Action Research

10 downloads 0 Views 74KB Size Report
Action Research: Exploring Teaching Practice. Richard Donato .... project for her MAT degree, action research is what teachers should always do, since it is.
Action Research: Exploring Teaching Practice Richard Donato University of Pittsburgh Professional Development and the English Language Teacher No area of education is as complex and pervasive as the professional development of practicing teachers. Despite strong recommendations for continual professional development, efforts to educate and renew practicing foreign language teachers are largely assigned to periodic workshops and yearly professional conference attendance. It is ironic that, despite the realization that ongoing professional development is central to the success of language education, research into teacher education has shown repeatedly that the benefits gained from one-day “how-to” workshops are limited and transitory. Thus, a critical question is how can teachers engage in on-going professional development in ways that make a difference to their practice, connect to their lives as teachers, and ultimately improve learning and instruction. Closely connected to this issue is finding ways to create self-renewing opportunities for teachers to participate in this substantive form of professional development given the demands and timeintensive nature of teaching in universities in Thailand. Action Research and the English Language Teacher One area that has recently been seen as potentially useful for weaving long-term professional development into the lives of teachers is the establishment of action research networks among teachers. In this way, teachers form communities of collaboration and change (Fullan, 2000) through the introduction of action research into their own classrooms. Through action research, teachers investigate closely a self-selected area of interest with a view towards seeing learning in a new light and thinking in alternate ways about instruction. This process, far from burdensome, is linked directly to the lives of teachers, is centrally situated in their classrooms, and is constituted through their interactions with students. Action research means innovation and change through on-going collaborative dialogue with colleagues in an effort to see teaching and learning in new ways and improve student learning. Action research is conducted by teachers, not merely on teachers by researchers who often lack knowledge of daily life in classrooms.

1

What follows is a brief discussion of action research, as I conceive it and have used it with my own students at the University of Pittsburgh and in Thailand with English language instructors at Chulalongkorn University Language Institute and at various other universities as part of the Collaborative Research Network project. After explaining action research, I will present some of the questions that Thai teachers have raised during my workshops. These topics represent concerns that are specific to the Thai context of English language instruction and areas of investigation that would contribute to a better understanding of English language instruction in Thai universities. The Action Research Process Recently Allwright (2005) has suggested that the term action research is highly charged with notions of experimental research and, for this reason, is largely concerned with fulfilling the requirements of experimental studies than with understanding the lived experience of teachers. For this reason, Allwright suggests that the term ‘exploratory practice’ is better suited for the work of the teacher researcher rather than action research. His major claim is that action research has focused too much on intervention and problem solving rather than on first understanding the complexities of language classroom life. Allwright’s suggestions for a reorientation to action research is much needed, having observed myself many teachers becoming too concerned with ‘fixing problems’ in classrooms rather than arriving at an understanding of the nature of the problem itself. Morever, Allwright suggests that action research that focuses on ‘fixing problems’ is often approached as a one-time occurrence in a teacher’s life rather than as al sustainable exploration of a teacher’s practice and a professional habit of thought and way of conceiving one’s work. The 4-part model that I have developed was based on various sources in literature on Action Research and involves a cycle of thinking, acting, reflecting, and re-thinking (Allwright, 2005; Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, 1988; Mills, 2003; Stringer, 1996; Wallace, 2000; Burnaford, Fgischer, & Hobson, 2001; Hopkins, 1993; Hartman, 1998; Freeman, 1988; Burns, 1999; Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999). Similar to Allwright’s notion of exploratory practice, the model’s primary goal is to identify areas of teaching that the instructor wants to understand better and to engage in a cycle of working with evidence to deepen understanding of the nature of the problem and to improve instruction. This orientation differs from an interventionist approach that pre-determines a remedy to a problem or concern that is then implemented and assessed. Rather, this model emphasizes that seeing and engaging in teaching differently requires first an understanding of the context of instruction and the realization that one’s beliefs and attitudes are intimately connected to the exploration process. Rather than establishing an action plan, as is often done

2

in classic models of action research, this approach seeks to identify and understand instructional situations, or ‘puzzles’ in Allwright’s words, so that principled and well reasoned actions and alternatives can be planned and assessed based on evidence and understanding. Through this model, teachers are introduced to the tools of action research. Teachers explore thinking tools in the form of areas of focus and questions to be explored. Teachers discover that research involves a clear area of focus and questions that permit rich descriptions rather than naïve comparison of methods or quick fix interventions. Additionally they learn that the best research always grows out of situations that are within their locus of control, that they feel passionate about, and that they would like to change or improve. The process of identifying an area of focus and establishing exploratory questions is far from neutral and requires an intimate relationship with one’s beliefs about teaching, the nature of language and learning, and the learners. Identifying an instructional problem or puzzle always leads to confronting one’s own values and beliefs about the relationship of theory, practice, and schooling and the effectiveness of one’s own work as a teacher. A critical component of action research is reconnaissance, or the recognition of one’s own contribution to creating positive educational change or maintaining mediocre or ineffective practice (Mills, 2003). As teachers explore their areas of focus, a supportive community of exploration is forged. Teachers grow together professionally and personally, as colleagues and friends, and learn how to respect and accept each other’s divergent experiences and opinions. Once areas of exploration and questions are established, teachers discuss the actions that are needed to gather evidence, explore concerns, and answer these questions. The teachers learn that answers to questions could be found by collecting data through personal experience, inquiry into their classrooms, and a systematic examination of teaching practice and student learning (Mills 2003). The tools of inquiry they explored as data collection techniques involved direct participant observation of their own instruction and learners, the use of surveys, interviews, and questionnaires, and the examination of existing documents such as lesson plans, videotapes, grades, journals, questionnaires, interviews, and student work samples. We discussed the importance of multiple perspectives on an issue. We concluded that no single instrument or test can capture the complexity of instruction and that information needs to be triangulated to be credible and valid. In action research of the exploratory kind, the goal shifts from the controlled setting of the laboratory and intervention to the uncontrollable and unpredictable life of a classroom and innovation.

3

Exploratory action research findings give way to locally constructed knowledge and understandings of one’s own students, classroom, and foreign language program. Based on these discussions and distinctions, the Thai instructors left sessions ready to begin their studies of their lives as teachers and the world of language learning of their students. Armed with a wellfocused area for investigation and questions that could be answered using a variety of classroom-based tools for collecting evidence, the teachers returned to the classroom prepared to initiate their projects, to collect information, and to make new discoveries to allow them to rethink practice Exploring the Thai EFL Classroom Based on my work with Thai teachers, I list several topics of interest that emerged in our discussions. I summarize briefly the topics in the hope they will identify areas of focus that are particular to the Thai teaching context and inspire other teachers to engage in their own research on these important topics. These focus areas were identified as Thai teachers reflected and discussed with each other what potential inquiries they could make into their own programs and practice. I will list these topics as WH-questions rather than noun phrases. The decision to cast topics as questions comes largely from the tradition of teacher research which seeks to describe a classroom phenomenon to understand it better rather than seek simplistic yes or no answers to research questions based on working hypotheses, dependent and independent variables, or a laboratory experiment. Note also that questions are written in such a way that their answers require rich descriptions of events, participants, and interactions. Only through rich descriptions can teachers explore their classrooms, change their professional practice in principled ways, or deepen their personal understanding of thorny issues. Finally, the questions are written using the pronoun ‘we,’ since the areas of exploration identified often were shared among several teachers across universities and within the same workshop. Questions: 1) What are the challenges of teaching large classes? How can we re-organize instruction to address the needs of large classes? 2) How do we effectively use technology and integrate technology into our instruction?

4

3) Given the diverse abilities of students in classes, how can we differentiate our approach and our assignments in the same class? 4) How can we enable our students to use English to express their own ideas on important topics rather than ‘cut and paste’ and copy information from websites? 5) How can we increase interpersonal communication in the classroom? 6) How might we implement portfolio assessment in large classes? 7) How might we incorporate group work effectively into large classes? 8) What types of tasks help learners communicate better? How can tasks be designed to support language learning? 9) What types of questions do students ask in EFL classes and what do these questions reveal about their approach to learning English and the understanding that they are developing? 10) How can our present activities be redesigned to allow for more communication in the classroom? Action Plans and Planning for Action Action research is a reflective cycle of planning for action leading to future action plans that can be carried out and more fully investigated. The questions above represent a teacher’s cycle of discovery and reflection that assesses conditions in the present for future pedagogical actions, instructional understanding and innovations, and research refinements. The questions suggest a focus on understanding perplexing issues such as, teaching large classes, redesigning communicative activities to allow greater focus on language, and the challenges of teaching various ability levels. All studies imply the need for collecting more information from students to establish a clearer perspective on student learning, pedagogical approaches, and curriculum. It is clear that these teachers understand the challenges of life in the EFL classroom It is hoped that, all the teachers who participated in these action research sessions have developed the tools for greater understanding of student learning, language teaching, and the

5

issues that face the profession. Exploring and reflecting on one’s practice is not an additional burden to what we do as teachers. It is fundamental and at the core of accomplished teaching. As one of my own students pointed out to me this past year as she began her action research project for her MAT degree, action research is what teachers should always do, since it is fundamentally “reflective practice.” Unlike other forms of professional development, action research goes far beyond the “what-to-do-on-Monday- morning” approach to teaching. It is continual, reflective, and renewing and, as such, represents perhaps our best effort at connecting teachers to their practice and building understandings that cannot be captured in teaching methodology textbooks or other generic educational recommendations. As one teacher stated, participation in the action research workshop provided a supportive network of teachers that allowed her to explore and understand her own issues and to learn the true meaning of teacher empowerment.

6

References Allwright, D. (2005). Developing principles for practitioner research: The case of exploratory practice. Modern Language Journal, 89, 355-366. Burnaford, G., J. Fischer, & D. Hobson, (Eds.). (2001). Teachers doing research: The power of action through inquiry (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative action research for English language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1993). Inside outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press. Freeman, D. (1998). Doing teacher research: From inquiry to understanding. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Fullan, M. (2000). Change forces: The sequel. Philadelphia: Falmer Press. Hartman, D. K. (Ed.). (1998). Stories teacher tell: Reflecting on professional practice. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company. Hopkins, D. (1993). A teacher’s guide to classroom research. (2nd ed.). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press. Mills, G. E. (2003). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project. 1996 Standards for foreign language learning: Preparing for the 21st century. Yonkers, NY: ACTFL. Stringer, E. (1996). Action research, A Handbook for practitioners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Wallace, M. J. (2000). Action research for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press.

7