Facilitating and Supporting Action Research by Teachers and Principals: Self-Study of a Superintendent’s Role

Jackie Delong

Brant County Board of Education, Brantford, Ontario, Canada

Paper presented at the International Conference,

Self-Study in Teacher Education: Empowering our Future,

Herstmonceux Castle, East Sussex, England August 5-8, 1996

 

Facilitating and Supporting Action Research by Teachers and Principals:

Self-Study of a Superintendent’s Role

Introduction

For the last year and a half I have been Superintendent of Schools for The Brant County Board of Education in Brantford, Ontario, Canada. I am a member of the senior administrative team that provides leadership to an education system of 2000 staff and 18,000 students, kindergarten to secondary school graduation. My particular areas of responsibility encompass 5000 students in a family of 14 elementary and secondary schools in a core city area, staff development, safe schools, community relations, career education and school-to-work connections, and adult and continuing education. While there are many and demanding roles within the job, it is challenging and fulfilling.

 

Much of the pleasure of the position derives from the supportive and caring climate of the system, both within the board office and in the schools and offices, and from the quality relationships I experience on a daily basis.

 

The administrative team is just that--a team. We care about and support each other in an atmosphere of creative thinking and problem-solving. Trust is the operating principle within the administrative team and with the Board of Education trustees. I believe that this working environment makes it possible for us to encourage and support a system that is a learning organization. We work without many of the obstacles common to workplaces where trust does not exist.

 

Trust and trustworthiness are important principles that I value. To those I would add honesty, fairness, empathy, commitment, interdependence, relationship-building, respect for the individual, and the importance of children and the community. My own children, now at university (one finishing, one beginning) continue to bring me a great deal of joy and comfort.

 

Over the years, I’ve been fortunate to have opportunities to experience a variety of roles and positions. I have held positions as teacher, department head, teacher federation leader, system special education coordinator, Ministry curriculum writer and school principal. In addition, I have contributed to the life of the community through volunteer activities in a variety of capacities. I thrive on change and on new opportunities to grow, to learn and to contribute. I am not happy if I am not on a sharp learning curve, constantly being challenged to improve. A perfectionist streak prevents me from being totally satisfied with what I do. Still, I have infinite patience with others.

 

This school year, 1995-96, has been a year of exciting learning and growth because of an opportunity to work with a group of teachers and researchers in Action Research. As I have described in another paper, "The Role of the Superintendent in Facilitating and Supporting Action Research," working with two pilot teams on their action research projects has inspired me to embark on my own journey of researching my own practice as a superintendent. As the teacher-researchers were recording, analyzing and reporting their improved practices, I was questioning my own. I was also observing a professional development process that was the intent, though not generally the practice, of the Teacher Performance Review procedure in our board.

 

The work I did in supporting the two action research pilot projects in my board during 1995-96 required my abilities to motivate and engage teachers in risk-taking, to plan, and to provide support and human, material, and emotional resources. At the time, I was focused on the growth of teachers in building their capacities to improve learning for students and not particularly on improving my own practice. Asking me to support teachers in their work is just part of what I do.

 

The challenge that I now face is analyzing how I can use what influence I have to improve learning in schools. One area of interest for me is that of Parental Involvement. Peter Moffatt (Director of Education and my critical friend/partner) and I have designed a non-hierarchical "Levels of Involvement" framework that we have begun to use in the board to analyze the level and degree to which parents are involved in our schools. The level that has the most interest is one called ‘Home’work, where parents are directly involved in the learning process with their children. In fact, both action research pilot projects involved parents as co-educators in their children’s learning. There are five other levels from volunteer to advisory. Both Peter and I believe that we can bring about improvement in the attainment of student outcomes if we can engage parents in the learning process. Building relationships of trust and understanding with the parents and, by extension, with the entire community will be central to this change.

 

To assemble data about the effectiveness of some of the strategies being employed to increase parental involvement, both Peter and I will be gathering evidence. Peter will do this on his regular visits to schools, focusing particularly on schools outside my direct jurisdiction (outside my family of schools), through his committee (The Internal Communications Network), and through observation and discussion with principals and trustees and with me.

 

I have engaged one principal and vice-principal in an elementary school to gather baseline data on levels of parental involvement in their school, to plan strategies to increase involvement, and to keep personal journals for observation and reflection. In fact, they are going to try School-Wide Action Research. To date, I have audio-taped three planning/thinking discussions with them. To this group, I plan to involve two other "focus" schools and to add an emphasis in the entire family of schools on Parental Involvement, as well as on using the action research process to determine our success.

 

I am currently working on a plan for in-service activities for staff and parents in building relationships, communication (particularly listening), facilitation, and parental and community involvement, as well as action research. At this time the questions seem overwhelming. I will need help in forming an action plan to answer the questions:

 

· What data will I need to gather so that I can evaluate the influence of my actions in my professional and community contexts?

· What data will I need to gather to evaluate my influence on the quality of education in my family of schools through increasing parental involvement in schools and in student learning?

· How can I evaluate my contribution to collaborative action research with Ron Wideman and with my family of schools?

I recognize the unique challenge in the role of superintendent, a role that generally keeps me at arms’ length from the children and the classroom. I work at solving this dilemma. This, of course, only adds to the challenge and, therefore, to the potential for making a difference.

 

Ron Wideman and I have collaborated on several action research projects, and we collaborated earlier in the writing of "The Common Curriculum, Programs and Policies 1994." Ron was the Project Coordinator and I was hired by The Ontario Ministry of Education and Training as a member of the writing team. As with the earlier writing, there is a truly synergistic process that occurs when we start writing. The ideas flow back and forth in a creative process that is quite remarkable. We’ve found that while we can germinate the ideas on our own, we produce much better work together in front of a computer terminal. Collaborative inquiry at work! I conclude this paper with one that Ron Wideman and I recently developed collaboratively.

 

 

 

Action Research: School Improvement that HonoursTeacher Professionalism

Jackie (Foerter) Delong ,Brant County (Ontario) Board of Education, Canada

Ron Wideman, Nipissing University, North bay, Ontario, Canada

 

Ontario is on the move toward an action research model for school improvement. In the action research process, the school becomes a learning organization for principal, teachers, and students. In collaboration with others, teachers collect information about the effectiveness of their practice, analyze the information, and draw conclusions about what parts of their program are working and where improvement is needed. This kind of investigation involves teachers in a personal reflective process that includes clarifying their values about learning and analyzing how their behaviour and the results of that behaviour correspond to these values.

 

Action research is not a new methodology but it is receiving increased attention and value around the world. Reflective practice, collaborative inquiry, teacher as researcher, self study, and living educational theory are other terms used to describe similar movements in Great Britain, The United States, Australia and Continental Europe (McNiff, 1995). One leader in the action research movement in Ontario is Tom Russell of Queen’s University, who has studied how pre-service education teachers experience the process of learning to teach (Russell, 1995). Lynne Hannay of the Midwestern Office of The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education is recognized for her grassroots work with classroom teachers in implementing the action research approach (Hannay, 1994).

 

During the last two years, there has been a growing momentum in the development of action research in Ontario. In 1995, The Ontario Ministry of Education and Training (MET) funded The Common Curriculum Innovation Fund project on Action Research. The Ontario Public School Teachers’ Federation (OPSTF) coordinated the project in four school boards - Brant Waterloo, East Parry Sound, and Nipissing - and hosted the "Act, Reflect, Revise" Conference in February 1996. A second opportunity for action researchers to share and reflect, "Act Reflect Revise Revitalize" will be held in Brantford, Ontario on February 27-28, 1997. The December 5-6, 1996 conference of the Ontario Educational Research Council (OERC) will be devoted entirely to the topic of action research.

 

Political, economic, and educational developments may encourage Ontario schools to use action research to anchor school improvement and professional development activity. Public pressure for a more productive and affordable school system will continue. The provincial curriculum will continue to be outcomes-based with high levels of education expected for all students. Increasingly, accountability for student learning will be pushed to the school level. There will be more site-based management with fewer administrative and support staff at the school board central office. We will see increased provincial inspection and testing. An emphasis on school-work connections and the operation of school councils will increase community involvement in the operation of each school.

 

We welcome the development by the Ministry of Education and Training of student learning outcomes for Grades 10 to graduation. However, decision-making about the strategies to improve learning by individual students is best made in the school rather than at the provincial or school board levels. These decisions need to be grounded in data acquired through school-based research. The school exists to enable all students to learn. As long as there is even one identifiable group of students which is not achieving, school staff should not feel satisfied.

 

The authors have extensive experience in the Ontario school system, having worked in a variety of teaching and administrative positions in school boards and the ministry. We are increasingly convinced of the need for an action research approach for the following reasons.

 

· We have long been aware that "imposed" professional development and school improvement initiatives have not usually been effective in changing classroom practices (Fullan 1982). Teachers are ready for a more professional model of professional development (Delong [Foerter], 1996). We have grown from the days when the primary concerns revolved around degree completion and additional qualifications to raise category levels.

 

· We respect the individual capacity and responsibility of teachers and principals to self-improve based on a concern for student achievement. Authentic assessment based on teachers’ own research should drive the ongoing growth and improvement of professional practice. It is a key means of professional renewal.

 

· We believe that when principals and teachers are action researchers they model the kinds of learning experiences we envision for students. They are able to make decisions that enable students to succeed as adults who are capable of constructive self-evaluation.

 

· We agree with Jack Whitehead that, "a form of inservice education which is based on teachers’ practice should be the knowledge base of educational theory" (Whitehead, 1993). More of the research on improving practice belongs with the practitioner in the classroom and school. The teacher’s voice needs to be central to the development of understanding of teaching and learning.

 

How Do You Do Action Research

Action research is a reflective process. It has more in common with qualitative, than the more traditional quantitative research methods. Qualitative research methods are not standardized. Emergent design is a key concept. Researchers are encouraged to design their own methods based on general guidelines rather than fixed rules to suit the nature of the study and the resources available.

 

One important guideline is to ensure the validity of findings. A key method is triangulation. The researcher partners with two trusted "critical friends" who share similar values and whose primary concern is to support the researcher’s attempts to improve his or her practice. These critical friends are a sounding board for the researcher - providing feedback on the research, the data, and the findings. Practically, triangulation should be a mutual relationship; each member of the group serves as his or her own researcher and critical friend to the other two. In action research, key questions help guide productive action. Two over-riding questions are:

 

1. How do I improve my practice?

2. What kind of evidence can I gather to show the impact of my work?

 

Sequenced questions such as the following provide more specific guidance:

1. What is the problem? The problem may be identified by reviewing current practice. For example, one could gather evidence of students’ learning to identify gaps between the intent of one’s teaching and the actual attainment of student learning outcomes.

2. What are some "possible solutions"? Solutions may be found in one’s imagination, by talking with critical friends and other colleagues, and by searching the educational literature.

3. What is the "possible solution" I want to investigate? The chosen solution must be personally meaningful. One needs to have a sense that it will make a difference.

4. How do I make the solution work? Test this proposed solution and modify it as needed. Active experimentation and the evaluation of experiments result, over time, in the development of new practices that work.

5. How do I record data and reflect on it? Keeping a journal and discussing it with one’s critical friends are effective methods. Writing is a thinking process which promotes reflection and results in insights that improve practice.

6. How do I share my experience with others? This is how the practitioner demonstrates and models his or her professional development and contributes to the improvement of educational practice. Holding a meeting, conducting a workshop, or writing a paper are possible ways to fulfill this responsibility.

7. What is next? Action research is an open ended, ongoing, cyclical process. The solution one develops to the initial problem will generate the next problem to be addressed. This is the catalyst to continuous professional improvement.

 

Why is Action Research Effective?

The literature and research on adult learning suggests why action research contributes to teacher growth. Action research begins from the natural investigative process teachers have been shown to use when making changes in their classroom practices (Wideman 1995). Action research makes that natural process more systematic and effective.

 

Action research is effective because it focuses on promoting "learning" rather than on delivering "instruction" or "training". Learning is a natural, cumulative activity that individuals undertake in order to meet perceived needs by changing themselves. Training, on the other hand, is the attempt by authorities to direct the potential of learning in the individual. Traditionally, we have relied on the use of training approaches for professional development with disappointing results. It is time for a Copernican revolution in thinking that establishes learning rather than training as the correct sun in the sky of educational change.

 

Action research is effective because it promotes a self-generated desire for self-improvement. We know that motivation for learning originates within the adult learner. The motivation to learn is value-based; the learner chooses to learn when he or she identifies personally important needs or interests that learning will satisfy (Brundage and Mackeracher, 1980). A great deal of learning is motivated by a need to respond to work-related problems (Tough 1982). Seeing a discrepancy between what teachers believe they should be doing and what they are actually accomplishing can engender a constructive personal accountability.

 

Action research is effective because support for the learner is built in. The critical friends/partners whom the teacher chooses serve as a sounding board and a source of ideas and encouragement. Teachers need support when they are changing classroom practices. In fact, the traditional isolation of the teacher in his or her individual classroom is a significant hindrance to change. Support is particularly needed when the change involves changes in the teacher’s value system. When teachers are making changes of this kind, they can experience a variety of painful feelings including fear, uncertainty and guilt that are alleviated through collaboration with trusted colleagues (Wideman, 1991).

 

What is Needed to Support Action Research

Traditional models of support for professional development are not effective in making action research work. Action research is what Stephen Covey describes as an "Inside-Out" approach (Covey, 1994). The professional begins with what he/she values and cares about to determine the research question and process, and to choose his or her critical partner. Although advisor/practitioner relationships may serve as a starting point, the absence of power relationships in action research, such as the relationship of expert to rookie teacher, makes true collaborative inquiry a reality.

 

The relationship among critical friends requires trust and the expectation of reflection from each partner. This process of equals learning together by reflecting on their individual practices may be difficult for some teachers and principals who have little experience or ability in acting collaboratively. They will need coaching by colleagues who possess the required skills and attitudes. Brant County was one of the boards involved in OPSTF’s Common Curriculum implementation project on action research. The experience of Brant County staff indicates that the following factors support a practitioner engaging in action research:

 

1. a minimum of two creative, reflective, teachers/administrators as critical friends

2. a supportive administrator/principal who encourages risk taking and who celebrates successes

3. a school culture that honours professionalism and reflective practice

4. time to plan and to record one’s research in a journal that includes observations and reflection

5. information and in-service on how to

· frame a question

· collect data

· analyze data

· work with critical friends

· share the research process and results with others

6. a self-generated research plan, including questions and research processes, validated through discussion with one’s critical friends

7. the capacity to publish and accredit the practitioners’ action research process and results.

 

Conclusion

In summary, we see a wave of support and encouragement in Ontario and in the world for valuing ongoing professional learning and respecting the teacher as researcher and reflective practitioner. Educators are ready to take increasing responsibility for their professional growth and are capable of meeting the challenge. Action research is an idea whose time has come and the maturing of the profession provides the climate for change. Action research is simply a very professional model of professional development that honours teacher’s commitment to improving educational practices.

 

References

Brundage, D.H., and Mackeracker, D. Adult Learning Principles and their Application to Program Planning. Toronto: Ministry of Education, Ontario, 1980.

Covey, S. Principle-Centred Leadership. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994.

Delong (Foerter), J. The Role of the Superintendent in Facilitating and Supporting the Action Research Process. Toronto: The Ontario Public School Teachers’ Federation, 1996.

Fullan, M. The Meaning of Educational Change. Toronto: The O.I.S.E. Press, 1982.

Hannay, L. Strategies for Facilitating Reflective Practice: The Role of Staff Developers. Journal of Staff Development. Vol. 15, No.3, 1994.

McNiff, Jean. Action Research for Professional Development. Dorset, UK: Hyde Publications: 1995.

McNiff J., Lomax P., and Whitehead J. You and Your Action Research Project. New York: Routledge, 1996.

Russell, T. Why I Can’t Teach Without Action Research? Toronto: The Ontario Public School Teachers’ Federation, 1995.

Tough, A.M. Intentional Changes: A Fresh Approach to Helping People Change. Chicago: Follett Publishing Company, 1982.

Whitehead, J. The Growth of Educational Knowledge: Creating Your Own Living Educational Theories. Dorset, UK: Hyde Publications, 1993.

Wideman, R. "Understanding How Change is Experienced - The Perspective of the Teacher". Orbit (26.3) 1995.

Wideman, R. How Secondary School Teachers Change Their Classroom Practices. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, 1991.