16th Ð18th
September 2004
Paper Presented By
Melinda A C Martin
Institute of Technical Education (ITE)
Singapore
Email: melinda_martin@ite.edu.sg
Lecturers in the Institute of
Technical Education (ITE) in Singapore participate actively in Innovation and
Learning Circles (ILC) under ITE's Employee Innovation Framework by undertaking
projects aimed at improving the quality of teaching and learning in ITE. For
these projects, the lecturers in ITE were accustomed to using the PDCA approach
(Shewart Cycle) - a systematic method used by businesses to improve products,
services and processes. In 2002, the PEPP&ER (Plan, Explore, Practice,
Perform, Enquiry & Reflection) model, based on Action Research principles,
was introduced to encourage action research projects. As a Best Practices
Facilitator in the Academy for Best learning in Education (ABLE), I facilitated
workshops for leaders whose teams opted to do action research through this
model and also offered support by being their critical friend. These teams
found the principles of Action Research appealing and diligently followed the
steps laid out in the PEPP&ER model. However, many found difficulty in
applying these principles within their groups. The questions that were often
raised were 'What is the next step?' or 'What do we do now?' As I analyzed my role as a critical
friend to these teams and in working with a few of these groups closely, I
developed an enquiry guide to facilitate
enquiry and reflection for teachers in ITE. This Paper documents my learning
journey in promoting enquiry and reflection as a critical friend and provides
evidence that although questioning each other did not come naturally for our
lecturers, they were able to appreciate and develop a spirit of enquiry as
action researchers when guidance is given to them.
Introduction
I was first introduced to the concept of action
research in 2002 in an incidental manner when I was asked to be a member of a
project group called Learning Circles (Ministry of Education, 2003) introduced
by the Manager of the Academy for Best Learning in Education (ABLE), Peggy Leong, who developed the PEPP&ER
Framework (Leong, 2004) as the process for collaboration amongst members of the
Learning Circle. PEPP&ER is based on the principles and practices of Action
Research. It draws inspiration in the later stages of its development from the
Living Educational Theory of Jack Whitehead whose work is documented in his
Action Research Website at http://www.actionresearch.net/ and that of Jean
McNiff. The PEPP&ER Framework is in Annex A.
For me, the experience of working in a Learning Circle (LC)
was different from that of being in the usual work groups that teachers often
find themselves in. Although all the members of this group came from the
different campuses of ITE and we were practically strangers when we started, we
somehow bonded through the course of the project and most of us admitted that
we had really looked forward to the meetings. One of the teachers in the group
was even inspired to write a poem on her experience in the group. This
was very different from the attitude most of our teachers have about working
together in a group. One of my
colleagues from another Learning Circle had remarked that ÔItÕs a lot easier
for teachers to work alone than come together to work in a groupÕ. Words like these echo the thoughts of many
teachers who have a busy schedule and find it difficult to even find a common
time every week to meet as a group of 5 or 6. However, our experience of being
in the LC group proved us wrong when we found that we actually had tremendous
bonding, were willing to set aside time to meet and were able to develop a
professional relationship that had contributed to our respective professional
growth and development.
In 2003, when I started my job attachment
as a Best Practices Facilitator, in the Academy for Best Learning in Education
(ABLE), a department that encourages best practices among teachers, I had the
opportunity to develop my understanding of Action Research further as one of my
responsibilities was to facilitate workshops for teachers who were leaders in
groups using the PEPP&ER process. As a follow-up of these workshops, some
of the leaders of these groups approached me upon completion of their groupsÕ
project to help them with the writing of the LC report. It was then that I
realized that though they had knowledge of the process, actual application of
the principles of PEPP&ER
required more than just knowledge of the process. It was important that
teachers adopt the habits of continual enquiry and reflection. I was concerned
that they were not reaping the full benefits as
members of a learning circle that had got together to improve the quality of the
teaching and learning.
As I firmly believe in the benefits of
teacher collaboration through action research I was determined to address this
concern immediately. It was then that I embarked on an action research journey
with the intent of helping teachers use the PEPP&ER process more
effectively. Below is an account of my journey that had led to the development
of a D-I-Y (Do-it-yourself) Kit for teachers in ITE to enable them to enhance
their learning circle efforts by becoming more like action researchers and less
like problem-solvers. The structure of this paper is based on the stages of
planning, exploring, practicing and performing of the PEPP&ER process.
Values and Beliefs
I started my journey by first examining my values and
beliefs as a Best Practices Facilitator. I value my role in improving teacher
collaboration to enable teachers to develop themselves professionally. From my
personal experience of using the PEPP&ER process, I found that it is good
to encourage teacher collaboration as it yields many benefits to both teachers
and students. I believe that when teachers collaborate to address concerns,
they will be able to get better results with their students as opposed to them
working in isolation. In LCs, teachersÕ wisdom and tacit knowledge on teaching
and learning can be tapped on to create new knowledge that would benefit the
teaching profession in technical education as the learning process is
documented and shared amongst teachers.
From my own experience of being a member of an LC and
also based on my dialogues with other teachers, I came to believe that
collaboration using the Action Research approach also enables teachers to bond
with each other and further ignites their passion in teaching as they focus
their attention on the issues of improving the quality of education rather than
the achievement of quantifiable goals and objectives as is the case when
teachers are put into project teams or committees to solve problems.
My Observations and Reflections
As a Best Practices Facilitator, in ABLE, I conduct
workshops for leaders of LC groups on the theory and principles of the
PEPP&ER process. As a follow-up, I also visit LC leaders if they request
for guidance. In some of my encounters with the lecturers in LC groups,
I found that our lecturers are not actively engaged in enquiry or reflection
but are using the PEPP&ER Framework as if it were a set of procedures for
problem-solving.
When facilitating workshops for LC leaders, I often
ask participants to share their concerns. In one of the sessions, a participant
shared his concern. He said, ÔMy
concern is student attrition. I have done all that could be done to address
this concern and there is nothing more that I can do to change or improve the
situation.Õ All the other participants unanimously agreed with him without even
seeking more information. I encouraged them to be his Critical Friend (McNiff,
J. with J. Whitehead, 2002) to ask him questions so that together they may be able
to talk about the concern, to reflect about their statements and to explore the
issue in greater depth. I found that they were at a loss.
In addition, when a few of the LC groups approached me to
look at their completed projects, I realized that they had failed to make
certain connections or address and challenge some of their assumptions during
the course of their project work. Despite the fact that Enquiry and Reflection
are integral to the PEPP&ER process as outlined in the model, there were not
enough enquiries made throughout the various stages of their project. The group
had focused more on strategies and quantitative results Ð something that was a
prominent feature of the PDCA (Shewart, W.A, 1986) process. It also became evident that they were
unsure about the application of the PEPP&ER process when they asked these
questions:
¤
Am I doing it the
right way?
¤
What kind of data
should I gather and is the data sufficient?
¤
Is this the
PEPP&ER approach or PDCA?
'Enquiry and Reflection' are, to
me, the tenets of action research
and an integral part of the PEPP&ER process that allow our lecturers to explore issues
thoroughly and ensure that they consciously challenge some of their assumptions
and take the effort to seek evidence to validate their findings. In addition,
their reports did not attempt to trace the learning process of the lecturers at
the various stages and the professional growth and development of the LC was
not captured at all. Most of all, I was concerned because though I valued teacher collaboration and
believed in its potential for the professional development of teachers, I was
not able to live out my values and beliefs and experienced myself as a Ôliving
contradictionÕ (Whitehead J, 1989)
To address this concern I reflected on why our
lecturers did not engage in enquiry and reflection. As these lecturers are used
to the PDCA process in their
previous projects, I felt that many of them might be adopting a task-oriented
approach in using the PEPP&ER Framework. Perhaps they were more used to
practical tasks like brainstorming, charting graphs rather than reflecting,
journaling and challenging assumptions and engaging in dialogue and sharing. Perhaps,
they were not accustomed to deep reflection nor making enquiries to challenge
others' assumptions or even to gather more evidence from others. Personally, I
felt that, like me, they were not comfortable in challenging their colleague's
viewpoint, as coming from Asian backgrounds, some questions may be viewed as
being confrontational.
I pondered upon
my own experience as a member of my LC group and realized that initially there
were instances when my views differed from the group's viewpoint but did not
voice my disagreement although I had evidence to back it up. There were a
number of reasons that made me act this way. The fear of others not accepting
my viewpoint and also not wanting to be in opposition with the group's
solidarity on certain viewpoints. However, as I warmed up to the group, I
realized that I was able to share and make enquiries more freely. And each time
I offered differing viewpoints, it was not rejected but led on to further
dialogue and new viewpoints on the issue. It was encouraging then for me to
know that my sharing had challenged certain assumptions of the group and thus
had helped the group to move on.
Based on my
reflection on what had encouraged me to make enquiries, I decided that two things are essential
for our lecturers embarking on action research in their LCs. Firstly, they need
to have a mindset that making enquiries and challenging assumptions are
positive. Secondly, that 'Critical Friendship' is critical for an LC. In order
for group members to share their reflections or challenge assumptions, they
must feel secure within the group. I had to ascertain if what I had arrived at
as a result of my observation and reflection were truly what the LCs needed or
were they just assumptions because of my personal experiences of being in an
LC.
Gathering, Analyzing & Reflecting on
data/evidence
I needed to find out the truth about why teachers in
ITE where not actively engaged in making enquiries and challenging assumptions.
I felt that the best way to find out how teachers in ITE felt about enquiry and
reflection was to interview them personally. I interviewed a total of 15 teachers and all of them agreed that
enquiry and reflection were important and essential for PEPP&ER and gave a
rating of 80 to 90 per cent. However, when asked if they felt comfortable
making enquiries to challenge assumptions in a group, there were mixed
responses. Some insisted that they would make enquiries and challenge
assumptions in any situation. However, most of the teachers said they would
respond according to how receptive their groups were to such enquiries.
Among this group was a teacher who commented that she
would only make such enquiries if she were the groupÕs leader but would not do
so if she were just a member. This I thought was interesting as this teacher
felt it was all right to ask questions if she was playing a particular role.
Only 3 of the teachers interviewed said they would not make enquiries to
challenge assumptions especially if the rest of the group members were
unanimous in their view.
All of them, however, admitted that they had come
across group members who would not make enquiries or even offer their comments
in a group. To address this, the survey participants offered some suggestions.
Among them were: creating a non-threatening environment, making efforts to
build rapport in the group and also helping every member understand his/her
role clearly.
At this point, I shared with my Critical Friend, Peggy Leong my values, beliefs and my concerns about helping these groups and the insights I gained from the data gathered. I also suggested that perhaps having an enquiry guide with questions mapped against the various stages of the PEPP&ER process would encourage teachers to consciously make enquiries within the group. The result of that sharing was the framing of my research question: How do I as a Best Practices Facilitator who supports the professional development of teachers, help these LC groups adopt a spirit of enquiry to help them become more like action researchers to move away from their current stance as problem-solvers?
As the focus of my action research is on enquiries, I
examined in detail the types of enquires in Jack WhiteheadÕs Action Plan
(Whitehead, J. 1993), McNiffÕs questions (McNiff, J 2002) and also the questions
listed in QueenÕs UniversityÕs Action Research assignment (1998) against the
various stages of PEPP&ER.
While WhiteheadÕs plan looked very simple, it also
implied that one who uses that plan is already familiar with the concepts,
principles underlying action research. McNiffÕs questions were part of a
concise guide that explained the various stages of action research and also
gave an insight into the principles of action research. In contrast, the
QueenÕs UniversityÕs guide for first-time action researchers had a more
detailed list of questions to guide in the various stages. I found that
questions like these would be more apt for my guide as most of the teachers in
ITE are also undertaking these projects for the first time.
It also struck me that, in most of the other models of
action research that I had looked at, it was the questions that were used to
define or characterize the various stages of the research process. This
realization encouraged me further in my quest to develop an Enquiry Guide. In ITE,
we have the PEPP&ER model to define the actions of the various stages of
action research. This model has been beneficial in helping teachers understand
the various stages and to track their progress. The importance of ÔEnquiryÕ and
ÔReflectionÕ (E&R) of the PEPP&ER Framework had always been stressed
during our workshops, but teachers had to take the responsibility to engage in
enquiry and reflection or else, the value of action research would be lost.
In addition, the questions in all of the action research
approaches or models were meant for individual action research and not for
group projects. Working
collaboratively in groups meant that one had to make self-enquiries and also
enquiries to the group. After studying the various plans, I decided to use some
of the questions and to modify and create some of my own to make it more
specific for using the PEPP&ER process in group projects.
I made up my mind to develop an Enquiry Guide that has
both self-enquiries and enquiries to be made as a Critical Friend to the LC
group. This guide would be made available to every member in the LC group who
can use it as a reference to guide them in their individual reflections and to
be brought to meetings to allow them to ask relevant questions as a Critical
Friend. To test out the effectiveness of this enquiry guide, I identified two
groups of teachers Ð those who attend our ILC workshops and thus had no prior
experience of PEPP&ER and those who have completed an ILC project using
PEPP&ER but had not fully engaged themselves in enquiry and reflection.
I decided to use survey questionnaires to
check if they found the questions in the guide useful and to sit in some of
their meetings as an observer to see how the guide was made use of. Finally I
would interview these teachers and collate their comments to further refine the
guide.
Practice: Testing the Enquiry Guide
The Enquiry Guide that I developed had
questions to match the Plan, Explore, Practice and Perform stages of the
PEPP&ER process. The objective was to stimulate dialogue among group
members and also to facilitate self-reflection. I created 2 separate lists of
questions for the PLAN stage: Enquiries (Self) & Enquiries (as a Critical
Friend to the group) and distributed them in the workshop for LC leaders. I
explained my reasons for developing the guide and encouraged them to use the
questions for self-reflection and also in their dialogues with their groups. I
also asked them to provide me with feedback on the guide - whether they found
it useful and if the questions were relevant. I then joined in as an observer
as they started their group discussions using the guide. I was surprised that
although they agreed that the questions were helpful, they were still not using
the questions in the guide to challenge each otherÕs assumptions.
Through my reflections on my experience
with the group, it seemed that the group needed more than just a list of
questions to help them to start adopting this habit of making enquiries. Since
they were to make these enquiries as a Critical Friend, I realized that in
addition to providing them with a list of questions, they needed to become
familiar with the roles and responsibilities of a Critical Friend. I then set
to work on this and further refined my guide.
I next met up with an LC group whose
leader had approached me to assist her in facilitating the groupÕs first
meeting and also introducing the concepts to them. I started by explaining
their roles as Critical Friends in the group and passed the guide to the leader
to facilitate in the meeting while I sat as an observer to see how it was being
used. I found that explaining the concept of the Critical Friend had helped
them and they took on the responsibility of making enquiries to gather more
information from their colleagues. However, I was quite taken aback when the
leader chose to skip the question on examining values and beliefs but continued
with the other enquiries. I felt that something was not right and urged the group
to share their values and beliefs.
As I listened to their sharing on their
values and beliefs, each person seemed very passionate about his or her belief.
Even in instances, where some members had admitted that they shared the same
value, they went on to elaborate on their respective values. As an observer, I
felt that in sharing their values and beliefs, they had an opportunity to talk
about something close to their heart and in doing so they were also able to
bond as they shared similar values like motivating students, building students
self-esteem, improving studentsÕ interpersonal skills and communication
abilities. Later, I checked with the leader on why she had chosen to skip the
question. She replied that all teachers have the same values and beliefs and so
she did not see the need to talk about it.
I used the same guide and approached
another LC group to try out the guide. The groupÕs leader also skipped the
question on values and beliefs. When I asked her, why she had skipped the
question, she replied that the group members might feel uncomfortable sharing
such issues. I encouraged the group to share and saw how the group bonded
through the sharing. I then reflected on my experiences with these groups
checking them against my own belief in sharing values and beliefs.
I came to the conclusion that it was
important for teachers to spend some time to talk about their respective values
as it will help them to focus on what they wanted to do for their project.
According to McNiff(2002), ÔAs a reflective practitioner you need to be aware
of what drives your work, so you
can be clear about what you are doing and why you are doing it.Õ There is a
need to bring our values to aconscious level so we may be able to check if we
are living out our values in practice.
To obtain validation on this statement, I
checked with some workshop participants on whether they felt it was important
to share their values and beliefs with their groups. One of the teachers said
this, ÔYes, itÕs important because sometimes when weÕve been teaching for so
long, we lose focus and itÕs good to remind ourselves of our values in this
way.Õ In addition, I had discovered through my observation that when teachers
share their values and beliefs, they are able to bond at a professional level.
One of the teachers in a group I sat in, made this remark after listening to
her colleague share his values and beliefs: ÔI didnÕt know you felt the same
way about students too!Õ Sharing of values thus enables teachers to bond and
build trust, which is necessary for Critical Friendship.
Following my work with the teachers, I
decided to further refine the Enquiry Guide to capture their sharing and also
to come up with an explanation on the concept of Critical Friendship that would
be included in the guide. I also approached other groups in ITE who were
successful in applying the principles of PEPP&ER. Through my dialogue with
them I discovered that one of the groups had a Critical Friendship Pledge that
helped them to focus on their roles in their group. I decided to adopt this and
made further refinements to the Enquiry Guide and shared it with some workshop
participants. The participants felt that the guide was useful in helping them
understand the concepts of the PEPP&ER process and apply it in a better
way.
Perform: Documenting and Sharing the experience
Having
completed the one phase of my Action Research journey, I have now documented
and am making my work public at this conference and to have it validated by the
community of action researchers here. Reflecting on my own journey, I realized that my experience has
brought me to a new understanding on the need to reflect on values and beliefs
when doing an action research project. As one of the teachers in ITE who has
been inspired to do action research in his group remarked, ÔIt involves a lot
of work and your heart has to be in it.Õ I have put my heart into the
development of this Enquiry Guide and it is by no means perfect as I continue
on my learning journey, the guide will be continually refined.
CONCLUSION
When I
started my Action Research journey,
I was concerned that I was not able to live out my values of improving
teacher collaboration to
enable them to develop themselves professionally. To some extent I was able to
address this concern through the development of the D-I-Y Kit to facilitate
enquiry and reflection among teachers collaborating in ILCs to improve the
quality of teaching and learning.
Action research is truly for those who value and
believe that they want to do something to improve their work. However,
supporting the professional development of teachers is an on-going process and
I need to address other concerns.
I need to help teachers realize that they can make meaningful contributions
to teaching and learning in ITE through action research. More specifically for
the next phase of my own professional development, I would like to encourage
habits of journaling and seeking information and evidence from various sources
of information for decision-making. I realize that there is really no ending to
action research. As one concern is addressed, another surfaces and guided by
the need to live out my values in practice, I will continue my journey to
become a better action researcher with passion and enthusiasm.
Leong,
P. (2004). Embarking on a Learning Journey:Developing the PEPP&ER Framework
for Action Research. Paper presented at the International Research Conference
on Vocational Education and Training, Aug 13-14, 2004, Thailand.
McNiff,
J. with J. Whitehead (2002). Action Research: Principles and Practice, (2nd
ed). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
McNiff,
J.(2002). Action Research Booklet (3rd ed.) at
http://www.jeanmcniff.com/booklet1.html
Ministry
of Education. (2003). Teachers Network Learning Circles. Teachers Network
publication, Singapore.
Queen's
University, Faculty of Education, Action Research Assignment Fall Term, 1998
at: http://educ.queensu.ca/~prof191/arguide.htm
Shewart,
W.A.(1986). Statistical Method from the Viewpoint of Quality Control. Dover
Publications.
Whitehead,
J. (1989) ÔCreating a living educational theory from questions of the kind,
ÒHow do I improve my practice?ÓÕ Cambridge Journal of Education, Vol. 19, No.1,
pp. 41-52
Whitehead,
J. (1993) The Growth of Educational Knowledge: Creating Your Own Living
Educational Theories. Bournemouth, Hyde.