A New Prospective on Action Research in Terms

【Abstract】Language teachers actively seek ways to improve their understanding about how to teach their students and they hope the insights gained accordingly could guide them to take a set of actions that will help increase the effectiveness of their teaching and students learning. In this essay， firstly principles are reviewed， and then its strengths and limitations are highlighted before processes of action research are concisely touched.

【Key words】action research；language

Definition of action research

What makes action research different is that is includes action. Action research is also known as research and action or research and development. Carr and Kemmis （1986） define that action research is simply a form of self-reflective enquiry undertaken by teachers in order to improve the rationality of their own practices， and their understanding of these practices and the situations where the practices are carried out. Burns （1999） agrees by explaining more simply that action research in the language classroom is a useful tool， which help teachers look critically at their own classrooms for the purposes of improving their own teaching and enhancing the quality of learning that takes place.

Action research is often used to describe the type of structured teacher reflection， or teacher-initiated research （Edge， 2001）. Therefore， action research is usually not to be done by outside researchers but the actual classroom teachers. In contrast to most language classroom research that is carried out by parties outside the classroom for the purposes of theory construction and testing， action research is typically conducted by practitioners in order to address an immediate classroom problem or need （Mackey & Gass， 2005）. Besides， because the problems of teachers are often shared with other teachers in the same school， action research has tended to become co-operative， involving many or all of the teachers in the school.

Principles

Hopkins （2002） thinks the essence of action research is to develop a teachers professional expertise and judgment. Concerning how far involvement in classroom research activity will impinge on teachers teaching and their personal time， he suggests the following four principles

1. A teachers primary job is to teach.

2. Reduce time-consuming.

3. Reliable methodology.

4. Choose feasible and practical topic

As for the first principle， teachers should keep it in mind that their primary job is to teach， and any research method should not interfere with or disrupt their teaching responsibility. It will be conflict if a teacher is doing action research to improve his teaching practice and at the same time ignore the primacy of the teaching and learning process.

The second principle is that the method of data collection must not be too demanding on the teachers time. A teacher needs to be certain about the data collection technique before using it. Because teachers themselves are already overworked and there are continuing demands of time for increased preparation and other professional development. By judicious use of specific data collection techniques and easy data analysis methods， time could be reduced.

As to the third one， it means that methodology employed must be reliable enough for teachers to develop strategies applicable to their classroom situation. It is no excuse at all to claim that rigor is unnecessary because the research is small-scale or undertaken by an individual teacher to improve personal practice. Because if a change in teaching strategy is to be made， then that decision needs to be based on reliable data.

About the fourth criterion， the research focus undertaken by the teacher should be one which is researchable and practical. If a teacher chooses a topic that is too complex， then he or she probably get frustrated.

When concerning the question and data involved in action research， Burn （2005， p.250） suggests some other principles. First， teachers should expand the scope of the study. Then， they should triangulate the data across different episodes， sites， and subjects through multiple data sources. Teachers should also test new findings against previous steps of the process. At last， teachers should avoid the bias inherent in cross-sectional research.

Strengths of action research

Action research is tentative and adaptive

Generally， traditional researches aim to find out universal ‘truth and ‘fact rather than solve problems within specific classrooms， so their findings are extremely difficult to be applied to classroom practice. However， action research is more tentative and adaptive， since action research may be applied to any classroom for specific purposes. Whenever specific knowledge is required for a specific problem in a specific classroom， action research is appropriate. It tends to comprehend all the factors relevant to an immediate problem and generate solutions to the practical problems （Marris and Rein， 1983）.

Designed for teachers

A feature which makes action research a very suitable procedure for work in classrooms is that conducting action researches is within teachers ability （Cohen & Manion， 1984）. Undertaking action research requires much less academic and research knowledge than traditional researches， so teachers dont have to worry their expertise of handling an educational research. Besides， since classrooms are the places where they undertake action researches， teachers could actually doing research while they are teaching， which allow them not to overwork in their limited spare time.

Self professional development

Action research make teachers take responsibility for their own learning and professional development. Within the action research process， teachers express this professional responsibility as they create and share knowledge and get better understanding of the teaching-learning process， which plays a very important role in their profession development.

Limitations

Incompatibility between teachers and traditional researchers

Since teachers and traditional researchers share their different objectives， values and orientations of doing research， communication and collaboration between them are naturally difficult. Cohen & Manion （1984） argue that the incompatibility is natural since teachers concern about action， doing things and translate generalizations into specific acts， while traditional researchers pursue precision， control， replication and attempts to generalize from specific events.

Creating data instead of interpreting data

Winter （1982） argues that action research tends to have a tradition which has a methodology for the creation of data， but not for the interpretation of data. He argues data from descriptive journals， the observers field notes， and open-ended interview probably create accounts that teachers would utilize without further examination， which is a great threat to the validity of the research.

Specific rather than general

Factors that make action research flexible also decrease the representative nature. Since an action research serves to a specific problem of a specific classroom， its very hard to generalize the findings to the outside world.

Process of action research

Distinctive patterns are furnished and illustrated by different linguists. One systematic pattern is offered by Stringer （2004， p.10） who argues the procedures of action research is made up of design， data collecting， data analyzing， communication and action. A little more recently Mackey and Gass （2005） summarize similarly that action research usually stems from a question or problem， involves gathering data， and is followed by analysis and interpretation of those data and possibly a solution to the research problem. Then this can be followed by discussion about the findings to other and sometimes by a change or modification to current practice.

Action research does not end up with data analysis. Its goal is not only to gain a better understanding of our classrooms but also to take practical steps to improve classroom instruction. After analyzing the data， teachers should generate practical solutions and a plan to implement them. It should be noted that in search for solutions， teachers should not assume that there is single solution to be discovered. Rather， there are many practical options from which we can choose.

Before teachers actually implement those practical solutions to action research question， teachers should try out them first， because no one could possibly know how effective those solutions would be. In fact， there has to be a follow-up action research to determine their effectiveness （Grabe & Stoller， 2002）. They argue that action research is never conclusive， nor is it static or self-contained.

Conclusion

As one of the most attractive forms of investigation， action research is more than just documents lying on a library shelf. Compared with traditional researches， it is not surprising to see action research is lacking in scientific rigor. However， as action research become more popular and used in more schools， it will become more standardized， less personalized and more open.

References：

[1]Carr，W.and Kemmis，S.（1986）.Becoming Citial：Knowing through Action Research.London：Falmer.

[2]Cohen，L.and Manion，L.（1984）.Research Methods in Education.London：Croom Helm.

[3]Creswell，J.（2002）.Educational Research：Planing，Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research.Upper Saddle River，NJ：Pearson.

[4]Edge，J.（2001）.Action Research：Case Studies in TESOL.Alexandria，VA：TESOL.

[5]Grabe，W.and Stoller，F(xiàn).L.（2002）.Teaching and Researching Reading.London：Longman.

[6]Gregory，R.（1988）.Action Research in the Secondary Schools.London：Routledge，Chapman and Hall.

[7]Mackey，A.& Gass，S.M.（2005）.Second Language Research： Methodology and Design.London：Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[8]Marris，P.and Rein，M.（1983）.Curriculum Evaluation in Schools.Beckenham：Croom Helm.

[9]Nunan，D.（1990）.Action Research in the Language Classroom.In J.C.Richards & D.Nunan（Eds.）In Second Language Teacher Education.Cambridge：Cambridge University Press.

[10]Stringer，E.（2004）.Action Research in Education.Ohio：Pearson Prentice Hall.

[11]Walker，R.and Adelman，C.（1990）.A Guide to Classroom Observation.London：Routledge.

[12]Wallace，M.J.（1998）.Action Research for Language Teachers.New York：Cambridge University Press.

【基金項(xiàng)目】本文系北京市支持中央高校共建項(xiàng)目—2013年青年英才計(jì)劃“實(shí)用英語(yǔ)學(xué)術(shù)寫(xiě)作研究”（項(xiàng)目編號(hào)：YETP1393）的研究成果。

作者簡(jiǎn)介：王猛，遼寧人，講師，研究方向：英語(yǔ)語(yǔ)言文化及教學(xué)法。