Action Research (AR) is a term used to denote a methodical system of investigation and reflection, performed by individuals for their own professional practice and development. It encompasses a social philosophy that is centered on acquiring practical knowledge that can be applied to concrete situations. The goals of AR can be generalized into three potential outcomes: “Improving practice, improving understanding of practice, and improving the situation in which the practice takes place”.
Table of Contents
1. Action Research – Introduction & Definition
2. Key Concepts & Distinctive Features
3. Role of the Researcher
4. Main Data Collecting Techniques
5. Critical Analysis
6. Ethnography – Introduction & Definition
7. Key Concepts & Distinctive Features
8. Role of the Researcher
9. Main Data Collecting Techniques
10. Critical Analysis
11. Comparing Ethnography & Action Research
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This paper aims to provide a critical examination and comparison of two prominent qualitative research methodologies, Action Research and Ethnography, within the context of educational research. The study explores their fundamental definitions, research roles, data collection techniques, and analytical strengths and weaknesses, ultimately guiding practitioners on when to apply each approach.
- Theoretical foundations and definitions of Action Research and Ethnography
- Methodological roles and responsibilities of the researcher in both paradigms
- Data collection techniques and analytical frameworks specific to each method
- Comparative analysis of practical application, insider-outsider dynamics, and scope of change
Excerpt from the Work
Action Research – Introduction & Definition
Action Research (AR) is a term used to denote a methodical system of investigation and reflection, performed by individuals for their own professional practice and development (Costello, 2011, pp. 6-7). It encompasses a social philosophy that is centered on acquiring practical knowledge that can be applied to concrete situations (Punch, 2009, p. 136). The goals of AR can be generalized into three potential outcomes: “Improving practice, improving understanding of practice, and improving the situation in which the practice takes place” (Atkins & Wallace, 2012, pp. 126-127).
AR is defined as a cyclical process, with each new piece of information generating new ideas and new questions (Punch, 2009, p. 136-7). There are numerous variations to illustrate the logical steps used in AR, with many including combinations of circles or spirals (Costello, 2011, p. 8). Kemmis and McTaggart (2000, p. 595-596) describe AR as first preparing for an adjustment, then once initiated, observing the results with a reflective attitude. Once this is done the cycle is repeated with the incorporated knowledge of the previous change made. Bassey (1998, pp. 94-95) outlines a more sophisticated eight stage model, revolving around three central themes: exploring the educational environment (Stage 1-4); implementing changes (Stage 5); observing and analysing the changes (Stage 6-8). Costello (2011) summarizes this process stage by stage below:
Stage 1: Defining the enquiry.
Stage 2: Describing the educational situation.
Stage 3: Collecting and analysing evaluative data.
Stage 4: Reviewing the data and looking for contradictions.
Stage 5: Tackling a contradiction by introducing some aspect of change.
Stage 6: Monitoring the change.
Stage 7: Analysing evaluative data concerning the change.
Stage 8: Reviewing the change and deciding what to do next. (p. 10)
Summary of Chapters
Action Research – Introduction & Definition: Defines Action Research as a cyclical, reflective methodology focused on professional practice improvement.
Key Concepts & Distinctive Features: Outlines the cyclical nature of AR and provides a structured eight-stage model for implementation.
Role of the Researcher: Discusses the dual roles of the reflective practitioner and critical theorist, emphasizing the researcher as an insider.
Main Data Collecting Techniques: Explores eclectic data collection methods and the importance of constant analysis within the AR cycle.
Critical Analysis: Evaluates the strengths regarding educational improvement and the weaknesses concerning potential bias and reliability.
Ethnography – Introduction & Definition: Introduces ethnography as a study of culture, aiming to understand holistic factors in educational settings.
Key Concepts & Distinctive Features: Identifies fieldwork as a fundamental pillar and lists six distinctive characteristics of educational ethnography.
Role of the Researcher: Examines the researcher's need to act as an insider and the necessity of managing cultural perspectives to avoid ethnocentrism.
Main Data Collecting Techniques: Reviews participant observation, interviewing, and narrative construction as core ethnographic methods.
Critical Analysis: Analyzes the ability of ethnography to provide deep social insights versus the risks of emotional attachment and power imbalances.
Comparing Ethnography & Action Research: Synthesizes the differences in aims, researcher status, and timing of data analysis between both approaches.
Keywords
Action Research, Ethnography, Qualitative Research, Educational Research, Fieldwork, Reflective Practitioner, Data Analysis, Participant Observation, Educational Environment, Insider Perspective, Critical Theory, Cultural Interpretation, Methodology, Professional Development, Social Change
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
This paper critically examines and compares two essential qualitative research methodologies—Action Research and Ethnography—specifically within the field of education.
What are the central themes discussed in this study?
The central themes include the philosophical foundations of both methods, the specific role of the researcher, various data collection techniques, and a critical look at the practical strengths and weaknesses of each approach.
What is the main objective of this comparative analysis?
The objective is to delineate the distinct differences and potential synergies between Action Research and Ethnography, helping researchers choose the appropriate methodology based on their research goals and professional position.
Which scientific methods are analyzed in this research?
The research analyzes Action Research (including practical, critical, and participatory approaches) and Ethnography (including critical ethnography and auto-ethnography).
What is addressed in the main section of the paper?
The main sections provide detailed definitions, implementation steps, the researcher's role, and data analysis techniques for both methodologies, culminating in a comparison of their aims, statuses, and analytical processes.
Which keywords define this work?
Key terms include Action Research, Ethnography, Qualitative Research, Fieldwork, Reflective Practitioner, and Participant Observation.
How does the role of the researcher differ between these two methods?
In Action Research, the researcher is typically an insider intimately involved in the environment they wish to change, whereas the ethnographer usually acts as an outsider gaining access to observe and record natural behaviors.
When is data analysis typically conducted in these two approaches?
Action Research involves constant, cyclical data analysis throughout the study, while ethnographic analysis is generally performed at the conclusion of the fieldwork.
Can these two methods be combined in a single study?
Yes, the conclusion notes that neither approach is incompatible with the other, and elements from both can be utilized to complement qualitative research designs.
- Quote paper
- Lee Hooper (Author), 2013, A Critical Examination Between Two Methods in Educational Research: Action Research & Ethnography, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/262264
