Action research and professional development in schools
Reflection as quality development and knowledge production
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.5535Keywords:
Insider research, School development, Practitioner action researchAbstract
This article examines practitioner action research in schools and how action research can enhance practice and generate knowledge through partnerships between academia and the education sector. In 2020, revisions to the Norwegian curriculum for primary and secondary education introduced guidelines for professional work. The changes in the curriculum framework entail teachers’ collaboration in knowledge production - utilizing research and their own experiences in the process. This changed the formal role of teachers from transmitting established knowledge to producing knowledge in professional development and research activities. The new regulations can be related to traditions within practitioner action research.
The article explores how action research can be used as a methodological framework in the professional work of schools. The starting point for the article is a thematic analysis of reflections from an action research project named Deeper Learning – How?, in which six schools participate in developing a model for unit planning. Structured interviews were conducted with members of school development groups in the schools every six months over 3.5 years, totaling seven interviews per school. The participants' reflections on their professional work serve as the empirical basis for the article.
Results from the thematic analysis demonstrate that participants employed the action research process as a methodological tool to cultivate new insights and enhance practice. These reflections enrich the schools' comprehension of their educational practices and lead to measures for improvements, actions, and change. The results also highlight that proactive leadership, agreed-upon measures, teamwork, and a consistent rhythm in professional work are vital for educational practice development and knowledge production.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Bradbury, H. (2015). The SAGE Handbook of Action Research. In The SAGE Handbook of Action Research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473921290
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589-597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
Bruner, J. (1991). The Narrative Construction of Reality. Critical Inquiry, 18(1), 1–21.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical Education, knowledge, and action research. London Falmer.
Chilisa, B. (2012). Indigenous research methodologies. Sage
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationships of Knowledge and Practice: Teacher Learning in Communities. Review of Research in Education, 24(1), 249–305. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X024001249
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance. Teachers College Press.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2021). Inquiry in the age of data: a commentary. Teaching Education, 32(1), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2020.1868142
Coghlan, D. (2019) Doing Action Research In Your Organization (5th ed.). Sage.
Dewey, J. (1916/2001). Erfaring og tenkning. I: L. E. Dale (red.), Om utdanning. Klassiske tekster (s. 53-66). Gyldendal.
Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92.
Fenwick, T., & Nerland, M. (2014). Reconceptualizing Professional Learning. Sociomaterial knowledge, practices, and responsibilities. Routledge
Gadamer, H.-G. (2012). Sannhet og metode. Pax Forlag
Gibbons, M. (1999). Changing Research Practices. In J. Brennan, J. Fedrowitz, M. Huber, & T. Shah (Eds.), What Kind of University? International Perspectives on Knowledge, Participation and Governance (pp. 23–35).Open University Press.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., & Scott, P. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Sage.
.
Hiim, H. (2010). Pedagogisk aksjonsforskning. Eksempler, prinsipper og kunnskapsfilosofisk grunnlag. Gyldendal akademisk.
Hiim, H. (2020). Likheter og forskjeller mellom tilnærminger til aksjonsforskning. I: S. Gjøtterud, H. Hiim, D. Husebø, & L. H. Jensen (red.), Aksjonsforskning i Norge: Grunnlagstenkning, forskerroller og bidrag til endring i ulike kontekster (volum 2) (s. 39-62). Cappelen Damm Akademisk/NOASP
Idris, K. M., & Asfaha, Y. M. (2019). Improving School Work in Challenging Context: Practitioners’ Views following a Participatory Action Research Project from Eritrea. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education, 3(2), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.3039
Kemmis, S. (2007). Participatory action research in the public sphere. In P. Ponte & B. Smith (Eds.), The quality of practitioner research (pp. 9–27). Sense Publishers.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action and the public sphere. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.) (pp. 559-603). Sage.
Kvernbekk, T. (2005). Pedagogisk teoridannelse. Fagbokforlaget.
Kvernbekk, T. (2011). Filosofisk om teori og praksis. Bedre Skole, (2), 20–25.
Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x
Lillejord, S., Bolstad, A. K., Fjeld, S.-E., Isaksen, L. S., Lund, T., Myhr, L. A., & Ohm, H. M. (2021). En skole for vår tid: Sluttrapport fra ekspertgruppen for skolebidrag. https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/0f38964bb67f4259b74967911799bdac/en-skole-for-var-tid_v5.pdf
Nicolini, D. (2009). Zooming In and Out: Studying Practices by Switching Theoretical Lenses and Trailing Connections. SAGE.
McNiff, J. (2011). What is Action Research? In J. Whitehead (Ed.), All you need to know about action research (2nd ed.) (pp. 7–17). Sage.
Mausethagen, S., Prøitz, T. S., Fekjær, S. B., Stenersen, C. R., & Finnanger, T. S. (2021). «En fot i begge leire hadde vært ypperlig.» En studie av offentlig ph.d. i utdanningsfeltet. Oslo Met/USN. https://www.utdanningsforbundet.no/globalassets/var-politikk/publikasjoner/eksterne-rapporter/en_fot_i_begge_leire-offentlig_phd_oslomet_usn_2021.pdf
Mills, M., Mockler, N., Stacey, M., & Taylor, B. (2021). 'The village and the world': research with, for and by teachers in an age of data. Teaching Education, 32(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2020.1868141
Ministry of Education (2017). Core curriculum – values and principles for primary and secondary education. https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/verdier-og-prinsipper-for-grunnopplaringen---overordnet-del-av-lareplanverket/id2570003/
Noffke, S. E., & Somekh, B. (2009). Action research: Methodology, context, and practice (2nd ed.). Sage.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company. How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press.
Norwegian Research Council (2023a). Ofentlig sekttor-ph.d. https://www.forskningsradet.no/sok-om-finansiering/midler-fra-forskningsradet/offentlig-sektor-phd/
Norwegian Research Council (2023b). Innovasjonsprosjekt i offentlig sektor. https://www.forskningsradet.no/sok-om-finansiering/hvem-kan-soke-om-finansiering/offentlig-sektor/innovasjonsprosjekter-i-offentlig-sektor/
Postholm, M. B., & Smith, K. (2017). Praksisrettet forskning og formative intervensjonsforskning: forskning for utvikling av praksisfeltet og vitenskapelig kunnskap. I: S. Gjøtterud, H. Hiim, D. Husebø, L. H. Jensen, T. H. Steen-Olsen, & E. Stjernestrøm (red.), Aksjonsforskning i Norge: teoretisk og empirisk mangfold. Cappelen Damm Akademisk (s. 71-94). https://doi.org/10.23865/noasp.17
Reason, P., & Bradbury. H. (2008). The SAGE Handbook of Action Research, ParticipativeInquiry and Practice (2nd ed.) SAGE.
Retningslinjer for tilskuddsordning for lokal kompetanseutvikling i barnehage og grunnopplæring (2021). Retningslinjer for tilskuddsordning for lokal kompetanseutvikling i barnehage og grunnopplæring (FOR-2020-12-22-3201). Lovdata. https://lovdata.no/dokument/LTI/forskrift/2020-12-22-3201
Robinson, V. (2011). Student-Centered Leadership. (1. Aufl., Vol. 15). Jossey-Bass.
Rutten, L. (2021). Toward a theory of action for practitioner inquiry as professional development in preservice teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103194
Sachs, J. (2016). Teacher professionalism: why are we still talking about it? Teachers and Teaching, Theory and Practice, 22(4), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1082732
Shirley, D., & Hargreaves, A. (2021). Five paths of student engagement: blazing the trail to learning and success. Solution Tree Press.
Stenhouse, L. (1981). What counts as research? British Journal of Educational Studies, 29(2), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.1981.9973589
Stringer, E. T. (2014). Action research (4th ed.). Sage.
Støren, K. (2022). Lokalt læreplanarbeid med fagfornyelsen. Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis, 16(1), 40–58. https://doi.org/10.23865/up.v16.3070
Støren, K. (2023). En didaktisk refleksjonsmodell for lokalt læreplanarbeid. Erfaringer og virkninger. Norsk pedagogisk tidsskrift, 107(4), 334-346. https://doi.org/10.18261/npt.107.4.5
Ulvik, M., Riese, H., & Roness, D., (2022). Å forske på egen praksis. Aksjonsforskning og andre tilnærminger til profesjonell utvikling i utdanningsfeltet. Fagbokforlaget.
Utdanningsdirektoratet (2021). Dybdelæring. https://www.udir.no/laring-og-trivsel/dybdelaring/
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Kristin Støren
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Declaration on copyright
- The author/s will keep their copyright and right of reproduction of their own manuscript, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, but give the journal a permanent right to 1) present the manuscript to the public in the original form in which it was digitally published and 2) to be registered and cited as the first publication of the manuscript.
- The author itself must manage its financial reproduction rights in relation to any third-parties.
- The journal does not provide any financial or other remuneration for contributions submitted.
- Readers of the journal may print the manuscripts presented under the same conditions that apply to reproduction of a physical copy. This means that mass reproduction of physical copies or production of copies for commercial purposes is not permitted without the agreement of the author/s.
