As I venture into the realm of action research, Jean McNiff’s work, our first reading, has been a really practical guide through the misty complexities of educational inquiry. McNiff’s conception of action research as a deeply personal, reflective practice resonates with my quest to transform my teaching. This process isn’t a linear trajectory but a spiral, or a cycle, as presented in the workshop, of continuous growth, where each reflection and action leads to new insights and further questions, further research, further growth and development of my practice. So I’m writing this blog post after our first workshop to reflect, or maybe put in words, what I understand as Action research.
Following the chart shown in class, I try to recreate one, with my thoughts and questions I may have to answer in the coming weeks.
First, identifying the problem, where to start? Well, I think it could all begin with a simple yet profound realization: a need to enhance student experience and/or engagement in my classroom. Drawing on McNiff’s approach, I understood that action research is a strategy for improvement, starting not from a hypothesis but from a desire to make a difference in my practice. It is a form of living theory, where I am both the researcher and the subject, the practitioner seeking to understand and ameliorate my educational environment.
With the problem outlined, I should embark on a data collection phase. McNiff advocates for a variety of methods. This data may serve as a reflective mirror, revealing not just the students’ experiences but also my own pedagogical choices and their effects.
Informed by the data, I may plan and execute an intervention, a new strategy aimed at bolstering satisfaction or engagement. Here, McNiff’s iterative cycles of action and reflection became evident. Changes in my teaching approach were not just interventions but experiments in a living lab, where theory and practice intertwine. This phase can be dynamic, with each class offering a fresh opportunity to refine my methods. Here I can start to think about cycles. This also reminds me of sprints in agile working methodologies.
McNiff’s emphasis on self-evaluation has been particularly transformative. So monitoring the outcomes is not to validate a predetermined hypothesis but to critically assess the effectiveness of my actions. This will help ensure that the changes I made serve the intended purpose.
Perhaps the most impactful aspect of McNiff’s model is the review and reflection phase. It is here that I need to consider the broader implications of my actions. Was I fostering a deeper interest in learning the subject? Will or did my intervention align with my educational values? This reflective phase wasn’t just about assessing outcomes but about understanding my evolving identity as an educator.
Reflecting on the action research cycle, I believe I’ve gained a better perspective on my project’s potential directions. As my tutors often remind us in the first workshop, “keep it simple. Simplifying the approach allows the core issues to surface, unobscured by complexity.
Reference:
McNiff, J. (2002) Action research for professional development. Available at: https://www.jeanmcniff.com/userfiles/file/Publications/AR%20Booklet.doc (Accessed: 05 October 2023).