Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
2003
Recommended Citation
Perrett, G. (2002). Teacher Development Through Action Research : a Case Study in Focused Action Research.. Australian Journal of
Teacher Education, 27(2).
http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2002v27n2.1
Gillian Perrett
University of Sydney
research is, after all, one specific way of research to see how useful the specific
implementing the more general cycle of input would be in stimulating action
practice and reflection. In Wallace’s model research projects. (Attempting to focus
professional practice and reflection interact the area of concern is a departure from
with the existing conceptual schemata that normal practice in the use of action
participants bring to the training course. research in teacher development,
Two types of knowledge are acquired which (in TESOL at least) generally
during the course: received knowledge and takes as a starting point the immediate
experiential knowledge. “[Received concerns the teachers bring to the
knowledge] consists of facts, data and inservice (Nunan, 1990).)
theories, often related to some kind of
research” (Wallace, p.12). Experiential We hoped that participants would end the
knowledge derives from Schön’s inservice program with an expanded range
“knowing-in-action” and “reflection” of options to help them help their students
(Wallace, p.13). Comparing Wallace’s to be independent learners in a high school
model with statements such as “The key environment and better problem solvers in
feature of [constructivist teacher education] any environment.
programmes is that they helped teachers to
reflect and take more responsibility and THE COURSE
control over their own learning” (Fung,
2000, p.155) shows the congruence The inservice program took place during
between these notions of reflective training four full day meetings over a span of eight
and constructivist learning. In marrying weeks (with one optional short meeting)
action research with direct instruction we and was organised according to the
were able to reference Wallace and Schön following schedule:
as we sought to construct a “mix” that
would both appeal to busy teachers as Day one
“useful” and challenge them Background to learning strategies -
professionally. lecture
Understanding learning strategies -
workshop activities
OBJECTIVES Identifying learning strategies -
workshop to prepare student
In addition we had three specific practical
questionnaires
objectives:
Day two
1. To trial a 'sandwich' model of teacher
Students' responses to the
inservice education, in the hope those
questionnaires - teachers’ reports
teachers who worked in different
Teaching thinking and discussion skills
schools would have the opportunity to
- workshop activities
experience the advantage of
Introduction to action research - lecture
collaborative discussion.
Day three
2. To introduce some specific new
Using teacher questions - workshop
material on learning strategies,
activities
thinking skills, discussion skills and
Teaching study skills - workshop
study skills. (These areas were chosen
activities
because of their potential for enabling
Action research - short lecture leading
learners to become autonomous and
into discussion groups centring on
achieve success in high school.)
pedagogical problems and possible
approaches to these
3. To trial a focused mode of action
The first stage was to provide a brief Teachers reported their findings
historical background to the notion of
learning strategies using as examples the In some cases reports confirmed previous
work of Selinker (1972) and Wong- teacher observations of their students. They
Fillmore (1979). These and additional all agreed that the most successful learners
examples were cited in relation to the two reported themselves as using a wider range
dominant views of language learning: the of different learning strategies than learners
psycholinguistic and the functional. whom teachers rated as less successful. In
other cases there were surprises. For
Rebecca Oxford’s chapter (1990) example, one group found that what was
containing her taxonomy of learning most obviously lacking at each level
strategies had been given to participants as differed: beginners were seen as needing to
part of their prereading package [the other develop social skills, intermediate learners
reading was Wenden and Rubin (1987, as needing to be less hard on themselves,
chapter one)]. Participants took part in advanced learners as needing to develop
several workshop activities in which they skills of self-correction and self-
matched Oxford's descriptions of some organization. Another group compared
learning strategies with their notes on the mature age year 11 students with 17 year
taxonomy and judged which learning olds and found the older age group relied
strategies would be most applicable to more exclusively on memory and coped
various classroom tasks and social with their feelings less successfully than
situations. By the end of this second the younger group: they had poor affective
session they had sorted out any difficulties strategies. 'Their compensation strategies
in identifying what Oxford means by the were very low, they didn't like guessing
different strategies, and had realised that and they didn't like to take risks and they
good language learners combine different even felt threatened by the survey,' one
strategies in different ways in different teacher reported. The younger learners, in
situations. contrast, were reported not to feel
threatened by the survey.
Teachers investigated their students'
Teachers reported that newly arrived solving techniques were surveyed. They
students found it difficult to focus on issues were invited to examine some of the
of how they learned. This prompted some assumptions that underlie the terms
teachers to reflect on the importance of the 'thinking skills' and to examine what is
work they do to show students how involved in problem solving for ESL
Australian teachers want them to learn; but learners.
prompted other teachers to reflect on the
need for themselves to accommodate to the Teachers were introduced to action
preferred learning styles and expectations research
of the students. Other young learners not
only enjoyed responding to the survey but After this the principles of action research
were keen to question their teachers about (Kemmis and McTaggart, 1988) were
the meaning of their results and to ask what introduced to the participants through a
they could do to improve their learning brief lecture and through the distribution of
strategies. Gow and Kember's booklet (n.d.). Three
points were emphasised: that action
Teachers thought about how people research at its best effects change in its
think own environment, that it does not seek the
'watertight' results of more familiar
Next participants heard a lecture called research paradigms and that the sequence
'Thinking about thinking and discussing' in of:
which approaches to teaching problem
is a spiral of activity with no logical assumes a role and has to respond to a
beginning or necessary end. It was also battery of questions about their
pointed out to participants - who found this motivations, actions and responses from
a point of great relief - that they had the rest of the class (Morgan and Saxton,
already been through one complete cycle. 1991). There were also two workshops on
While this remark was included to reassure teaching study skills.
the less confident, it was also hoped that it
would position participants where they had Teachers returned to the notion of
been when they had finished reporting their action research
findings from their school survey earlier in
the day. It was suggested to them:
However, we felt that in some ways these new ideas with feelings of confidence.
outcomes were disappointing: a lot of These assumptions proved to be unfounded
teachers reported on teaching projects, and so we had to consider where, with
which we felt they would have taught hindsight, we would have varied the
anyway (although it is possible that here amounts of guidance and intervention.
we were unable to gauge an increase in Perhaps an even longer project was needed
reflectivity). Few of the teachers integrated to build confidence and reflection and to
learner strategy training firmly into their bed down the connections made between
own practice even though at the end of the inservice course and teachers'
cycle one it had been clear there was awareness of their professional practice.
understanding, interest and many ideas for
further applications. The teachers' written Our hope that learning through the action-
reports, even though we had developed a research mode would promote reflective
common schematic structure and allowed teaching practice was obviously borne out
several hours of in-session time for writing, for the duration of the project. However,
consulting and editing, were of a when we encouraged some of the most
disappointingly low quality. At the time we autonomous and innovative teacher-
concluded that more time was needed to researchers to present their projects at a
have been offered for developing Sydney conference held a few months later
professional writing skills; retrospectively we found that many of them had difficulty
we might have learnt from Sachs’ warning: recalling and relating to their projects after
Within school-based the summer break. It seems that we had
contexts the reporting of made assumptions about the likelihood of
action research often longterm transfer which may not have been
belongs to relatively warranted. This question obviously
ephemeral types of demands further investigation if
communication Wadsworth's 'imaginative leap' is to
represented in talk and become a permanency.
dialogue. The reporting
of academic research, on CONCLUSION
the other hand, is likely
to take the form of formal Our decision to marry some content input
talks or conference into the action research cycle was
presentations, written sufficiently successful for us to continue
publications and working with the model, although it
academic publications. seemed that we might have offered too
(1999, p.45) much input. The next time the program
Sachs’s remark is made in the context of was presented we reduced the amount of
exploring the clash that occurs between the input. Learning strategies and action
culture of the school and the culture of the research were introduced, then time was
university when teachers and academics allocated for some teachers to present
cooperate for research purposes. For the examples of the units of work they were
teachers our expectation of an academic currently teaching. A workshop followed
presentation may simply have appeared not where ways of integrating strategy training
relevant to their work. into some of these units could be worked
out. This seemed to focus attention better
It seems that we had assumed that the but with this second group we encountered
teachers would be able to make many more considerable resistance to spending time on
links between strategy development, action the action research project in their teaching
research and their own classrooms than time. The teaching assistants that Crookes
they actually were able to. We had also and Chandler (2001) worked with had
assumed that they would be able to try out similar reservations about the viability of
allocating time from their already busy TESOL Quarterly, 30 (3), 591-598.
teaching schedules. It seems that if we
wish teachers to be become serious Burns, A. (1997) Valuing Diversity: Action
teacher-researchers then administrators Researching Disparate Learner Groups.
need to take seriously the notion of release TESOL Journal, 7 ( 1 ), 6-10.
time from teaching.
Burns, A. (1999) Collaborative Action
In this project, because the action research Research for English Teachers. New York:
projects of the teachers became the action Cambridge University Press.
research of the teacher developers, three
levels of learning took. The school students Cook, V. (1996) Second Language
developed their English and their Learning and Language Teaching.
understanding of how to learn English, London: Arnold.
their teachers developed new ways of
thinking about supporting their students' Crookes, G. and Chandler, P.M. (2O01)
learning and the teacher educators worked Introducing Action Research into the
with a new model of teacher inservice. Education of Postsecondary Foreign
Running the inservice session as a series of Language Teachers. Foreign Language
meetings over a number of weeks was an Annals, 34 (2), 131-140.
undoubted success. The results suggest that
there is real scope for continuing to Ellis, R. (1994) The Study of Second
develop ways of marrying the input and Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford
action research models of inservice teacher University Press.
development. Teachers appreciate being
introduced to new ideas in their inservice Fung, Y. (2000). A constructivist strategy
experiences and we believe they are most for developing teachers for change: A
likely to integrate the insights they gain Hong Kong experience. Journal of In-
from these experiences if they are service Education, 26 (1), 153-167.
encouraged to do so in a structured or
semistructured way. However it seems that Gow, L. and Kember, D. (n.d.) Small Scale
considerable amounts of time need to be Action Research in Education. Hong Kong:
made available to teachers if projects of Hong Kong Polytechnic.
this sort are to be fully beneficial.
Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. (1981) The
Whilst the Wallace model points to Action Research Planner. Geelong: Deakin
improvement in professional competence, University Press.
this appears to encompass teaching
competence rather than the development of Morgan, N. and Saxton, J. (1991) Teaching
research competence. The teachers in this Questioning and Learning. London:
study appreciated all the techniques, Routledge.
understandings and challenges that
stimulated improved learning in their Nunan, D. (1989) Understanding
students, but were less receptive to what Language Classrooms: a guide for teacher
they may have perceived as attempts to initiated action. New York: Prentice Hall.
turn them into researchers.
Nunan, D. (1990) Action research in the
language classroom. In J.C. [Richards and
REFERENCES D. Nunan (eds.) Second Language Teacher
Education (pp. 62-81). Cambridge:
Burns, A. (1996) Collaborative action Cambridge University Press.
research and curriculum change in the
Australian Adult Migrant English Program. Nunan, D. (1996) Learner Strategy