Action
Reaction
The
format/context/content of the term research
may change, but the label itself will not. Most people in their 30’s 40’s or
50’s have not only experienced traditional research, as it were, but have most
likely been part of the entire process. As a student in elementary school, I remembered
that everything was structured to the point that I felt I was part of a
production line, in an automotive factory. If it were not for my dear school
friends, with whom I felt were my second family, I do not think I would have
survived. During that time, there was only one way, one type of classroom pedagogy
or structure; it was simply the teacher-centered approach. A student either
went along to go along or here it is,
pass or fail. The responsibility was
enormous and we all had to do learn quickly, this was case, in my early childhood.
I suppose it made little woman and men of us all, in some respects. We were
truly all different characters, very strong in our own key signatures.
Before action research, traditional research was a
linear activity that made teachers and principals more like technicians and
they were created from outside researchers, usually by university researchers.
These types of traditional researchers are good for creating or expounding on
theory and practice, but classroom environments and students were not part of the
equation. If the latter were, they only played a smaller role or simply a
destination point. Traditional research may be conducted simply to
structuralize or provide a base for an already established curriculum.
Education research is a field of inquiry aimed at
advancing knowledge of education and
learning processes, development of the tools and methods necessary to support
this endeavor. Educations researchers aim to describe, understand, and explain
how learning takes place throughout the life cycle and how formal and informal
processes of education affect learning, attainment, and the capacity to lead
productive lives. Scholarship in this arena is undertaken at the individual,
situational, institutional, and social structural levels of analysis. The
unifying purpose for education research is to build cumulative and sound
knowledge about student learning, teaching methods, teacher training, and
classroom dynamics. In contrast, teacher inquiry (several labels exist) consist
of how teachers interpret their surroundings, in the classroom. In addition, to
how the student could comfortably and successfully adjust. When confronted with the intricate, diverse,
delicate and often times chaotic context of the classroom’s trial and tribulations,
teacher inquiry furnishes rich descriptions of the teaching and learning
process. At its peak, teachers can change their alliance to form new
relationships with pedagogical content knowledge and schooling
practices/procedures, simultaneously rearranging the hierarchical relationships
that currently exist to the priests of knowledge in temple-like schools or the
university arenas. Teachers are now playing more of a role as problem-posers,
not simply constrained to be problem-solvers.
In some ways, action research studies can cross-over or
be similar to that of traditional educational research studies. After observing
the comparative chart (Appendix A) one could determine that both studies would
make an effort at improving the classroom learning environment, both would use
data to reach conclusions. The major difference is that action research uses
real-time in-class studies, whereas traditional educational research may use
theory or the reports of negative/positive experiences from academic institutions
(I.e. schools) as a catalyst for change. In addition, action research is based
on one study, in one environment, so the results or effects may differ from
study to study, due to demographics and/or logistics. Traditional educational
research may look at a larger scenario for the betterment of the educational
environment, but miss important variables such as demographics, poverty, a
unique social-structure of a single community, immigration policies and their
adverse effects.
Some studies interact directly with a culture and others
indirectly. Study #3 of the comparative chart dealt directly with the culture
(Chinese) designated in the study. Parents of the students were contacted
exclusively by the teacher (includes administration) and an exchange of Chinese
and English languages took place, during the process. Study #2 influenced the
students and respective teachers (future teachers) quiet effectively.
Collaboration, writing skills and the study of Native-American history were
introduced throughout the study. The study was also quiet successful, improvements
and realizations were present with all parties involved, at the conclusion. In
addition, this study incorporated the most equity in teaching practices simply
because all students, at all levels, were involved. Weaker or stronger students
were given assistance, along the process. Surprisingly, attitudes towards
writing also changed to more positive ones, at the conclusion of the study.
In conclusion, the most important aspect of action
research is the exclusive involvement of the teacher. I believe that action
research would be effective and useful in a targeted or specific area of a
community, but not necessarily pertinent to the whole, regarding education. Traditional
educational research could be effective as a whole, but not necessarily to a
specific community, with regards to education (i.e. methodology or pedagogy). Therefore,
both studies may be seen as necessary and more effective, when combined.
Appendix
A
|
|
