DOCUMENT RESUME ED 393 876 TM 024 750 AUTHOR … · Corey, S. M. (1952, May). Educational research and the solution of practical problems. Educational Leadership,9(8), 478-484. What

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 393 876 TM 024 750

AUTHOR Alexander, Gary C., Comp.; And OthersTITLE Action Research: A Bibliography To Begin.INSTITUTION Minnesota Univ., Minneapolis. Center for Applied

Research and Educational Improvement.PUB DATE Oct 95NOTE 97p.

PUB TYPE Reference Materials Bibliographies (131)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC04 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Action Research; *Cooperation; *Educational Change;

Educational Research; *Evaluation Methods; Mentors;*Methods Research; Organizational Development;*Participatory Research; Political Influences;Research Methodology; Social Influences

IDENTIFIERS Dewey (John)

ABSTRACTAction research, which, broadly defined, was one of

the activities in which educators following in the footsteps of JohnDewey engaged, emerged as a systematic approach for improvingeducational practice in the two decades following World War II.Action research then passed into relative obscurity. It has recentlyre-emerged in the educational literature and provides models foreducational improvement. This bibliography, which is a work inprogress, marks a place to begin reading about action research.Sources, some of which are annotated, are grouped into the followingcategories: (1) Early Writings: Before 1985 (37 references); (2)Origiub and Concepts (56 references); (3) 1985 to 1990 (55references); (4) How To: The Process of Action Research (34references); (5) How To: The Products of Action Research (16references); (6) Related Writings: Reflective Practice (45references); (7) Collaborative Research (49); (8) Sociology/PoliticalTheory (two refrences); (9) School Change (six references); (10)

Program Evaluation (three references); (11)

Supervision/Coaching/Mentoring (nine references); (12) OrganizationalDevelopment (three referencbs); (13) Curriculum Deliberation(Contains five references.) (SLD)

************************************************************************ Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made *

* from the original document. *

***********************************************************************

7-0(1

Action Research: A Bibliog--phy to Begin

U.S. DEPARTMENT Of EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Rswch and Imptovement

EDUChfONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

Sm documont has been reproduCed asreceived front the person or o(ganizationoriginating it

0 Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction ouahty

Points of view(); opinions staled in the docu-ment do not necessarily reprUant OfficialOE RI position or policy

Compiled by

Gary C. Alexander

University of Idaho

Edited by

Jean A. King

Kyla L. Wahlstrom

University of Minnesta

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

67144 e-A-L8-x71/16---ko

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

Compiled for the Center for Applied Research andEducational Improvement

(CAREI)

College of Education

University of Minnesota

October 1995

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Early Writings: Before 1985 Page 2

Origins and Concepts Page 8

1985 to 1990 Page 32

How To: The Process of Action Research Page 48

How To: The Products of Action Research Page 55

Related Writings: Reflective Practice Page 62

Collaborative Research Page 70

Sociology/Political Theory Page 86

School Change Page 86

Program Evaluation Page 87

Supervision/Coaching/Mentoring Page 88

Organizational Development Page 92

Curriculum Deliberation Page 92

INTRODUCTION

The intuitive notion of action research--usinginformation to evaluate and make decisions about how toimprove practice--is probably as old as the act ofteaching itself. Action research, broadly defined, wasone of the activities in which many Progessiveeducators, following the problem-solving tenets of JohnDewey, engaged. In the United States, it emerged as asystematic approach for improving educational practicein the two decades following World 161r. II and thenpassed into relative obscurity, although practitionersin a number of settings continued their studies. Thework of educators in the United Kingdom and Australiaprovided continuing models for the application ofaction research in the classrooms, and the recent, andindeed, triumphant re-emergence of action research inthe educational literature is nothing short ofastonishing. Since the mid-1980's, articles, chapters,and books discussing its rationale and methods haveappeared on a regular basis, and a number ofprofessional groups have taken on action research as aviable means of improving schools.

This project was undertaken with the hope of providinga useful bibliography for schools-and university basedcolleagues interested in understanding the actionresearch process. The bibliography that appears on thefollowing pages must be considered a work in process.It is, however, a place to begin.

Sincere thanks must be given to the followingindividuals: Jean A. King and Kyla L. Wahlstrom fortheir editorial support. Susan Noffke, Sharon Oja, andIris Tiedt, whose helpful critiques of an earlierversion of this bibliography greatly shaped its currentform and content; and Nancy Marquette, who did thefinal wurd-processing of the document.

Gary C. AlexanderJean A. KingKyla J. Wahlstrom

4

2

EARLY WRITINGS: BEFORE 1985

Campbell, D. T. (1978) . Qualitative knowing inaction research. In M. Brenner, P. Marsh, & M. Brenner(Eds.). The social context of method. New York: St.

Martin's.

Chein, I., Cook, S., & Harding, J. (1948,

February) . The field of action research. The AmericanPsychologist,3,43-50.

Corey, S. M. (1950, February) . Teachers asinvestigators. Proaressive Education127(4) ,131-132.

Corey, S. M. (1952, May) . Educational researchand the solution of practical problems. EducationalLeadership,9(8) , 478-484.

What is the relationship between the practicaldecisions made every day by school people and themore careful methodology dignified by the name,"research"? This question is analyzed by StephenM. Corey. (Editor's comments)

Corey, S. M. (1953a) . Action research to improveschool practices. Columbia: New York Teachers'College.

Corey, S. M. (1953b, October) . A perspective oneducational research. Phi Delta Kappan,35(1), 21-24.

Corey, S. M. (1954a, January) . Hoping? Orbeginning to know! Childhood Education/30(5), 208-211.

Corey, S. M. (1954b, February). Action researchand the classroom teacher. NEA 1Durna1, 43(2), 79-80.

Corey, S. M. (1955) . Implications c_ cooperative-action research for teacher education. In AmericanAssociation of Colleges of Teacher Education, Yearbook,(pp. 164-172).

3

Elliott, J., & Adelman, C. (1973). Supportingteacher research in the classroom. Tta New Era,54,210-213,215,

Elliott, J., & Adelman, C. (1973). Reflectingwhere the action is: The design of the Ford TeachingProject. Education for Teaching,92, 8-20.

Elliott, J., & Adelman, C. (1976). Classroomaction research. (Ford Teaching Project, Unit 2Research Methods) . Norwich, England: University ofEast Anglia, Centre for Applied Research in Education.

Elliott, J. (1976-77) . Developing hypothesesabout classrooms from teachers' practical constructs:An account of the Ford Teaching Project.Interchange17(2), 2-20.

Elliott, J. (1978) . What is action research inschools? Journal LI Curriculum Studies,10(4), 355-357.

This short paper is an attempt to clarify "action-research" aL distinct from more traditionalconcepts of educational research and itsrelationship to other modes of reflection onpractice. A summary of what action-research meansand a figure is included. (GCA)

Elliott, J. (1980) . Implications of classroomresearch for professional development. In E. Hoyle &J. Megarry (Eds.), Professional development ofteachers: Worldbook Df education 1980 (pp. 308-324).London: Kogan Page.

The author argues that the process-product paradigminvolves an acceptance of a radically differentview of the nature of teaching and learning fromthe action research paradigm. These underlyingassumptions imply different methodologicalapproaches to the study of teaching and learning.

4

Process-product methodology treats the teacherexclusively as an object of research and assumeshis professional development to be a quiteindependent activity. By contrast, action researchnecessitates dialogue with the teacher and therebyinvolves him or her as a participant in theresearch process itself. Such involvement itselfconstitutes a mode of professional development.Therefore action research is not only a researchprocess but also a process of teacher education.

During the last decad2 the study of classroomevents has become a major growth area foreducational research. In this chapter, I shall notbe reviewing specific research findings in order todiscuss their relevance for teacher education. I

shall contrast two distinct approaches to classroomresearch in terms of their underlying assumptionsabout the relationship between teaching andlearning, and in the light of these assess theirpotential for influencing professional development.It will be my contention that not every way ofinfluencing the practice of teachers in classroomscontributes to their professional development.Such development is an educational process, and inorder to influence this process, classroom researchmust possess educative potential. (;_bstract

accompanying article)

Elliott, J. (1980b) . Teacher participation _in thedevelopment of practical theory. Unpublished Master ofPhilosophy thesis, Univerity of London.

Elliott, J. (1983, January) . Paradigms ofeducational research and theories of schooling, Paperpresented at the Sociology of Education Conference,Birmingham, England. (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 232 896)

In the first part of the paper, the authordiscusses his observation that teachers perceive

5

any form of theorizing in schools to beintellectually dependent on educationalresearchers. Teachers assume that their access toeducational theories depends on a group external tothemselves and that theory has little practicalvalue in the classroom. In the second part of thepaper, the author discusses four existing researchparadigms currently employed in the study of theprocess of schooling in society--functionalist,phenomenological, action-research, and socialreproductionist. The functionalist model ofsystems analysis is attractive to many because itviews social processes as self-regulating systemsand appears to provide the foundation for a trulyempirical-analytic science of society, free ofvalue bias. In Alfred Schutz's phenomenologicalanalysis model, social processes are viewed as theconstructions of autonomous individuals. Habermas'educational action-research model is based on theassumption that social processes rely on theexistence of subjectively shared rules ofinterpretation for translating soc2,a1 norms andvalues. Social reproductionist theory attempts toshow that subjective meanings expressed in socialaction are biased by their economic function. Theaction-research model best supports educationalresearch as a science aimed at improving schooling,thus maximizing the theoretician practitionerrelationship. (Abstract accompanying article)

Hodgkinson, H. (1957, December) . Action research:A critique. The Journal of EducationalSociology,31(4), 137-153.

Horace Mann-Lincoln Study Group. (1948, November).Recommended: Group research for teachers. TeachersCollege Record,50(2), 108-113.

Lasky, L. R. (1978) . Personalizing teaching:Action research in action. Young Children,33(3),58-64.

6

Lewin, G., & Lewin, K. (1942, October) . Democracy

and the school. Understanding the Child,10(1), 7-11.

Lewin, K. (1938, July) . Experiments on autocraticand democratic principles. The Social Frontier44(37),316-319.

Lewin, K. (1944, January). The dynamics of groupaction. Educational Leadership. 195-200.

This article discusses the impact of experiments ingroup and leadership problems and how they provideinsight into the essential aspects of democratic

living. (GCA)

Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minorityproblems. Journal of, Social Issues,2(4), 34-36. In S.

Kemmis & R. McTaggart (Eds.), The action researchreader (3rd ed.) (pp. 41-46). Geelong, Victoria:Deakin University Press, 1988.

Lewin, K. (1947) . Channels of group life; Socialplanning and action research. Human Relations,1, 143-

153.

Lewin, K., & Grabbe, P. (1945, August). Conduct,

knowledge, and acceptance of new values. Journal of

Social Issues,1(3), 53-64.

Oliver, B. (1980) . Acton research for in-servicetraining. Educational Leadership,37, 394-395.

Shumsky, A. (1956) . Cooperation in actionresearch: A rationale. Journal of EducationalSociology,30, 180-185.

Shumsky, A. (1958) . The action research way oflearning: La approach to insQrvice education. New

York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

7

Stenhouse, L. (1975) . An introduction tocurriculum research and development. London:Heinemann.

Stenhouse, L. (1978) . Using research means doingresearch. Norwich: Centre for Applied Research inEducation, University of East Anglia. (mimeo; preparedfor Festschrift to Johannes Sandven).

Stenhouse, L. (1979) . The problem of standards inilluminative research. Scottish Educational Review,11(1), 7. (In L. Bartlett et al. (Eds.), Perspectiveson case study 2: The quasi-historic,a1 approach.Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press.

Stenhouse, L. (Ed.). (1980). Curriculum researchand development in action. London: Heinemann.

Stenhouse, L. (1981) . What counts as research.British Journal of Educational Studies,2_9(2).

Stenhouse examines the concept of research, what itis, who does it, and what it implies, especiallyfor the classroom teacher. (GCA)

Stenhouse, L. (1983) . Authority, education aademancipation, London: Heinemann.

Taba, H. (1957) . Problem identification. InResearch for curriculum improvement (pp. 42-71).Washington, D. C.: Association for Supervision andCurriculum Development.

Taba, H., & Noel, E. (1957). Action research: Acase study. Washington, D. C.: Association forSupervision and Curriculum Development (NEA).

8

ORIGINS AND CONCEPTS

Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & Smith, D. (1987).Action science: Concepts, methods, and skills forresearch and intervention. New York: Jossey-BassPublishers.

Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1989). Participatoryaction research and action science compared: Acommentary. American Behavioral Scientist,32(5),612-623.

Berthoff, A. E. (1981) . The teacher as researcher.In The making of meaning. Montclair, NJ: Boynton/CookPublishers, Inc.

Berthoff sugo-I.ists that teachers in dialogue withone another can find directions for excellence asthey work out their own theory. This does not meangenerating new data, but, instead, reconsideringthe data that is at hand. (Author)

Bolster, A. S. (1987) . Toward a more effectivemodel of research on teaching. In Teachers, teaching,and teacher education. M. Okazawa-Rey, (Ed.).Cambridge, MA: Harvard College.

Cameron-Jones, M. (1983, December) . A researchingprofession? The growth of classroom action research.Paper presented at the Seminar on Pedagogy, Focus onTeaching Project, Moray House College of Education,Glasgow, Scotland. (ERIC Document Reproduction ServiceNo. ED 266 133)

In education, action research is research carriedout by practitioners with a view to improving theirprofessional practice and understanding it better.This paper concentrates particularly upon classroomaction research by in-service teachers, although

9

the approach can also be embodied in pre-service

training courses and can embrace a very wide range

of professional practice outside the classroom.

Classroom action research is now seen as a major

means of professional development, particularly

within innovative in-service courses and programs

and, as such, it is attracting growing support and

interest. As this approach becomes morewidespread, the notion of teacher-as-researcherbecomes better dereloped and more fully understood.

This paper outlines the origins of the approach,

describes its characteristic features, gives

examples, and presents two questions which it

raises for Scotland: (1) how will this approach

contribute to the development of in-service? (2)

how will it contribute to the development of

research? (Abstract accompanying article

Cameron-Jones, M. (1985) . Locus o.n teacher

project. (Final Report) . Edinburgh: Scottish

Education Department. (ERIC Document Reproduction

Service No. ED 266 128)

Focus on primary teacher staff development. Its

aim was to produce, from a platform of school-based

research, materials to support improvement in

primary classroom teaching. The focus was

specifically on teaching, rather than on other

aspects of a teachers' professional work.

These materials were not to be directed merely at

surface or e;ren just technical improvements in

teacher performance but were to go deeper and

affect teachers' thinking about thinking; their

actual conceptualization of teaching itself. Three

year project (1983-85) (Abstract accompanying

article)

Carr, W. (1985) .Philosophy, values and

educational science. Journal of. Curriculum Studies,

'7(2), 199-132.

10

in this article, Carr examines the concept thatmetaphysical and moral beliefs cannot be excludedfrom educational research. He gives thephilosophical basis for reflective actionresearch. He concludes by stating:

1) if I am correct in supposing values to be aninescapable category in educational research then,once again, the old positivist segregation of factsand values break down.

2) . . . since educational researchers cannotevade the task of deciding the educational valuesappropriate to their work, they cannot evade theresponsibility for critically examining andjustifying the educational values that theirenquiries seek to foster and promote. . . . itfollows that philosophical reflection andargumentation are central features of the methodsand procedures of research.

3) . . . philosophy and values are not just anecessary but inconvenient feature of educationalresearch; they are an indispensable requirement forthe development of any genuinely educationalscience. (Abstract accompanying article)

Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical:Education, knowledge, and action research.Philadelphia: The Falmer Press.

This book offers a philosophical justification forthe view that teachers have a special role asresearchers and that the most plausible way toconstrue educational research is as a form ofcritical social science. One of the purposes ofthis book is to question the conformist view ofeducation by questioning some of the beliefs onwhich it rests. (Authors' comments)

Cook, S. W. (1984, August) . Action research: Itsorigins and early application. Paper presented at theAnnual Meeting of the American PsychologicalAssociation, Toronto, Canada. (ERIC Document

11

Reproduction Service No. ED 253 544)

This paper contains informal remarks on actionresearch in social psychology from its post WorldWar II origins to its current status. Kurt Lewinfirst described action research in the 1946article, "Action Research and Minority Problems,"as a three-step process of program planning,program execution, and follow-up evaluation.Ronald Lippitt and Marion Radke also described 10aspects of action research in 1946, based onprograms to reduce anti-Semitism and racialprejudice by the Commission on CommunityInterrelations of the American Jewish Congress andthe Institution of Ethnic Affairs. Participationin the research by the research subjects was themost important element. By 1948 four additionalapproaches to action research developed:diagnostic, participant, empirical andexperimental. Questions and comments on thecurrent status of action research have been raisedby Nevitt Sanford, Leona Tyler, and Stuart Oskamp.What happened to action research--whether it died,moved into other disciplines, or reemerged with newnames like program evaluation or social policyresearch--remains unanswered. (Abstractaccompanying article)

Ebbutt, D. (1985) . Educational action research: Somegeneral concerns and specific quibbles. In R. G.Burgess (Ed.), Issues in educational research:Oualitative methods. (pp. 152-174) . Philadelphia, RA:The Falmer Press.

Elliott, J. (1985) . Educational action-research.In Research, polic.y and practice. World Yearbook ofEducation (pp. 231-250) . New York: Nichols PublishingCompany. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED256 004)

This paper explores the relationship between a

14

12

process model of curriculum design and the view ofthe theory-practice relationship embodied in theidea of educational action-research. It concludeswith an exploration of the problem of establishingan appropriate form of.organization for action-research in educational institutions. This papercovers four major themes:

1)the nature of educative action and itsrelationship to educational knowledge;2)the development of teachers' professionalknowledge through action-research;3)educational research and educativepractice; and4)the institutionalization of action-research in schools.

In developing each theme the author draws togethera variety of relevant theoretical work, andillustrates his exposition with examples of action-research projects with which he has beenpersonally involved. ;Abstract accompanyingarticle)

Florio, S., & Walsh, M. (1980). The teacher as acolleague in classroom research. In H. Trueba, G.Guthrie & K. Au. (Eds.) . Culture in the bilingualclassroom: Studies in classroom ethnography. Rowley,MA: Newbury House.

Florio-Ruane, S., & Dohanich, J. B. (1984).Research currents: Communicating the findings:Teacher/researcher deliberations. Language Arts,65(2), 182-191.

Griffin, G. A. (1983) . Interactive research anddevelopment on schooling: Antecedents, purposes, and_significance for school improvement. Austin: TexasUniversity, Research and Development Center forTeacher Education, Education Annex. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 234 024)

13

This paper introduces the antecedents and conceptsunderlying a two-year investigation of InteractiveResearch & Development of Schooling (IR&DS) . IR&DSis an alternative means of conducting cchool-basedresearch & development and is seen as a means to:(1) involve school personnel in systematic inquiry;(2) improve the utility of research findings forthe improvement of educational practice; (3) reducethe time lag between knowledge generation andknowledge utilization; (4) strengthen localeducation agency capability to act upon schoolproblems; (5) coordinate school improvementactivities between higher education agencies andlocal education agencies; (6) generate knowledgeabout schooling practices; and (7) provideprofessional growth opporcunities to participantsin the process. The paper is organized into sixsections. First, an overview of IR&DS ispresented. This is followed by a delineation ofthe purposes of the implementation of the strategy.Antecedents to IR&DS are presented with particularattention given to the first test of the model inthe late 1970's. The differences between that testand the present study are discussed. Last, therelation between IR&DS and school improvement andstaff development is advanced as a preliminaryproposition based upon findings from the presentstudy. (Abstract accompanying article)

Huling, L. L. (1982, March) . The effects .onteachers of participation in an interactive researchand development project. Paper presented at the AnnualMeeting of the American Educational ResearchAssociation, New York, NY. (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 220 450)

This paper describes an interactive research anddevelopment project that has been successful intraining teachers to use research findings andpractices in their teaching. Classroom teacherswere organized into interactive research and

14

development teams along with staff developers anduniversity researchers. Each team conducted afield-based research project. Also reported arethe results of an investigation of certain types ofchanges teachers made as a result of participatingin this program. Participating teachersdemonstrated a significant change in concerns aboutthe use of research findings and practices inteaching and a significant increase in researchteaching development skills. (Abstractaccompanying article)

Kelly, A. (1985) . Action research: What is it andwhat can it do? In R. G. Burgess (Ed.), Issues ineducational research:_ Qualitative methods (pp.129-151. Philadlephia, RA: The Falmer Press.

Kemmis, S. (1980, November). Action research inretrospect and, prospect. Paper presented to the AnnualMeeting of the Australian Association for Research inEducation, Sydney.

Kemmis, S. (1982) . The aa_claily critical school.Paper presented at the annual conference of theAustralian Association for Research in Education,Brisbane, Australia.

Kemmis, S., et al. (1983) . The action researchreader. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press.

Krathwohl, D. (1974) . An analysis of theperceived ineffectiveness of educational research andsome recommendations. Educational Psychologist,11(2),73-86.

While not the usual type of presidential address,this paper follows a conviction that began with asimilar presidential address to the AmericanEducational Research Association, that it is moreimportant to use this occasion to consider criticalproblems confronting the profession than to report

15

personal research. Because of the leadership rolethat educational psychologists have traditionallyplayed, the consideration of these problems, whichaffect the entire educational field, seemedparticularly appropriate. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

Lagemann, E. (1989, Summer) . The plural worlds ofeducational research. History 9_1 Education Ouarterly,29(2), 184-214.

Lytle, S., & Cochran-Smith, M. (1989, April).Teacher research: Toward clarifying the concept. The

Ouarterly,11(2), 1-27.

Limiting the official knowledge base for teachingto what academics have chosen to study and writeabout disenfranchises teachers and relegates theirknowledge to the status of practical information orcommon sense. This contributes to a number ofproblems: discontinuity between what is taught inuniversities and what occurs in classroorfs;teachers ambivalence about or disregard for theclaims of academic research which often seemscounter-intuitive or unconnected to the dailydemands of their work lives; and, because teachersare seldom recognized as potential contributors tothe making of knowledge, a dearth of codifiedinformation about the reality of classroom lifefrom the perspectives of insiders. Unfortunatelyteacher research, which by definition has uniquepotential to address issues that teachers identifyas significant, does not yet have an acknowledgedplace in constructing the know2edge base forteaching. (Author)

Martin, D. W. (1985, April) . Applied vs. basicresearch: On maintaining your ):)alance with a foot ineach camp. Presidential address presented at theAnnual Meeting of the Rocky Mountain PsychologicalAssociation, Tucson, AZ. (ERIC Document Reproduction

16


The paper discusses a number of issues concerningthe practical usefulness of cognitive psychologyresearch, and presents a case study of pilottraining methcds to illustrate a model of researchprocesses that produces outcomes which contributeto both basic and applied research goals. researchstudies are described as varying in the degree towhich they include reviews of the literature,present practical conclusions, select andmanipulate variables based on convenience or bias,or add to the existing body of knowledge. Thefollowing research strategy is recommended:identify application set; determine commondimensions; create complex generic laboratory taskto test the theoretical hypothesis; performexperiment; form theoretical conclusion; validateconclusion and task; and list applications. Thisstrategy is illustrated in detail with a casestudy. The case study describes flight training ofaircraft pilots, with emphasis on tneir attentionto multiple visual stimuli. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

May, N. (1982, Summer) . The teacher as researchermovement in dritain. In W. H. Schubert & A. L.Schubert (Eds.) . Conceptions of curriculum knowledge:Focus oR students arid teachers (pp. 23-30).Pennsylvania: RA State University, College ofEducation.

McCutcheon, G. & Jung, B. (1990) . Alternativeperspectives on action research. Theory intoPractice,29(3), 144-151.

McKernan, J. (1988, Spring) . The countenance ofcurriculum action research: Traditional, collaborative,and emancipatory critical conceptions. Journal ofCurriculum and Supervision,3(3), 173-200.

17

The action-research movement offers practitioners aresearch stance toward their work and is nowenjoying a resurgence of interest as practitionerscontinue to expand their notion of what counts asgood curriculum research. This paper has threeobjectives: to examine and explore the evolution ofaction research as a scientific enterprise; todiscuss the countenance, or character, ofcontemporary curriculum action research bydisclosing and focusing on the key concepts thatgive substance to the idiom of such inquiry; andfinally, to present a practical model of theaction-research process. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

McKernan, J. (1988, Spring) . Teacher asresearcher: Paradigm and praxis. ContemporaryEducation,59(3), 154-158.

Mohr, M. (1980, Winter) . The teacher asresearcher. Virginia Fnglish Bulletin, 61-64.

Murray, D. (1982) . Learning ty teaching. UpperMontclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook.

Donald Murray's collected articles on teaching andwriting are listed here because he discusses somany issues of interest for classroom research onwriting. His book contains articles onassignments, conferencing, revising, editing,grading and even the politics of writing.Selections from this book are very useful dependingon the particular aspect a teacher researcherfocuses on in his or her study. However, thecentral article in the book, "Write Research to beRead," is so important for teacher-researchers toread, I cannot imagine a group not reading anddiscussing it. We read it just as we began towrite up our rough drafts of our studies. Ithelped each writer establish a clear sense of herown voice. Because teacher research is intended

18

primarily for an audience of teachers, this issueof establishing an authoritative and honest voiceis crucial. If other teachers do not believe thevoice of the researcher, they will discount thestudy. (Abstract accompanying article)

Nixon, J. (1987) . Only connect: Thoughts onstylistic interchange within the research community.British Educational Research Journa1,13(2), 191-202.

This paper seeks to discuss current issues inteacher research in terms of two distinct butrelated research fields: action research and casestudy. Both share a common aspiration: the formerattempts to shift educational research closer tothe concerns of practitioners by redefining theirrole as active participants in the researchprocess; the later tries to exert a similarinfluence by taking as its object of enquiry thebounded system within which practitioners operate.

In spite of their commonality of purpose, however,action research and case study highlight differentkinds of issues and problems. Each has its owngurus and guinea-pigs, its own journals andagendas, its own distinct crop of methodologicalliterature. In this literature, action researchhas been presented as participatory, developmentaland self-evaluative, while case study is seen asplacing the emphasis on procedural principles thatare democratic, heuristic and interpretive.Throughout the following analysis the attempt isnot to equate teacher research exclusively with oneor other of these orientations, but rather, bytracing continuities across methodologicalboundaries, to locate it as a vital element incurrent thinking about applied educationalresearch. (Author's comments)

19

Noffke, S. (1989) . The social context of actionresearch: A comparative and historical analysis.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of theArurican Educational Research Association, SanFrancisco, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED 308 756)

Noffke, S. (1990) . Action research and the workof teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting ofthe American Educational Research Association, Boston,MA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 320871)

This paper outlines the assumptions about the workand working conditions of teachers evident invarious practices of action research in education.First, a thorough analysis of documents from theperiod of action research in the post-World War IIera in the United States is presented. Images ofthe work and workplace of teaching from this periodbegin to establish patterns to be pursued inlooking at later work. The second section beginswith an examination of the writings of LawrenceStenhouse whose thoughts on the teacher-as-researcher have been influential in the developmentof action research, especially in the UnitedKingdom and Australia. The section concludes witha discussion of projects conducted in Australia,the United Kingdom, and the United States in thelate 1970s and early 1980s. Finally, issues inaction research related to the work and workplaceof teachers are identified, and their implicationsfor current action research practices arediscussed. (Abstract accompanying article)

Oja, S. N., & Pine, G. J. (1983). A two yearstudy of teachers' stages of development in relation tocollaborative action research in schools. Final reportfandl appendices to final report. Washington, D. C.:National Institute of Education, New Hampshire

20

University, Durham, Dept. of Education. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 248 227)

Action research conducted by teams of universityprofessors and middle school teachers investigatedthe relationship between teachers' developmentalstages, collaborative research, and individualteacher change. Section 1 describes the study'spurposes and objectives and the methods used inanalyzing teachers' stages of development. Anoverview of the study is presented in section 2.Section 3 discusses developmental stage andlife/age theories of adult development,organizational change, and school context and thevalue and method of collaborative action research.Section 4 describes characteristics of theparticipating teachers, the study methodology, andthe two middle school sites; school contexts andthe history of school change. Section 5 describesthe research topics undertaken by the two researchteams. Section 6 presents findings of one team'sresearch process and group process. Findings onthe organizational and school context, as theyrelated to the work of the collaborative researchteams, are presented in section 7. Section 8includes teachers' developmental test scores andtheir perceptions regarding issues in thecollaborative action research process. The finalsection summarizes conclusions from the findingsand considers implications for collaborative actionresearch and staff development. The appendicescontain: (1) a review of the literature oncollaborative action research; (2) descriptions ofresearch instrumentation; (3) discussions on actionresearch and group process analysis and a casestudy of one research team; (4) reports from tworesearch teams taking part in the study; and (5)descriptive summary reports on the teachers,researchers, and institutional settings involved inthe study. (Abstract accompanying article)

21

Oja, S. N. (1984, April) . Developmental stagecharacteristics of teachers participating in acollaborative action research project. Paper presentedat the Annual Meeting of the American EducationalResearch Association, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 246 038)

An investigation was made of the relationshipsamong teachers' stages of development; theirperceptions of school and classroom problems; andtheir reasons for participating in a collaborativeaction research project. On the basis ofobservations, logs, interviews, and introductoryquestionnaire data, life age/cycle profiles of eachof 10 middle and junior high school teachers wereconstructed. Each teacher completed questionnairesto describe character-related personality stages ofdevelopment. Three test instruments were used todetermine teachers' levels of moral reasoning, egomaturity, conceptual complexity, and interpersonalsensitivity. The teachers' stages of developmentwere then related to their perceptions of thechange process and the process of collaborationduring the constructed. The data suggested themeson the relationships of individual dimensions ofteachers' stages of development, issues in theteaching-schooling profession, and the process ofcollaborative research. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

Oja, S. N. (1984a, April) . Role issues inpractical collaborative research on change in schools.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 247 249)

Tnis paper addresses one major question: Whatunique perspectives and skills does the universityresearcher, in ilteraction with theteacher/practitioner, contribute to help acollabor.ative research/evaluation team identify its

22

research and achieve its goal? Case analysis of arecently completed National Institute of EducationProject (Action Research on Change in Schools) hasgenerated several possible responses to this majorquestion. These responses include how theuniversity researcher: contributes to an effectiveand efficient group process; establishes a norm ofsupport for risk-taking and role-changing; andbroadens individual perspectives by probing thepractitioners' experience bases. Other sub-questions explored in similar fashion include:What responsibility does the researcher have to thereality and practicality of the research to beundertaken? What responsibility does theresearcher have to limit the team's research tothat which has generalizable results, and toidentify and/or ignore side issues which areintroduced? (Abstract accompanying article)

Oja, S. N. (1990) . Developmental theories and .theprofessional development of teachers. Paper presentedat the Annual Meeting of the American EducationalResearch Association, Boston, MA.

Oja, S. N., & Ham, M. C. (1984, Fall). Acognitive developmental approach to collaborativeaction research with teachers. Teachers CollegeRecord,86(1), 171-192.

Collaborative action research is one strategy thatprovides opportunities for translating concepts foreducational reform into practice. The researchproject on which this article is based sought todescribe how teachers in groups functioning atdifferent developmental stages viewed issues incollaborative action research. (In introduction toarticle)

Peters, M., & Robinson, V. (1984). The originsand status of action research. Journal of AppliedBehavioral Science,20(2) , 113-124.

23

Phillips, D. (1980, December) . What do theresearcher and the practitioner have to offer eachother? Educational Researcher,9(11), 17-20 and 24.

Pine, G. J. (1984, April) . School context, newcontexts and school change. Paper presented at theAnnual Meeting of the American Educational ResearchAssociation, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 250 372)

Action Research on Change in Schools (ARCS) was atwo-year collaborative action research projectinvolving two groups of middle/junior high schoolteachers, one in Michigan and one in New Hampshire.While the purpose of the project for the universityresearchers was to examine individual change withinthe framework of collaborative action research, thepervasive concern of the teachers throughout theproject was school change. Based on these goals,the ARCS teams evolved into "temporary systems,"defined as groups of individuals who engage in ajoint task for a limited period of time. Peersupport, the sharing of ideas, the experience ofcollegiality and group decision making, wereespecially prized by the ARCS teachers. The teamscreated their own operational contexts based on anatmosphere of collegiality and inquiry. By the endof the project, collaborative action researchprocess become the school's context for decisionmaking and initiating change. (Abstractaccompanying article.)

Rich, S. (1983, October) . On becoming teacherexperts: Teacher-researchers. Language Arts,E2(7),892-894.

Ross, D. D. (1983, April) . Action research _am auniversity laboratory school: An interview study.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

24

(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 230 613)

Fifteen teachers who have conducted group orindividual action research projects wereinterviewed to identify factors which promote and,at times, limit teachers' efforts to conduct actionresearch studies. Interviews which ranged from 45-90 minutes focused on teachers' definitions ofresearch, their involvement in research projects,support they received and problems they encounteredin research projects, and their awareness of theprojects of others. Drawing on teachers'observations and recommendations, ninerecommendations are made to school policy makerswho wish to encourage teachers to conduct actionresearch studies: (1) help teachers develop arealistic definition of research; (2) encourageparticipation in research projects, but keepparticipation voluntary; (3) provide time and moneyas incentives for conducting research; (4) providesystematic instruction to help teachers develop theskills necessary to conduct research; (5) provideaccess to appropriate resource personnel on acontinuing basis; (6) develop a systematic way forteachers to share ideas with one another; (7)

recruit only highly motivated teachers; (8) involvethe teachers from the initial moment of decision-making; and (9) make several people responsible forthe coordination of the project. (Abstractaccompanying article)

Ross, D. D. (1984, Winter) . A practical model forconducting action research in public school settings:Focus on research. Contemporary Education, 55(2), 113-117.

Mal;y educators today are discussing the value ofaction research but, as yet, action research is notoccurring in many public school classrooms.Teachers and administrators interested in fosteringacticn research need strategies for eliciting

25

school system support and for encouraging teacherparticipation. This article presents a practicalmodel for making increased participation arealistic possibility. The ideas are based oncurrent literature and on comments made by teacherswho recently have been engaged in action researchprojects. (Abstract accompanying article)

Rudduck, J. (1985). Teacher research andresearch-based teacher education. Journal of Educationfor Teaching,11(3), 281-289.

This paper argues for redrawing the relationshipbetween research, teaching, and teacher education.The notion of research as conducted by practicingteachers and its possible contribution to thecommon store of education knowledge needs to beexamined and clarified. Teacher research sustainsprofessional curiosity and focuses professionaldialogue. (Author)

Rudduck, J. (1989) . Critical thinking andpractitioner research: Have they a place in initialteacher training? Paper presented at the AnnualMeeting of the American Educational ResearchAssociation, San Francisco, CA. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 310 109)

Schubert, W. H., & Schubert, A. L. (1984, April).Sources of a theory of action research in progressiveeducation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting ofthe American Educational Research Association, NewOrleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED243 925)

The paper defines action research and whatconception of theory might best contribute to itsdevelopment. Action research is a continuousconscious attempt to seek increased meaning anddirection in a teacher's relationship withstudents. Practical inquiry of teachers with their

26

students is a form of educational research. AMasters Degree Program in Instructional Leadershipin which students pursue an internship instead of aformal thesis is described. The internshipinvolves students in proposing and implementing achange in their own teaching situation. A reviewof curriculum research examines Dewey's practicalinquiry approach and the more formalizedexperimental studies promoted by Thorndike,Cattell, and others. Action research theory issummarized in several points, among them thataction research is a spirit of inquiry that strivesfor meaning and direction in the educative actionof teachers, learners, and those who help them.(Abstract accompanying article)

Simmons, J. M. (1984, December). Action researchas a means of professionalizing staff development forclassroom teachers and school staffs. Paper presentedat the Development Council, Williamsburg, VA. (ERICDocument Reproduction Service No. ED 275 639)

This paper focuses on critically analyzing both thepotential and problems of practitioner ActionResearch as a means of genuine professionaldevelopment for classroom teachers today. ActionResearch is a process of systematic inquiry and ofknowledge, skill, and attitude growth in whichclassroom teachers on either an individual orcollaborative basis investigate a self-identifiedinstructional problem and attempt to betterunderstand and improve the teaching/learningprocess occurring in their classrooms. Thispaper's critical analysis involves a review of theissues surrounding teaching as an emergingprofession, what is known about effective staffdevelopment practices, and what is emphasized inthe literature on school workplace conditions inwhich teachers function on a day-to-day basis.Finally, the paper reviews the potential as well asvarious serious dilemmas inherent in the use of

27

action research as a staff development experience.The nature of such dilemmas are discussed in termsof certain cautions which should be noted regardingpractitioner action research at this time. A sevenpage list of references concludes the document.(Abstract accompanying article)

Simmons, J. M. (1985, March-April) . Exploring therelationship between research and practice: The impactof assuming the role of action researcher in one's ownclassroom. Paper presented at the 69th Annual Meetingof the American Educational Research Association,Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED 266 110)

A study examined the impact of assuming the role ofaction researcher in one's own classroom as anexample of inquiry-oriented, professional staffdevelopment. The study was a part of acomprehensive, longitudinal investigation of theimpact of certain professional developmentexperiences on K-12 classroom teachers. A reviewof the literature and interviews and questionnaireresearch project sought to determine: 1) ways thatteachers were influenced by reflectively analyzingtheir own practices in light of research regardingthe teaching-learning process; 2) the impact of theteacher's attitudes toward doing research, readingresearch, and using investigating teacherexperiences and beliefs regarding the relationshipof educational research and their classroompractices. The teachers felt that there have beenpositive increases in their knowledge and skills inthe following areas: 1) effective teaching-learning; 2) research; 3) reflective thinkinghabits; 4) the need for continuing professionaldevelopment; and 5) overall effectiveness asteachers. (Abstract aCcompanying article)

Simmons, J. M., & Sparks, G. (1985). Usingresearch to develop professional knowledge and

28

teaching. Journal af Staff Development,6(1), 106-116.

Describes the use of action research to helpteachers meet their own improvement needs.(Abstract accompanying article)

Smulyan, L. (1983, April) . Action research onchange in schools: A collaborative project. Paperpresented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 235 192)

Action research, a term first used in the 1940's byKurt Lewin, implies the application of tools andmethods of social science to immediate, practicalproblems, with the goals of contributing to theoryand knowledge in the field of education andimproving practice in the schools. Collaborativeaction research suggests that each grouprepresented in the process shares in the planning,implementation, and analysis of the research; andthat each contributes different expertise and aunique perspective to the process. Problems inconducting collaborative action research includeinitiating a collaborative project between schooland university; addressing the concerns of allparticipants; and participating in the processes ofcollaboration which occur between the project'sinception and the production of its results. TheAction Research on Change in Schools projectproposes to examine the relationships amongteachers' developmental stages, action research inschools, and individual teacher change. (Abstractaccompanying article)

Smulyan, L. (1984, April) . Collaborative actionresearch: Historical trends. Paper presented at theAnnual Meeting of the American Educational ResearchAssociation, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 254 949)

29

This paper presents a historical overview of theuse of action research in education and describesthe basic assumptions and expectations thatcontinue to characterize collaborative researchprojects today. Action research was initiated inthe 1930's by Kurt Lewin and adapted by educatorsin the 1940's. Interest in action researchdeclined between 1953 and 1957, and during the1960's and early 1970's action research becameinquiry done by practitioners with the help of aconsultant. In the mid-1970's, new and expandedviews of action research began to appear, leadingto a revival that has continued into the 1980's.In recent studies, the method itself has become atopic of inquiry. Certain common expectationsabout the process of collaborative action researchcan be identified and grouped into the followingthree categories: (1) participation in the researchprocess--teacher and researcher roles; (2) staff(practitioner) development--expectations andoutcomes; and (3) conditions or requirementsnecessary for successful collaborative actionresearch. Some of the problems involved incarrying out a collaborative action researchproject are also discussed. A 38-item referencelist is provided. (Abstract accompanying article)

Stones, E. (1986) . Towards a systemic approach toresearch in teaching: The place of investigativepedagogy. British Educational Research Journa1,12(2),167-181.

Perhaps if teachers were genuinely involved inresearch that touched on their own concerns,research might gradually become less prone tofollow fashion as well as becoming less dependentupon short term funds. There are many in theteaching force who would be willing to engage inresearch activity as things are at present.However, one of the things that need addressing byteachers and the research community, is increasing

30

the opportunity for such research activities. .

This is a matter that needs the attention ofteacher organizations as well as researchassociations such as BERA [British EducationalResearch Association]. I discuss this matter andapproaches to increasing teacher involvement laterin the paper. (Author's comments)

Tikunoff, W., & Mergendoller, J. (1983). Inquiryas a means to professional growth: The teacher asresearcher. Staff Development, 82nd yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education, (Chicago:University of Chicago Press), 210-227.

The development of research skills as a form ofprofessional growth for educators is the topic ofthis paper. The discussion proceeds in threeparts. First, the nature of research is defined.Then a research and development strategy thatengages teachers in the conduct of inquiry isdescribed. We call this strategy InteractiveResearch and Development (IR&D) . Finally, threevariations of Interactive Research and Developmentprocess are discussed. Our concern throughout iswith developing an understanding of how engagementin the conduct of research provides rich, valuableprofessional growth experiences for teachers.(Author's comments)

Wallace, M. (1987) . A historical review of actionresearch: Some implications for the education ofteachers in their managerial role. Journal ofEducation for Teaching,13(2), 97-115.

It has been questioned whether action research andmanagement perspectives may be reconciled indeveloping a strategy for supporting teachers inimproving their contribution to the management ofeducational institutions. The debate is seen torest upon the conception of action research andmanagement employed. By tracing the history of

31

action research a range of conceptions is portrayedand key differences are ,Inalyzed. In order for aconception of action research to be articulated as

an approach to educational management it issuggested that teacher educators, teachers andhead-teachers should clarify their position inrespect of five fundamental issues raised by thereview and analysis: the values inherent in theenterprise; the rights and responsibilities of

those involved; the nature of learning to performmanagerial tasks; the relationship between theoryand practice; the achievement of rigor; and theprovision of support for action researchers.(Abstract accompanying article)

Whyte, W. (1989) . Introduction. AmericanBehavioral Scientist, 32(5), 502-512.

This article defines participatory action research,

looks at the history of organizational behavior,and views current research (GCA).

Williamson, P. A., & Taylor, J. B. (1983, Fall).

Action research: From the ivory tower to the firing

line. Education,104(1), 93-95.

The authors examine current strategies whichteachers employ to solve classroom concerns and

point out various shortcomings. A form ofaction research is then described which theauthors have employed with in-service teachers.Specific suggestions are made concerning the use

of action research by superintendents,principals, and teachers. (Abstract

accompanying article.)

32

1985 TO 1990

Adelman, C. (1989) . The practical ethic takespriority over methodology. In W. Carr (Ed.), Qualityin teaching: Arguments for a reflective profession(pp. 173-182) . London: The Falmer Press.

Amarel, M. (1987) . Research currents: Theclassroom collective: We, them, or it? Language Arts64, 532-539.

Barritt, L., Bleeker, H., Beekman, T., & Mulderij,K. (1985) . Researching Educational Practice. GrandForks, ND: North Dakota Study Group on Evaluation.

Bissex, G. L. (1988) . On learning and notlearning from teaching. Language Arts,65(8), 771-775.

Bracy, G. (1989, July) . Why so much educationresearch is irrelevant, imitative and ignored. TheAmerican School Board Journa1,176(7), 20-22, 42.

Part of the problem with education research isslavish imitation of psychological research, itselfa pale imitation of research in the physicalsciences. More central, though, are fundamentalflaws in how research should be conducted, coupledwith a pernicious reward structure at theuniversities. (Author's comments.)

Burton, F. R. (1986, November) . Researchcurrents: A teacher's conception of the action researchprocess. Language Arts,63, 718-723.

Frederick Burton brings together the concepts ofaction and reflection. In his own puzzling abouthis students, he illustrates that substance forthought need not only come from outside theclassroom; our daily actions as teachers provide

33

much "content for reflection," and that reflectionin turn enriches our actions. As Burton notes, thebringing together of action and reflection definesthe essence of the currently popular but elusiveconcept of "teacher-research." Thus, as the columnitself demonstrates, information coming fromoutside the classroom and that coming from insidethe classroom can enrich each other. (Editor'scomments.)

Carr, W. (1989, Jan./Feb.). Action research: Tenyears on. Journal of Curriculum Studies/21(1), 85-90.

This article is a review of Action Research inClassrooms and Schools, D. Hustler, A. Cassidy andE. C. Cuff (Eds.), Allen and Unwin, London (1986,220 pages; and Action Research and the Nature ofSocial Inquiry: Professional Innovation andEducation Work, by Winter, et al. (1987), 167pages.

The author discusses the present status of action-research as a legitimate methodology and itsrelationship to the theory of positivism, itsprecursor. The author contends that an adequateanalysis of this relationship has not been made andtherefore, the relationship is still ambiguous andconfused. (Article's Abstract)

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1990a).Research on teaching and teacher research: The issuesthat divide. Educational Researcher,19(2), 2-11.

Neither interpretive nor process-product classroomresearch has foregrounded the teacher's role in thegeneration of knowledge about teaching. What ismissing from the knowledge base for teaching,therefore, are the voices of the teachersthemselves, the questions teachers ask, the waysteachers use writing and intentional talk in theirwork lives, and the interpretive frames teachers

34

use to understand and improve their own classroompractices. Limiting the official knowledge basefor teaching to what academics have chosen to studyand write about has contributed to a number ofproblems, including discontinuity between what istaught in universities and what is taught inclassrooms, teachers' ambivalence about the claimsof academic research, and a general lack ofinformation about classroom life from a truly emicperspective. This article proposes that teacherresearch has the potential to provide thisperspective; however, several critical issuesdivide teacher research from research on teachingand make it difficult for the university-basedcommunity to acknowledge its potential. Thearticle also proposes that in order to encourageteacher research, the educational community willneed to address incentives for teachers, thecreation and maintenance of supportive networks,the reform of organizational patterns in schools,and the hierarchical power relationships thatcharacterize much of schooling. (Abstractaccompanying article)

Cochran-Smith, M. (1990b) . Reinventing studentteaching. Journal of Teacher Education,42(2), 104-118.

Cochran-Smith, M. (in press) . Learning to teachagainst the grain. Harvard Educational Review.

Comber, B. (1988) . The continuing conversation:Choices in educational research. Language Arts,65(8),776-787.

Comfort, L. (1985) . Action research: A model fororganizational learning. Journal of Policy Analysisand Management,5(1), 100-118.

Cooper, L. (1990) . Teachers as researche_s:Attitudes, opinions and perceptions, Paper presentedat the Annual Meeting of the American Educational

35

Research Association, Boston, MA. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 322 130)

Teacher researchers may be the essential linkbetween the philosophy and training of highereducation and the grass roots implementation at the

public school level. The Teacher-Researcher (T-R)Institute has the potential of providing acatalyst for role change and a channel for researchin action. This paper describes the merits anddefaults of the Baltimore County (Maryland) T-Rprogram from the classroom teacher's point of view.It also shows the perceptions of a group from theMaryland Writing Project. Teacher-researchersattend a 1-week workshop at the T-R Institute toprepare manuscripts describing classroominvestigations for publication in educationjournals. To determine the impact of the T-RInstitute on professional growth, a 10-itemquestionnaire requiring handwritten responses wasdeveloped and distributed. A follow-up evaluationwas conducted via telephone interviews. Aninstrument developed from the outcomes of the twosurveys was designed to measure attitudes towardthe program. Responses to the questionnaire arediscussed and briefly analyzed. The findingsindicated similar positive attitudes and opinionsboth from the T-R participants and the more diverseMaryland Writing Project. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

Daiker, D. A., & Morenberg, M. (Eds.). (1990).

The writing teacher as researcher. Heinemann.

Dyson, A. H., & Genishi, C. (1988) . Paradoxes inclassroom research. Language Arts,55(8), 788-798.

Elliott, J. (19871 September) . Knowledge, power

and teacher appraisal. Paper presented to the B/itishEducational Research Association Annual Conference,Manchester, England. (ERIC Document Reproduction

36


The relationship between teacher appraisal andeducational research in the United Kingdom isillustrated by the personal and professionalexperiences of an educator. An autobiographicalanalysis of this relationship, in light of M.Foucault's analysis of this relationship betweenpower and knowledge, is presented. A clearrelationship between teacher training andapplication of that training in the classroom islacking. A similar lack of relevance characterizesschool curricula in relation to student experience.Avoiding an over-disciplinary stance by theteacher, and preventing a loss of teacher authorityover students are best achieved by action-researchbased curriculum development. Participation inthe approach daveloped by L. Stenhouse, through theSchools Council/Nuffield Humanities Project(SCNHP), increased the level of action-researchbased development. The position of teacherappraisal within the system is a part of a muchbroader strategy for transforming power relationsin the educational system. In the SCNHP, thetransition was made from developing schoolcurriculum to developing teacher curriculum, andfrom a first-order action research to a second-order action research. The current situation,based on an agreement between the government,employers, and teachers' associations, iscritiqued. (Abstract accompanying article)

Elliott, J. (1989) . Knowledge, power and teacherappraisal. In W. Carr (Ed.), Quality in teaching:Arguments for a reflective profession (pp. 201-219).London: The Falmer Press.

Elliott, J. (1989a) . Academic and action-research: Tha training workshop as an exercise inideological deconstruction. Paper presented at theAnnual Meeting of the American Educational Research

37

Association, San Francisco, CA. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 307 715)

Elliott, W. (1988) . The primacy of experience andthe politics of method. Educational Researcher,17(5),15-20.

Evans, C. L., et al. (1987). Educationalpractitioners: Absent voices in the building ofeducational theory. Washington, D. C.: WellesleyCollege, MA Center for Research on Women. (ERICDocument Reproduction Service No. ED 294 861)

A discussion is presented on the lack of fitbetween educational research and educationalpractice. It is pointed out that traditionalresearch is likely to be particularly inaccessibleto female practitioners who may feel more alienatedby and excluded from the world of research thantheir male colleagues. Teachers need toparticipate actively in research in a way which isindividually meaningful and which enhances ratherthan interferes with their primary activity,classroom teaching. A description is given of thework of the Educators' Forum, a seminar designed tostimulate and support practitioner research. TheForum encourages teachers to participate inpractitioner research, through which they learn totake seriously and articulate what they know and todiscover ways to find out what they don't know.The seminar ,opports sustained professionaldialogue based on the teachers' own knowledge oftheir educational practice. The research agendaconsists of their own individual concerns. Thiseffective participation in educational research isdemonstrated by case studies reported by threeelementary teachers who conducted research in theirclassrooms. (Abstract accompanying article)

Freedman, S. W., et al. (1987). Response to

38

student writing. NCTE Research Report 23. Urbana, IL:National Council of Teachers of English.

Noting that while writing teachers acknowledge thatresponding to their students' writing is central totheir teaching, they still express frustrationabout how to make their response effective. Thisbook describes a two-part study conducted todiscover how the nation's most successful writingteachers respond to their students' work.(Abstract accompanying article)

Glickman, C. (1990). Action research: The schoolas the center of inquiry. In Supervision ofinstruction: A developmental approach (2nd, ed.).Boston: Allyn and Bacon. (pp. 358-370).

Chapter 18 examines action research as theintegrating task for instructional improvement.Included are a brief history, examples ofindividual teachers and schools, and a procedurefor making decisions about school-wide actionresearch. (GCA).

Goldsberry, L. (1990) . Is action research trulyResearch: The instructional leadership practicum.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, Boston, MA.

Goswami, D., & Stillman, P. R. (Eds.) . (1987).Reclaiming the .classroom: Teacher research as anagency fQx Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook.[P.O. Box 860, 52 Upper Montclair Plaza, UpperMontclair, NJ 07043] . (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 277 022)

This book addresses the how's and why's of actionresearch although it is not a step-by-step how-tobook. It is a collection of essays written bytheorist-practitioners and actual classroomteacher-researchers who share their experiences and

41

39

insights. (GCA)

Ham, M. C., & Oja, S. N. (1987, February) . Acollaborative approach to leadershi in supervision.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanAssociation of Colleges for Teacher Education,Arlington, VA. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED 277 696)

This project demonstates a collaborative processdesigned to address the continuing preparation ofprincipals who have primary responsibility forsupervising and evaluating teachers, and theirpreparation of cooperating teachers as moreeffective supervisors of student teachers. Theproject focuses on one major question: What is therole of collaborative action research in providingpublic school principals and teachers with supportand challenge for both individual andorganizational develcpment and improved supervisorypractice? The project includes three phases over a3-year period: (1) five elementary and two middlestaff members facilitated the formation ofCollaborative Teacher Supervision Groups); (2) bothprincipals and teachers are applying cognitive-developmental theory to current supervisorypractices; and (3) the Principal Leadership Groupand the Teacher Supervision Groups will matchsupervisee developmental stages with appropriatemodes of supervision and will disseminate theirfindings. The long-range value of this inquiry isthree-fold: (1) to generate implications andfurther questions for the design and implementationof more effective supervision strategies; (2) toenhance teacher effectiveness and student learningthrough improved supervisory practices; and (3) tocontribute to the development of a theoretical basefor the practice of instructional supervision.(Abstract accompanying article)

Kincheloe, J. (1991) . Teachers as researchers:

40

Oualitative inquiry as a path to empowerment. NewYork, NY: The Falmer Press.

According to Kincheloe, the best way for teachersto gain the ability to counter school bureaucraciesis to empower themselves through the knowledge ofqualitative research and inquiry. (GCA)

King, B. (1990) . Creating curriculum together:Teachers, students, and collaborative investigation.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 322 111)

(1988, July/August) . Learning fromchildren: Teachers do research. Harvard EducationLetter14(4).

Standing at the all-important intersection oftheory and practice, teachers are in a position toformulate research questions that are critical toeducational improvement. What teachers learn fromtheir inquiries can be applied immediately to theirown daily practice and, at the same time, alsoconstitutes a source of important knowledge for thefield of education. (Author)

Livingston, C., & Castle, S. (Eds.) . (1989).Teachers and research in action-, National EducationAssociation.

Loucks-Horsley, S., et al. (1987). "Teacher asresearcher" in Continuing to Learn: A Guidebook forTeacher Development. (pp. 46-53). The RegionalLaboratory for Educational Improvement of the Northeastand Islands.

Lytle, S. & Cochran-Smith, M. (1990, Fall).Learning from teacher research: A working typology.Teachers College Record,92(1), 1-103.

41

Mayher, J. (1991) . New lenses for old problems:What we believe is what we see. In R. Brause, & J.Mayher (Eds.), Search and re-search: What theinquiring teacher needs to know (pp. 3-22). New York,NY: The Falmer Press.

Mayher, J., & Brause, R. (1991). The never-endingcycle of teacher growth. In R. Brause, & J. Mayher(Eds.), Search and re-search: What the inquiringteacher needs to know (pp. 23-42). New York, NY: TheFalmer Press.

McConaghy, T. (1987, April). Teachers asresearchers: Learning through teaching. Phi DeltaKappan,68(8), 630-631.

McConaghy talks about classroom research aslearning by doing and how the process will enhanceand keep teaching alive and exciting. (GaA)

McCutcheon, G. & Oberg, A. (1989) . Teachers'experierce doing action research. Peabody Journal ofEducatioh, 64(2), 116-127.

This article presents results of a survey of 10teachers which was designed to explore teachers'experiences with action research. Concreteexamples of what it's like to do action researchare viewed as a valuable resource for teachers andfor teacher educators who terIch action researchcourses. (Abstract accompanying article)

Miller, D. M., & Pine, G. J. (1990) . Advancingprofessional inquiry for educational improvementthrough action research. Journal of StaffDevelopment,11(3), 56-61.

Mohr, M. (1988) . Teachers as researchers: Theopportunity to create a profession. Manuscriptsubmitted for publication.

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

44

42

This article describes different kinds of researchthat classroom teachers conduct and the variousmodels for teacher-researcher work in universityand local school settings. Also discussed are theopportunities that need to be available if teacher-researcher work is to grow and become a vital partof the K-12 teaching profession. (Abstractaccompanying article)

Mohr, M., Grumbacher, J., Hauser, C., Mathews, G.,& Willoughby, K. (1989, April) . Teacher-researchers:Their voices, their continued stories. The OuarterlyQf. the National Writing Project, 11(2), 4-7, 19.

Nixon, J. (1987, Winter) . The teacher asresearcher: Contradictions and continuities. PeabodyJournal of Education,64(2), 20-32.

This article discusses the current issues facingteachers involved in research (GCA).

Noffke, S. E. (1990). Knower, knowing, and knownin action research. Paper presented at the AnnualMeeting of the American Educational ResearchAssociation, Boston, MA.

Noffke, S. E., & Brennan, M. (1988, February).Action research and reflective student teaching at UW,MA..dialcaL Issues and aEampaaa. Paper presented at theAnnual Meeting of the Association of Teacher Educators,San Diego. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED292 793)

This paper outlines some of the issues that emergedfrom guiding student teachers through theexperience of conducting action research. Actionresearch was used as a way of working towardstudent teaching experience that would provideopportunities and structures to facilitate andenhance the students' development as reflectiveteachers. Several different approaches were used

43

in introducing action research to student teachers.

To clarify their thinking, it was emphasized thatthe study was a means of obtaining and applyingpractical results to specific classroom situations.Students were also given some insight into data-gathering and observation as ways to develop theirreflective teaching practices. In a discussion onhow the student teachers were helped to reflectwithin their action research, a description isgiven of the "cosmic egg," a teaching tooldeveloped to aid critical reflection by emphasizingthe interrelatedness of all dimensions of an

educational issue. The final section of thisreport considers issues that emerged from theexperience of student teacher practice of action

research. The appendices include a list of

projects undertaken by the students, a diagram of

the "cosmic egg," examples of action researchreports written by student teachers, and a list of

resources on using action research. (Abstract


Noffke, S. E., & Zeichner, K. M. (1987, April).

Action research and teacher thinking: The first phase

of the action research on action research piaiaat atthe University of Wisconsin, Madison. Paper presented

at the annual meeting of the American EducationalResearch Association, Washington, D. C. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 295 939)

This report on action research projects conductedby student teachers as part of their pre-serviceteacher preparation program focuses on how actionresearch improves the understanding of educational

practices by the practitioner-researchersthemselves. Two major topics are discussed.

First, specific claims about the impact of actionresearch on teachers' understandings are identified

from selected projects conducted in the UnitedStates, the United Kingdom, and Australia. Adescription of the methodologies used to collect

44

supporting data is included. The second majortopic of the paper is a description of the "ActionResearch on the Action Research" project under wayat the University of Wisconsin, Madison. ActionResearch has been used in the University'selementary student teaching program for severalyears as one way to provide opportunities forgrowth in the ability to reflect systematically onone's own teaching practice. A comprehensivereview of the literature on the impact actionresearch can have on teacher thinking introducesthe main body of the paper. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

O'Connor, B. (Ed.). (1990). Ask the experts. . .

about action research versus formal research. BusinessEducation Forum,44(4), 8-9.

This article iscusses whether action researchhas more potential in solving school policyproblems than formal research. Determined thatboth types can and should be used in theeducational decision-making process. (Abstractaccompanying article)

Oja, S. N. (1987, October) . Future prospects forcollaborative models of teacher education: Acollaborative approach to leadership in supervision.Paper presented at the Regional Holmes Group FallConference, Boston, MA. (For related document, see ED292 754) (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 293800)

The Collaborative supervision Project involving theUniversity of New Hampshire and several publicschools is described. This paper addresses theuniversity teacher education interest in enhancingsupervisory effectiveness and the teacher educationfaculty during the initial planning stages and thedevelopment, demonstration, and dissemination yearsof the project. A description is given of the

47

45

directive from the superintendent to the principalsin the district to investigate different models ofsupervision resulted in two years of self-study ofsupervisory effectiveness. This led to the schooldistrict's interest in joining with the teachereducation faculty to mutually develop a programwhich would address supervision issues. Successfulpractices are described and the way in which theproject addresses some of the Holmes Group goals issummarized. (Abstract accompanying article)

Oja, S. N., & Pine, G. J. (1987a) . Collaborativeaction research: Teachers' stages of development andschool contexts. Peabody Journal of, Education, 64(2),96-115.

Oja, S. N. (1988) . Teachers' ages and stages ofdevelopment. In Holly, M. L. and McLoughlin, C. S.(Eds.). Perspectives on teacher professionaldevelopment. Lewes, England: Falmer Press.

This chapter presents short in-depth descriptionsof six different middle/junior high teachers andtheir participation on collaborative actionresearch teams in their schools. The teachersrepresented different ages, career cycles, andstages of development. The reasons "why" teacherschose to become involved in collaborative actionresearch often correlated with their life age andcareer cycles. On the other hand, "how" theteachers participated in the teams, and theirgoals, expectations, and outcomes often correlatedwith their developmental stage perspectives.(Author's comments)

Pine, G. J. (1986). Collaborative action researchand staff development in middle school. Middle SchoolJourna1,18(1), 33-35.

Examples of action research projects addressingvarious topics: individualization, peer tutoring,

4 c'

46

learning centers, learning modules, small groupinstruction, reading strategies, and classroommanagement. The outcomes of these studies led toconcrete changes in classrooms and to teachers'reports of significant professional growth.(Abstract accompanying citation)

Shalaway, L. (1990) . Learning to teach . . not

just for beginners. Scholastic, Inc.

Sockett, H. (1989) . The challenge to action-research. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research Association, SanFrancisco, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.'SD 307 691)

Strickland, D. S. (1988) . The teacher asresearcher: Toward the extended professional. LanguageArts,65(8), 754-764.

Tripp, D. (1990) . Socially critical actionresearch. Theory into Practice, 22(3), 158-166.

This article contains ten articles which focus onthe teacher as researcher.

Tway, E. (1988) . The resource center: The teacheras researcher. Language Arts,65(8), 799-801.

Winter, R. (1989) . Teacher appraisal and thedevelopment of professional knowledge. In W. Carr(Ed.), Ouality in teaching: Arguments for areflective profession (pp. 183-199) . London: The

Falmer Press.

Zitlow, C. S. (1987, April) . Dimensions offaculty participation in a program designed to promotepractice centered inquiry. Paper presented at theAnnual Meeting of the American Educational ResearchAssociation, Washington, D. C. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 282 854)

49

47

The Teaching Excellence Program, designed topromote faculty use of practice-centered inquiry,was conducted at a large research university (OhioState). The program was based on aconceptualization of practice-centered inquiry that

draws on action research, reflection-in-action, and

action science ideas. Data collected throughoutthe program included tape recordings and fieldnotes of faculty meetings, consultant notes onfaculty activities, products generated byparticipants, organizational documents, and writtenevaluations of the program. A desire for collegialinterchange on teaching was found to be a majoraspect of the program. Participants wereencouraged by an awareness that others cared aboutteaching in an environment where the reward systemis not perceived as being supportive of teachingimprovement. This paper provides an overview ofthe program, including a description of aims,

format, and participants. The concerns expressed,topics explored, assistance and support needed, theevolving pattern of interactions, factors whichsupported or inhibited participation, and variouseffects of the program are summarized. (Abstract


48

HOW TO: THE PROCESS OF ACTION RESEARCH

Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & Smith, D. (1987).Action science: Concepts, methods, ,and skills forresearch and intervention. New York: Jossey-BassPublishers.

Asher, C. (1987) . Developing a pedagogy for ateacher-researcher program. English Education419(4),211-219.

Based on the teacher-researcher program Carla Asherand colleague Nancy Wilson led at the Institute forLiteracy Studies at Lehman College, this articledescribes seven principles that are essential to afunctioning teacher-researcher program, oftencomparing them to similar essentials in theteaching of writing. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

Brause, R. (1991) . Hypothesis generating studiesin your classroom. In R. Brause & J. Mayher (Eds.),Search and re-search: What the inquiringteacher needs to know (pp. 181-206) . New York, NY:The Falmer Press.

Brause, R., & Mayher, J. (1991a) . Collecting andanalyzing classroom data in theory and in practice. In

R. Brause & J. Mayher (Eds.), Search and re-search: What the inquiring teacher needs to know (PP.

131-156) . New York, NY: The Falmer Press.

Clift, R. J., & Houston, R. (Eds.) . Encouragingreflective practice in education. (1990). New York:Teachers College Press.

What does it mean to think through teacher inquiryto the practical and improvement outcomes in

schools in terms of student's learning and

49

development? This book includes differingperspectives on how to put theory and practicetogether and how to pair inquiry goals with areality base and grounding in practice. (Author's

comments)

Collins, J. (1991) . Testing hypotheses in yourclassroom. In R. Brause & J. Mayher (Eds.), Search

and re-sear_cb: What the inquiring teacher needs toknow (pp. 157-180). New York, NY: The Falmer Press.

Dicker, M. (1990) . Using action research tonavigate an unfamiliar teaching assignment. Theoryinto Practice,29(3), 203-208.

Duckworth, E. (1987). The having of wonderfulideas and other essays QD teaching and learning. NewYork: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Ebbutt, D. (1982) . Taachers as researchers: Howfour teachers coordinate action-research in their

respective schools. Mimeo. Cambridge, England:Cambridge Institute of Education.

Gebhard, J. (1989) . The teacher as investigatorof classroom process: Procedures and benefits. Paperpresented at the Annual Meeting of the Teachers of

English to Speakers of Other languages, San Antonio,

TX. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 304 877)

Groarke, J, Ovens, P., & Hargreaves, M. (1986).

Towards a more open classroom. In D. Hustler, A.Cassidy, & E. Cuff (Eds.), Action research inclassrooms and school:s (pp. 79-86). London: Allen &

Unwin.

Haysom, J. (1985) . Inquiring into the teachingprocess. Toronto: The Ontario Institute for Studiesin Education.

A book designed to be a stimulant to action and

50

reflection for teachers who are concerned to make astudy of their own teaching. The book is dividedinto two parts; first, invitations to teachers tomake a personal appraisal of their teaching throughan analytical procedure which involves gatheringinformation about four major aspects of teachingprocess: the teacher's frame of reference, theteacher's actions, the pupil's actions, and thepupil's covert experiences. The second part of thebook contains invitations to teachers to implementand monitor changes which naturally follow from the

self-appraisal. (Author's comments)

Hopkins, D. (1982, December) . Doing research inyour own classroom. Phi Delta Kappan,64(4), 274-275.

Research can be a means of allowing teachers toengage in critical reflection upon their craft,says Mr. Hopkins. He demonstrates how teachers canuse research to improve their own teaching.(Comments accompanying article)

Hopkins, D. (1985). Teacher's guide to classroomresearch. Great Britain: St. Edmund Bury Press.

This book helps teachers to look critically attheir own classrooms primarily for the purpose ofimproving their teaching and the quality of life in

their classrooms. (Author's comments)

Jaquez, C. (1989) . Messages from teachers toresearchers. In C. Livingston & S. Castle (Eds.).Teachers and research in action (pp. 84-89).

Washington, DC: National Education Association.

Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1982). The actionresearch planner (Rev.). Geelong, Victoria: Deakin

University Press.

Manen, M. (1991) . Researchjng lived experience:Ullman science for. .an action sensitive pedagogy.

51

Buffalo, NY: State University of New York Press.

Mayher, J., & Brause, R. (1991) . Finding andframing questions. In R. Brause & J. Mayher (Eds.),Search and re-search: Wh. the inquiringteacher needs to know (pp. 115-130) . New York, NY: TheFalmer Press.

Mayher, J., & Brause, R. (1991). Concluding andbeginning. In R. Brause & J. Mayher (Eds.), Searchand re-search: What the inquiring teacher needs toknow (pp. 207-210). New York, NY: The Falmer Press.

McClure, R. (1989) . Teachers using research:What does it mean? In C. Livingston & S. Castle(Eds.). Teachers and research in action (pp. 13-28).Washington, DC: National Education Association.

Mohr, M. M., & Maclean, M. S. (1987). Workingtogether: A guide for teacher-researchers. NationalCouncil of Teachers of English.

Myers, M. (1985) . The teacher-researcher: How tostudy writing in the classroom. Urbana, IL: NationalCouncil of Teaches of English/Educational ResourcesInformation Center.

This book was designed as a companion volume to AProcedure for Writing Assessment and HolisticScoring (Myers, 1980) . It is written for teacherslooking for ways to analyze writing samples and topromote the idea of the teacher's being aresearcher. (Abstract accompanying article)

Nations, J. (1989) . Usino research to solvestudent grouping problems. In C. Livingston & S.Castle (Eds.). Teachers and research in action (PP.29-34). Washington, DC: National EducationAssociation.

52

Nixon, J. (1981) . A teachers' guide to action,research. London: Grant McIntyre.

Oberg, A. (1990) . Methods and meanings in actionresearch: The action research journal. Theory intoPractice,29(3), 214-221.

Olson, M. (Ed.). (1990). Openin7 the door toclassroom research. Newark, Del.: InternationalReading Association. (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 318 703)

This book presents the teacher as researcher from avariety of perspectives.

Sabine, C. D. (1983, October) . An easy guide toaction research for the school administrator. Paperpresented at the Annual Meeting of the Associationof School Business Officials, Phoenix, A2. (ERICDocument Reproduction Service No. ED 246 537)

Action reseaL7h begins by identifying goals asperceived in the community; input is sought inneighborhood hearings or by running a series in thelocal newspaper and inviting response. Once aresearch group is organized, Action Researchcontinues as a five-stage flexible study plan forpractitioner improvement involving turning goalsinto researchable problems, breaking problems intotheir important parts, choosing fact-findingtechniques, collecting and analyzing data, andpresenting conclusions and recommendations. Stage4, for example, entails recruiting volunteers fordata collection on a geographical basis andclassifying "raw data." That Action Research canbe successful is shown in several examples,including one in which a Maryland fact findingproject led to the problem-solving approaches. Theguide includes a short bibliography and a five-pageskeleton planning aid. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

53

Schaefer, P. (1989) . Becoming researchers:Teaching mathematics to gray-area students. In C.Livingston & S. Castle (Eds.). Teachers and researchin action. (pp. 35-54). Washington DC: NationalEducation Association.

Schnesk, J. & Rackliffe, G. (1989) . Facultydecision making: Sources of information. In C.Livingston & S. Castle (Eds.) . Teachers and researchin action. (pp. 69-83) . Washington DC: NationalEducation Association.

Shalaway, L. (1990) Tap into teacher research.Instructor,100(1), 34-38.

Examines the work of four teacher researchers andgives suggestions on how to be a better teacherresearcher (GCA).

Sugarman, J. (1989) . Practicing theory: Teachersusing and creating knowledge. In C. Livingston & S.Castle (Eds.). Teachers and research in action. (pp.

97-102) . Washington DC: National EducationAssociation.

Sullivan, P. (Ed.). (1987). Teachers' research.Curriculum alblication,2. San Diego Area WritingProject.

This is a series of articles about successfulpractices used in the classroom by teachers seekingways to make the practices even more successful.The teachers conducted research to determine howtheir classroom practices compared with the ModelCurriculum Standards. The series serves also as asource of questions for teachers contemplatingdoing a research project. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

Thompson, C. (1989) . Knowledge, power,

54

professionalism, and human agency. In C. Livingston &S. Castle (Eds.). Teachers and research in action.(pp. 90-96) . Washington DC: National EducationAssociation.

Ward, N. (1989). Developing collegiality aroundresearch. In C. Livingston & S. Castle (Eds.).Teachers and research in action. (pp. 55-68).Washington DC: National Education Association.

55

HOW TO: THE PRODUCTS OF ACTION RESEARCH

Bissex, G. L., & Bullock, R. H. (Eds.) . (1987).

Seeing for ourselves: Case-study research by teachersof writing. Heinemann.

Dicker, M. (1990) . Using action research tonavigate an unfamiliar teaching assignment. Theoryinto Practice,29(3), 185-195.

Glaze, B. (1987) . A teacher speaks out aboutresearch. In J. Self (Ed.). Plain talk about writingand learning. Richmond, VA: Virginia Department ofEducation.

This book was published as a product of a state-wide effort to promote writing and learning.Bernadette Glaze's article describes how, as ateacher-researcher, she weaves together theexisting research, her own research questions, andthe interests and needs of her students to create aclassroom where research is the focus. (Abstractaccompanying article)

Golby, M. (1989) . Teachers and their research.In W. Carr (Ed.), Ouality in teaching: Arguments for areflective profession (pp. 163-172) . London:The Falmer Press.

Henry, J. (1985) . A critical analysis of actionresearch based in-service education: Four case studies.Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Deakin University, Geelong,Victoria.

Hustler, D., Cassidy, A., & Cuff, T. (Eds.).

(1986) . Action research in classrooms saad schools.London: Allen and Unwin.

56

This collection of essays is intended to provideexamples of what practitioners are actually doingto examine, explicate, and improve their ownpractice. The intention is to demonstrate whataction research is, from an involved rather than apurely theoretical stand point. All contributionsin this book are grounded in examples of research;all are in a sense close to being case-studies.The second central purpose of this book is toprovide a glimpse of the variety of possibilitiesand problems involved in collaboration betweenprofessionals working in differing sectors of theeducational system. (Editor's comments)

King, B. (1990) Creating curriculum together:Teachers, students, and collaborative investigation.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 322 111)

According to the neo-Marxist critique, actionresearchers often neglect to take into account thehistorical, social, political, and cultural forceswhich silence students and protect the status quoin schools. One way to overcome this criticism isto link teacher research and emancipatorypedagogy, such as that advocated by Paulo Freire,

in which both teachers and students collaborativelypose problems arising from real-life situationsand, through questioning and reflection, pursueways to solve the problems. Even if theiractions are unsuccessful, students gain newknowledge and perspectives, and they learn to becritical in their thinking and actions. Forexample, a biology class raised questions about atoxic dump, located less than two miles from the

school, which was not slated for local attentioneven though it was listed by the EnvironmentalProtection Agency as hazardous and in need ofimmediate clean-up. Students generated questionsand conducted research in which the interaction of

f)

57

science, society, and political and ethicaldecision making became evident to them. Action,such as a case study that can be madeavailable to others, indicates that students cangenerate their own curriculum and be motivated tolearn in the process. Through such collaboration,change toward more democratic schools becomes morelikely. (Abstract accompanying article)

Kleinfeld, J. (1988). Learning to think like ateacher: A study of cases. Unpublished paper, Centerfor Cross34-Cultural Studies, Rural College, Universityof Alaska, Fairbanks.

Kleinfeld's paper examines the rise of reflectivepractice or action research as it applies to theuse of case studies and teacher preparation. Thepaper shows how case methods can be used todevelop the particular professional way ofthinking characteristic of expert teachers. (GCA)

Langston Hughes Intermediate School. (1987).Teacher research on student learning: A compilation ofresearch studies focusing on minority andunderachieving students conducted by the LangstonHughes school-based research group. Fairfax County,VA: Fairfax County Public Schools.

This teacher-researcher publication is a collectionof articles from teachers of various disciplines(English, social studies, physical education,science) who conducted research on minorityachievement in their classes and school. Alsoincluded are three studies about the teachers whoconducted the research and a description of theprocess they went through. The book wasdistributed to the rest of the faculty at theschool. Copies of it can be obtained from Hughesat 11401 Ridge Heights Road, Reston, Virginia22091. (Abstract accompanying article)

58

Lawn, M. (1989) . Being caught in schoolwork: Thepossibilities of research in teacher's work. In W.

Cari (Ed.), Ouality in teaching: Arguments for areflective profession (pp. 147-161). London: TheFalmer Press.

Morin, A. (1985, January). New trends for newneeds in instructional technology theory anddevelopment. Paper presented at the Annual Conventionof the Association for Educational Communications andTechnology, Anaheim, CA. (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 256 327)

This report shares insights on varied experiencesin action research at the university level anddescribes methods for involving subjects inresearch. Examples used include case histories oftwo projects: the Project de Recherche etd'Intervention a la Maison (PRIM), a researchproject on home intervention; and the Ford TeachingProject. Based on experiences in conducting acollective writing colloquium with populareducators in Quebec, seven principles are discussedwhich indicate that action research requires: (1)

negotiation that leads to commitment; (2) an open

contract; (3) a neutral quest for significance; (4)

transcendence of the application of theory topractice; (5) valuing the experience of others; (6)

diffusion of aggressive dialogue and argumentactivities; and (7) living with uncertainty and theknowledge that every situation is unique.Applications of a participatory action researchapproach are discussed, including its use as astrategy for collecting data and writing scripts orregional research proposals, and as a projectevaluation model. Conclusions address the need touse action research to bridge the gap betweenpractice and theory. A 15-item reference list isincluded. (Abstract accompanying article)

Oldroyd, D., & Tiller, T. (1987). Change from

59

within: An account of school-based collaborative actionresearch in an English secondary school. Journal ofEducation for Teaching,13(1), 13-27.

This paper argues that for change in schools tooccur, the active collaboration of significantactors within each institution is essential.Attempts to introduce change are more likely tosucceed if they: recognize the interdependence of

individual actors and their institutional settings;are conducted in language accessible to theparticipants; start with the work-a-day experiencesand perceptions of individual actors, both staffand pupils; address the "social" as well as the"material" realities and barriers within the

institution's unique culture. In an Englishsecondary school with a tradition of school-basedin-service activities, a two-term collaborationbetween a Norwegian ethnographic researcher, theschool's professional tutor, and a voluntaryteacher action research group of staff, used avariety of approaches, to attempt to changeclassroom practice and perceptions about school

"realities." The article describes how thecollaboration evolved and the highly personalnature of change from within based on self-help.It presents an alternative to other attempts tobring about change, which are based on thewithdrawal of actors from the setting which theyare seeking to change. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

Olson M. (Ed.). (1990). Opening the door to

claasroom research. Newark, Del: International ReadingAssociation.

The idea of the teacher as researcher is presentedfrom several different perspectives-- theteacher's, the administrator's, and the university

based researcher's to convey a sense of what it

means to be a teacher/researcher. The following

160

chapters are included: (1)the Teacher asResearcher-- A Historical Perspective (Mary W.Olson); (2) The Door is Open. Won't You Come In?(Faye Brownlie);(3) Learning toResearch/Researching to Learn (Carol S. Avery);(4)Content Teachers as Researchers in Australia (BertMorris, Patsy Bopf, and Nea Stewart-Dore);(5)Teaching as Research (Carol M. Santa);(6)Collaborating with Teachers on Research (Andrew C.Porter); (7) Preparing Principals for an

Action Research Agenda in the Schools (John J.Beck);(8) Involving School administrators inClassroom Research (Floyd Sucher);(9)A Model ofTeaching and Instructional Improvement (S. JaySamuels and H. Lawrence Jones); and (10)Commentary--Teachers Axe Researchers (PatrickShannon) . (Abstract accompanying article)

Parson, G. (Ed.). (1985). Hand in hand: Thewriting process the microcomputer. Juneau, AK:Alaska Department of Education.

This book is the result of a collaborative researcheffort by ten Alaskan high school teachers todocument what happened when they and their studentsbegan to use computers and writing process. Sinceall teacher-researchers in the project had asimilar focus to their research, the finding arereliable beyond one classroom. Also included isself case study information from the teachersinvolved. (Abstract accompanying article)

Wood, P. (1988, April) . Action research: A field

Perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting ofthe American Educational Research Association, New

Orleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED 295 938)

This paper presents the personal narrative of ateacher who engaged in action research in herclassroom. A step-by-step description, outlined in

63

61

the prescribed form for conducting action research(plan, act, observe, and reflect), notes thesuccesses and failures encountered throughout theexperiment. A student teacher was conductingaction research on a different topic simultaneouslyin the classroom. How collaborating on the twoprojects affected the cooperating teacher-studentteacher relationship is described. A discussion isoffered on the value of action research in theclassroom, in pre-service teacher education and in-service educational programs for practicingteachers. (Abstract accompanying article)

Wotring, A., & Tierney, R. (1981) . Two studies 9_1writing in high school science. Berkeley, CA: Bay

Area Writing Project.

Pioneers in conducting classroom research projects,Wotring and Tierney document what happened whenthey began to use writing in the context of scienceteaching. (Abstract accompanying article)

64

62

RELATED WRITINGS

REFLECTIVE PRACTICE

Anzul, M., & Ely, M. (1988) . Hall of mirrors:The introduction of the reflective mode. LanguageArts, La(7), 675-687.

Axmaline, W. & Hoover, R. (1989) . Fieldexperience as a vehicle for transformation: Ideology,education and reflective practice. Journal of TeacherEducation, 40(2), 42-48.

Buckley, R. (1988). From questions to newquestions: Reflections. Language Arts,65(7), 640-641.

Discusses the practioners' process of reflectivepractice (GCA).

Bullough, R., Jr. (1989). Teacher education andteacher reflectivity. Journal of Teacher Education,12(2), 15-21.

This article examines the processprogram development (GCA).

of reflective

Calderhead, J. (1989). Reflective teaching andteacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education,a(1), 43-51.

This article examines the origins and naturereflective teaching (GCA).

of

Canning, C. (1991, March) . What teachers sayabout reflection. Educational Leadership/48(6), 18-21.

Cruickshank, D. (1985) . Uses and benefits ofreflective teaching. Phi Delta Kappan,66(10), 704-706.

63

Elabaz, F. (1988) . Critical reflection onteaching: Insights from Freire. Journal ol Educationfor Teaching114(2), 171-181.

Evans, C. (1991, March) . Support for teachersstudying their own work. Educational Leadership,48(6), 11-13.

Gideonse, H. (1990) . Organizing schools toencouraae teacher inquiry. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,Inc.

Explains how changes in school organization can bemade to enhance teachers' ability to solveclassroom problems, and can foster their abilityto tailor classes to specific student needs. (GCA)

Gore, J. (1987). Reflecting on reflectiveteaching. Journal at Teacher Education,38(2), 33-39.

This article compares the methods of Cruickshank tothose of Zeichner.

Grant, C. A., & Zeichner, K. M. (1984). On

becoming a reflective teacher. In C. A. GrantPreparing for reflective teaching (pp. 1-18). Boston:

Allyn & Bacon.

Grimmett, P., & Erickson, G. (1988). Reflectionin teacher education. New York: Teachers CollegePress.

A discussion by several authors in Canada and theUS on how Schon's ideas on the nature of reflectionand the reflective practitioner can be integratedinto teacher education, supervision, and teanhing.Commentary, critiques, and dialogue from a varietyof perspectives inform this discussion. (Author's

comments)

64

Grimmett, P. (1989) . A commentary on Schon's viewof reflection. Journal DJ. Curriculum andSupervision,5(1), 19-28.

Harris, I. (1989) . A critique of Schon's views onteacher education: Contributions and issues. Journalof Curriculum and Supervision,5(1),13-18.

Harris examines Schon's work as it relates to theprofessional practice of teachers. (GCA)

Kennedy, M. (1989, Spring). Reflection and theproblem of professional standards. Colloquy,2(2), 1-6.

Killion, J., & Todnem, G. (1991, March). A processfor personal theory building. Educational Leadership,48(6), 14-16.

Kremer, H. (1988) . Reflection and professionalknowledge--A conceptual framework. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 296 971)

LaBoskey, V. (1989) . From studio to classroom-ornot? Journal p_f Curriculum and Supervision,5(1) 29-34.

LaBoskey examines what are seen as several problemsin Schon's reflective model. (GCA)

Liston, D. & Zeichner, K. (1987) . Reflectiveteacher education and moral deliberation. Journal ofTeacher Education,38(6), 2-8.

Meek, A. (1991, March) . On thinking about teaching:A conversation with Eleanor Duckworth. EducationalLeadership,48(6) , 30-34.

Monson, R. & Pahl, M. (1991, March) . Charting anew course with whole language. EducationalLeadership,48(6), 51-53.

7

65

Noffke, S. & Brennan, M. (1988) . The dimensionsof reflection: A conceptual and contextual analysis.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research Association (New Orleans,LA). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 296968)

O'Gorman, R. (1989) . Knowing in action. Journalof Curriculum and Supervision,5(1), 10-12.

Osterman, K. (1990) . Reflective practice: A newagenda for education. Education and Urban Society,22(2), 133-152.

Reviews the concept of reflective practice withinthe framework of experiential learning theory.Discusses ways in which reflective practiceadvances professional practice for teachers andadministrators. Explores the implications of theseideas for professional education and for schoolreform (Abstract Accompanying Article).

Pugh, W. C. (1987, April) . Reflection in action asprincipal's learning and decision-making tool. Paper

presented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, Washington, D. C.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 283 279)

This case study of a central office schoolimprovement initiative in an urban system examinesinstructional leadership practices of two juniorhigh school principals. The school-based researchfocuses on correlates of school effectiveness in"low achieving" settings and the principal'scapacity to "reflect-in-action," an ability to makeongoing effective decisions about unpredictableproblems and situations. Study findings suggestthat development and practice of instructionalleadership behaviors in low-achieving schools areassociated with (1) the environment (schoolclimate); (2) the principal's own past professional

66

experiences and staff development; (3) the issue ofempowerment; and (4) the principal's capacity toreflect-in-action. The report presents a typologyof principal's instructional leadership practicesand an analysis of the researcher's roledelineation. The study's primary implications are(1) school district's research offices can have apositive effect on improvement initiatives throughthe methodologies of action research and ethnologyand (2) researcher's and practitioner's capacitiesto achieve positive educational outcomes areenhanced by the ability to reflect-in-action.researcher and principal can thereby become agentsfor change in improvement initiatives. The reportconcludes with two reference pages and an appendixidentifying the typology and its ethnographicconceptual foundations. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

Ross, D. (1989) . First steps in developing areflective approach. Journal of Teacher Education,40(2), 22-30.

This paper examines the introduction of reflectivepractice to preservice teachers (GCA).

Ross, W. & Hannay, L. (1986) . Towards a criticaltheory of reflective inquiry. Journal of TeacherEducation,37(4), 9-15.

Schon, D. A. (1983) . The reflective practitioner:How professionals think in action. New York: BasicBooks.

This book examines what one might call the"underside" of professional practice, the intuitive"knowing" that exists within all of us and comesfrom accumulated knowledge and experience. Schondiscusses this process through the use of a numberof examples to show how professionals really goabout solving problems. (GCA)

67

Schon, D. A. (1988) . Educating the reflectivepractitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

This book builds on the concepts of professionalcompetence introduced in Schon's first book andoffers a new approach to educating professionals.(GCA)

Schon, D. A. (1989) . A symposium on Schon'sconcept of reflective practice: Critiques,commentaries, illustrations. Journal of Curriculum andSupervision,5(1), 6-9.

This article is a selection of quotations fromSchon's books and speeches on reflective practice.(GCA)

Schon, D. A. (Ed.). (1991). The reflective turn:Case studies in and on educational practice. New York,NY: Teachers College Press.

Schulman, J., & Colbert, J. (1989). Cases ascatalysts for cases: Inducing reflection in teachereducation. Action in Teacher Education,11(1), 44-52.

Smyth, J. (1989). Developing and sustainingcritical reflection in teacher education. Journal ofTeacher Education,40(2), 2-14.

Smyth provides background information on theemergence of reflectivity as a conceptual thrust in

teacher education. He also discusses some of theimpedim2nts to empowerment that teachers andteacher educators confront as they attempt toimplement critical reflection in their curricula.Smyth concludes that if teachers (and teachereducators) are going to uncover the forces thatinhibit and constrain them, they need to engage infour forms of action with respect to teaching.These "forms" are characterized by four sequential

68

stages and are linked to a series of questions: (a)

describing (What do I do?), (b) informing (Whatdoes this mean?), (c) confronting (How did I cometo be like this?), and (d) reconstructing (Howmight I do things differently?) . (Abstractaccompanying article)

Sparks-Langer, G. & Colton, A. (1991, March).Synthesis of research on teachers' reflectivethinking. Educational Leadership,48(6), 37-44.

Stephens, D. & Reimer, K. (1990) . Explorations inreflective practice. (Report No. 514). Urbana, IL:Illinois University, Center for the Study of Reading.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 324 692)

Surbeck, E., Han, E., & Moyer, J. (1991, March).Assessing reflective responses in journals.Educational Leadership,48(6), 25-27.

Sykes, G. (1989, Spring) . Learning to teach withcases. Colloquy,2(2), 7-13.

Tama, M., & Peterson, K. (1991, March). Achievingreflectivity through literature. EducationalLeadership,48(6), 22-24.

Veal, M., et al. (1988) . School contexts thatencourage reflection: Teacher's perceptions. Paperpresented at the Florida Conference on ReflectiveInquiry: Contexts and Assessments (Orlando, FL,October 20-22, 1988). (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 307 269)

Waxman, H. (Ed.). (1988). Images of reflection inteacher education. Reston, VA: Association of TeacherEducators. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED316 542)

Wellington, B. (1991, March). The promise ofreflective practice. Educational Leadership,48(6)14-5.

69

Wibel, W. (1991, March) . Reflection throughwriting. Educational Leadership,48(6), 45.

Wildman, T., & Niles, J. (1987). Reflectiveteachers: Tensions between abstractions and realities.Journal of Teacher Education,38(4),

Zeichner, K. & Liston, D. (1987, February).Teaching student teachers to reflect. HarvardEducational Review,57(1), 23-48.

Conventional teacher education programs follow anapprenticeship model and, in so doing, aspire toprovide student teachers with pedagogical skillsand techniques derived from a pre-existing body of

knowledge. In this contribution to HER's specialseries, "Teachers, Teaching, and TeacherEducation," Kenneth M. Zeichner and Daniel P.Liston argue that the conventional approachinhibits the self-directed growth of studentteachers and thereby fails to promote their full

professional development. Illustrating analternative model, the authors describe and assessthe elementary student teaching program at the

University of Wisconsin, Madison-a program orientedtoward the goals of reflective teaching, greaterteacher autonomy, and increasing democraticparticipation in systems of educational governance.(Abstract accompanying article)

Zeichner, K. (1989, Spring) . Kenneth Zeichnerreflecting on reflection. Colloquy,2(2), 15-21.

70

COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH

Anderson, B. L., & Cox, P. L. (1988) . Configuringthe education system for a shared future: Collaborativevision, action, reflection. Andover, MA: The RegionalLaboratory for Educational Improvement of the Northeastand Islands.

Anglin, L., & Mooradian, P. (1990). Colleges,universities and the urban school district: Acollaboration dilemma! (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 316 630)

This article reports the findings of adescriptive study of collaborative activitiesundertaken by postsecondary institutions inCleveland (Ohio) with Cleveland Public Schools.The nature of the collaborative activities isdescribed and recommendations for multi-interinstitutional cooperation leading to acommon educational agenda are discussed.(Abstract Accompanying Article)

Berkeyh, R., et al. (1990). Collaborating forreflective practice: Voices of teachers,administrators, and researchers. Education and UrbanSociety,22(2), 204-232.

Discusses the work of six practioners, theirprocess, and the impact of their reflection.

Canning, C. (1991, March) . What teachers say aboutreflection. Educational Leadership,48(6), 18-21.

Clift, R., et al. (1990). Restructuring teachereducation through collaborative action research.Journal of Teacher Education,41(2), 52-62.

This article describes a collaborative actionresearch project between University of Huston

71

education faculty and the staff of five elementaryschools. The project investigated the status oflearning cultures for teachers and administratorsin their schools. Implications for initial andcontinuing preparation of teachers and principalsare drawn. (Abstract accompanying article)

Corrigan, D.,& Mobley, W. (1990). Educationalreform agenda and partnerships. Paper presented at theConference on School-University Partnerships. (ERICDocument Reproduction Service No. ED 325 037)

Major factors contributing to the crisis in UnitedStates education are summarized, including poverty,changes in the American family, childabuse, changes in the ethnic composition ofschools, increasing global competition, decline intraditional student performance measures, crisisin mathematics and science, shortages of teachers,shift in the make-up of the work force, the dropoutsituation, and intergenerational interdependence.The educational reform movement is discussed, bothhistorically and with its current emphases onteacher empowerment, restructuring schools ascenters of inquiry, allowing a 'bottom -up'strategy for change, and establishingaccountability for results. Includes41 references. (Abstract Accompanying Article)

De Bevoise, W. (1986, February) . Collaboration:Some principles of bridgework. Educational Leadership,A2(5), 9-12.

De Bevoise supports the idea of collaborationbetween universities and schools, but underscoresthe fact that this collaboration is built on mutualneed and mutual satisfaction, plus realisticexpectations. (GCA)

72

Evans, C. (1991, March) . Support for teachersstudying their own work. Educational Leadership,48(6),11-13.

Fergus, E., & Wilson, D. (1989). Advancingeducational equity through social action research: Acollaborative effort between universities and schools.Equity and Excellence,24(2), 38-45.

Friedman, M. (1990) . Collaboratives--universitiesand schools as partners in staff development. Paperpresented at the Eastern Educational ResearchAssociation Conference. (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 318 715)

Some basic considerations undergird partnershipsbetween schools and colleges undertaken to work onproblems of mutual concern that may bedifficult to solve individually. Studies haveindicated that successful collaboratives requirethe existence of certain special conditions and thesurmounting of certain barriers. Research studieshave pointed to factors that facilitate andmaintain collabortaion. Five maj-Dr factors areconsidered important for collaborative development:(1) assessment of needs, (2) decision making, (3)

willingness to reach out, (4) apperceptivebase, and (5) flexibility. (Abstract AccompanyingArticle)

Goodlad, J. (1987a) . Schools and universities can--and must--work together. Principa1,67(1), 9-15.

Discusses the need for the development of school-university collaboration in the school reformmovement. Describes three successful collaborativeprojects showing the positive effects gained fromsuch collaborations. Includes a sidebar outliningthe essentials for such partnerships and a list ofreferences. (Abstract Accompanying Article)

73

Goodlad, J. (1987b). Linking schools anduniversities: Symbiotic partnerships. Occasional paperNo. 1. Seattle, WA: Washington University Center forEducational Renewal. (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 298 645)

This paper discusses an approach to educationalimprovement through collaboration between schools

and universities. It develops the concept ofsymbiosis between unlike institutions in which eachrecognizes need for the other in seeking to fulfillits self-interest. The first section defines theessential characteristics of successful renewal:that workers at all levels must have optimalopportunities to combine their expertise, and that

there must be a continuous infusion of bothrelevant knowledge and alternative ideas forpractice stemming from inquiry into the enterprise.(Abstract Accompanying Article).

Harris, R., & Harris, M. (1990). Symbiosis on trialin educational renewal. Paper presented at the AnnualMeeting of the Northern Rocky Mountain EducationalResearch Association. (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 325 482)

The collaboration of universities andschools/school districts has often been proposed asan effective force for reviewing the quality of theschools and the education of the educators. Astudy of a workshop that was a major collaborativeevent is an ongoing university-schools partnershipillustrated that symbiotic and organic cooperationis functioning in the Brigham Young University-Public School Partnership, which was initiated in1984. (Abstract Accompanying Article)

Hord, S. (1985) . Collaboration or cooperation:Comparisons and contrasts, dilemmas and decisions.Paper presented at the Meadow Brook Symposium onCollaborative Action Research in Education. (ERIC

74

Document Reproduction Service No. ED 258 356)

This report discusses collaboration and cooperationin the field of education, describing them asdistinctly different operational processesbetween either individuals or organizations, witheach mode requiring different kinds of input andeach yielding different sorts of returns. Basedon these premises, the report attempts to brieflyanswer the following questions: How arecollaboration and cooperation different? and Whatis the value of distinguishing between them? Inthe main section, the literature is explored on thetopic of concepts and paradigms of individual,organizational, and interorganizational behavior.Also reviewed are the reports of agencies andinstitutions that 'cooperated,"coordinated,''collaborated,' or 'consorted.' Another sectioncompares and contrasts collaboration andcooperation, using 10 catagories. A third sectionfurther refines these definitions into preliminarymodels for explicating the process of cooperationand collaboration. A 25-item reference list isprovided. (Abstract accompanying article)

Hord, S. (1986, February) . A synthesis of researchon organizational collaboration. EducationalLeadership,43(5), 22-26.

Hord discusses the differences betweencollaboration and cooperation. She explores theliterature, examining the concepts and paradigms ofindividual, organizational, and inter-organizationbehavior to go in a scholarly perspective onindividuals and groups working together. (GCA)

Hoyle, E. (1985) . Educational research:Dissemination, participation, negotiation. Research,poliy and practice. World Yearbook Fducation (pp.203-217) . New York: Nichols Publishing Company.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 256 002)

75

Huling, L. & Johnson, W. (1983) . A strategy forhelping teachers integrate research into teaching.Teacher-Educator,19(2), 11-18.

Reasons why teachers do not use educationalresearch are summarized, and an interactiveresearch and development project aimed atovercoming utilization problems is described. In

the project, teachers, staff developers, and Texas

Tech University researchers workedcollaboratively to study problems and concerns of

classroom teachers. (Abstract AccompanyingArticle).

Intrilligator, B. (1986) . Collaborating with the

schools: A strategy for school improvement. Paperpresented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 277 089)

This paper posits guideline for planners forming

interorganizaitonal arrangements--orcollaboratives--among universities, businesses,community organizations, and schools. The paperhypothesizes that schools can benefit fromcollaboratives and that these partnerships'success is atte-dant upon mutual unerstanding ofa collaborative focus. (Abstract AccompanyingArticle)

Jacullo-Noto, J. (1988, Summer) . Partnerships thatwork: Involving teachers in their own development. New

Directions for Continuing Education,38, 63-75.

The author discusses the collaborativepartnerships that can be created betweenuniversity faculty and school personnel by usingaction-research as a research and developmentmodel. The author feels that collaborativepartnerships are the hope of the future. (GCA)

76

Killion, J., & Todnem, G. (1991, March) . A processfor personal theory building. Educational Leadership.,48(6), 14-16.

Kyle, D. W., & McCutcheon, G. (1984).Collaborative research: Development and Issues.Journal of Curriculum Studies,16(2), 173-179.

Traditionally, participants in educational researchare separable into two groups: the researchers andthe "researched." Recently, however, severaleducators have discussed benefits of these groupsworking together to study educational problems and,thus, advocate collaboration among researchers andpractitioners (for example, Florio and Walsh).Indeed, the National Institute of Education'srecent request for proposals reflects a belief incollaborative research in one of its criteria forthe evaluation of proposals: "evidence that, whereappropriate, there is collaboration betweeninvestigators and practitioners in definingresearch questions and conducting research."

Interest in collaboration, though, raises a numberof questions. How did the approach develop? Whatmethodological and ethical issues are related tothis new relationship between researchers andpractitioners? How might such an approach beuseful? What sorts of roles can researchers andpractitioners have in inquiry? The issues are notraised in order to frighten researchers from doingcollaborative research, nor to be critical of it;rather, the issues are raised to permit theirexamination so researchers and teachers can pursuetheir work more conscious of the sorts ofopportunities and difficulties they mightencounter. (Abstract accompanying article)

Lieberman, A. (1986a, February) . Collaborativework. Educational Leadership143,(5), 4-8.

77

This article supports the idea that school andcommunity leaders working together not only bringmore resources to their problem-solving efforts butdevelop mutual trust and support that enhanceprofessional development. (GCA)

Lieberman, A. (1986b, February). Collaborativeresearch: Working with, not working on. . .

Educational Leadership,43(5), 28-32.

This article discusses the work cf Ward andTikunoff as it relates to collaborative researchwith teachers and principals. Lieberman discussesthe results of a study done in both an urban andrural setting on interactive research. Thebenefits of teacher collaboration teams forresearch and development are discussed as well asthe interactive process. (GCA)

Lucas, P. (1988) . An approach to research basedteacher education through collaborative inquiry.Journal at Education for Teaching,14(1), 55-73.

This paper argues that in order to encouragestudent teachers to engage in systematic reflectionand nurture appropriate dispositions towardsinquiry, we must act upon the implications of ourknowledge of their vulnerable condition and oftheir perceptions of what is relevant. It issuggested what this might mean in practice, and therole of collaborative enquiry in the promotion ofreflection is analyzed. There are three foci: theissue of student teachers approaching research; therelationship between professional collaboration ina small-scale "critical community" and the qualityand form of reflection; and the dilemma of beinghonest and being sensitive in providing feedback,particularly where the role of student teacher vis-a-vis regular teacher is inverted. (Abstractaccompanying article)

78

McDaniel, E. (1989) . Collaboration for what?Sharpening the focus. Action in Teacher Education,la(4), 1-8.

Mahon, P. (1991, March) . The zen of teaching.Educational Leadership,48(6), 35-36.

Meek, A. (1991, March) . On thinking about teaching:A conversation with Eleanor Duckworth. EducationalLeadership,48(6), 30-34.

Miller, J. (1990) . Creating spaces and findingvoices: Teachers collaborating for empowerment.Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

This book examines the collaborative efforts offive teachers and a university professor as theywork through the problems of collaborative

inquiry toward teacher empowerment. (GCA)

Oakes, J., Hare, S. E., & Sirotnik, K. A. (1986).Collaborative inquiry: A congenial paradigm in acantankerous world. Teachers College Record,87, 545-561.

Oja, S. N. (1988) . Program assessment report: Acollaborative approach to leadership in supervision.Part B of the final report to the US department ofeducation, Office of educational research andimprovement. Durham, NH: University of New HampshireCollaborative Research Projects.

Collaborative action research was used as a processin which elementary school principals, cooperatingteachers, and university supervisors couldinvestigate a common iFsue of importance,supervision of teachiTig interns in their schools.school and university participants met incollaborative supervisory teams to investigatetheories of development and alternative models of

bi

79

supervision, the goal was for participants to

become more effective supervisors by learning to

match appropriate supervision strategies to thecognitive-developmental needs and stages of the

supervisees. In this program, the context of the

collaborative action research supervisory teamssupported and positively challenged teachers whowished to take on more supervisory responsibilitieswith interns. The Program Assessment describes

outcomes and benefits for school teachers andprincipals, graduate teaching interns, school-university collaboration, and the universityteacher education program, and includes poignantexcerpts from the participants' own voices as theyreflect on their experiences during this three yearcollaborative action research project. (See also

the.Project Portrayal and Practice Profile in Oja

and Ham, 1988. Author's comments)

Oja, S. N. (1988b, January) . Some promising

endeavors in school-university collaboration:Collaborative research an_ei collaborative supervision in

the University of New Hampshire five-year program.Paper presented at the Holmes Group Second AnnualConference, Washington, D. C. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 294 335)

Two areas of school-university collaboration in the

University of New Hampshire five-year program of

teacher education are collaborative research and

collaborative supervision. This paper discusses

how teachers, school administrators and university

faculty work together as research and supervision

issues in teacher education. In considering issues

important in school-university collaborativeresearch, the first one examined is therelationship between school content and thecollaborative research being conducted. The second

issue involves questions of project control and

leadership. A description is given of two models

of supervision that are being used. In one model, a

80

cooperating teacher assumes major responsibilityfor coordinating the teachers and interns withinthe school. Another school, using an egalitarianmodel, has all cooperating teachers meet regularlyas a group with the university supervisor in orderto address specific questions of internsupervision. Products of the project are brieflydescribed, and intended outcomes are suggested.(Abstract accompanying article)

Oja, S. N., & Ham, M. C. (1988). Project Portrayaland Practice Profile. Part A and C of the final reportof A Collaborative Approach to Leadership inSupervision project to the US department of education,Office of Educational research and improvement.Durham, NH: University of New Hampshire CollaborativeResearch Projects.

The Project Portrayal summarizes the evaluation ofthis collaborative action research approach toleadership in supervision project over its entirethree years. This report makes summative analysisof major issues, strategis, and collaborativeaction research approaches and discussesimplications for staff development, personal andorganizational collaboration, and educationalchange. The Practice Profile includes projectdemographics, implementation requirements forcollaborative action research approaches tosupervision, and a checklist of essential programcomponents, each with descriptors for idea2,acceptable, or unacceptable levels ofimplementation. (See also the Program AssessmentReport in Oja, 1988 Author's comments)

Ola, S. N., & Smulyan, L. (1989). Collaborativeaction research: A developmental approach. New York:The Falmer Press.

This book uses the Action Research on Change inSchools (ARCS) project as a case study for

81

analyzing key elements of effective collaborativeaction research. It focuses in particular on thecollaborative processes which interact with, andinfluence, the research process and outcomes of anaction research team, drawing on theory in thefields of group dynamics anu adult development toexplain how individuals and groups develop throughtheir involvement in action research. (Comments bythe authors)

Pine, G., & Keane, W. (1989). Collaboration foreducational excellence and equity: Lessons learned.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of theAmerican Association of Colleges for Teacher Education,Anaheim, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED304 437)

Porter, A. C. (1986) . Collaborating with teacherson research: Pioneering efforts at the Institute forResearch on Teaching (Occasional Paper No. 105).Washington, D. C.: Office of Educational Research andImprovement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED283 794)

This paper reports on the characteristics of onespecific form of collaborative research that wasdeveloped by the faculty from research institutionsof higher education collaborating with teachers inK-12 schools on the conduct of research onteaching. Eighteen teachers have participated inthis research with faculty from Michigan StateUniversity under the direction of the Institute forResearch on Teaching (IRT). Typically, teachersteach in the morning and ale with IRT in theafternoon. Research time is paid for by the IRT tothe school district, including benefits. Thecontributions teachrs make to a research programchange and improve as they become familiar withresearch agend,-, ani requirements. Teachers havedefined researcn programs in the areas of: (1)

classroom strategies; (2) integrating the teaching

82

of language arts into the teaching of othersubjects; (3) the design of empiricalinvestigations; (4) the staying power of changes inteaching practice; and (5) replication of workacross many school settings. A description isgiven of how the teachers and faculty members worktogether and their perceptions of the benefits ofthe work. The costs of collaborative research,both institutional and personal, are alsodiscussed. Brief descriptions are given ofalternative forms of collaborative arrangements toillustrate the concepts, breadth and potentialpower. (Abstract accompanying article)

Reed, C., Mergendoller, J., & Horan, C. (1990).

Collaborative research: A strategy for schoolimprovement. Novato, CA: Beryl Buck Institute forEducation.

Sagor, R. (1991, March) . What project Learn revealsabout collaborative action research. EducationalLeadership,48(6), 6-10.

Sockett, H., & Endo, T. (1989). Collaboration inprofessionalism: The case nf the Center for AppliedResearch L. Development in Education (CARD). Presentedat the American Educational Research Association.

SooHoo, S. (1989) . Teacher researcher: Emergingchange .agent. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting ofthe American Educational Research Association, SanFrancisco, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction ServiceNo. ED 307 255)

Sparks-Langer, G. & Colton, A. (1991, March).Synthesis of research on teachers' reflective thinking.Educational Leadership,48(6), 37-43.

Surbeck, E., Han, E., & Moyer, J. (1991, March).Assessing reflective responses in journals.Fiducational ,Leadership,48(6), 25-27.

85

83

Tama, M. & Peterson, K. (1991, March) . Achievingreflectivity through literature. EducationalLeadership,48(6), 22-24.

Torney-Purta, J. (1985, April) . Linking facultiesof education with classroom teachers throughcollaborative research. Journal ot Educational Thought,19.(1), 71-77.

Trubowitz, S. (1986) . Stages in the development ofschool-college collaboration. Educational Leadership,A2(5), 18-21.

The stages of development of the process ofcollaboration between Queens College, the New YorkCity Board of Education, and Louis ArmstrongMiddle School, are presented in an effort to helpuniversities and schools form partnerships.

Watkins, B. (1989) . Schools and colleges seenfailing to form close partnerships. Chronicle of HigherEducation,35(27), A1,15.

Collaboration among and within universities,schools, teacher organizations, and public agenciesare seen as the key to educational reform. Thegoal is the improvement of some aspect of teachereducation, research, or schooling. (AbstractAccompying Article)

Ward, B. A., & Tikunoff, W. J. (1982, February).Collaborative research. Paper presented at the NationalInvitational Conference, "Research on Teaching:Implications for Practice," Warrenton, VA. (ERIC

Document Reproduction Service No. ED 221 531)

Characteristics and contributions of collaborativeresearch studies to educational practice areexplored in this paper. Definitions ofcollaborative research are presented which note its

84

multiple roles and similarity to action research.Reasons for conducting collaborative research aregiven, centering around increased use of researchoutcomes facilitated investigation, and reducedtime lapse before investigation. The strategy ofinvolving all school practitioners in research isillustrated through four models: 1) interactiveresearch and development (using teams ofresearchers and participants); 2) collaborativeresearch within an entire school faculty; 3)collaborative research within an entire schooldistrict; and 4) university-based research withcooperating school personnel. Eight studies aresummarized in which the collaborative researchstrategy was limited to teacher participants: 1)teachers' techniques with classroom disruptions; 2)effects of reducing class size; 3) process-centeredteaching; 4) teachers' perceptions of effectivebilingual instruction; 5) acquisition of writingliteracy; 6) common issues of interest to a schoolfaculty; 7) how children learn to read; and 8)writing instruction at the elementary level.Conclusion based on developments and outcomes ofcollaborative research in education are stated. Anannotated bibliography of 18 studies is appended.(Abstract accompanying article)

Whitford, B., et al. (1989). Sustaining actionresearch through collaboration: Inquiries forinvention. Peabody Journal of Education,64(3),151-169.

Wibel, W. (1991, March) . Reflection throughwriting. Educational Leadership,48(6), 45.

Wu, P. C. (1986) . Research on collaboration: Why itworks in some places and not in others. Paper presentedat the Annual Meeting of the National Council of Stateson Inservice Education. (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 280 128)

This paper approaches the concept of collaboration

85

by using a workshop format in three segments: (1) a

puzzle to solve, (2) lessons on collaborationlearned from solving the puzzle, and (3) a tabularoverview of the fundamental differences betweenuniversities and school districts which hindercollaboration. Included are 24 references.(Abstract accompanying article)

88

86

SOCIOLOGY/POLITICAL THEORY

Bernstein, R. J. (1976) . The restructuring ofsocial and political theory. London: Methuen UniversityPaperback. (Part III).

Rapoport, R. (1985). Children, youth, and families:The action-research relationship. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

SCHOOL CHANGE

Atkin, M. (1989, November). Can educationalresearch keep pace with education reform? Phi DeltaKappan,71(3), 200-205.

The progress of meaningful school reform willremain stalled until teachers emerge from theirmarginal positions in the research community andbecome full partners in the conception and theconduct of educational inquiry, Mr. Atkinmaintains. (Editor's comments)

Fullan, M., Bennett, B., & Rolheiser-Bennett, C.(1989) . Linking classroom and school improvement.Invited address at the American Educational ResearchAssociation.

This article is organized into 4 main sections. In

the first section, the authors identify the mainfeatures of why all major reform efforts havefailed to date. Second, they describe a majorreform effort they are engaged in called TheLearning Consortium. Third, they present acomprehensive framework which is designed to helpunderstand classroom and school improvement.Fourth, they formulate several important conceptualand policy implications for further developing theframework and its use. (GCA)

87

Fullan, M., Bennett, B., & Rolheiser-Bennett, C.(1990) . Linking classroom and school improvement.Educational Leadership, 13-19.

Giroux, H. (1988). Teachers as transformativeintellectuals. In H. Giroux (Ed.), Teachers asintellectuals (pp. 121-128) . Massachusetts: Bergin &Garvey.

Livingston, C., & Castle, S. (1989). Teachers andresearch in Action. NEA school restructuring series.Washington, D.C.: National Education Association.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 314 380)

O'Connor, B. (Ed.). (1990). Ask the experts. .

about action research versus formal research. BusinessEducation Forum,44(4), 8-9.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

Bickel, W. E., & Cooley, W. W. (1986) . Decision-oriented educational research.Boston/Dordrecht/Lancaster: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.

Price, R., & Politser, P. (Eds.). (1980).Evaluation and action in the social environment. New

York: Academic Press.

Scriven, M. (1986) . Evaluation as a paradigm foreducational research. In House, E. R., (Ed.), New

Directions in Educational Evaluation. London: The

Falmer Press, pp. 53-67.

Scriven contends that researchers must change theirvision of themselves "into service-researchersrather than pure-scientific-researchers." The needis to select and solve problems that really pay offfor practitioners. (GCA)

88

SUPERVISION/COACHING/MENTORING

Coe, D. (1990) . Toward collegial inquiry: Is theremore to clinical supervision than the improvement Dfpractice? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 319 724)

Written from the perspective of a participant, thatis, the classroom teacher as novice supervisor,

this paper presents, in case study form, adescription of two cycles of clinical supervisioninvolving teaching peers in an elementary school.The purposes of the paper are twofold. First, thepaper explores, through illustrations from the casestudy, a number of themes germane to the doing ofclinical supervision. Second, the paperdemonstrates that there is more to clinicalsupervision than instrumental etfectiveness. Theimprovement of practice, often espoused in theliterature as the aim of any clinical supervisionsituation, becomes subordinate to unintended, yetever developing and important outcomes,

namely, a deeper mutual respect among participantsand the enhanced self-underscanding that ispromoted by such a collaborative workingrelationship. Viewing clinical supervision as aninstance of collaborative action research providesfor the implications of collegial inquiry in aclinical supervision context to be more fullyexplored. (Abstract accompanying article)

Elliott, J. (1988, April) . Teachers as 112searchers:Implications for supervision alid teacher education.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 293 831)

The opening section of this paper describes theauthor's first experience with collegial attempts

89

at curriculum reform through practical inquiry,illustrating a process in which ideas are testedand developed in action. It is pointed out thatthis form of teacher-based practical inquiry is acharacteristic feature of a certain kind ofcurriculum reform process. It is stated that theinstitutionalization of "action-research" and"teachers as researchers" as approaches to teachereducation within academic institutions raises anumber of critical issues for tutors andsupervisors to reflect about. If we are tofacilitate reflective practice as a form ofeducational inquiry in schools then we must treatteacher education as a reflective practice also.

"Some of the issues to be faced by teachereducators in promoting reflective practice andaction research on the part of teachers areillustrated by detailed descriptions of threereform projects: (1) The humanities CurriculumProject, under the direction of Lawrence Stenhouse(1967); (2) The Ford Teaching Project (1973-75);and (3) The Teacher-Student Interaction and Qualityof Learning Project (1981-83) ." (Abstractaccompanying article)

Elliott, J. (1989) . Action-research and theemergence ol teacher appraisal in the UK. Paperpresented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No, ED 309 522)

Elliott, J. (1990) . Teachers as researchers:Implications for supervision and for teacher education.

Teaching k Teacher Educatior,6(1), 1-26.

This paper focuses on tae problems, dilemmas andissues which confront facilitators of teacher-basedaction research in schools. The paper incorporatesa biographical strand in which the author describesthree action research projects he has been involvedin as a facilitator during the last 15 years. In

90

doing so he attempts to show how each projectaddresses problems, dilemmas and issues forfacilitators which were unresolved in previousones. He attempts to illustrate the development ofhis understanding of the facilitator's role overtime. The paper also attempts to clarify thetheoretical and philosophical assumptions whichunderpin the action research movement in education.Finally, one of the central points that the authorwishes to stress is that teacher-based actionresearch emerged in the U. K. as a dimension ofschool-based curriculum development initiated byteachers. He argues on the basis of personalexperience that the action research movement wasnot something primarily transmitted from the highereducation sector into the school system, eventhough teacher educators within higher educationinstitutions have played a major role infacilitating action research and articulating itsunderlying logic. (Abstract accompanying article)

Mac Pherson, R. J. S. (1982, December). The W. A.peer process consultancy project: Action research asINSET for principals. Paper presented at the AnnualMeeting of the New Zealand Association for Research inEducation, Christchurch, New Zealand. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 229 836)

Five self-selected triads of Western Australia (W.A.) principals served as process consultants toimprove their schools. Patterns of communication,leadership procedures, tensions impedingcollaboration, decision-making, and problem-solvingprocedures were the foci of attention. Thestrategy asked each consultant pair (in turn) toclarify their values with regard to a realadministrative issue in their peer's school; toconstruct a vision of a feasible alternative; andto generate change strategies and tactics beforeoffering feedback and facilitative services. Theconsultation process occurred over a two-month

91

period followed by a day-long workshop. Most ofthe principals found the experience productive, andregretted its termination. Reports from each triadare summarized, and implications drawn later by theauthor are provided. A table illustrates responsesto a survey of competencies and understandingsconsultants wanted as content for future workshops.(Abstract accompanying article)

Showers, B. (1985) . Teachers coaching teachers.Educational Leadership,42(7), 43-49.

Smyth, J. (1984). Teachers as collaborativelearners in clinical supervision: A state-of-the-artreview. Journal of Education for Teaching,10(1), 24-38.

Taba, H., Noel, E., & Marsh, J. (1955). Actionresearch as a technique of supervision. EducationalLeadership112(8), 453-458.

Winter, R. (1987) . Problems in teacher appraisal--an action-research solution? Paper presented at theAnnual Conference of the British Educational ResearchAssociation, Manchester, England. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 292 861)

Procedures and rationales for teacher appraisal areexamined. The target-output model calls foragreed-upon objectives to be compared withprofessional work. The performance criteria modelcompares professional work to agreed criteria ofcompetencies. A diagnostic model of appraisal ofteacher needs and potentials is joined with theothers in a "product" model that has more relevancefor professional work as it views professionaldevelopment in the process of teaching, instimulating learning by the teacher. Inapproaching the problem of government appraisal of

a profession, an "action-research" model isproposed to deal with enhancement of teachers'professionalism, leaving aspects of promotion and

92

response to incompetence to separate initiatives.(Winter, et al., p. 18.)

ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1978). Organizationallearning: A theory of action perspectives. Reading,MA: Addison-Wesley Press.

This book is particularly helpful in understandingthe consistency or lack of consistency betweenone's espoused and practiced values. (Abstractaccompanying article)

Roweton, W. E., & Wright, C. B. (1985).Teacher/researcher collaboration in an age oforganizational development. Paper presented at theAnnual Meeting of the American Education ResearchAssociation, Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 270 422)

Most agree, in general, that educational researchbenefits American schools. However, the specificrelationship between research and applicationremain poorly cultivated, and too littleeducational research is actually utilized byclassroom teachers. This paper selectively reviewsthe intricate association between educationalresearchers and American practitioners and focuseson models of professional collaboration.Educational research will be more generouslyapplied if researchers, research institations,teachers, and schools would realisticallyaccommodate one another. A four-page list ofreferences is included. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

CURRICULUM DELIBERATION

Connelly, M. (1978) . How shall we publish case

93

studies in curriculum development? : An essay reviewof Reid and Walker's case studies in curriculum change.Curriculum Inquiry,8(1), 73-82.

McKernan, J. (1991) . Action inquiry: Studiedenactment. In E. C. Short (Ed.), Forms at curriculuminquiry (pp. 309-326) . Buffalo, NY: State Universityof New York Press.

Roby, T. W. (1985) . Habits impending deliberation.Journal Q1 Curriculum Studies,17(1), 17-35.

The ingredients of this essay are straightforward:a short description of the deliberative format, adescription of some habits which impededeliberation-especially in its curricular form-andsome suggestions for their amelioration. (Author)

Reid, W. A. (1988, Fall) . A research agenda: Theinstitutional context of curriculum deliberation.Journal of Curriculum and Supervision,4(1), 3-16.

Willinsky, J. (1989). Getting personal andpractical with personal practical knowledge.

rriculum Inquiry,19(3), 247-264.

Clandinin and Connelly's research on teacher's"personal practical knowledge" has made asubstantial contribution to the study on teacherthinking. Yet as their research is currentlyconstituted, its conception of teaching tends toisolate the teacher, as it fails to deal with theinstitutional elements to this form of work Twofundamental principals of this research project arereconsidered: one is the methodological as theresearcher strives to collaborate with teachers,and the other is conceptual as the researcherpursues an individuality that lies at the center of"personal practical knowledge." A return toClandinin and Connelly's data suggests thatlimiting factors in their collaborative efforts

91)

94

include discourse conventions and the press fornarrative unity. The principal challenge to theirconception of the individual comes from the post-structuralist theories of the subject which wouldallow a more open, if less unified, experience inthe teaching of school. (Abstract accompanyingarticle)

Documents

DOCUMENT RESUME ED 393 876 TM 024 750 AUTHOR … · Corey, S. M. (1952, May). Educational research and the solution of practical problems. Educational Leadership,9(8), 478-484. What