Pedagogical Action
Research:
Balancing teaching and
research in universities
Professor Lin Norton
[email protected]
June 2010
CUEA
1
Outline

Why pedagogical action research?

Pedagogical action research in the university context

The role of reflective practice

The scholarship of teaching and learning (SOTL)

A case study from the UK
June 2010
CUEA
2
Pedagogical action research: a
definition

“the fundamental purpose of pedagogical action research
is to systematically investigate one’s own
teaching/learning facilitation practice with the dual aim of
modifying practice and contributing to theoretical
knowledge”.
(Norton, 2009)

Using a reflective lens to look at some problem and then
determining a methodical set of steps to research
that problem and to take action
June 2010
CUEA
3
University context is crucial

Unless we take into account the influences that are
operating on us within the university context it is unlikely
that carrying out pedagogical action research will be as
influential as it might be:
‘ University departments are hives of intrigue and
conspiracy. Trying to reach an understanding of issues
concerned with teaching and learning, therefore, implies
getting to grips with a whole range of human issues such
as the attitude of students, the politics within
departments and the ethos and environment of the
institution’
(Kember, 2000, p.25)
June 2010
CUEA
4
The university context
According to Fanghanel’s (2007) framework, there are
filters that are fluid and influence the choices academics
make to privilege certain activities over others:

The micro level (internal predispositions, aspirations
goals)

The meso level (the department, the discipline)

The macro level (institution, external factors, research –
teaching nexus)
June 2010
CUEA
5
The micro level:
Academic identities







Why did you come into Higher Education?
How would you describe your primary role- researcher or
teacher?
Which do you enjoy the most?
Which do you spend the most time on?
What does your department/institution expect you to do?
Why when we have more work than time, do we apply to
‘buy ourselves out of teaching’?
Do academics ever ask to ‘buy themselves out of
research’?
June 2010
CUEA
6
Meso level of practice:
the department

Departments and how they are run have a huge influence
and hold on academics

Tacit knowledge: “that’s the way we do things around here”
– more powerful than any formal mechanisms such as
CPD, induction etc, includes:
 norms, discourse and value sets associated with
assessment, teaching practices, research culture as
well as daily work practices.

Can cause stress for new academics who are trying to
establish a role identity, professional knowledge and
competence (Norton et al, in press)
June 2010
CUEA
7
Meso level of practice:
the discipline
Neumann, Parry &
Becher’s (2002)
adaptation of
Biglan’s (1973)
subject
classification:
Hard
Pure
A
Soft
C
June 2010
B
D
CUEA
Applied
8
Description of quadrants
A. Hard pure knowledge: concerned with universals,
simplification and a quantitative approach.
B. Soft pure knowledge: tends to be holistic concerned with
particulars and is likely to favour a qualitative approach
C. Hard applied knowledge : derived from hard pure
knowledge, concerned with applications (i.e. mastering the
physical environment), aimed at products and techniques
D. Soft applied knowledge: derived from soft pure
knowledge, concerned with enhancing professional
practice,aimed at protocols and procedures.
June 2010
CUEA
9
Implications for how academics
view teaching and research
Neumann et al findings:

hard pure and hard applied - strongly committed to
research and less committed to teaching, (generally seen
as relatively straightforward and unproblematic),
collaborative research and teaching

soft pure and soft applied - greater emphasis on scholarly
knowledge that translates readily into teaching, more
emphasis on individualistic enquiry and not so much
acceptance of joint teaching
June 2010
CUEA
10
Macro level of practice:

External factors:
 Globalisation
 Managerialism
 Internationalisation
 Entrepreneurialism

Institutional policy particularly relating to teaching and
research:
 Selection and Promotions policies
 Resourcing
 Recognitions and value
June 2010
CUEA
11
Expectations of university lecturers
Excellent in
teaching and
learning
Research
active
Income
generate
Subject expert
Reflective
practitioner
June 2010
CPD
CUEA
Scholarship of
learning and
teaching
12
Action research:
a practical solution
“Action research is action-and-research (Dick 2000).
Action research combines twin aims in a single process.
Action researchers wish to improve some aspect of
professional practice or social process, while generating
new knowledge at the same time. Action research is not
action for research (doing something to increase
understanding), nor research for action (increasing
knowledge to be applied later). These two purposes come
together in a single project.” Hughes (2004)
June 2010
CUEA
13
The role of reflective practice in
action research

Over-used term (Knight,2002)

Reflective practice should be seen as
systematic, active and enabling us to give
up what sometimes might be our most dearly
cherished beliefs about teaching and
learning:
‘reflective thinking is always more or less troublesome…it
involves willingness to endure a condition of mental unrest’
(Dewey, 1910)
June 2010
CUEA
14
Reflection applied to education

Work of Donald SchÖn (1983) The reflective
practitioner

SchÖn’s thinking developed from earlier work with
Argyris on the distinction between
‘Espoused theories’ and ‘Theories in use’

Argyris, C & SchÖn, D. (1974) Theory into practice.
San Francisco: Jossey Bass
June 2010
CUEA
15
How does reflective practice link
to pedagogical action research?




Action research enables us to reflect on our practice
systematically (Parker, 1997)
Action research enables us to take control of our own
CPD
Action research can help us transform our professional
perspective
Action research is often collaborative and thus guards
against being too inward –looking and serving to confirm
our previously-held assumptions
June 2010
CUEA
16
The scholarship of teaching and
learning (SOTL)

Contested in the literature and not yet readily accepted
by the UK sector but its core elements are valuable in
helping to raise the profile of teaching in universities
Boyer argued that the scholarship of teaching
should have its own status and recognition
June 2010
CUEA
17
SOTL- why is it important?

SOTL includes both ongoing learning about teaching
AND the demonstration of teaching knowledge ( Kreber
& Cranton, 2000)

SOTL helps to raise the status of teaching, enables
teachers to teach more knowledgeably and provides a
framework in which teaching quality can be assessed
(Trigwell & Shale, 2004)

SOTL has the potential to bring about significant change
to how the sector sees the goals and purposes of a
higher education (Kreber, 2005)
June 2010
CUEA
18
Key elements of scholarship of
teaching and learning (Chalkely 2003)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
“Keeping abreast of developments in the theory, and
practice of teaching, particularly in one’s own discipline or
specialist field;
Reflecting carefully and critically on one’s own teaching
and on its successes and failures in promoting high quality
learning;
Engaging in pedagogic research so as to help provide a
firm basis of evidence for the adoption or rejection of
particular learning and teaching methods;
Contributing to the communication and dissemination of
good practice in the learning and teaching of one’s
discipline or specialist field:
Bringing to one’s work in teaching and curriculum
development the same high standards of intellectual rigour
and peer review which are commonplace in research.”
June 2010
CUEA
19
The scholarship of teaching:
what’s the problem? Bass (1999)

Bass makes the telling point that one of the differences
between scholarship (teaching) and discipline based
research is the way we think about the problem:
In research the
problem is at the
heart of the
enquiry process
and we’re proud of
it
June 2010
In teaching, the
problem is something
we don’t usually want to
have and we’re
ashamed of it
CUEA
20
Changing the status
of the problem



In pedagogical action research, this is precisely what
happens….
The teaching problem:
 Psychology students don’t use enough journals in
their essays
The research problem translated into a research
hypothesis:
 A multi-layered intervention (librarians’ input, revised
formative assessment, exemplars ) will increase the
use of journals in an essay
(Norton, Norton & Thomas, 2004)
June 2010
CUEA
21
7 characteristics of action research
(Kember, 2000)
1. A social practice (Not decontextualised from
environment or separating researcher form the
researched)
2. Aimed towards improvement (Essential)
3. Cyclical (not necessarily simple spirals of reflection,
acting, planning observing but progressive refinements
4. Systematic enquiry (does not mean ’soft option’)
5. Reflective (outward not inward)
6. Participative (guards against making mistaken
assumptions about one’s own practice)
7. Practitioner determined (driven from own need to
know)
June 2010
CUEA
22
Criticisms of Action research
June 2010
1.
Not ‘proper’ research as
seen in the positivist
scientific tradition (issues
round generalisability,
validity)
2.
Largely un-theorised
descriptions of practice
CUEA
23
Responding to the criticisms

Positivist research is a narrow view where experimental
design and cause and effect seeking is privileged over
any other form of enquiry

Kember (2000) suggests ‘sensible adaptation’ and fine
tuning’ rather than generalisability and validity

Bartlett & Burton (2006) say that action research is
inevitably unique as its carried out by professionals in
the context of their own working practice. They suggest
concept of ‘relatability’
June 2010
CUEA
24
Responding to the criticisms (2)

Bartlett & Burton (2006) argue that the description of
practice can often actually constitute the data

Cotton & Griffiths (2007) in framing descriptive accounts
we have to draw on the theoretical in order to make our
research accessible and meaningful to those we
disseminate it to.

In order to be action research rather than curriculum
development or reflective practice- it must be subject to
peer scrutiny and review. It’s critical questioning and
appraisal that makes it research
June 2010
CUEA
25
The methodological-cumorganizational problem
(Lindsay et al, 2002)
Managers rarely use pedagogical evidence so while
academic staff can and do make changes within their
own courses, the chances of influencing institutional
policy in learning and teaching are modest, but practical
principles can help:

Choose research studies that are directly relevant to
your institution’s policies

Design studies where evidence is compelling as
possible (often quantitative)
Present your findings to as many committees as
June 2010
CUEA
possible

26
The action research process:
an easy step by step approach
ITDEM
Identifying a problem/paradox/ issue/difficulty
Thinking of ways to tackle the problem
Doing it
Evaluating it
Modifying future teaching.
Norton (2001)
June 2010
CUEA
27
An example of action research and its
effects on practice in a PBL context
(Norton 2004)
Context: 3rd year Counselling Psychology module
Psychology Applied Learning Scenarios (PALS): a textbased hypothetical vignette which can be used in a wide
variety of learning and assessment situations to engage
psychology students in holistic and relational learning and to
prepare them for the world of work either as psychologists or
as professional practitioners with psychological expertise
Available at
http://www.psychology.heacademy.ac.uk/docs/pdf/p20040422_pals.pdf
June 2010
CUEA
28
PALS as assessment technique:
the difference between curriculum
development and action research

Cycle 1: PALS used in examinations (Curriculum
development)

Cycle 2: PALS used in course work essay worth 70%
(Curriculum development)

Cycle 3: PALS used in course work essay and the essay
feedback checklist (action research)

Cycle 4: PALS as the ‘heart’
of the course (action
CUEA
research)
June 2010
29
Cycle 3 using ITDEM

Identifying the problem: Students asked to evaluate two
theories of their choice to a PALS were relying on
description rather than evaluation

Thinking of ways to tackle the problem: Give explicit
assessment criteria

Doing it: Use the essay feedback checklist

Evaluating it: Research matching tutor and student
ratings, interviews with staff, questionnaires with students
(Norton et al 2002)

Modifying future practice: Cycle 4
June 2010
CUEA
30
Cycle 4: using ITDEM

Identifying the problem: too much focus on assessment
criteria raised students anxieties encouraged a strategic
approach

Thinking of ways of tackling it: reconceptualising
assessment criteria as learning criteria (LO’s)

Doing it: through PALS group presentation and essay

Evaluating it: Research analysis of essays and student
feedback ( Norton, 2004)
Modifying future practice: Students needed earlier
feedback on presentationsCUEA
to help with the essay task
June 2010

31
Pedagogical action research as
an intensity spectrum
(adapted from Kember 2006)
Reflection
on L & T
Action research
on L&T
Action research
which
contributes to
theory
Seminar
Refereed
Journal
paper
conference paper
paper
June 2010
CUEA
32
Turning teaching problems into
pedagogical action research









Why are students not attending my lectures?
Why don’t students read?
What can I do to enthuse my students?
What can I do to help students become more analytical in
their writing?
How can I help students to link theory with their practice?
What is going wrong in my seminars when my students
don’t speak?
Why won’t students use the library?
Why are retention and progression rates falling?
What can I do to make my lecturing style more accessible?
June 2010
CUEA
33
Pedagogical Action Research,
reflective practice and SOTL:
killing three birds with one stone
1.
2.
3.
June 2010
Carrying out research on your own teaching
and/or on your students’ learning is interwoven
with being a reflective practitioner.
Pedagogical action research is an empowering
form of CPD, particularly in engaging with the
scholarship of learning and teaching (SOTL)
Pedagogical action research needs to be
disseminated and open to public scrutiny through
peer reviewed conference papers and journal
CUEA
articles
34
Growing a pedagogical action
research network: a case study




PAR established in 2001, and then became part of the
University Learning and Teaching strategy (2002-05) with
government funding to support its activities:
monthly meetings on annual institutional theme
giving support to small-scale PAR projects
annual PAR symposium
Now a recognized research group of the University
http://www.hope.ac.uk/learningandteaching/lat.php?page=par&current=p
ar

PRIME: in house journal
http://www.hope.ac.uk/learningandteaching/lat.php?page=prime&current
=prime

Biennial Pedagogical Research in Higher Education
conference (PRHE)
http://www.hope.ac.uk/learningandteaching/lat.php?page=prhe&current=
CUEA
35
prhe
June 2010