Rosalind Hurford Research Methods in Education MA Unit

If the development of an emotionally literate classroom is fundamental to my own values and philosophy of education, how can I show the impact of it on the well-being and learning of the children I teach? How do I research this in my classroom?

Introduction

In this assignment I intend to demonstrate how, through generating my own living educational theory as an explanation for my own learning and that of my students, I am using an action research method to investigate the development of emotional literacy within my classroom, and why the choice of this methodology is best suited to the area of research and the situation in which it is taking place.

I intend to focus briefly on the background to the research and how it links to my own life values; examine the nature of different types of research methodologies, with reference to current ongoing debates about educational research, and the particular suitability for me of using a reflective narrative form; both to advance my own knowledge, improve my own educational practice and to add to the knowledge base of the wider educational community.

I will outline the form that my research takes and what evidence and data I expect to gather from it. In addition I will address the question of the criteria by which my research can be validated and judged.

Background to the Research, My Values and my ‘Living Contradiction’.

Teaching is a very personal occupation. How I organise my classroom, how I approach subjects and how I interact with the pupils is part of my personality, which in turn has been formed by experiences and how I perceive myself in relation to the rest of the world. Because of this there are personal qualities I wish to promote in the children which are linked to my own values.

School life is dominated by timetables and targets with the result that frequently a ‘production line’ situation appears to dominate. What concerns me is that addressing adequately the emotional needs of the children, seeing them as individuals rather than results. To this end my research focuses on how I am developing emotional literacy and empathy in the classroom, thus enabling each child to feel valued and secure enough to take risks. Underpinning this is my agreement with the definition that :

‘Emotional Literacy …means the capacity to register our emotional responses to the situations we are in….so that we recognise the ways in which they influence our thoughts and our actions’ (Orbach, S. 2001 p2)

Forms of Research and Different Methodologies.

Selecting the type of methodology to use seems to me to have several issues to address. Not least is the ongoing debate between a more traditional ‘scientific’ approach which has dominated social sciences and has its roots far in the past, and a more recent action research practitioner methodology.

The advantages of a propositional, objective and quantifiable methodology appear to lie in the appeal of measurable facts which can be checked and scrutinised by others. This type of research is advocated, among others, by Cohen & Manion (1995) who describe education research to be ‘a systematic and scholarly application of the principles of a science of behaviour to the problems of people within their social context’ (p40). Eisner (1988), in discussing the various forms of research, concludes that ‘propositional language is the vehicle, par excellence, for precise communication.’ (p16)

There are obvious strengths in choosing a scientific approach. There is a precision in using quantative data, an objective means of validating and the recognition that it is a tried and trusted form of research.

The problem with this type of approach is that while this might work for someone working objectively as an observer of the practice in my classroom, the nature of what I want to pursue requires a more subjective, qualifiable and reflective approach. In assessing my impact on the children’s learning there will be a lack of hard numerical data because I am looking to identify changes in their attitudes and behaviours.

The social sciences traditional approach also focuses on education research and not educational research, distinct areas as outlined by Witty. (2005) It would require that I act as an outsider in my research and that my ontological position, and therefore my epistemology and methodology will be driven by a spectator stance. As Furlong, (2003), explains:

‘A ‘big science’ policy for research is .. inappropriate in a world where practitioners increasingly want and need to engage in research themselves as a key strategy in ‘knowledge transfer’. (p1).

Smith (1997) also describes the traditional situation as being ‘one of ‘separation’ of researchers from what is researched, of their capacity to accurately represent reality, of objectivity as their way of professional life. (p7)

In contrast to the ‘scientific’ methodologies, and more naturally integrated in my work as a practitioner, is the action research approach to educational research, outlined as ‘a purposeful investigation, which involves gathering data and generating evidence in relation to articulated standards of judgement, in order to test an emergent theory.’

( Whitehead & McNiff, 2006,p12). Using this approach I begin by identifying a concern of my own practice that could be developed and use an action- reflection cycle such as that outlined below. This is then partly validated against my own living theory of education, my personal validation, and in collaboration with others, a social validation.

What is my concern?

Why am I concerned?

What experiences can I describe to show why I am concerned?

What can I do about it?

What will I do about it?

What kind of data will I gather to show the situation as it unfolds?

How will I explain my educational influence in learning?

How will I show that any conclusions I come to our reasonable, fair and accurate?

How do I evaluate the evidence-based account of my learning?

How do I modify my concerns, ideas and practices in the light of my evaluations?

Whitehead & McNiff (2005)

In Bassey’s (1992) opinion this type of reflective research could lead to ‘creative research with new systems, the development of novel solutions and the formulation of new ideas, by systematic and critical enquiry.’ (p1) and Furlong & Onancea (2005) conclude that ‘applied and practice-based research are not methodologically depleted forms of research; rather they can be innovatory modes of research that cater for a different set of needs and define quality in terms of wider social robustness. (p9)

This would seem to be more in keeping with what I want to achieve. I am not being employed by an outside agency to decide national policy, neither is my interest purely academic. This is personal to my professional life, relates to my values as being part of an inclusional world, and as such the research needs to have relevance to what I do, what I want to achieve and be manageable within the constraints of normal teaching. As I see it, getting embroiled in a debate over the various forms of research is best left to those at a distance from the classroom. What is important is that I identify the aspects of valid and reliable research, and choose a methodology that suits the context and purpose of my research. This does not mean joining one side or the other, both approaches have their own value in research, both have their drawbacks. As Snow (2001) comments:

‘Methodological rigor is, of course, not a concept limited in application to particular research strategies: Examples of bad research carried out with every possible quantitative and qualitative method could be cited, and bad research is not redeemed by association with any particular research tradition.’(P3)

There are questions that I must ask myself, and keep in mind throughout. What is the purpose of my research? What do I wish to extract from it? How will I present my findings in a systematic and honest form that will demonstrate my awareness of ethical considerations? How will I explain clearly what I have learned in a ‘language’ that other practitioners and those in education will understand and by what means will I validate it?

Whatever methodology is employed, or combination of methodologies, the outcome must be an extension to my learning and, hopefully, that of my pupils, which will be shown to withstand critical interrogation by others. Snow (2001) emphasises that the knowledge produced ‘must be both rooted in observation and be formulated in such a way that it transcends observation. (p5) Although the account will be created from my own concern, it will need to have the rigor and professional accountability expected from any form of research.

The Choice of Using a Living Theory Action Research Methodology

By selecting to use Action Research, (Whitehead & McNiff, 2005, 2006) I am asserting my right to generate my own living educational theory based on my own life values and embodied professional knowledge. It enables me to put myself in control of my own self-reflective process, allowing my own perceptions and the standards by which I judge my own effectiveness to guide me towards the point I wish to reach. In moving the research forward in this way I am accepting the concept of ironic validity as described by Patti Lather (1994):

‘Contrary to dominant validity practices where the rhetorical nature of scientific claims is masked with methodological assurances, a strategy of ironic validity proliferates forms, recognizing that they are rhetorical and without foundation, post epistemic, lacking in epistemological support. The text is resituated as a representation of its ‘failure to represent what it points toward but can never reach’ (p40)

I am acknowledging the valid arguments (Bullough & Pinnegar 2001, Donmoyer, 1996, Snow, 2001, Eisner, 1993, 1997 amongst others) that this raises the question of how to make my findings reliable and acceptable to the public body of educational theory, and will demonstrate that my work is not only of relevance to myself, but is of interest to a wider audience and has been carried out in a critical and evaluative way. By pursuing this method of research it is my intention to not only further my own knowledge and practice but to add to educational theory in general. The benefits of my action research are confirmed by Furlong & Onancea (2005) when they state:

‘There are at least two senses in which a research project can be evaluated in terms of its contribution to practice and to practitioners. The first is the extent to which it provides them with facts, evidence, experiments, new ideas etc., in a fashion that can be instrumental. This is what we call the technological dimension of research quality – its value for use.

The second is its contribution to the collective and personal growth of practitioners and policy makers; changing them as people through establishing forms of collaboration and partnership, increasing their receptiveness, reflexivity, virtuousness, and morality. This we call capacity building and value for people in terms of the development of tacit knowledge and of the ethical, interactional and critical dimensions of practice. (P10)

The action-reflection cycle is one ideally suited to the nature of my investigation. As I set out on my research path I have no predetermined outcome, except that in the process I will have modified and developed my practice, tested my results against my own standards of judgement and collaborated in critical evaluation with peer practitioners to assess the quality and authority of my research. In this, I will be extending my knowledge into the public domain; Karl Popper’s third world of knowledge.

This is not to say that I have no idea of what I want to achieve, but it allows for a creativeness, openness and conclusions that Bullough & Pinnegar (2001) state are:

‘hard won, elusive, are generally more tentative than not. The aim of self-study research is to provoke, challenge, and illuminate rather than confirm and settle.’ (p20)

By using a cycle of action and reflection I shall be able to tailor my research as it makes progress, constantly assessing and reviewing the impact of what I am doing and making informed decisions.

I feel very in tune with Marshall’s (2004) views on the exciting prospect of carrying out research this way. She illustrates it thus:

‘A sense of curiosity or a question surfaces, becomes stronger over time, creates figure against ground in my experience, demands attention and beckons, with a hint of danger too because the possible development might also challenge me in some way, take me to a learning edge. Inquiry of this kind is thrilling, making me feel especially alive.’ (p308)

My Action Research Cycle based on my Living Theory of Education

I interpret the action research cycle as one might view growing a perennial plant. You start at sometime with the seed or cutting, maybe by chance. You watch the initial growth and you see its potential. You make sure it is watered, fed and allow it to develop. Later on you consider whether it is in the best place, needs feeding, supporting. You take cuttings and new plants become established in their own right and the process continues.

To continue the analogy, this current action research cycle is rooted in my past experiences which provide a base for future growth. Each time I identify an aspect of concern I am nurturing the growth of a new cutting. Hammersley (1998) explains that:

‘The process of enquiry is historically located and shaped by context. We start from where we are; we always begin from particular assumptions and cannot question all of these at once’ (p19)

The beginning of this action research is grounded in identifying my concern for the value of emotional well being of the children, and thus future adults. The changes in educational policies since the 1980’s have been very target and measurable data orientated. Thankfully this is now beginning to change and although I welcome new policy moves to bring a sense of humanity back into education I feel there are ways I can personally address this without waiting for another ‘lunchbox’ of official ideas.

Having identified my concern I then took the step of validating its moral and ethical grounding by discussing my ideas with colleagues at school, senior management and in exchange of views with other teachers at the Tuesday evening sessions at the University. In this way I am beginning to validate my ideas and put them in a public domain, attempting to ensure, as Feldman (2003) expresses that:

‘Because our work as teacher educators is inherently moral and political, we need to make sure—to the best of our abilities—that our research, as well as our teaching, is worthy of this trust.’ (p27)

The next stage has been to increase my own knowledge of the nature of emotional literacy, empathy and investigate possible teaching resources. In this I have consulted literature such as by Goleman ( 2005), Orbach (2000), Csikszentmihalyi (2002), amongst others, as well as contacting organizations such as the Adlerian Society and Antidote, consulted practical teacher guides on developing circle time and looked at resources available on the web.

Following this (and still ongoing) I have discussed the nature of the ideas I have read about with colleagues, reflected on their responses and also reflected on how this fits with my specific values and situation. This cycle of action (including consultation) and reflection will continue throughout (and beyond) the research.

I have in mind to introduce several small changes to the layout of the classroom and timetable at the start of the new term: new cushions for the book corner, establishing a weekly ‘Golden Time’, a daily short class meeting time, negotiating and involving the children more in the daily routines, and planning a series of circle times – in addition to other strategies already in place.

Initially I want to see how the children respond to these things and whether the innovations have development potential. But more than that I want to assess how I am with the children, whether my own behavior promotes the concept of emotional literacy and how they respond to me. For this I have chosen to keep a written narrative account of the days, my reflections on what has worked or not worked, what issues have arisen and whether I feel I have addressed them in the most effective way.

A written narrative will form the main part of my research data. It is also my intention to use video in the circle time sessions to compare with my journal reflections. I want to examine and share with others how I behave; assess what my expressions and body language demonstrate, and offer the two accounts to critical evaluation. Both forms of recording are open to misinterpretation if I alone am judging them. This can then be extended into making assessments of how the children behave towards each other, whether there is an effect on their attitude to lessons and their to work calmly and co-operatively, both in my judgment, that of other adults working with them and in their own evaluations.

My intention is to use video as a backup confirmation of what I am doing. Used alone I do not feel it suffices. The camera becomes an extension of the photographer’s eye, it is largely mono sensory; it shows what happens but not what was going on inside at the time, in the same way that a baby’s expression might be considered a reflection of joy or wind, depending on who is watching it. For this reason using the written narrative is very important to me to confirm or deny what the camera sees. As Eisner (1988) states:

‘To try to comprehend the ways in which people function and the meanings the events in their lives have for them and to neglect either seeing or portraying those events and meanings is to distort and limit what can be known about them .’ (p17)

By using a reflective journal I am looking inward to what my embodied knowledge and own living theory tells me is good or bad. Marshall (2006) proposes that this is a necessary part of the self-reflection process and is:

‘essential to bringing attention to how I look outward and act.’ ( p12)

Writing my ‘own story’ is also a comfortable way of expressing myself. I find it enjoyable and this also enables to me to fit the research into daily routine without it causing friction.

Narrative writing also suits the nature of open-ended action research, whereas it would not be specific enough for a more traditional methodology. In this I agree with Carter’s (1993) opinion that:

‘The richness and nuance cannot be expressed in definitions, statements of fact, or abstract propositions. ..The knowledge represented in story cannot..be reduced to abstract rules, logical propositions, or the covering laws of scientific explanation. Story..accommodates ambiguity and dilemma.’ (p6)

By using this form of data representation I am opening myself up to examining a wider variety of questions, generating insight (Eisner 1997), constructing my own meaning and hopefully presenting what I have found in a way that other educationalists will find readable, relate to their own experiences and yet still have a reliability. The narrative is able to portray and communicate the subtleties of experiences and feelings and this is supported by Crites (1971):

‘Set within a world of consciousness, the mundane stories are also among the most important means by which people articulate and clarify their sense of the world.’ ( p 296)

In addition to these two forms of data collection I also intend to interview children about how they feel circle times help them, whether they feel I am addressing their emotional development and how this links to the way I organize their lessons, my attitude towards them and their general emotional feelings about being in my class. This will be important feedback in helping me to validate my own interpretations and is supported by Connelly & Clandinin’s (1990) view that:

‘When one engages in narrative enquiry the process becomes even more complex, for, as researchers, we become part of the process. The two narratives of participant and researcher become, in part, a shared narrative construction and reconstruction through the enquiry.’ (p5)

Establishing the Validity of Action Research.

In order to take my investigations from the personal level to acceptability as valid research in the public domain I will need to demonstrate that it has been systematic, rigorous, ethical and reliable. My standards of judgment will need to be examined and tested against the standards of others, the reasonableness of my claims validated. From the outset of working with the children I need to follow the BERA guidelines on ethical research by ensuring all participants are informed, permission for interviews and videoing is obtained and the right to opt out respected.

Whitehead & McNiff (2006) describe the qualities required by research in that it must be:

*Comprehensible, in that a form of language is used that is commonly understood by all;

*Truthful, in that all recognize these as true accounts and not fabrications;

*Sincere, so that all parties can trust what the other says;

*Appropriate, for the context, while recognizing the unspoken cultural norms in which their discourses are embedded. (p102)

In my collection of data, whether that is personal reflection, video, interview or questionnaire I will need to ensure that I have provided a clear and detailed description of how the data was collected and what it was that I considered worthwhile about it.

I will need to elaborate on what I have learned from the research as it progresses and how this links to my own values and living theory of judgment. By using different methods of collecting data, seeing the picture from different angles, such as comparing my own impressions with a video session, my intention is to demonstrate the reliability and trustworthiness of my study.

In my accounts it will also be important to explain how I have changed as a result of what I have observed or thought, to provide evidence that there has been a value to what I have been doing. In all this there will be my own self-validation against my own values of judgment, but as Marshall says (2006) this is not sufficient to make it worthwhile public research:

‘Reporting this level of detail about what I think/feel/sense also seems so trite. Doesn’t everyone do this self-tracking and deconstruct their own potential narratives with a critical eye as they go along? (p309)

This is echoed by Feldman (2003) who suggests that:

‘Issues of validity are important because when we engage in reflective processes that focus on ourselves (as in the construction of autobiographical narratives), we cannot be sure of the accuracy of what we see.’ (p27)

In order to bring my research into the public body of knowledge it must also share Hiebert, Gallimore & Stieglers (2002) criteria of having been ‘created with the intent of public examination, with the goal of making it shareable among teachers, open for discussion, verification, and refutation or modification. (p7)

The results of my research will need to be tested against the values of other teachers and educators, a social validation through meeting with critical friends or validation groups such as the Tuesday group at the University and colleagues at work, thus attaining the deeper meaning, expanded awareness, enlarged understanding as a ‘community decision’. (Eisner, 1997) My impressions need to be checked, my responses and conclusions questioned robustly and the trustworthiness of the work challenged. By doing this I am endeavouring to establish the validity of my own standards of judgement against those of other teachers. Whitehead (2005) describes the important of this in that:

‘Affirmations of shared meaning can be transformed, in the course of their clarification and emergence in practice, into living critical standards of judgment. Such standards are needed to judge the validity of any claim that we know our educational influence in our own learning, in the learning of others and in the learning of our social formations. Such standards are needed in validating and legitimating our living theories.’

Conclusions

Johnson (1989) describes embodied knowledge as:

’Knowledge in process, which emerges in the flow of practical activity, is directed towards ends…and is a context-sensitive exercise of imaginative capacities for dealing with problematic situations.’ (p364)

By using an action research methodology to investigate how my values impact on the well-being and learning of the children in my class I am extending my own learning, addressing concerns about the learning of the children and, by ensuring my the validity and rigor is endorsed by critical colleagues, I am contributing to a wider body of educational theory about good practice. My ontological stance of being a participant in the world around me influences my sense of what I know and how I know it. My research has social purpose in that I want to foster an atmosphere of inclusionality and caring relationships with my pupils.

This motivation excludes me from using a traditional scientific approach and with it the qualities of accuracy, transferability and measurable data. An action research method enables me use reflexivity in constructing my own meanings in my research and explore the implications as an insider and part of the generative evolutionary process. As Eisner (1988) states:

‘All methods and all forms of representation are partial and because they are partial, they limit, as well as illuminate what through them we are able to experience.’ (p19)

In appraising the value of my research I shall acknowledge the views of Furlong & Oancea (2005) that:

‘If we are to appraise a piece of research on its value for use, we need to concentrate not on its actual impact – something that would be almost impossible to assess in the short term - but on its potential value and on the openings that it provides to realise that potential. ’ (p12)

In judging my impact I shall be drawing on my own embodied knowledge and what I hold to be good and of value in life, the importance of good relationships, of conviviality, empathetic validity (Bassey, 1992), love of life and passion for what I do.

At the end, wherever that may be, I hope to have taken several steps along the road of my own learning, shown myself to be critical of my judgments and receptive to the opinions of others.

It is a route that as yet has no definite map. I travel with my heart and eyes open, my mind prepared to adapt and learn further. It is an exciting journey and an adventure that I look forward to sharing.

References

Bassey, M. (1992) Creating Education through Research. British Educational Research Journal. Vol.18, No.1, pp3-16 (retrieved 6/7/06)

Bullough, R.& Pinnegar, S. (2001) Guidelines for Quality in Autobiographical Forms of Self- Study Research. Educational Researcher, Vol 30, No.3, pp.13-21 (retrieved 9/8/06)

Carter, K. (1993) The Place of Story in the Study of Teaching and Teacher Education. Educational Researcher, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp5-12 + 18 (retrieved 25/6/06)

Cohen, L & Manion, L. (1995) Research Methods in Education. London. Routledge.

Connelly,F.M. & Clandinin, D.J. (1990) Stories of Experience and Narrative Enquiry. Educational Researcher, Vol.19, No. 5, pp2-14 (retrieved 25/6/06)

Crites, S. (1971) The Narrative Quality of Experience Journal of American Academy of Religion, Vol.39, No.3, pp291-311 (retrieved 25/6/06)

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002) Flow. London. Rider Press

Donmoyer, R. (1996) Educational Research in an Era of Paradigm Proliferation: What’s a Journal Editor to do? Educational Researcher, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp19-25 (retrieved 25/6/06)

Eisner, E.W. (1988) The Primacy of Experience and the Politics of Method Educational Researcher, Vol.17, No.5, pp15-20 (retrieved 24/6/06)

Eisner, E.W. (1993) Forms of Understanding and the Future of Educational Research. Educational Researcher, Vol.22, No. 7, pp5-11 (retrieved 28/3/06)

Eisner, E.W. (1997) The Promise and Perils of Alternative Forms of Data Representation. Educational Researcher, Vol. 26, No.6, pp4-10 (retrieved 28/3/06)

Feldman,A. (2003) Validity and Quality in Self-Study. Educational Researcher, Vol 32, NO3, pp. 26-28 (retrieved 9/8/06)

Furlong, J. (2003) BERA at 30. Have we come of age? Inaugural Presidential Address , Heriot-Watt University retrieved 14/8/06 from And read John Furlong's 2003 Presidential Address on BERA at 30. Have we come of age? http://www.bera.ac.uk/addressdownloads/Furlong,%202003.pdf

Furlong, J & Oancea, A (2005) Assessing Quality in Applied and Practice-based Educational Research. A Framework for Discussion. Retrieved from www.esrc.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/Images/assessing_quality_shortreport 8/8/06

Goleman, D. (2005) Emotional Intelligence. New York.Bantam.

Hammersley, M. (1998) Telling Tales About Educational Research: A Response to John K. Smith. Educational Researcher, Vol.27, No.7, pp18-21 (retrieved 25/6/06)

Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R, & Stiegler, W. (2002) A Knowledge Base for the Teaching Profession: What Would It Look Like and How Can We Get One? Educational Researcher, Vol31, No.5, pp3-15 (retrieved 9/8/06)

Johnson, M. (1989) Embodied Knowledge. Curriculum Enquiry, Vol.19, No. 4, pp361-377 retrieved 25/6/06)

Lather, P.(1994) Fertile Obsession: Validity after Post structuralism. ( Gitlin, A. Ed. Power and Method: Political Activism and Educational Research.) London. Routledge

Marshall,J. (2004) Living Systemic Thinking: Exploring Quality in First-Person Action Research. Action Research, Vol.2, No.3, pp309 -329 (retrieved 25/6/06)

Marshall, J. Self-Reflective Inquiry Practices in Reason,P. , Bradbury,H. (Ed) Handbook of Action Research. Participative Inquiry and Practice. Sage Publications retrieved 25/6/06

McNiff, J & Whitehead, J. (2005) Action Research for Teachers. David Fulton.

Orbach, S. (2000) Towards Emotional Literacy. London. Virago.

Smith, J.K. (1997) The Stories Educational Researchers Tell About Themselves. Educational Researcher, Vol.26, No. 5, pp4-11 (retrieved 25/6/06)

Snow,C.E. (2001) Knowing What We Know: Children, Teachers, Researchers (Presidential Address to AERA, 2001 in Seattle) Educational Researcher, Vol.30, No.7, pp3-9 (retrieved 25/6/06)

Whitehead, J. (2005) Living inclusional values in educational standards of practice and judgement.

Keynote for the Act, Reflect, Revise III Conference, Brantford Ontario. http://www.actionresearch.net retrieved 25/6/06

Whitehead,J & McNiff, J. (2006) Action Research living Theory. London. Sage Publications.

Whitty, G. (2005) Education(al) Research and Education Policy Making: Is Conflict Inevitable? Retrieved 14/8/06 from Whitty, G. (2005) Education(al) research and education policy making: is conflict inevitable. Presidential address to the BERA annual conference, 17^th September, 2005. Retrieved 19 July 2006 from http://k1.ioe.ac.uk/directorate/BERAPresidentialAddress09-2005.pdf