on the list of priorities for transformation in South Africa, and examining these
issues therefore provides an ideal basis from which to interrogate our approach to these in our
everyday practices:
[The] 'living I' should be placed at the center of educational enquiries, not as an abstract
personal pronoun but as a real-life human being. As a human being living and working in social
contexts, 'I' often experience myself as a living contradiction in that I say one thing and do
another. For example, I may believe in social democracy but do not always give people sufficient
opportunity to state their point of view... The contradiction can be understood in terms of how
our values are denied in practice' (McNiff
&
Whitehead, 2003:72).
The following narrative of one of the authors outlines how she attempted to adapt her teaching
to make it more in line with her values:
l112en
I started teaching social responsibility more explicitly in my English for Academic Purposes
classes, in response to government policy, I realized that I was teaching values from an entirely
Western point of view. This contradicted my desire to move away from Eurocentrism. As a result,
I started giving my students the opportunity to take the lead in introducing concepts associated
with social responsibility. I did this by encouraging them to define what ubuntu is through class
discussions (the African philosophy of ubuntu includes ideas of social responsibility). After this,
I showed them how ubuntu principles can be incorporated into some traditional academic
discourses. Specifically, I used role-playing exercises in which students acted out a conflict of
75
76
Validating living educational theories
Traditional research relies heavily on the concepts of validity and reliability to justify
it.
Action
research is closer to the concept of trustworthiness of qualitative research. McNiff (2005a:1) claims
that the "validity of their accounts lies in practitioners' capacity for creative critical engagement,
as they explain how they transform their practices into processes of critical theorising, using their
articulated values as their living epistemological standards".
How does one transform the ontological values of action researchers into the "living epistemological
standards of judgement" used to validate their claims to educational knowledge? (Whitehead &
McNiff,2005). Schon (1995) called for "a new epistemology for a new scholarship", and this requires
a move away from traditional means of validation. The steps used to validate theory in more
traditional forms of research are not applicable to action research since they are used to test an
objective view of knowledge. Action research sees knowledge as subjective and relative, and
knowledge construction as a "self-formative process" (Giroux, 1988:14), where personal meanings
are generated, while Freire (1988:xxviii) argues that "subjectivity has to play an important role in
transformation". We need firstly to understand ourselves in our historical, social and political
contexts, before we can realise our transformative potentials. Once we are aware of what
historical/political forces have contributed to the prevalence of certain ideologies, we will be in a
position to critique these and develop ideologies which are more suited to our current context.
Educational research therefore needs its own epistemology and discourse, rather than trying to
adhere to methods which were designed for the positivistic perspective of the natural and social
sciences.
interest scenario. In their role-playing, they had to use both Western argumentation and ubuntu
principles in order to resolve the conflict. I continued to hold myself accountable through
interrogating my teaching practices and, in doing so, I realized that I was still imposing my
methods on the students without giving them an opportunity to speak about what their feelings
were in the situation. As I want to be student-centred in my approach, I once again experienced
myself as a 'living contradiction.' Through the use of action research, I introduced a more
democratic approach, giving the students opportunities to discuss and write about what emotions
they had during the role-playing exercises. Through this process, I discovered that - in simply
acting out a conflict situation - role-players experience similar emotions to those experienced
in real-life conflict, such as anger, sadness and frustration. So this discovery
is
becoming my
living educational theory.
I have realized that the tension between my values and my teaching methods
is
not always easily
resolved, however. In another action research project, I explored using a film that
is
very popular
with students, 'The Matrix Reloaded', to increase student mterest and motivation. The film certainly
did seem to promote student interest, but the scene that the students watched and enjoyed included
a considerable amount of violence - and violence against a woman at that. On the one hand, I
want to be a peace educator and a lecturer who
is
sensitive to gender issues; on the other, my
students enjoy watching violent movies and they may be more motivated to come to class if they
know that they are going to watch action movies. A contradiction such as this will probably
require an in-depth study, which could yield more valuable 'living theories' around gender, values
and the use of visual pedagogy. In my opinion, what
is
important
is
to explore dissonance within
ourselves, no matter how uncomfortable doing so may be, in order to produce new knowledge.
We recognise that there are multiple ways of knowing and multiple landscapes from which
knowledge can be gathered, and any claims to knowledge/theory generation can be made by
critically reflecting on and "seeking synchrony" among these manifold perspectives (Reason
&
Torbert, 2001:7). In other words, can other practitioners relate to and learn from our accounts?
Traditional forms of research are subject to 'rules' of the discipline and objectivity is seen to validate
the 'truth' of the results. Action research calls for freedom from such rigid rules. Values have to
be made explicit and the subjective involvement engenders a passion which is the motivating force
behind the research. We research because we are passionate about improving our teaching and
learning and helping others to do the same. However, this does not mean that we just rely on our
own opinions. As with empirical research, data can be gathered and evidence generated to justify
the claims that we make. Such data may be quantitative evidence of practical outcomes, such as
higher marks or increased participation; qualitative data gleaned from journals, interviews,
observations; or it may be reflections on the mismatch between propositional theory found in
literature and the everyday realities and experience of practice.
;
The underlying purpose of action research is to 'facilitate learning and improvement, not to control
or predict outcomes. McNiff (2005:4) explains it as follows:
It [AR]is about how we can problematise practice so that practice does not become a process
of implementing rules in order to fit action into a predetermined model. It is about asking
interesting questions about whether we are exercising our influence in a way that we hope is
educational.
Action research is open-ended, and does not arrive at a conclusive 'truth'. Rather it is a process
of continued learning. As such, validation should be more about ensuring quality than ensuring
the 'correct' methods were used in arriving at conclusions and that such conclusions are 'right'.
Action researchers are not bound to follow criteria set out by 'experts', but can negotiate their own
criteria. One example of this is the thesis of Hartog (2004), who was granted a doctoral degree by
the Unviversity of Bath. She negotiated quality criteria with the examiners and asked them to judge
the value of her thesis by asking questions such as,
':4rethe values of my practice clearly articulated
and is there evidence of a commitment toward living them in practice?': "Doesmy inquiry account
lead you to recognise how my understanding and practice have changed over time?", "Does this
thesis show originality of mind and critical thinking?".
She also invited the examiners to apply
the social standards of Habermas's (1975) truth claims by asking if the account was comprehensible,
truthful and sincere, and whether it had been crafted with due professional and ethical consideration.
However, in order for these criteria to be accepted by others, it is advisable to make sure the
research is
normative
(accepted by the different role-players as being in keeping with their values);
appropriate
for the specific time and place; and, perhaps most importantly, can be
implemented
in such a way that it contributes to the improvement of practice (Reason
&
Torbert, 2001:8).
Aslong ago as 1983, Hirst (1983:24) indicated that we should be generating theory from "operationally
effective practical discourse". Research can only be transformative if it is seen to generate theory
which actually can be put into practice and be seen to make a positive difference to any given
situation. The bottom line in action research is
'Will it improve my practice?',
but it is not a recipe
for the correct steps to do things. It is a sharing ofwhat worked for a particular researcher working
in a particular context. This removes the concepts of generalizability and validity from the equation.
77
Hirst, P.H. (Ed.). (1983).
Kincheloe, J.L. (2003).
London: Routledge. .
Lentin, R. (2005)."I'll
Retrieved May82006
Marshall, J.
&
Reason,~
supervision process.
Education,
15(2),117
McLaren, P.(1988).Criti
a critical pedagogyof
McNiff,J. (2005a).Livi
the American Educati
April. Retrieved 7Ap
McNiff,J. (2005b).Pe
education ofsustai
invited symposium
11
our self-study practic
http://www.jeanmcni
McNiff, J.
&
Whitehead,
J
McNiff,J.
&
Whitehead,
1.
McNiff, J.
&
Collins,U.(1
Ireland.
Bournemou
NMMU.(2005).Mission,
Reason, P
&
Torbert,
W.R.
merits of action res
Schon, D.A.(1996).
Edu
Learning in the
Pron
Schon, D.A.(1995).The
27-35.
Susman, G.
&
Evered,R.
Administrative Scien
Whitehead, J. (2004).Pro
from a training school
Whitehead,1. (1989).Cr .
improve my practice?"
Whitehead, J
&
McNiff,
J."
democratic values?
W
Cohen, L.
&
Manion, L. (1997).
Research Methods in Education.
London: Routledge.
Council on Higher Education (CHE), (2003). Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQc).
Improving Teaching
&
Learning Resources. Pretoria: CHE.
Council on Higher Education (CHE), (2000). Shape and Size Report. Pretoria: CHE.
Elliott, 1. (2004). The struggle to redefine the relationship between "knowledge" and "action" in
the academy: some reflections on action research. Retrieved on 7 May2006 from
http://www.bath.ac.uk/edssajw/johnelliott.htm.
Foucault, M. (1980).
Power and Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings.
NewYork:
Pantheon.
Freire, P.(1988). Introduction. In H.A.Giroux,
Teachers as intellectuals: Towarda critical pedagogy
of learning.
New York: Bergin
&
Garvey.
Giroux, H. (1988).
Teachers as Intellectuals: Toward a critical pedagogy ofleaming.
New York:
Bergin
&
Garvey.
Habermas,1. (1972).
Knowledge and Human Interests.
Boston: Beacon.
78
Action research is an approach which is eminently suited to contribute to the transformation of
the university in line with its stated values. Its main purpose, in an educational context, is to
enhance the learning of all and enable them more fully to understand the situations in which they
find themselves, so that they may act more effectively. To do this, it collects data from a "whole
range of information based on the experience of those involved" (Reason
&
Torbert, 2001:9) -
inquiry into values and purposes, perceptions and ontology and practical enquiry into our teaching
and learning practices. We critically interrogate our purpose, values and behaviour to create our
own living theories to improve the quality of our practices. We share this with other actors in the
institution in order to develop mutual understandings and better ways of interaction. It is a never-
ending process in which we welcome feedback and input from all stakeholders, at which point the
reflective cycle starts again. By making our living theories explicit and disseminating them, we
can influence the education of other social formations and impact the transformation of education
on a much wider scale than our immediate environments. To paraphrase Tolstoy, if you want to
change the world, first start with yourself.
Conclusion
Bibliography
Action research is in a constantly developmental state, therefore action researchers "should stress
the importance of developing new forms of explanation rather than permitting their research to
be dominated by method or bytraditional forms of theoretical, conceptual frameworks" (Whitehead,
1989). The main questions that should be posed by all action researchers to 'validate' their work
are:
"DoI accept and live out my values as fully as I can?"
and
"Are these values acceptable and
useful for others in promoting transformation in educational practice?"
(McNiff, 2005b:24).
Those to whom the research is disseminated can take from it what may apply to them, try to
incorporate it into their own situation and, through a cycle of reflective action, create their own
living theories. Educators are thus given the freedom "to make judgements that are right for them
in relation to the values they espouse" (McNiff,2005a:6). If you give people the freedom to live and
work according to their values, they usually assume the responsibility to do so and are morally
bound by the choices they make.
Hirst, P.H. (Ed.). (1983). Educational Theory and its Foundation Disciplines. London: Routledge.
Kincheloe, J.L. (2003). Teachers as Researchers: Qualitative Inquiry as a Path to Empowerment.
London: Routledge.
Lentin, R. (2005). "I'll be a post-feminist in a post-patriarchy": reflexivity is a feminist issue.
Retrieved May8 2006 from www.iol.ie/-mazzoldi/toolsforchange/postmet/feminist.html
Marshall, J.
&
Reason, P. (1994). Adult learning in collaborative action research; reflection on the
supervision process. Studies in Continuing Education: Research and Scholarship in Adult
Education, 15(2),117-132.
McLaren, P. (1988). Critical theory and hope. In H. A. Giroux, Teachers as Intellectuals: Toward
a critical pedagogy of learning. New York: Bergin
&
Garvey.
McNiff,J. (2005a). Living with foxes: learning about self, home and the other. Paper presented at
the American Educational Research Associationannual meeting Peace Education SIG,Montre'8eal,
April. Retrieved 7 April 2006 from www.jeanmcniff.comlLivingwithfoxespaper.htm.
McNiff,J. (2005b). Pedagogy, theory of mind, an? educative influence: how do I contribute to the
education of sustainable social formations? A.paper presented at the EARLlConference SIG
invited symposium Teaching and Teacher Education: 'Demonstrating accountability through
our self-study practices as teacher educators': Nicosia, August. Retrieved 9 April 2006 from
http://www.jeanmcniff.comlJ.McNiffEARLl2005.htm.
McNiff,J.
&
Whitehead, J. (2003). Action research: principles and practice. London: Fulton.
McNiff,J.
&
Whitehead, J. (2005). Action research for teachers. A practical guide. London: Fulton.
McNiff,J.
&
Collins, U. (1994). (Eds.) A new approach to in-career development for teachers in
Ireland. Bournemouth: Hyde.
NMMU.(2005). Mission, Vision and Values.Retrieved on 15April2006 from http://www.nmmu.ac.za.
Reason, P
&
Torbert, W.R.(2001). Toward a transformational science: a further look at the scientific
merits of action research. Concepts and Transformations, 6(1), 1-37.
Schon, D.A.(1996). Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and
Learning in the Professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schon, D.A.(1995). The New Scholarship Requires a New Epistemology. Change, Nov/Dec 1995,
27-35.
Susman, G.
&
Evered, R. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 582-603.
Whitehead, J. (2004). Professional learning through a generative approach to mentoring: lessons
from a training school partnership and their wider applications. Work in progress.
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.
Whitehead, J
&
McNiff,J. (2005). How do we explain our educational influence in living our
democratic values? Work in progress.
79
LA Wood*
University Foundation Programme
Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
Summerstrand South Campus
PO BOX
77000
Port Elizabeth 6031
Telephone: 041 5042834
Email: Lesley.wood@nmmu.ac.za
Tulsidas Morar
Faculty of Education
Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
PO Box 77000
Port Elizabeth 6031
Telephone: 041 5044596
Cell: 083 651 6992
Fax: 041 504 1617
Email: Tulsi.morar@nmmu.ac.za
L Mostert
Centre for Teaching, Learning and Media,
Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
PO Box 77000
Port Elizabeth 6031
Telephone: 041 5042686
E-mail: Linda.mostert@nmmu.ac.za
*To whom correspondence should be addressed
80
Abstract
