Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Action Research for Educational Communications and Technology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology

Abstract

Action research refers to the formalized, self-reflective research of practitioners. According to Cochran-Smith and Lytle (Inside and outside: Teacher research and knowledge. NY: Teachers College Press, 1993) action research is “systematic and intentional inquiry” (p. 7). It is often conducted collaboratively in research groups that meet in person or at a distance via communication technologies. Action research transforms the traditional “outside-in” relationship between practitioners and the educational community. It can provide a powerful means for bridging the divide between theory and practice and encouraging practitioners to engage in innovative practices. Action research includes a cyclical process of posing questions, collecting data, reflecting on findings, and reporting results. This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of action research and its history in the USA, Great Britain, and Australia. It also describes the epistemological and ontological differences between practical and critical action research. To inspire future action research in our field, we detail the action research method, including data collection and analysis techniques and provide example studies from the field of educational communications and technology. More specifically, we demonstrate the manner in which action research has already been used to better understand the impact of the integration of technology in classrooms and social settings. At the same time, we describe how action researchers have used educational communications and technology to conduct action research and to teach this research method through online or hybrid classes. Technology can be both the focus and part of the method of the action research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allan, K., & Miller, S. M. (1990). Teacher-research collaboratives: Cooperative professional development. Theory into Practice, 29(3), 196–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Altrichter, H., Feldman, A., Posch, P., & Somekh, B. (2008). Teachers investigate their work: An introduction to action research across the professions(2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bargal, D. (2006). Personal and intellectual influences leading to Lewin’s paradigm of action research. Action Research, 4(4), 367–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bay Area Writing Project. (1979). Bay area writing project, California writing project, national writing project: An overview. ED 184123. Berkeley, CA: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berthoff, A. (1987). The teacher as RE-searcher. In D. Goswami & P. Stillman (Eds.), Reclaiming the classroom: Teacher research as an agency for change (pp. 22–38). Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton & Cook.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borko, H., Whitcomb, J. A., & Byrnes, K. (2008). Genres of research in teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. L. Lytle, S. Feiman-Nemser, & D. J. McIntyre (Eds.) & K. E. Demers (Assoc. Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 1017–1049). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brause, R. S., & Mayher, J. S. (Eds.). (1991). Search and re-search: What the inquiring teacher needs to know. London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T., & Jones, L. (2001). Action research and postmodernism: Congruence and critique. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brydon-Miller, M., & Greenwood, D. (2006). A re-examination of the relationship between action research and human subjects review processes. Action Research, 4(1), 117–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caro-Bruce, C., Flessner, R., Klehr, M., & Zeichner, K. (2007). Creating equitable classrooms through action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, F., Jenkins, A., Woodward, C., Kop, R., & Jenkins, E. (2012). Exploring how social media can enhance the teaching of action research. Action Research, 10(2), 170–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavanaugh, C., & Dawson, K. (2008). Technology, professional development and action research in EETT middle school classrooms. Florida League of Middle Schools Journal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavanaugh, C., Dawson, K., White, S., Valdes, N., Ritzhaupt, A., & Payne, D. (2007). Leveraging laptops: Effective models for enhancing student achievement. Project Research Report 2006–07. Florida Center for Instructional Technology. Retrieved from http://etc.usf.edu/laptops4learning/resources/reports/Final_Report.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, Y., Liao, R., Wang, T., & Chang, Y. (2010). Action research as a bridge between two worlds: Helping the NGOs and humanitarian agencies adapt technology to their needs. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 23, 191–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1995). Teachers’ professional knowledge landscapes. New York: Teachers’ College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1990). Teacher research and research on teaching: The issues that divide. Educational Researcher, 19(2), 2–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1993). Inside and outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). The teacher research movement: A decade later. Educational Researcher, 28(7), 15–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Corey, S. M. (1953). Action research to improve school practices. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelissen, F., vanSwet, J., Beijaard, D., & Bergen, T. (2010). Aspects of school-university research networks that play a role in developing, sharing and using knowledge based on teacher research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 147–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, A., Foulger, T., Hansen, R., Kim, M., Schmidt, D., Smith, A., et al. (2011). TPACK in teacher education: Innovative models that work. Presentation abstract for the ISTE annual conference. Retrieved April 1, 2011, from http://www.isteconference.org/

  • Dawson, K. (2007). The role of teacher inquiry in helping prospective teachers untangle the complexities of technology use in classrooms. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 24(1), 5–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, K., Cavanaugh, C., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2008). Florida’s leveraging laptops initiative and its impact on teaching practices. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(2), 143–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Chicago, IL: Regnery.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Elliot, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elwood, S., Feliciano, R., Gems, K., Gulasingam, N., Howard, W., Mackin, R., et al. (2007). Participatory GIS: The Himboldt/West Humboldt Park community GIS project, Chicago, USA. In S. Kindon, R. Pain, & M. Kesby (Eds.), Participatory action research approaches and methods: Connecting people, participation and place (pp. 170–178). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, B., & Blumenreich, M. (2005). The power of questions: A guide to teacher and student research. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, A. (1993). Teachers learning from teachers: Knowledge and understanding in collaborative action research. Unpublished dissertation. Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, A. (1996). Enhancing the practice of physics teachers: Mechanisms for the generation and sharing of knowledge and understanding in collaborative action research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(5), 513–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrance, E. (2000). Action research. Providence, RI: LAB at Brown University. Retrieved from http://www.alliance.brown.edu/pubs/themes_ed/act_research.pdf

  • Foulger, T. S., Williams, M. K., & Wetzel, K. (2008). We innovate: The role of collaboration in exploring new technologies. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20(1), 28–38. Retrieved from http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/current.cfm

    Google Scholar 

  • Foulger, T. S., & Williams, M. K. (2007). Filling the gap with technology innovations: Standards, curriculum, collaboration, success! Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 23(3), 107–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gall, J. P., Gall, M. D., & Borg, W. R. (2007). Applying educational research: A practical guide (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gitlin, A., & Haddon, J. (1997). Educational research: Acting on power relations in the classroom. In S. Hollingsworth (Ed.), International action research (pp. 70–84). London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glanz, J. (1998). Action research: An educational leader’s guide to school improvement. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glanz, J. (1999). A primer on action research for the school administrator. Clearing House, 72, 301–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded ­theory. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodson, I. (1999). The educational researcher as a public intellectual. British Educational Research Journal, 25(3), 277–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, D., & Levin, M. (2007). Introduction to action research: Social research for social change (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Grimmett, P., & MacKinnon, A. (1992). Craft knowledge and the education of teachers. In G. Grant (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 18, pp. 385–456). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Grundy, S. (1997). Participatory action research in Australia: The first wave—1976 to 1986. In R. McTaggart (Ed.), Participatory action research: International contexts and consequences (pp. 125–149). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interest. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculum-based TPACK development. In C. D. Maddux (Ed.), Research highlights in technology and teacher education 2009 (pp. 99–108). Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education (SITE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatch, T. (2006). Improving schools in turbulent times. The New Educator, 2, 267–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatch, T., & Shulman, L. S. (2005). Into the classroom: Developing the scholarship of teaching and learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hechter, R., & Phyfe, L. (2011). TPACK in the science methods classroom: Focusing on the space between. In Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2011 (pp. 4115–4121). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Hendricks, C. (2009). Improving schools through action research: A comprehensive guide (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollingsworth, S., & Sockett, H. (1994). Positioning teacher research in educational reform: An introduction. In S. Hollingsworth & H. Sockett (Eds.), Teacher research and educational reform (pp. 1–21). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollingsworth, S. (1994). Teacher research and urban literacy: Lessons and conversations in a feminist key. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyland, N., & Noffke, S. (2005). Understanding diversity through social and community inquiry. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(4), 367–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, M. (2005). The lamp and the mirror: Action research and self studies in the social studies. In K. Barton (Ed.), Research methods in social studies education: Contemporary issues and perspectives (pp. 57–83). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judah, M., & Richardson, G. H. (2006). Between a rock and a (very) hard place: The ambiguous promise of action research in the context of state mandated teacher professional development. Action Research, 4(1), 65–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemmis, S., & Grundy, S. (1997). Educational action research in Australia: Organization and practice. In S. Hollingsworth (Ed.), International Action Research: A casebook for educational reform (pp. 40–48). London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner (3rd ed.). Victoria: Deakin University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action and the public sphere. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 559–603). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, P. (2009). Action research approach on mobile learning design for the underserved. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(3), 415–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kincheloe, J. (1991). Teachers as researchers: Qualitative inquiry as a path to empowerment. London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kincheloe, J. (1995). Meet me behind the curtain: The struggle for a critical post modern action research. In P. L. McLaren & J. M. Giarelli (Eds.), Critical theory and educational research (pp. 71–90). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kindon, S., Pain, R., & Kesby, M. (Eds.). (2007). Participatory action research approaches and methods: Connecting people, participation and place. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lagemann, E. C. (2000). An elusive science: The troubling history of education research. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lampert, M. (2000). Knowing teaching: The intersection of research on teaching and qualitative research. In B. M. Brizeula., J. P. Stewart, R. G. Carrillo, & J. G. Berger (Eds.), Acts of inquiry in qualitative research (pp. 61–72). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, B. B., & Rock, T. C. (2003). The effects of collaborative action research on preservice and experienced teacher partners in professional development schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(2), 135–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, C., Guerrero, M., Makikana, L., & Armstrong, M. (2002). Exploring language, identity, and the power of narrative (pp. 8–10). Network Magazine: Bread Loaf Teachers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lytle, S., Portnoy, D., Waff, D., & Buckley, M. (2009). Teacher research in urban Philadelphia: Twenty years working within, against, and beyond the system. Educational Action Research, 17(1), 23–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lytle, S. L., & Cochran-Smith, M. (1994). Inquiry, knowledge, and practice. In N. S. Hollingsworth & H. Sockett (Eds.), Teacher research and educational reform (Vol. 93, pp. 22–51). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLean, M. S., & Mohr, M. (1999). Teacher-researchers at work. Berkeley, CA: The National Writing Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manfra, M. M. (2009a). Action research: Exploring the theoretical divide between practical and critical approaches. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 3(1), 32–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manfra, M. M. (2009b). Critical inquiry in the social studies classroom: Portraits of critical teacher research. Theory and Research in Social Education, 37(2), 298–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCutcheon, G., & Jung, B. (1990). Alternative perspectives on action research. Theory into Practice, 29(3), 144–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKernan, J. (1991). Curriculum action research. London: Kogan.

    Google Scholar 

  • *McKernan, J. L. (1996). Curriculum action research: A handbook of methods and resources for the reflective practitioner. London: Kogan.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2002). Action research: Principles and practices (2nd ed.). London: Routledge Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • *McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2010). You and your action research project (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McTaggart, R. (1991a). Action research: A short modern history. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McTaggart, R. (1991b). Principles for participatory research action research. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3), 168–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *McTaggart, R. (Ed.). (1997). Participatory action research: International contexts and consequences. Albany, NY: State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, G. (2011). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, M., Rogers, C., Sanford, B., Nocerino, M. A., MacLean, M. S., & Clawson, S. (2004). Teacher research for better schools. New York: Teachers College Press and the National Writing Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, Q. T. (2007). Understanding high school black male students’ achievement and school experience. In C. Caro-Bruce, R. Flessner, M. Klehr, & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Creating equitable classrooms through action research (pp. 78–99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noffke, S. E. (1997). Professional, personal, and political dimensions of action research. In M. W. Apple (Ed.), Review of research in ­education (Vol. 22, pp. 305–343). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostorga, A. N. (2010). Technology integration in teaching action research. International Journal of Instructional Media, 37(2), 131–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, M. (2008). Teacher candidates reflect together on their own development of TPCK: Edited teaching videos as data for inquiry. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the society for information technology and teacher education international conference 2008 (pp. 5305–5309). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, J. N. (2001). Action research, pedagogy, and change: The transformative potential of action research in pre-service teacher education. Curriculum Studies, 33(1), 43–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, J. N., & Valli, L. (2005). Preservice teachers becoming agents of change: Pedagogical implications for action research. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(1), 57–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2006). Handbook of action research. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, V. (1994). Conducting research on practice. Educational Researcher, 23(5), 5–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, S. (2007). What strategies can I incorporate so that the English language learners in my classroom will better understand oral directions? In C. Caro-Bruce, R. Flessner, M. Klehr, & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Creating equitable classrooms through action research (pp. 59–77). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. R. (2004). Experimental research methods. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 1021–1044). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savenye, W. C., & Robinson, R. S. (2004). Qualitative research issues and methods: An introduction for educational technologists. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 1045–1071). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shager, E. J. (2007). Been there, done that: Student inquiry about high school dropouts. In C. Caro-Bruce, R. Flessner, M. Klehr, & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Creating equitable classrooms through action research (pp. 29–58). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Stenhouse, L. (1985). Research as the basis for teaching. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoecker, R. (2008). Challenging institutional barriers to community-based research. Action Research, 6, 49–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strieb, L. Y. (1993). Visiting and revisiting the trees. In M. Cochran-Smith & S. L. Lytle (Eds.), Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge (pp. 121–130). NY: Teacher’s College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stringer, E. L. (2007). Action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taba, H. (1955). School culture: Studies of participation and leadership. Washington: American Council on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Manen, M. (1990). Beyond assumptions: Shifting the limits of action research. Theory into Practice, 29, 152–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M. K., Foulger, T. S., & Wetzel, K. (2009). Preparing preservice teachers for 21st century classrooms: Transforming attitudes and behaviors about innovative technology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 17(3), 393–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wetzel, K., Foulger, T. S., & Williams, M. K. (2008–2009). The evolution of the required educational technology course. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25(2), 67–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeichner, K. M. (1994). Personal renewal and social construction through teacher research. In S. Hollingsworth & H. Sockett (Eds.), Teacher research and educational reform (Vol. 93, pp. 66–87). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. North Carolina State University, 7801, Raleigh, NC, 27695, USA

    Meghan McGlinn Manfra

  2. Durham Public Schools and North Carolina University, 511 Cleveland Street, Durham, NC, 27702, USA

    Daniel Kelvin Bullock

Authors
  1. Meghan McGlinn Manfra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel Kelvin Bullock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meghan McGlinn Manfra .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Learning Technologies, C, University of North Texas, North Elm 3940, Denton, 76207-7102, Texas, USA

    J. Michael Spector

  2. W. Sunset Blvd. 1812, St. George, 84770, Utah, USA

    M. David Merrill

  3. , Centr. Instructiepsychol.&-technologie, K.U. Leuven, Andreas Vesaliusstraat 2, Leuven, 3000, Belgium

    Jan Elen

  4. Research Drive, Iacocca A109 111, Bethlehem, 18015, Pennsylvania, USA

    M. J. Bishop

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Manfra, M.M., Bullock, D.K. (2014). Action Research for Educational Communications and Technology. In: Spector, J., Merrill, M., Elen, J., Bishop, M. (eds) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation