Transcript Document 7809024

Action research: Two levels
Sigurlina Davidsdottir
Penelope Lisi
Context
• Two researchers have worked with four schools
since 2000 to help with self-evaluations
• We have used “deliberative democratic
evaluation”:
– Inclusion (everyone interested can participate)
– Before the evaluation, discussions about what to
evaluate, evaluation questions, etc. (dialogue)
– After data is in, discussions about what to do with
them (deliberation)
What to expect (Fullan, 2001)
• 1. Data is collected
– Decisions are made on which processes will be looked at
– A few teachers take on the main bulk of the job
– A few teachers evaluate their own work, still limited
• 2. Increased cooperation
– Groups begin to cooperate and discuss each others’ viewpoints
– A few options appear and are discussed when making decisions
– Cooperation leads to more teacher job satisfaction
• 3. Changes in school structure
– More than just changes in teaching practice
– Problems discussed and solved within the groups and the school
– Changes in practice are based on data
• 4. Changes leading to better teaching and learning
– When the first three levels are in place, the bulk of the job can now
concentrate on what happens in the classrooms
What actually happened
• Exactly what Fullan said:
• Ist year: groping around for methods.
– A few teachers active
– A few more taka a positive stand, little action
• 2nd year: much more cooperation
– Groups begin to meet regularly for discussions
– Cooperation across departments
– Increased teacher job satisfaction
• 3rd year: Data driven decision making
– Evaluation methods are now the norm
– Quite some work is being done within departments
• 4th year: Grassroots initiatives
– Teachers want help with action research within their classrooms
What is needed for self-evaluation
in schools to be successful?
• Teachers “own” the evaluation, feel that this is their job
– “Discussions with peers have been key here”
• School culture values self-evaluation
– “Strong, positive associations between staff and principal encourage us
to try out new approaches”
• Context is conducive to cooperation
– “Major changes are discussed with teachers”
• Teacher development is facilitated
– “The school provides us with time for development in our jobs”
• School authorities support the evaluation efforts
– “Without support from our principal this would not have been possible”
• Teachers are enthusiastic about new approaches
– “We are beginning to understand that this does not hurt and data can be
a tool in our hands”
Action research on two levels
• What was done on the school level was action
research in itself:
– Teams from the schools met and decided:
• What would be evaluated
• What would be the major evaluation questions
• How to collect data to answer them
– When data was in, the teams decided:
• What the data was telling them
• How to go about making a development plan
• How to evaluate the results
• Then the individual departments wanted more:
– Help in doing their own action research projects
– Making data help them at their own classroom level