This section describes my self-study. Action Research is the method that I chose to research my practice so I am better able to understand why I choose to work the way I do. I outline my data collection and my data analysis. I also describe my submission to the Ethics Review Board and the issues that were clarified for me as a result.
Background
My introduction to the action research methodology was in 1997, as part of my professional growth strand. At that time, teachers deemed competent were encouraged to decide on two or three aspects of their practice that they would like to improve, then devise a plan for making the changes. At the end of the year, the teacher would meet with their principal and consider whether or not the goals had been achieved. I decided to adopt the action research process as a means of researching the potential improvements in my practice. Trusting the process was difficult. I felt that I was doing what any good teacher would be doing: watching themselves work and making note of the strategies that worked and those still needing improvement. However, as I sat down to write up the finished project, I began reading and reflecting on the various journal entries I had collected from myself and from my students. All provided a great deal of food for thought. At that point, the growth was evident. Only by choosing to stop and look back was I able to understand the transformation that had taken place with my students and me. In that study, I proved to myself that my philosophy of education makes a difference for children! That was empowering and exciting! Rather than basing my perception of myself as a good teacher on nebulous feelings, I was able to prove that I truly was helping students improve their self-confidence. At this point, like Conle (2000), "my lived and my academic routes became one road" (p. 193). I adopted the reflective stance and began to make connections between my personal and professional life.
Brock University and the Grand Erie District School Board (GEDSB) provided the opportunity to further my knowledge of the action research process at a perfect time. Representatives created a partnership between the two organizations, with the understanding that the participants would pursue their studies using the action research methodology. Sixteen teachers and administrators applied to do graduate work as a result of the new partnership. Our cohort has reached a level of trust and support that is not common in postgraduate work and has also impacted on our professional interaction. While we learned together, every course started from where the prior course left off. After the first course, we did not have the awkwardness of getting to know each other all over again.
Near the end of our first year, we were fortunate to have Dr. Jack Whitehead as visiting professor for our research methods course. He guided us through our process of writing a proposal and developing a research question that related to our espoused values as educators. As I have mentioned before, our values become more apparent if they are tested or we have to prioritize between two of our values. We were encouraged to formulate our research to answer the question, "How do I improve this process of education here?" (Whitehead, 1989, p. 3).
In the fall of 2000, we were to prepare a submission to the Ethics Review Board at Brock University. Because we had chosen to research our practice in our respective educative settings, there would be children, teachers, and parents involved in our study. As a consequence, we would need to have our project proposals approved to ensure that no one would be exploited in our research process. The following is a journal excerpt.
On September 18th, I received an email from Michael (Manley-Casimir) in preparation for the first class of the fall. I was excited. I had started my new job and things were going well. I was looking forward to seeing many of the people in the cohort for the first time since the July courses.
In my zeal, I downloaded all of the pages that Michael recommended. I wanted to be ready for anything! I didn't read them, just printed them out and put them in my binder for the class.
At the class, the discussion began to unnerve me! What were all of these forms for? Did the university not trust me to be professional in my job? And there was a "resubmission form." What did that mean? Action research is too fluid to pin down at this stage of data collection! Oh well, if this is a necessary evil,
I'll do it! I filled in the forms, wrote the letters, then sent everything off, quickly. I wanted to officially get going on my project! I used the word "officially" because I had been journaling since before I started the job. I wrote about my feelings of alternating calm and panic; excitement and dread; confidence and ineptitude.
I wanted to capture all the emotions because Christopher Day (2000) stated that very few people have researched and written about the position of principal.
Upon my receipt of my refusal, I was really taken aback! What do they mean, "a position of power over [my] participants"? "Social harm...coercion, and possible fear." Who do they think they are?
They are questioning my professionalism! Do they honestly think that I could use this information against people who have agreed to help me? Do they think I did this with my students in previous projects? How dare they question me, an experienced action researcher? "They" obviously do not understand the action research self-study process!
I calmed down and decided to "play the game." I was not going to intentionally mislead the board; however, I decided to give them what they appeared to want and consider this one small obstacle in my path. Upon its resubmission, my proposal was immediately successful and I was off! (Compilation of journal entries, Fall 2000)
This process drastically changed my view of the university. I had been naïve in my belief that involvement with an institution of higher learning was without politics or academic jealousy, and that power and knowledge were diametrically opposed. I believed that the more people learned, the more they would realize they still have to learn so humility and increased collaboration would be the result. I believe that many people in the cohort were discouraged and disillusioned by the ethical review process. Some may even have considered dropping out of the program. The energy in our meetings diminished slightly. As an experienced action researcher, I believed in the action research process enough to fight for its validity as a viable means of researching aspects of my practice. However, I was concerned about the demoralizing impact the ethical review process would have on the cohort, yet was determined to help where I could.
The action research process and the teaching profession mandate that elements such as professionalism, trust, and the reflection cycle are present in our practice. As a consequence, I felt that some of the types of answers demanded by the ethics board were unnecessary. I understand, however, that my initial indignation was due to the emotional energy needed to resubmit my proposal. The Ethics Review board must protect the university against potential lawsuits as a result of the unscrupulous use of human subjects. Similarly, legislation impacting my position as an elementary vice principal is also becoming more and more stringent as a means to protect children.
Action Research Process as Ethical
First, professional ethics. The Ontario College of Teachers has written Standards of Practice (January 1999b). They have also drafted a document regarding the ethical standards of practice expected from teachers (1999a). As a member of the teaching profession, refusal to acknowledge the contents of either document could have severe consequences on my career. Any research undertaken by educators to improve their practice must adhere to those ethical guidelines. Teachers with the Grand Erie District School Board who are deemed competent have been encouraged to participate in action research as part of their professional growth strand for years. As a member of this board, I have the permission of the school board and the blessing of the College of Teachers to engage in this type of research. Both organizations encourage teachers to reflect on their own practice, thus taking responsibility for their own professional development. Other professions take pride in adding to their professional knowledge base. Action research, which encourages the sharing of practitioner research through presentation and/or writing as part of the validation process, provides a natural vehicle for the development of that base.
Action research is, by its very nature, an ethical process. An investigation of the evidence of my values in my practice is actually a search for the reasons for my professional choices. "Action research has to do with making informed choices in practice, choices that are guided by a sense of the pedagogical good, which is more a concern about ethics than knowledge" (Smits, 1997, p. 292). According to McNiff (2000), "action research is a value-laden practice. It involves reflecting on our values, and asking ourselves whether we are living them in practice" (p. 10).
The second element is trust. Teachers have been given a sacred trust--the education of children. That trust cannot be violated without serious consequences. When an action researcher decides on an aspect of their practice for improvement, they must continually monitor their impact on students and student learning. As part of the action research process, participants must grant permission to be quoted and/or their photographs used. In the case of children, parents must be informed if any kind of presentation will be given. However, the focus of the research is the teacher's practice and not the students' ability. We are using "our own classrooms as laboratories and our students as collaborators" (Hubbard & Power, 1993, p. xiii), not subjects.
The third element is the cycle of reflection. The reflection cycle is central to this type of research, so the very act of "carving our plans in stone" for the review board, could negatively impact the cyclical action research process. It is to be a living process of acting, reflecting, revising, and then acting again. Action researchers very often do not know where they will end up, because reflection could result in a shift of direction or emphasis. In fact, once started, the process often takes on a life of its own. The researcher just chooses to stop and write up the progress to date, but once "reflection-on-action" (Schön, 1983, p. 276) and "reflection-on-values" (Ghaye & Ghaye, 1998, p. 42) becomes a habit or a way of thinking, the process is continuous.
My Method
My chosen method of researching my practice has many components. As mentioned already, my main component is action research. The following 10 points outline the action research process (McNiff, Lomax & Whitehead, 1996) I chose to follow:
- A commitment to educational improvement
- A special kind of research question
- Putting the 'I' at the centre of the research
- A special kind of action that is informed, committed and intentional
- Systematic monitoring to generate valid data
- Authentic descriptions of the action
- Explanations of the action
- New ways of representing research
- Validating claims made as a result of the research
- Making the action research public (p. 16)
McNiff, Whitehead, Laidlaw and the Bath Action Research Group (1992) believe that without an improvement in the "social order" then there is no purpose for the research. Improving the alignment between my espoused values and those evident in my practice will make me a more credible leader and ultimately, I hope, have a positive impact on student learning.
The formation of my question was addressed in the previous chapter. The research question must articulate an aspect of my practice that I hope to improve and as such, must be based around "I" (Whitehead, 1989). He frequently encourages teachers to videotape their practice. He believes that "when you view yourself on video you can see and experience your "I" containing content in itself. By this [he means] that you see yourself as a living contradiction, holding educational values whilst at the same time negating them" (p. 4). I discuss my living contradictions in Chapter Four.
As mentioned earlier, my students and coworkers are collaborators in my study. However, "I am the subject and object of the research"(McNiff, et al. 1996, p. 17). Some of the ways that I fit into the research are: "by showing humility and exposing my vulnerability, by owning my mistakes, [and] by standing my ground when my principles are at stake" (McNiff, et al. 1996, p. 17).
The fourth and fifth points above refer to the action research cycle--acting, reflecting on the outcome, and revising my practice. To ensure that my practice is informed and intentional, I must listen to teachers, students, quality literature and myself. Relying on any one source could result in a biased study. When one or two of my sources validate my observations, triangulation occurs, which will help ensure that my data are authentic. My literature review is interwoven throughout this project. Reading quality literature on classroom practice and leadership skills is necessary to inform my practice and provide grounding for my actions. Once data have been collected, analysis must take place. Descriptions and explanations must be represented accurately, in a public forum, in order to receive validation.
The action research is a viable means of researching my practice. It is a "lived practice that requires that the researcher not only investigate the subject at hand but, as well, provide some account of the way in which the investigation both shapes and is shaped by the investigator" (Carson & Sumara, 1997, p. xiii). Acknowledging and embracing bias, building relationships (Black 1998), measuring professional development, valuing my own way of learning and knowing (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger & Tarule, 1997), analyzing my own methodology, and appreciating rather than overlooking the rigor of qualitative research are all factors addressed in my study.
A major concern in educational research is bias. The action research process involves the formation of a question that is explored rather than the formation of a hypothesis to be proven. Palys (1997), in his book Research Decisions, states that scientists "have no initial biases" while lay-persons, "may or may not have initial biases" (p. 6). Investigating a concern without acknowledging personal biases does not mean that there are no biases, only that they are being ignored. Everyone has biases and, if a hypothesis is formed at the outset, thinking, viewing, and studying will then take place through the point of view of that hypothesis. In action research, the question is more fluid. As the researcher acts, then reflects on the result, the question may shift slightly as more knowledge is obtained. The next action may be different that the one initially planned, based on the results of the previous action. At certain points along the way, the researcher is expected to hold up their observations and/or results to receive the "phenomenological nod" (Buytendijk cited in Van Manen, 1990, p. 27) from colleagues who recognize the validity and rationality of the decisions made by the practitioner/researcher. Eliciting feedback from colleagues will be more likely to ensure the accuracy of observations, thus strengthening the study. This may also result in a shift in direction. Acknowledging the researcher's point of view is a healthy means of determining the values held by the researcher and contributing to their personal "living educational theory" (Whitehead, 1989).
As mentioned in Chapter Two, two people have been my most important "critical friends" (McNiff et al., 1996, p. 30). Jackie Delong and Heather Knill-Griesser have been coresearchers and have frequently listened to my reflections and asked questions to help move my thinking. Bassey (1991) believes this process is very important.
The action researchers' use of the critical friend is as pertinent for those who seek to understand as for those who seek to change, and the criticism needs to focus on the style of communication as much as on the construction of ideas. (p. 14)
Along with Jackie and Heather, the cohort group has proven to be invaluable in pointing out aspects of my study that are sometimes too obvious to me to be articulated. Over the 2-year span of the cohort, various occasions have been provided for us to present our works-in-progress for feedback, questions, and suggestions.
Engaging in the action research process takes courage and a commitment to regular journal writing. Holley (1997) stated, "engaging in some self study meant that I will feel vulnerable and I am uncomfortable with this."(Chapter 1) Rereading journal entries after time has elapsed can reveal patterns in the issues contained in the journal and allow the reader to become aware of attitude shifts and professional growth. Courage is necessary for two reasons. One is to ensure that the journal entries are honest and include failures as well as successes. Second, investigating our own practice means we have to be willing to risk seeing things we do not like in our practice. "The human subject is not merely contained or supported by a context or an environment--the individual literally is the context" (Carson & Sumara, 1997, p. xviii). Every situation can provide learning and personal growth, so with the correct attitude, even negative situations can be learning experiences.
Possible Issues
Use of the term methodology may be problematic for some; however, consideration of the way in which I learned what I did involves analysis of my method. I use the term, "process" to describe how I have learned what I have come to realize that I know. There have been concerns expressed regarding the possible rigor of qualitative research, one problem being the replicability of results and the second being the subjective analysis of narratives and journals. "Often, a problematic situation presents itself as a unique case" (Schön, 1987, p. 5). Working with people means that no two relationships are the same. No two people are the same, and therefore, no set diagnosis and/or prescription will have the same effect if applied in two different situations. It would be unethical to hold one group of children back while I try improvements with another group. The "control group" would potentially be disadvantaged. I believe that is unethical. As I reflect on my practice, I am changed. Experience and new information are evolving continually, so we are never the exact same person facing the exact same problem. Therefore, replicability is an unrealistic aim.
"'Rigour' is [sometimes] misconstrued as 'neat'. Definite answers are wanted even if it means some of the questions are ignored" (Cook, 1998, p. 105). Life is not a logical sequence of events. Relationships, events, and problems do not exist in neat, concise packages which we can choose to open as we have the time or the energy to deal with the contents. This idea raises a question. Can research studies that are compartmentalized to certain aspects of our lives be perceived to have true validity? Do they change lives for the better? Do they contribute to a better "social order?" (McNiff et al., 1992). Do those studies really improve student learning?
If we miss out the 'messy' bit, if we tidy everything up to fit in a system, the creative part of our work can be lost. By only describing the tangible and certain do we hide the essence of our professional work; the development of the thinking process? (Cook, 1998, p. 106)
I believe we do! A rigidly detailed research plan would imply a prediction of our findings in the process. The cycle of action research involves watching, assessing then making new action choices based on the assessment. The complete research process could be outlined only if the results of our actions were predicted in advance. Life is not a predictable series of outcomes, so it is unrealistic to expect action research--research of the individual--to be any different.
More than just a method of research, action research is a method for professional development. Engaging in action research empowers teachers; allows them to take responsibility for their own professional development. As such, the increased use of action research as a method will help reestablish teaching as a profession. Christopher Day (2000) describes the term professionalism as it refers to teachers:
[It] means having a strong technical culture (knowledge base); service ethic (commitment to serving clients' needs); professional commitment (strong collective identity); and professional autonomy (control over classroom practice). (p. 114)
Data Collection
My plan was to collect the data I would need to show that my values are evident in my practice--that I am credible and walk my own talk in my new role as vice principal. I collected emails, interview transcripts, personal journal entries, and saved notes from parents, staff, and students. Initially I had hoped to collect interviews or surveys near the beginning of my new job and then again, from the same people, near the end of my first year. A comparison of initial impressions from people and their later thoughts, would, I thought, give me the information to show my growth in my new role. I had also hoped that people would be pleasantly surprised at my willingness to appreciate and value each person. However, once into the position, I was uncertain about affecting the budding relationships with my new colleagues. Even though my experience had shown that taking a risk and asking for that level of feedback could help build a relationship, I was beginning to believe that a certain level of trust had to be established first. Since my proposal did not receive the approval of the ethics board until almost Christmas, I had a reason for delaying my data collection and, in retrospect, I realize it was a welcome respite.
I was still able to journal, however, and my personal journal entries from August to November taught me a great deal. Like Deirdre, "my journal enables me to consciously reflect on my engagement within various creative or intuitive experiences" (Cole & Knowles, 2000, p. 67). I believe that the things I learned from my own journal can and should be considered part of the study. Learning to trust my knowledge and my intuition was a valuable experience provided by the waiting period inflicted by the ethics board. I realize that I have my own way of perceiving the world and of picking up clues from people around me that affect how I relate to people and to situations.
Involving collaborators in the action research process may actually build relationships and improve the working environment. For example, I asked a colleague how I could better do my job. She was immensely flattered, and agreed to a taped interview. I believe our working relationship was strengthened as a result. To receive honest feedback, a level of trust must first be reached whereby the person being asked for input must trust that the researcher is prepared to accept the answer, whether positive or negative. I interviewed her and was given very valuable feedback and insightful observations that have positively impacted my job.
In February, I participated in a Covey training session based on the book, The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People (1989). The course has the same title as the book but was designed in 1998. My immediate superior--the school principal, and five peers were asked to complete profiles on me regarding my effectiveness in the seven habits. I asked Sandy, the school secretary, to complete one of the peer profiles on me. After reading it over one evening, she told me that she was "enormously flattered that I valued [her] point of view enough to ask [her] to fill out the form "(Personal Journal entry, February 2001). My experience has shown me that asking people for input and acting on that input when appropriate has the impact of building relationships. It worked with my own students in the past, and I see it continuing to work with colleagues. Creating an environment where positive and constructive criticism is welcomed rather than avoided is another positive aspect of the action research process. It is important to check that perceptions, observations and feelings are valid, and valuing the input of others helps them feel valued as well. One morning, I arrived at work to find a note from Susanne, a colleague, on my desk. She described a situation that I had helped her through earlier, and the final line of the note stated, "I appreciate the fact that you make me feel valued here" (Jan. 18, 2001).
Data Analysis
This involved two main components. The first I will describe is the means of analyzing and reflecting on my collected data: transcribed interviews, personal journal entries and email correspondence. The second component is my use of stories--the stories I chose and what I believe they taught me.
My reflection happened in three stages. The first two are "reflecting-in-action" (Schön, 1982, p. 276) and "reflecting-on-action" (p. 49). The first method I used as I went through my day. At the end of the day, I wrote to record situations that stood out. I did not stop to consider why they were significant, because I believed that a little distance as provided by time would increase the depth of my reflection and allow themes to emerge. My second stage of reflection happened periodically. About once a week, I wrote my overall impressions, issues, concerns over the last few days; this is short-term reflection. That reflection had the most direct impact on my actions. My third stage of reflection was analyzing my collected data during the final writing process.
For an example of the impact of my short-term reflection, I include the following phone calls. A mother called me one afternoon and yelled for almost 30 minutes. The reason was that her daughter had been disrespectful to a teacher and to me and I had called her into my office to reprimand her. She went home and complained to her mother. I tried throughout that conversation to explain the true situation, but I could hear the daughter in the background contradicting everything I said. I did not react on the phone, but I went home that day in a very angry frame of mind. Upon consideration, I realized that I did not need to take her words personally and that trying to state my side of the issue only fanned the fire. A few months later, a parent called to complain that an episode had happened in his daughter's class that he wanted addressed. He was very angry and yelled for a few minutes. Rather than trying to interject, I listened. When he finished, I assured him that I was unaware of the situation and would be glad to investigate for him. He calmed down immediately and the next morning, the situation was addressed. I believe the main difference in the two situations was my listening. The parent felt he was heard and I did not react with emotion.
My third stage of reflection happened much later, just prior to writing my final project. I filed all of my journal entries, emails, transcribed interviews, and quotes from colleagues in chronological order in a very large binder. Then, I dipped into my journal and began to read. Many times I found a section that I did not remember writing or receiving. That "reflection-on-values" (Ghaye & Ghaye, 1998, p. 9) revealed patterns or threads in my work of which I was previously unaware. I have discovered that when I am getting ready to write about an aspect of my work, or as a conclusion to an aspect of my study, I read and reflect at a different depth. By this time, I was able to see connections and themes. "Themes are abstract (and often fuzzy) constructs that investigators identify before, during, and after data collection. Literature reviews are rich sources for themes, as are investigators' own experiences" (Ryan & Bernard in Denzin & Lincoln, 2000, p. 780). They suggest that "researchers' values and prior experiences" (p. 781) are a source for themes.
Initially, I read through to reacquaint myself with what was there. The passage of time since the beginning of the year, meant that some of my recollections were fuzzy. Besides, I did not want to search only for the values I thought I held. That would be biased. I wanted to see if others were also evident. As I read, I added to my list, and then I sat back and narrowed down my list of values to ensure that there was very little overlap. I was also looking for less tangible values. If I could see an action, then I incorporated that into my list of standards. I believe that my standards are based on my values. Now, how will I see evidence of my espoused values in my practice if they are intangible? That will be difficult.
Once I had created a draft list of values and another list of standards, I went back through my binder of data. Using coloured pens to "code" (Ryan & Bernard in Denzin, p. 780), I highlighted quotes to substantiate my claims that my respective values are evident in my practice and helped to create my standards of practice. I used one colour for values, another colour for standards, and placed tabs on those pages so I could find my chosen quotes when I began to write.
What were my criteria for choosing quotes? Early in my new position I realized that I would be working with more closely with some teachers than others due to our assignments as learning resource teachers. I was responsible for the intermediate students. I also recognized that certain people were respected by their colleagues for their honesty and experience. I approached two or three and asked if they would be willing to be interviewed as to my effectiveness in my role as vice principal. They were a little embarrassed, thrilled, and flattered all at the same time. In Chapters Four and Five, I describe situations which I feel substantiate my claims and, wherever appropriate, I provide quotes from my data to validate those claims.
The second component is my use of stories. I have used the terms "situations" and "stories" interchangeably. All of my stories are descriptions of situations which have happened in my past. Situations in my past experiences are drawn from my memory and so I refer to them as stories.
How would my memory serve me? Would time have muted things in my mind? Would I only remember selectively, in other words, what I wanted to remember? I had to get this matter out in the open...and acknowledge it. (Canzoneri cited in Cole & Knowles, 2000, p. 29).
Situations are descriptions of recent experiences that I recorded in my journal and so are more accurate. Van Manen (1990) states, "You need to describe the experience as you live(s) through it. Avoid as much as possible causal explanations, generalizations, or abstract interpretations" (p. 64).
Stories from my past have shaped my values and, consequently, who I am as an educator. However, situations in my current position which elicit a strong emotion are also significant for what they can teach me about myself. Clandinin and Connelly (1994) explain a method for analyzing stories.
Methods for the study or personal experience are simultaneously focused in four directions; inward and outward, backward and forward. By inward we mean the internal conditions of feelings, hopes, aesthetic reactions, moral dispositions, and so on. By outward we mean existential conditions, that is, the environment of what Bruner(1986) calls reality. By backward and forward we are referring to ...To experience an experience is to experience it simultaneously in these four ways. (p. 417)
In my first two chapters, I chose stories to show the origin of my values and the formation of my philosophy of education. In Chapters Four and Five, I have chosen situations to substantiate my claim that my values are evident in my practice. In all four chapters, reflection has provided the "temporality" (Clandinin & Connelly, 1994). The significance of these stories is their relation to each other over time. The connection to each other is the themes which predominate in my life--my values of care, respect, trust, empathy, humour, and music.
Action Research is a way of working that helps us to identify the things we believe in, to check that we are justified in holding these beliefs, and then work systematically towards making them come true. It might not be possible to realise them completely, but we can go some way towards it. (McNiff, 2000, p. 2)
Experiencing the Research Process
Moving to a new position produced some complications in my original plans for my study. Would I be able to develop the relationships necessary to receive honest appraisals of my effectiveness in my new role? How is it possible to reflect on, and therefore, improve on, new practice? When I began the master's degree, I assumed that I would be analyzing my practice to improve it. However, in a new position, I did not have any basis for my comparison. In October at a master's class, Geoff Suderman-Gladwell wrote the following:
I see that you, Cheryl, are in a new job. Most of us are reflecting on something that we feel [we]are expert in doing. You are in a new situation. You have in the back of your mind the idea that maybe you don't know what you [are] doing. Are you just reflecting on bad practice? What does good practice look like? How can you compare what you are doing now to previous experiences if you are doing it for the first time. (October 21, 2001)
Another complication is my thought process.
As time went on and I became more adept at analyzing my own thinking and exploring multiple perspectives, I began to struggle with the contradiction that the more I thought about things, the more complex and confusing they became. Even though I relished the expansion of my thinking, at times I still wanted simple, concrete answers. (Ritchie & Wilson, 2000, p. 100)
There were times when I began to think that my reflecting was going to collapse in on itself and the resulting cacaphony would not help my process at all. So, while engaging in the process, I occasionally stepped outside of it to watch myself in the process, and each step backward shifted my view and my perspective. It is like a hallway with a mirror on each side. As you stand between the mirrors and look in one direction, you see various versions of yourself, and as you turn and look the other way, you see even more perspectives and versions of yourself. The difficulty is to look through enough mirrors to see the real person. The issue became finding a balance between reflecting on my practice and reflecting on my process of analyzing my practice. However, my complications only served to clarify my thinking and shift me in a new, more focused direction.
My sequence of writing and reflecting, as mentioned above, is one that has evolved over 4 years of engaging in various action research projects. I have had periods of inconsistent journaling which concerned me until I realized that those were times that I was thinking about the connections. So reflecting is no longer something I need to "make" time for; it has become a natural process while walking Jazz (see Acknowledgements) or jogging.
I have also learned my method of learning and perceiving the world. This validates my experience as an educator. Participation in the action research cycle of articulating a concern, trying a possible solution, and reflecting on the results affects my future actions based on my knowledge as an experienced teacher/administrator. Consciously analyzing my method of solving problems and considering my rate of success validates my knowledge and strengthens my view of myself as a professional educator.
In the next chapter, I describe my values evident in my practice and include quotes from the data I collected to substantiate my claim.
