Pub Date : 2023-08-08DOI: 10.1080/09650792.2023.2252212
Allan Feldman
This issue of Educational Action Research includes 12 articles and one review of a podcast. The reviewing of podcasts related to action research is new for our journal, but, in this issue, Mindy Gold introduces us to The Action Research Podcast, hosted by Adam Stieglitz and Joe Levitan. As of this writing they have released 39 episodes, beginning in September 2020. As Gold describes in her review, the Podcast is a source of important information about action research and is enriched by the many guests who share their wisdom with the hosts. Readers of this journal will find the website to be enlightening and a useful resource for their work. I now turn to the regular articles in this issue. In most of them, the authors take either a participatory and/or critical stance toward action research; that is, there are some articles that report on participatory research, some that take a critical stance, and some that do both. It may seem odd that there are articles in this issue that are participatory but not critical, or critical but not participatory. I believe many of the journal’s readers would define participatory research as having a critical perspective; however, as this issue demonstrates, it is possible to have research that is one but not the other. From my reading of the articles, I found six that explicitly stated they were participatory. I next examined the ways in which the authors characterized the participatory nature of their projects. In all six, collaboration between the authors and participants was central to their approach. This was expressed as the studies being co-designed (Morris et al.), set up as a partnership (Chadha et al.), being community-based (Costley et al.; Morris et al.; Schwedhelm et al.), or involving the people who are the focus of the study (Costley et al.; Tiefenthaler, Schmidt, & von Köppen). That said, several of the articles reserved the term ‘researcher’ to refer to the authors, describing community-members or other stakeholders as ‘participants’ (Morris et al.; Schwedhelm et al.; Stapleton & Mayock). Several of the articles featuring participatory methods used definitions of participatory research that included critical aspects, and are, therefore, both participatory and critical. For example, two articles included the use of critical conversations and the construction of knowledge through open and critical dialogues in which hierarchies and power structures were questioned (Schwedhelm et al.; Stapleton & Mayock). Others made clear that participatory research required that relationships among researchers, co-researchers, and participants need to be egalitarian (Tiefenthaler, Schmidt, & von Köppen) and that participants should be recognized and valued, and seen as active agents in existing power and social structures (Stapleton & Mayock). I also looked to see how the authors who used critical methods defined what they meant by that. One aspect was a focus on what Isobel Rainey refers to in her paper as the ‘gra
本期《教育行动研究》包括12篇文章和一篇播客评论。回顾与行动研究相关的播客对我们的杂志来说是新的，但是，在这一期中，Mindy Gold向我们介绍了由Adam Stieglitz和Joe Levitan主持的行动研究播客。截至撰写本文时，他们已经从2020年9月开始发布了39集。正如戈尔德在她的评论中所描述的那样，播客是行动研究重要信息的来源，许多嘉宾与主持人分享他们的智慧，丰富了播客的内容。这本杂志的读者会发现这个网站对他们的工作很有启发性和有用的资源。现在我来看看这一期的常规文章。在大多数研究中，作者对行动研究采取了参与和/或批判的立场;也就是说，有些文章报道参与性研究，有些文章采取批评立场，有些文章两者兼而有之。这期杂志上有些文章是参与性的而不是批判性的，或者是批判性的而不是参与性的，这似乎有些奇怪。我相信这本杂志的许多读者会把参与式研究定义为具有批判性的视角;然而，正如这个问题所表明的，有可能只有一种研究而没有另一种研究。从我阅读的文章中，我发现有六篇明确表示他们是参与式的。接下来，我考察了作者描述其项目的参与性的方式。在这六项研究中，作者和参与者之间的合作是研究方法的核心。这表现为研究是共同设计的(Morris等人)，作为伙伴关系建立的(Chadha等人)，以社区为基础的(Costley等人;Morris等人;Schwedhelm et al.)，或涉及研究的重点人群(Costley et al.;蒂芬塔勒，施密特，冯Köppen)。也就是说，一些文章保留了“研究者”一词来指代作者，将社区成员或其他利益相关者描述为“参与者”(Morris等人;Schwedhelm等人;斯台普顿&马约克)。一些以参与性方法为特色的文章使用了包括关键方面的参与性研究的定义，因此，既是参与性的，也是批判性的。例如，两篇文章包括批判性对话的使用，以及通过对等级和权力结构提出质疑的开放和批判性对话来构建知识(Schwedhelm等人;斯台普顿&马约克)。其他人明确指出，参与式研究要求研究人员、共同研究人员和参与者之间的关系需要是平等的(Tiefenthaler, Schmidt， & von Köppen)，参与者应该得到认可和重视，并被视为现有权力和社会结构中的积极行动者(Stapleton & Mayock)。我还查看了使用批判方法的作者如何定义他们的意思。一个方面是关注伊莎贝尔·雷尼在她的论文中所说的“基层”，她认为这是“局外人，边缘人，被压迫的人，被排斥的人，边缘人或边缘人，来自全球南方和贫困北方的从业者”的同义词。《教育行动研究2023》(EDUCATIONAL ACTION RESEARCH 2023)，第31卷，第31期。4,611 - 619 https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2023.2252212
{"title":"Participatory and critical action research","authors":"Allan Feldman","doi":"10.1080/09650792.2023.2252212","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2023.2252212","url":null,"abstract":"This issue of Educational Action Research includes 12 articles and one review of a podcast. The reviewing of podcasts related to action research is new for our journal, but, in this issue, Mindy Gold introduces us to The Action Research Podcast, hosted by Adam Stieglitz and Joe Levitan. As of this writing they have released 39 episodes, beginning in September 2020. As Gold describes in her review, the Podcast is a source of important information about action research and is enriched by the many guests who share their wisdom with the hosts. Readers of this journal will find the website to be enlightening and a useful resource for their work. I now turn to the regular articles in this issue. In most of them, the authors take either a participatory and/or critical stance toward action research; that is, there are some articles that report on participatory research, some that take a critical stance, and some that do both. It may seem odd that there are articles in this issue that are participatory but not critical, or critical but not participatory. I believe many of the journal’s readers would define participatory research as having a critical perspective; however, as this issue demonstrates, it is possible to have research that is one but not the other. From my reading of the articles, I found six that explicitly stated they were participatory. I next examined the ways in which the authors characterized the participatory nature of their projects. In all six, collaboration between the authors and participants was central to their approach. This was expressed as the studies being co-designed (Morris et al.), set up as a partnership (Chadha et al.), being community-based (Costley et al.; Morris et al.; Schwedhelm et al.), or involving the people who are the focus of the study (Costley et al.; Tiefenthaler, Schmidt, & von Köppen). That said, several of the articles reserved the term ‘researcher’ to refer to the authors, describing community-members or other stakeholders as ‘participants’ (Morris et al.; Schwedhelm et al.; Stapleton & Mayock). Several of the articles featuring participatory methods used definitions of participatory research that included critical aspects, and are, therefore, both participatory and critical. For example, two articles included the use of critical conversations and the construction of knowledge through open and critical dialogues in which hierarchies and power structures were questioned (Schwedhelm et al.; Stapleton & Mayock). Others made clear that participatory research required that relationships among researchers, co-researchers, and participants need to be egalitarian (Tiefenthaler, Schmidt, & von Köppen) and that participants should be recognized and valued, and seen as active agents in existing power and social structures (Stapleton & Mayock). I also looked to see how the authors who used critical methods defined what they meant by that. One aspect was a focus on what Isobel Rainey refers to in her paper as the ‘gra","PeriodicalId":47325,"journal":{"name":"Educational Action Research","volume":"31 1","pages":"611 - 619"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44967075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-06DOI: 10.1080/09650792.2023.2244536
Britteny M. Howell, S. Buckingham, Carrie King, T. Kelly
{"title":"“A little bit fun, a little bit frustrating:” utilizing photovoice to document university student responsibility during a global pandemic","authors":"Britteny M. Howell, S. Buckingham, Carrie King, T. Kelly","doi":"10.1080/09650792.2023.2244536","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2023.2244536","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47325,"journal":{"name":"Educational Action Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46143833","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-01DOI: 10.1080/09650792.2023.2242425
J. A. Handeland, A. Prinz, E. M. Ekra, M. Fossum
{"title":"‘I realised it when we played with the doll!’: nursing students’ learning from participation in an action research project that included manikins","authors":"J. A. Handeland, A. Prinz, E. M. Ekra, M. Fossum","doi":"10.1080/09650792.2023.2242425","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2023.2242425","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47325,"journal":{"name":"Educational Action Research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59978886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-02DOI: 10.1080/09650792.2023.2229870
U. Bergmark, Ann-Charlotte Dahlbäck, Anna-Karin Hagström, Sara Viklund
{"title":"Leading with care: four mentor metaphors in collaboration between teachers and researchers in action research (Translated from the Swedish and revised by the authors)","authors":"U. Bergmark, Ann-Charlotte Dahlbäck, Anna-Karin Hagström, Sara Viklund","doi":"10.1080/09650792.2023.2229870","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2023.2229870","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47325,"journal":{"name":"Educational Action Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46100985","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-02DOI: 10.1080/09650792.2023.2231512
Andargachew Moges Agonafir
ABSTRACT In the 21st century, preparing university students for real work and lifelong learning requires instructors to serve as facilitators of learning rather than as providers of information. Instruction needs to be learner-centered, active, enjoyable, and engaging. As one form of active learning strategy, cooperative learning (e.g. group assignment) helps students to collaborate in tasks actively, and this in turn improves their learning and performance. However, in my undergraduate course, when I encourage students to do assignments in groups, many of them do not take it seriously and, as a result, the final product is in terms of quality and participation. The objective of this action research was to improve the educative value of group assignment as one form of cooperative learning by way of designing the task thoughtfully, following up and motivating students, providing constructive and timely feedback, and ensuring greater student engagement in the task. Third year psychology students were enrolled for the project, and two phase actions were implemented: preliminary and actual action implementation. The outcomes of the preliminary and actual action implementation were then compared. The findings revealed that, as a result of the intervention, students changed their attitudes towards group assignment and were more engaged in the second assignment than the first (t = 6.51, p = 0.05). Students’ performance in the second test and group project also increased (t = 2.80, p = 0.05 and t = 7.67, p = 0.05 respectively). Based on the findings, implications for future research and action are suggested.
{"title":"Using cooperative learning strategy to increase undergraduate students’ engagement and performance","authors":"Andargachew Moges Agonafir","doi":"10.1080/09650792.2023.2231512","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2023.2231512","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the 21st century, preparing university students for real work and lifelong learning requires instructors to serve as facilitators of learning rather than as providers of information. Instruction needs to be learner-centered, active, enjoyable, and engaging. As one form of active learning strategy, cooperative learning (e.g. group assignment) helps students to collaborate in tasks actively, and this in turn improves their learning and performance. However, in my undergraduate course, when I encourage students to do assignments in groups, many of them do not take it seriously and, as a result, the final product is in terms of quality and participation. The objective of this action research was to improve the educative value of group assignment as one form of cooperative learning by way of designing the task thoughtfully, following up and motivating students, providing constructive and timely feedback, and ensuring greater student engagement in the task. Third year psychology students were enrolled for the project, and two phase actions were implemented: preliminary and actual action implementation. The outcomes of the preliminary and actual action implementation were then compared. The findings revealed that, as a result of the intervention, students changed their attitudes towards group assignment and were more engaged in the second assignment than the first (t = 6.51, p = 0.05). Students’ performance in the second test and group project also increased (t = 2.80, p = 0.05 and t = 7.67, p = 0.05 respectively). Based on the findings, implications for future research and action are suggested.","PeriodicalId":47325,"journal":{"name":"Educational Action Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45223832","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-30DOI: 10.1080/09650792.2023.2230593
Tshewang Rabgay, G. Kidman
{"title":"A culturally relevant action research model for Bhutanese secondary science teachers","authors":"Tshewang Rabgay, G. Kidman","doi":"10.1080/09650792.2023.2230593","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2023.2230593","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47325,"journal":{"name":"Educational Action Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44384472","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：