Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
To cite this article: Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day (2000) Action research and reflective
practice: towards a holistic view, Educational Action Research, 8:1, 179-193, DOI:
10.1080/09650790000200108
RUTH LEITCH
Queens University of Belfast, United Kingdom
CHRISTOPHER DAY
University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
Downloaded by [UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL] at 04:50 07 August 2017
ABSTRACT Two concepts that have captured the imagination of the educational
community in the last 60 years have been those of reflective practice and
action research. Both, in their various forms, are considered to be critical
dimensions of the professional development of teachers. However, whilst both
were receiving academic attention during the 1930s and 1940s (Lewin, 1934,
cited in Adelman, 1993; Lewin, 1946; Dewey, 1933), it was not until
Stenhouses (1975) notion of the teacher-as-researcher that the two came most
compellingly into relationship and educational action research as a process,
which held at its centre different kinds of reflection, began to be reformulated in
Britain (Carr, 1993). This article considers the important part played in
teachers development by different kinds of action research. Its central thesis is
that, although action research has a critical role to play not least as a means of
building the capacity of teachers as researchers of their own practice, there has
been insufficient attention given to both the nature of reflection in the action
research process, and its relationship to the purposes, processes and
outcomes. The article challenges the rational, cognitive models of reflection that
are implicit in much of the action research literature. It suggests that more
attention needs to be given to the importance of the role of emotion in
understanding and developing the capacities for reflection which facilitates
personal, professional and ultimately system change.
... the way of teaching demands a long journey that does not have
any easily identifiable destination ... It is a journey that I believe
179
Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day
must include a backward step into the self and it is a journey that
is its own destination. (Tremmel, 1993, p. 456)
In any analysis, it is initially important to differentiate the terms reflection
and reflective practice. Reflection is considered as a process or activity that
is central to developing practices (Dewey 1933, 1938; Loughran, 1996).
However, although it retains connotations of thinking processes and
contemplative self-examination, in this context it seems to remain more a
metaphor for representing a process of learning from experience than a term
which might be subject to more detailed analysis. In the literature, for
example, reflection is predominantly associated with acts of cognition that
are linked to learning how rather than learning about or what. Dewey
(1933, p. 12) defined reflective thinking as a number of phases in thinking,
i.e. a state of doubt, hesitation or mental difficulty in which thinking
originates, followed by an act of searching or inquiring to find material that
will resolve the doubt. In 1996, Loughran, drawing on the work of Dewey
(1933) and Goodman (1984), defined reflection as the deliberate and
purposeful act of thinking which centres on ways of responding to problem
Downloaded by [UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL] at 04:50 07 August 2017
situations (p. 14). Thus, reflection is associated with thinking and is judged
to involve the cognitive processes of both problem finding and problem-
solving, concepts which continue to fascinate in cognitive psychology (Arlin,
1990; Csikszentmihalyi & Sawyers, 1995).
It was Schn, in the mid-1980s, who distinctively popularised the
image of the reflective practitioner by extending Deweys (1933)
foundational ideas on reflection through observing how practitioners think
in action. This led to Schn (1983) coining reflection-on-action and
reflection-in-action as the two forms of reflective thinking. His model of the
epistemology of practice (p. 49) was timely and well received within teacher
education and research. According to Schn (1983) reflection-in-action
acknowledges the tacit processes of thinking which accompany doing, and
which constantly interact with and modify ongoing practice in such a way
that learning takes place. Much of this may remain unconscious, tacit and
unverbalised (Clark & Yinger, 1977), though Loughran (1996) suggests that,
in meeting unanticipated problem situations, reflection-in-action comprises
reframing the problem and improvising on the spot so that the experience
will be viewed differently. Reflection-on-action, on the other hand, is viewed
as teachers thoughtful consideration and retrospective analysis of their
performance in order to gain knowledge from experience. Russell & Munby
(1992) describe it succinctly as the systematic and deliberate thinking back
over ones actions (p. 3). These two processes together, in Schns terms,
form the core professional artistry of the reflective practitioner. Subsequent
research has been focused on determining that reflective practice exists,
and identifying enabling and disenabling conditions which affect its use,
and the means by which it might be fostered within all levels of the teaching
profession.
180
A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH
explicit the dynamic interplay between thinking and action, what Shulman
(1987) terms the wisdom of teaching, so that teachers may become
thoughtful and learn from their work in the light of purposes and principles,
which are moral (Sockett, 1993).
Dewey (1933) considered reflection in practice as having a moral base,
where professional actions would be treated as experimental, and the
individual would reflect both on their actions and their consequences. The
relationship of effectiveness to moral purposes of teaching remains a key
area in the international debate on the nature of teachers professionalism
(Jackson et al, 1993; Goodson & Hargreaves, 1996). Thus, while a reflective
practitioner may be concerned to improve practice and to develop additional
competence, what defines the effective reflective practitioner is more a set of
attitudes towards practice based upon broader understandings of self,
society and moral purposes than those which seek simply to increase
efficiency in relation to delivery and narrowly conceived achievement
targets. It is particularly important in current policy contexts for those
engaged in action research to be clear about its purpose. Zeichner & Gore
(1995) advocate a social reconstructionist approach to action research
aimed at, for example, politicising student teachers reflective abilities:
while we are interested in reflection about teaching practices ...
and student teachers practical theories ... we are also concerned
with encouraging action research that contributes towards the
elimination of the social conditions that distort self-understandings
of teachers and undermine the educative potential and moral base
of schooling and teacher education. (p. 19)
Serving teachers needs are even more complex. For example, there is in
England, a growing concern of a double-edge sword creeping into
181
Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day
which individual and groups of teachers may indirectly receive support and
encouragement for change, whilst being unwittingly channelled into taking
on responsibility for solving problems and conflicts, the sources of which are
manifestly outside their making. Thus, while still holding a key role in
encouraging reflective practice, there are clearly different modes of action
research, which according to purpose will have different kinds of benefits,
signal the kinds of teaching practices which are encouraged or discouraged
by policy makers and, more importantly, define the meaning of
professionalism.
182
A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH
(and here the link with action research becomes sharper), reflective practice
is considered to be central to the growth of teachers as inquirers who
engage in collaborative research with others from inside and outside the
school in generating knowledge of practice rather than finding themselves
as objects whose role is to implement existing theory in practice (Peters,
1985). However, research continues to reveal that there is a continuum of
reflective practice that exists within the profession (Ebbutt, 1989; Day,
1999). Teachers may reflect in differing ways at different times. It is
important, therefore, to recognise the impact of teachers positions in their
career and life cycle, and the effects of the organisational and cultural
contexts in which they work if opportunities for their professional growth to
be maximised (Day, 1993).
of reflective practice are change and improvement (Corey, 1952, 1953; Carr
& Kemmis, 1986; Whitehead, 1989; Elliott, 1991; Atkin, 1993). The ways in
which the reflective inquiry processes within action research are framed and
interpreted, however, relate to the underpinning epistemology of the action
research model being employed whether, for example, the goal is for
teachers to become more effective or efficient or empowered. The
relationship between particular models of action research and types of
reflective processes is graphically demonstrated by Grundys (1982) typology
[2], that distinguishes between technical, practical and emancipatory models
of action research. Technical action research seeks to deliver more efficient
effective practice through the practical skill of the participants (Grundy,
1982, p. 357). With its emphasis on orderly sequencing of research and the
use of methods associated with the social science paradigm, it seems to
require technical research expertise which may be externally provided, and
thus this model presents less opportunity for the development of teachers
capacities for reflection in or on practice. Altrichter & Posch (1989) warn
that this can also restrict practitioners to a subordinate, technical-rational
approach to teaching without developing reflective features of professional
action (p. 91). Reflection in this approach, is likely to be related to solving
immediate pressing problems of efficient and effective delivery of curricula.
It is likely to be orientated towards the development of pedagogical
strategies, skills and tactics
In contrast, practical action research aims to improve practice through
the application of practical judgement and the accumulated personal
wisdom of the teacher. Models of action research falling within this frame
are as concerned with process as the end product of inquiry. They rely not
only on the exercise of moral and practical judgement by teachers, but also
their capacities to identify issues or problems that are salient to this in
these professional contexts. Reflective processes within this action research
approach are likely to focus upon building teachers capacities to self-
183
Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day
184
A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH
action research. In the first approach, Carr & Kemmis (1986) view it as a
collective, collaborative activity engaged in by a self-critical community of
practitioners, who are committed to transforming the educational system in
line with rational and democratic principles by researching their own
practice. In this case, reflection takes on a social-reconstructionist mantle,
as practitioners confront, in their own and others practice, the oppression
inherent in dominant, socially and historically embedded ideologies. The
structure for the facilitation of this radical approach to reflective practice
remains mostly confined within the seemingly tidy model of planning, acting,
observing, reflecting and critiquing the broad social, political and economic
contexts of teaching and learning.
The second approach is typified by the work of Whitehead (1989, 1993)
and supported in the writings of Lomax (1986, 1994), McNiff (1992, 1995)
and Dadds (1995). Whitehead (1989, 1993, 1996) has developed a
commonsense concept of living educational theory in which each of us is a
living contradiction of ourselves. This is not unlike Argyris & Schns
(1976) theory of action differing principally in its emphasis upon values.
Downloaded by [UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL] at 04:50 07 August 2017
Whilst we may hold certain values dear, these are often negated or denied in
practice. From this position, two fundamental questions arise: How do I
improve my practice? and How do I live my values more fully? These
necessitate engaging in a process of explaining your present practice in
terms of an evaluation of your past (Whitehead, 1996, p. 2) with a view to
individuals creating improvements in their present and future contexts. The
action inquiry is carried out through a variety of means including,
autobiography, dialogical conversations, fictional stories (Evans, 1994),
reflective writing and journals (Holly, 1989). The researchers become aware
of the values that drive their work so that they may be clear about what
they are doing and why. Through such processes, teachers as researchers
construct their own living educational theory. Their claim to knowledge
may then be validated by groups of critical peers and thus eventually
contribute to the dynamic pool of living theory, which has the potential for
generalisation (Whitehead, 1989, p. 73). Whiteheads approach is
emancipatory, but its initial emphasis is on introspective processes and
individual, rather than collective social action. However, both models have
similar goals and aim to challenge deep structures (Holly, 1987). The
difference remains in their respective starting points within one, the
system, within the other, the individual.
In summary, then, across the typology of action research approaches
outlined by Grundy, it is possible to observe not only the key role that
different forms of reflection play but also the ways in which different goals
influence the development of specific reflective processes in the
participant(s).
Specific tools for reflection are increasingly being incorporated into
action research methodologies from other disciplines and contexts. These
are justified as aids to reflective processing and meta-cognition, as well as a
185
Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day
186
A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH
187
Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day
188
A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH
Correspondence
Ruth Leitch, Graduate School of Education, Queens University of Belfast,
69/71 University Street, Belfast BT7 1HL, United Kingdom
(r.leitch@qub.ac.uk).
Notes
[1] Schn (1983) drew a distinction between the notions of technical rationality
and the knowledge of practice. Therefore, reflection was seen as an important
vehicle for the development of professional knowledge etc.
[2] A similar tripartite distinction is made in the works of Van Manen (1977) and
Zeichner & Gore (1995).
References
Adelman C. (1989) The Practical Ethic Takes Priority over Methodology, in W. Carr
(Ed.) Quality in Teaching: arguments for a reflective profession. Brighton: Falmer
Press.
189
Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day
Adelman, C. (1993) Kurt Lewin and the Origins of Action Research, Educational Action
Research, 1, pp. 724.
Altrichter, H. & Posch, P. (1989) Does the Grounded Theory Approach Offer a
Guiding Paradigm for Teacher Research? Cambridge Journal of Education, 19,
pp. 2132.
Argyris, C. & Schn, D. A. (1976) Theory in Practice: increasing professional
effectiveness. New York: Jossey-Bass.
Arlin, P. (1990) Wisdom: the art of problem-finding, in R. J. Sternberg (Ed.) Wisdom:
its nature, origins and development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Atkin, J. M. (1993) Developments in the Philosophy/Sociology of Science and Action
Research, Educational Action Research, 1, pp. 187188.
Carr, W. (1993) Whatever Happened to Action Research? Educational Action Research,
2, pp. 427436.
Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986) Becoming Critical: education, knowledge and action
research. London: Falmer Press.
Clandinin, D. J. (1989) Developing Rhythm in Teaching: the narrative study of a
beginning teachers personal practical knowledge of classrooms, Curriculum
Downloaded by [UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL] at 04:50 07 August 2017
190
A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH
191
Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day
Lewin, K. (1946) Action Research and Minority Problems, in G. W. Lewin (Ed.)
Resolving Social Conflicts. New York: Harper & Row.
Lewin, K. (1952) Group Decision and Social Change, in G. W. Swanson,
T. M. Newcomb & E. L. Hartley (Eds) Readings in Social Psychology. New York:
Henry Heath & Co. Reprinted in S. Kemmis & R. McTaggart (1988) The Action
Research Reader, 3rd Edn. Geelong: Deakin University Press.
Lomax, P. (1986) Action Researchers Action Research; a symposium, British Journal
of Inservice Education, 13, pp. 4250.
Lomax, P. (1994) The Narrative of an Educational Journey or Crossing the Track,
paper based on Inaugural lecture, Kingston University, January.
Loughran, J. J. (1996) Developing Reflective Practice: learning about teaching and
learning through modelling. London: Falmer Press.
McNiff, J. (1992) Action Research: principles and practice. London Routledge.
McNiff, J. (1995) Action Research for Professional Development. Bournemouth: Hyde
Publications.
Munby, H. & Russell, T. (1989) Metaphor in the Study of Teachers Professional
Knowledge, in A. Oberg & G. McCutcheon (Eds) Theory into Practice, 29(3),
Downloaded by [UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL] at 04:50 07 August 2017
pp. 5561.
Peters, J. L. (1985) Research in Reflective Teaching: a form of laboratory teaching
experience, Journal of Research and Development in Education, 18(3), pp. 5562.
Richardson, V. (1990) The Evolution of Reflective Teaching and Teacher Education, in
R. T. Clift, R. W. Houston & M. C. Pugach (Eds) Encouraging Reflective Practice in
Education: an analysis of issues and programs. New York: Teachers College
Press.
Russell, T. & Munby, H. (1992) Teachers and Teaching: from classrooms to reflection.
London: Falmer Press.
Schn, D. A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Shulman, L. (1987) Knowledge and Teaching: foundations of the new reform, Harvard
Educational Review, 57(1), pp. 122.
Sockett, H. (1993) The Moral Base for Teacher Professionalism. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Somekh, B. (1995) The Contribution of Action Research in Social Endeavours: a
position paper on action research methodology, British Educational Research
Journal, 21, pp. 339355.
Stenhouse, L. (1975) An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development.
London: Heinemann.
Teacher Training Agency (1996) Teaching as a Research-based Profession, Promoting
Excellence in Teaching. London: TTA Information Section.
Tremmel, R. (1993) Zen and the Art of Reflective Practice in Teacher Education,
Harvard Educational Review, 63, pp. 434458.
Tripp, D. (1988) On Collaboration: teachers, self-assessment and professional
journals, Cambridge Journal of Education, 18, pp. 313332.
Van Manen, M. (1977) Linking Ways of Knowing with Ways of Being Practical,
Curriculum Inquiry, 6, pp. 205288.
192
A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH
193