This article was downloaded by: [90.200.220.

213] On: 09 September 2013, At: 14:18 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Educational Action Research

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/reac20

Action research and reflective practice: towards a holistic view

Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day
a b a b

Queen's University of Belfast, United Kingdom

University of Nottingham, United Kingdom Published online: 20 Dec 2006.

To cite this article: Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day (2000) Action research and reflective practice: towards a holistic view, Educational Action Research, 8:1, 179-193, DOI: 10.1080/09650790000200108 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09650790000200108

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Educational Action Research, Volume 8, Number 1, 2000

Action Research and Reflective Practice: towards a holistic view

RUTH LEITCH Queens University of Belfast, United Kingdom CHRISTOPHER DAY University of Nottingham, United Kingdom

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

ABSTRACT Two concepts that have captured the imagination of the educational community in the last 60 years have been those of reflective practice and action research. Both, in their various forms, are considered to be critical dimensions of the professional development of teachers. However, whilst both were receiving academic attention during the 1930s and 1940s (Lewin, 1934, cited in Adelman, 1993; Lewin, 1946; Dewey, 1933), it was not until Stenhouses (1975) notion of the teacher-as-researcher that the two came most compellingly into relationship and educational action research as a process, which held at its centre different kinds of reflection, began to be reformulated in Britain (Carr, 1993). This article considers the important part played in teachers development by different kinds of action research. Its central thesis is that, although action research has a critical role to play not least as a means of building the capacity of teachers as researchers of their own practice, there has been insufficient attention given to both the nature of reflection in the action research process, and its relationship to the purposes, processes and outcomes. The article challenges the rational, cognitive models of reflection that are implicit in much of the action research literature. It suggests that more attention needs to be given to the importance of the role of emotion in understanding and developing the capacities for reflection which facilitates personal, professional and ultimately system change.

Reflection and Reflective Practice

... the way of teaching demands a long journey that does not have any easily identifiable destination ... It is a journey that I believe

179

Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day must include a backward step into the self and it is a journey that is its own destination. (Tremmel, 1993, p. 456) In any analysis, it is initially important to differentiate the terms reflection and reflective practice. Reflection is considered as a process or activity that is central to developing practices (Dewey 1933, 1938; Loughran, 1996). However, although it retains connotations of thinking processes and contemplative self-examination, in this context it seems to remain more a metaphor for representing a process of learning from experience than a term which might be subject to more detailed analysis. In the literature, for example, reflection is predominantly associated with acts of cognition that are linked to learning how rather than learning about or what. Dewey (1933, p. 12) defined reflective thinking as a number of phases in thinking, i.e. a state of doubt, hesitation or mental difficulty in which thinking originates, followed by an act of searching or inquiring to find material that will resolve the doubt. In 1996, Loughran, drawing on the work of Dewey (1933) and Goodman (1984), defined reflection as the deliberate and purposeful act of thinking which centres on ways of responding to problem situations (p. 14). Thus, reflection is associated with thinking and is judged to involve the cognitive processes of both problem finding and problemsolving, concepts which continue to fascinate in cognitive psychology (Arlin, 1990; Csikszentmihalyi & Sawyers, 1995). It was Schn, in the mid-1980s, who distinctively popularised the image of the reflective practitioner by extending Deweys (1933) foundational ideas on reflection through observing how practitioners think in action. This led to Schn (1983) coining reflection-on-action and reflection-in-action as the two forms of reflective thinking. His model of the epistemology of practice (p. 49) was timely and well received within teacher education and research. According to Schn (1983) reflection-in-action acknowledges the tacit processes of thinking which accompany doing, and which constantly interact with and modify ongoing practice in such a way that learning takes place. Much of this may remain unconscious, tacit and unverbalised (Clark & Yinger, 1977), though Loughran (1996) suggests that, in meeting unanticipated problem situations, reflection-in-action comprises reframing the problem and improvising on the spot so that the experience will be viewed differently. Reflection-on-action, on the other hand, is viewed as teachers thoughtful consideration and retrospective analysis of their performance in order to gain knowledge from experience. Russell & Munby (1992) describe it succinctly as the systematic and deliberate thinking back over ones actions (p. 3). These two processes together, in Schns terms, form the core professional artistry of the reflective practitioner. Subsequent research has been focused on determining that reflective practice exists, and identifying enabling and disenabling conditions which affect its use, and the means by which it might be fostered within all levels of the teaching profession.

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

180

A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

Schns notion of reflective practice was a reaction against an instrumental notion of teaching where the teacher is a technician implementing others knowledge in practice (Schn, 1983).[1] However, it and many other texts on reflection present an essentially rational, problemsolving means of learning rooted as it is in cognitive psychology, with its emphasis on critical thinking. Johnston & Badley (1996, p. 4) defined reflective practice as the acquisition of a critical stance or attitude towards ones own practice and that of ones peers. The essential concern is the explication of meanings and understandings of teachers as they engage in actual practice across diverse teaching contexts (Grimmett et al, 1990). Critical theorists have extended Schns categories adding reflection about action as a means of ensuring that teachers reflect on the social, economic and political purposes and conditions of teaching and learning, as well as the school and classroom contexts (Zeichner, 1993). These notions continue to form the basis of much of the thinking about the nature of reflection and the development of effective reflective practitioners in the teaching profession. Reflective practice in these terms entails making conscious and explicit the dynamic interplay between thinking and action, what Shulman (1987) terms the wisdom of teaching, so that teachers may become thoughtful and learn from their work in the light of purposes and principles, which are moral (Sockett, 1993). Dewey (1933) considered reflection in practice as having a moral base, where professional actions would be treated as experimental, and the individual would reflect both on their actions and their consequences. The relationship of effectiveness to moral purposes of teaching remains a key area in the international debate on the nature of teachers professionalism (Jackson et al, 1993; Goodson & Hargreaves, 1996). Thus, while a reflective practitioner may be concerned to improve practice and to develop additional competence, what defines the effective reflective practitioner is more a set of attitudes towards practice based upon broader understandings of self, society and moral purposes than those which seek simply to increase efficiency in relation to delivery and narrowly conceived achievement targets. It is particularly important in current policy contexts for those engaged in action research to be clear about its purpose. Zeichner & Gore (1995) advocate a social reconstructionist approach to action research aimed at, for example, politicising student teachers reflective abilities: while we are interested in reflection about teaching practices ... and student teachers practical theories ... we are also concerned with encouraging action research that contributes towards the elimination of the social conditions that distort self-understandings of teachers and undermine the educative potential and moral base of schooling and teacher education. (p. 19) Serving teachers needs are even more complex. For example, there is in England, a growing concern of a double-edge sword creeping into

181

Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day government directives in the area of research, which may ultimately have an impact on the quality, purposes and outcomes of teacher research. In recent years, with others, David Hargreaves (1996), has presented the case for, among other substantial changes, greater involvement of teachers as practitioners in the research process, in order to establish a reliable, evidence-base of what teachers do in classrooms (p. 7). Employing the parallel of medicine as an established, evidence-based profession, teachers would engage systematically and actively in the process of problem-based learning in order to benefit practice in the field of education. Such an outcome is entirely consistent with the notion of the teacher as reflective practitioner (p. 8). However, whilst this bears all the hallmarks of a political endorsement [see Teacher Training Agency (TTA), 1996] of an action research paradigm, the model which he presents implicitly is one involving technical reflection as a means of increasing teachers efficiency in delivering the curriculum, rather than, for example, building problemsolving, and self-evaluation capacities and understandings of the effects on teaching and learning of broader social and policy contexts. Action research of this kind could provide merely a convenient, and legitimate means by which individual and groups of teachers may indirectly receive support and encouragement for change, whilst being unwittingly channelled into taking on responsibility for solving problems and conflicts, the sources of which are manifestly outside their making. Thus, while still holding a key role in encouraging reflective practice, there are clearly different modes of action research, which according to purpose will have different kinds of benefits, signal the kinds of teaching practices which are encouraged or discouraged by policy makers and, more importantly, define the meaning of professionalism.

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

The Role of Reflective Practice in the Professional Development of Teachers

There are three reasons why reflective practice is increasingly being recognised as being essential to good teaching and having a central role in the learning life of the effective teacher (Day, 1993, p. 83). The first concerns the nature of teaching. The assumption is that since teaching and learning are complex processes and since there is not necessarily one right approach (Loughran, 1996), deliberating among competing versions of good teaching and recasting past understandings and current practices (Grimmett et al, 1990) are likely to lead to improvement. Without a capacity to evaluate assumptions, teachers will be more inclined to remain prisoners of (their) programs (Argyris & Schn, 1976, cited in Day, 1985, p. 137) and, as a result, their professional effectiveness in circumstances which inevitably change over time will be decreased. The second is that engaging in reflective practice is a means of helping individuals towards greater selfknowledge and self-challenge a useful way of achieving personal development (Johnston & Badley, 1996, p. 5) through, for example, an analysis of the personal values and theories that underlie teaching. Finally

182

A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH

(and here the link with action research becomes sharper), reflective practice is considered to be central to the growth of teachers as inquirers who engage in collaborative research with others from inside and outside the school in generating knowledge of practice rather than finding themselves as objects whose role is to implement existing theory in practice (Peters, 1985). However, research continues to reveal that there is a continuum of reflective practice that exists within the profession (Ebbutt, 1989; Day, 1999). Teachers may reflect in differing ways at different times. It is important, therefore, to recognise the impact of teachers positions in their career and life cycle, and the effects of the organisational and cultural contexts in which they work if opportunities for their professional growth to be maximised (Day, 1993).

The Relationship between Different Orientations of Action Research and Reflective Practice
Examination of the action research literature reveals that its goals like those of reflective practice are change and improvement (Corey, 1952, 1953; Carr & Kemmis, 1986; Whitehead, 1989; Elliott, 1991; Atkin, 1993). The ways in which the reflective inquiry processes within action research are framed and interpreted, however, relate to the underpinning epistemology of the action research model being employed whether, for example, the goal is for teachers to become more effective or efficient or empowered. The relationship between particular models of action research and types of reflective processes is graphically demonstrated by Grundys (1982) typology [2], that distinguishes between technical, practical and emancipatory models of action research. Technical action research seeks to deliver more efficient effective practice through the practical skill of the participants (Grundy, 1982, p. 357). With its emphasis on orderly sequencing of research and the use of methods associated with the social science paradigm, it seems to require technical research expertise which may be externally provided, and thus this model presents less opportunity for the development of teachers capacities for reflection in or on practice. Altrichter & Posch (1989) warn that this can also restrict practitioners to a subordinate, technical-rational approach to teaching without developing reflective features of professional action (p. 91). Reflection in this approach, is likely to be related to solving immediate pressing problems of efficient and effective delivery of curricula. It is likely to be orientated towards the development of pedagogical strategies, skills and tactics In contrast, practical action research aims to improve practice through the application of practical judgement and the accumulated personal wisdom of the teacher. Models of action research falling within this frame are as concerned with process as the end product of inquiry. They rely not only on the exercise of moral and practical judgement by teachers, but also their capacities to identify issues or problems that are salient to this in these professional contexts. Reflective processes within this action research approach are likely to focus upon building teachers capacities to self-

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

183

Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day evaluate. Elliotts (1991) revision of Lewins (1952) self-reflective spiral of cycles, which entail the steps of observe-reflect-plan-act-evaluate, provides an approach for undertaking practical action research of this kind. Here the aim is to improve the quality of action within a situation. Theory is generated and validated through the examination of practice by the practitioner rather than being independently applied. For Elliott (1991) Action initiates reflection (p. 23). He emphasises the recurrent feature of reconnaissance, in the action research cycle, which involves analysis and reflection of the situation, rather than merely fact-finding. His elaboration of techniques to gather evidence for reconnaissance and monitoring (e.g. diaries, analytic memos, running commentary) seems to demonstrate the value to learning and change of more introspective, self-reflexive kinds of analysis. However, closer examination reveals that these are for largely taskorientated purposes. He cautions that although the process of analysis is an endless one, ... in action research (it) must be interrupted for the sake of action (p. 74), a warning later echoed in the words of Bridget Somekh (1995): Too much emphasis on the importance of self in action research can distract the practitioner from the substantive focus of the study. There is a tendency for some action research to become ingrown and contentless, so that self-exploration and personal growth seem to become the whole focus and purpose of the research. This may be an effective form of therapy, but it is difficult to call it research. (p. 348) Thus, within practical action research of this type, we have a version of reflective practice, which focuses almost exclusively on the individual in the professional domain with self-awareness only important as a precondition for the practitioners professional development (Elliott, 1978). However, this model is limiting also, since it seems to rely solely upon transactional experience and as a result, writers such as Handal & Lauvas (1987) remain essentially pessimistic about serving teachers opportunities to move beyond practical reflection. Although it does acknowledge the moral base of teaching and the broader social justice values, which are central to the third approach, it does not necessarily result in the development or transformation of teachers perspectives of self nor the raising to awareness of what being a professional may mean in terms of the construction or reconstruction of identity. Emancipatory action research is the third mode identified by Grundy (1982). Its purpose is the emancipation of participants in the action from the dictates of compulsions of tradition, precedent, habit, coercion as well as from self-deception (Grundy, 1982, p. 358). It is, therefore, outwardly directed toward the social or educational system, as well as being focused upon individual practice. There are two main contrasting, but complementary approaches, both of which present serious challenges to the definition of teaching as a profession offered by the two previous types of

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

184

A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH

action research. In the first approach, Carr & Kemmis (1986) view it as a collective, collaborative activity engaged in by a self-critical community of practitioners, who are committed to transforming the educational system in line with rational and democratic principles by researching their own practice. In this case, reflection takes on a social-reconstructionist mantle, as practitioners confront, in their own and others practice, the oppression inherent in dominant, socially and historically embedded ideologies. The structure for the facilitation of this radical approach to reflective practice remains mostly confined within the seemingly tidy model of planning, acting, observing, reflecting and critiquing the broad social, political and economic contexts of teaching and learning. The second approach is typified by the work of Whitehead (1989, 1993) and supported in the writings of Lomax (1986, 1994), McNiff (1992, 1995) and Dadds (1995). Whitehead (1989, 1993, 1996) has developed a commonsense concept of living educational theory in which each of us is a living contradiction of ourselves. This is not unlike Argyris & Schns (1976) theory of action differing principally in its emphasis upon values. Whilst we may hold certain values dear, these are often negated or denied in practice. From this position, two fundamental questions arise: How do I improve my practice? and How do I live my values more fully? These necessitate engaging in a process of explaining your present practice in terms of an evaluation of your past (Whitehead, 1996, p. 2) with a view to individuals creating improvements in their present and future contexts. The action inquiry is carried out through a variety of means including, autobiography, dialogical conversations, fictional stories (Evans, 1994), reflective writing and journals (Holly, 1989). The researchers become aware of the values that drive their work so that they may be clear about what they are doing and why. Through such processes, teachers as researchers construct their own living educational theory. Their claim to knowledge may then be validated by groups of critical peers and thus eventually contribute to the dynamic pool of living theory, which has the potential for generalisation (Whitehead, 1989, p. 73). Whiteheads approach is emancipatory, but its initial emphasis is on introspective processes and individual, rather than collective social action. However, both models have similar goals and aim to challenge deep structures (Holly, 1987). The difference remains in their respective starting points within one, the system, within the other, the individual. In summary, then, across the typology of action research approaches outlined by Grundy, it is possible to observe not only the key role that different forms of reflection play but also the ways in which different goals influence the development of specific reflective processes in the participant(s). Specific tools for reflection are increasingly being incorporated into action research methodologies from other disciplines and contexts. These are justified as aids to reflective processing and meta-cognition, as well as a

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

185

Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day means of documentation: autobiography (Day, 1985), journals (Tripp, 1988; Holly, 1989), image-making (Clandinin, 1989), metaphors (Munby & Russell, 1989), dialogical conversations between internal voices, flow-ofconsciousness recordings, fictional stories (Whitehead, 1989). Action research then, represents a potentially powerful means of developing reflective processes across the teaching profession. Without access to the idea of the action-reflection cycle, embodied in the different action research approaches, and the expectations and rigours of writing up, inherent in action research projects, reflection could remain tacit, amorphous, in action and with little perceivable benefit to practice. In this sense, action research provides a tangible focus and structures for developing critical capacities though the extent to which this occurs will be limited by the particular goals of such research. As one student teacher commented, the difference between undertaking a specific action research project and simply being a reflective teacher is that in the former individuals are forced to draw all their thoughts and ideas together in such a way that new observations can be made (Zeichner & Gore, 1995, p. 29). According to Adelman (1989), there is a paucity of high-quality research reports by teachers demonstrating the processes and outcomes of reflection through action research and, despite an increase in opportunities for publication in recent years, this remains the case. Research within cognitive science demonstrates also that the art of problem finding (a highlevel meta-cognitive skill) is a much rarer commodity than that of problem solving (Arlin, 1990; Csikszentmihalyi & Sawyers, 1995). Teachers themselves have also been shown to hold a tendency to technologise action reflection cycles (Richardson, 1990) and, in so doing, trivialise the opportunities for real engagement with and ownership of a meaningful, selfreflexive inquiry. This results not only from personal history and disposition, but also from school culture and the busyness of school life (Cole, 1997). So for personal, social, contextual and psychological reasons, there are limitations in both the conceptualisation and conduct of action research and reflection.

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

Towards a Holistic Model of Action Research: reflecting on the action

A self-aware, self-reflexive teaching population, capable of producing the highest quality learning situations for pupils, is a laudable and necessary aim in a world characterised by social fragmentation, increasing economic competition and personal turbulence. A holistic vision of reflective teaching, however, has yet to be achieved. What is required for teacher educators and those involved in the action research-reflection debate is a greater clarity of thinking about the connections between what reflection, being a reflective practitioner-action researcher, and being a professional involves. This might lead to the development of more complex models of reflection, related to purpose, which take greater cognisance of existing knowledge from other

186

A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH

disciplines, particularly those aspects of psychology concerned with cognitive processes including problem-finding, insight, wisdom, creativity. Additionally, relevant insights and understandings of human nature derived from other paradigms including counselling, psychotherapy, human relationships, personal growth and systems theory, for example, need to be integrated with current concepts of reflection in a seamless manner, such that a more encompassing and heuristic model of reflection is developed. At the moment, much of the literature provides a linear principally cognitive model of reflection (though see Dadds, 1995), with the tendency, despite the rhetoric, for this to be hierarchical in nature, with lower level, instrumental reflection being transcended, according to circumstance, by higher level introspective, or collective processes concerned with personal change and emancipation. This linear conceptualisation has been challenged by Tremmel (1993) as promoting an undue focus on mental processes that support practice (p. 446). He calls us to incorporate such Zen Buddhist notions as mindfulness and paying attention into a broader concept of reflection. Indeed, recognition of the key role that mental processes play seems always to be over-shadowed by a less generous acknowledgement of the cognitive-affective links in the reflective process which are central to action research (see also Korthagen, 1993). Mind-set, motivation, attitudes and emotions are all clearly relevant too. While Dewey (1933) did recognise the moral basis of action, outlining the three attitudes of open-mindedness, whole-heartedness and responsibility, which he considered necessary to predispose someone to reflect and experiment upon their actions, there has been relatively little attention paid to these subsequently in the study of either reflective practice or action research. There are a growing number of post-graduate courses which have been developed over the last two decades which demonstrate strong commitment to the development of reflective practice (Hall et al, 1996, 1997; Leitch, 1993). Many of these courses have been designed, delivered and assessed outside the boundaries of the cognitive action research paradigm, but contain many of its purposes and processes. They are based on a more integrative model of thinking, feeling and acting, which elaborates Schns notions of reflection in and on action. The main axiom of such holistic approaches is that emotions are key and, therefore, the starting point for development and change, due to the recognition that emotions across the range are such powerful determinants of thinking processes (Goleman, 1996), and that turbulent emotions, whether past or present, limit thinking (Jackins, 1965; Goleman, 1996) and encourage responses based on restrictive patterns of behaving. For example, encountering a problem in a classroom is unlikely to produce either keen observation or a unique response but, more predictably, will involve a restricted set of behaviours, based on old patterns of emotional distress and thinking (Zeichner & Gore, 1990). Thus, reflection-in-action is always going to be limited or pre-empted by an individuals previous experiences where unprocessed or confused

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

187

Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day emotions predominate. Reflection-on-action is, therefore, a prerequisite for reflection-in-action to be manifested effectively. So, in order to encourage flexible thinking in action, what Tremmel (1993) calls being mindful in the moment, opportunities must be presented for teachers to map and understand the patterns of their lived experience, both in their personal and professional lives, in order that they may better understand their current purposes and practices. Such a process is independent of but has clear parallels with Whiteheads (1989) approach to living theory and Korthagens (1993) call for strategies that promote teacher awareness by means of non-rational processes. Whilst often employing similar tools to facilitate reflection, the main difference is that the approach outlined here focuses upon reflection itself as being central to the action research paradigm, incorporating psychotherapeutic and psychological insights. Conceptualising reflection at the centre of any of the processes of change inherent in action research methodologies not only acknowledges that teaching is an emotional practice(Hargreaves, 1998, p. 319), but also that emotions are integral to organisational life (Fineman, 1993) frequently occurring as by-products of the socio-political circumstances in which teachers work. What this acknowledgement demands of teachers engaging in reflection, for whatever purpose and within whichever action research paradigm selected, is that they are committed to engaging with the emotional dimension of their context whether at a personal or system level. Arriving at emotional understanding through, for example, unravelling the relationship between current thinking, feeling and behaving, and how these link to our most basic emotional roots or, through unpicking the way in which the cultural value system of a school controls and inhibits the emotions of its members, is central to developing flexible and rational approaches to change. To avoid a well-rehearsed, but limited approach to reflection on feelings (i.e. intellectualising which is usually self-serving, justificatory and thereby defeats the goals of arriving at new insights or clear decision-making or problem-finding/ solving), the approaches derived from the worlds of psychology or psychotherapy are those which by-pass the rational in the first instance, and find access to the emotional and imaginary substrates of the teacher. Thus, for example, the use of drawings or collage work with individual or groups of teachers to represent the felt sense of an organisation, and what are the perceived impediments to development powerfully access emotional and symbolic dimensions which would not otherwise be available to exploration and reappraisal. Without access to these emotions, there is no opportunity to release feelings and without release there is little room for re-evaluation (Jackins, 1965). Developing reflective opportunities of this kind has evident consequences for those engaging in or facilitating action research methodologies. Primarily, there must be a conceptual understanding of the nature of emotional understanding, and its links to change processes in individuals and

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

188

A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

organisations. In addition, there must be safety and containment in the approaches, which are adopted by individuals or groups. Finally, there must also be a fitness for purpose to ensure that identified goals are not being lost in any mindless self-exploration. Early evaluation of the impact of such approaches to teacher reflection (Leitch, 1993) has indicated that they not only provides the individual with opportunities for profound re-evaluation, but have also led frequently to powerful changes within the teachers practices. While such claims clearly need further evaluation, documentation and validation, the current store of teacher journals and independent research theses, which are living testimony to this process, provide the basis on which the case for such a reflective journey may be built. Identifying reflection as the engine of action research processes, which are conceptualised more holistically, adds to the learning possibilities for all those involved, and the richness of what might otherwise be continuing adherence to restrictive action research paradigms and practices. Paradoxically, as policy makers in all countries exhort teachers to become lifelong learners in the ever more demanding and complex worlds of classrooms and schools, so the strictures which they place upon the use of time and the accompanying mechanisms for bureaucratic accountability increase. These often result in diminishing, rather than increasing opportunities for structured reflection through action research. They thus decrease teachers capacities to raise standards of teaching, learning and achievement in circumstances where many children and young people are becoming disillusioned with schooling alongside raised expectations of teachers by parents and employers.

Correspondence
Ruth Leitch, Graduate School of Education, Queens University of Belfast, 69/71 University Street, Belfast BT7 1HL, United Kingdom (r.leitch@qub.ac.uk).

Notes
[1] Schn (1983) drew a distinction between the notions of technical rationality and the knowledge of practice. Therefore, reflection was seen as an important vehicle for the development of professional knowledge etc. [2] A similar tripartite distinction is made in the works of Van Manen (1977) and Zeichner & Gore (1995).

References
Adelman C. (1989) The Practical Ethic Takes Priority over Methodology, in W. Carr (Ed.) Quality in Teaching: arguments for a reflective profession. Brighton: Falmer Press.

189

Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day

Adelman, C. (1993) Kurt Lewin and the Origins of Action Research, Educational Action Research, 1, pp. 724. Altrichter, H. & Posch, P. (1989) Does the Grounded Theory Approach Offer a Guiding Paradigm for Teacher Research? Cambridge Journal of Education, 19, pp. 2132. Argyris, C. & Schn, D. A. (1976) Theory in Practice: increasing professional effectiveness. New York: Jossey-Bass. Arlin, P. (1990) Wisdom: the art of problem-finding, in R. J. Sternberg (Ed.) Wisdom: its nature, origins and development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Atkin, J. M. (1993) Developments in the Philosophy/Sociology of Science and Action Research, Educational Action Research, 1, pp. 187188. Carr, W. (1993) Whatever Happened to Action Research? Educational Action Research, 2, pp. 427436. Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986) Becoming Critical: education, knowledge and action research. London: Falmer Press. Clandinin, D. J. (1989) Developing Rhythm in Teaching: the narrative study of a beginning teachers personal practical knowledge of classrooms, Curriculum Inquiry, 19, pp. 121141. Clark, C. & Yinger, R. (1979) Three Studies of Teachers Planning, Research Series 55. East Lansing: Michigan State University.

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

Cole, A. (1997) Impediments to Reflective Practice, Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 3, pp. 727. Corey, S. M. (1952) Action Research by Teachers and the Population Sampling Problem, Journal of Educational Psychology, XLIII (October), pp. 331338. Corey, S. M. (1953) Action Research to Improve School Practices. New York: Teachers College Press. Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Sawyers, K. (1995) Creative Insight: the social dimension of a solitary moment, in R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds) The Nature of Insight. London: MIT Press. Dadds, M. (1995) Passionate Inquiry and School Development. London: Falmer Press. Day, C. (1985) Professional Learning and Researcher Intervention: an action research perspective, British Educational Research Journal, 11, pp. 133151. Day, C. (1993) Reflection: a necessary but not sufficient condition for professional development, British Educational Research Journal, 19, pp. 8393. Day, C. (1999) Developing Teachers: the challenges of lifelong learning. London: Falmer Press. Dewey, J. (1933) How We Think. New York: Heath & Co. Dewey, J. (1938) Experience and Education. New York: Collier Books. Ebbutt, D. (1985) Educational Action Research: some general concerns and specific quibbles, in R. Burgess (Ed.) Issues in Educational Research. Lewes: Falmer Press. Elliott, J. (1978) What is Action Research in Schools? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 10, pp. 355357.

190

A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH Elliott, J. (1991) Action Research for Educational Change. Buckingham: Open University Press. Evans, M. (1994) An Action Research Inquiry into Reflection in Action as Part of My Role as Deputy Head-teacher, PhD thesis, University of Bath, via Internet. Fineman, S. (Ed.) (1993) Emotion in Organizations. London: Sage. Goleman, D. (1996) Emotional Intelligence. London: Bloomsbury. Goodman, J. (1984) Reflection and Teacher Education: a case study and theoretical analysis, Interchange, 15(3), pp. 926. Goodson, I. F. & Hargreaves, A. (1996) Teachers Professional Lives. London: Falmer Press. Grimmett, P. P., MacKinnon, A. M., Erickson, G. L. & Riecken, T. J. (1990) Reflective Practice in Teacher Education, in R. T. Clift, R. W. Houston & M. C. Pugach (Eds) Encouraging Reflective Practice in Education: an analysis of issues and programs. New York: Teachers College Press. Grundy, S. (1982) Three Modes of Action Research, Curriculum Perspectives, 2(3), pp. 2334. Hall, E., Hall, C. & Sirin, A. (1996) Professional and Personal Development for Teachers: the application of learning following a counselling module, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, pp. 383398.

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

Hall, E., Hall, C. & Abaci, R. (1997) The Effects of Human Relations Training on Reported Teacher Stress, Pupil Control, Ideology and Locus of Control, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, pp. 483496. Handal, G. & Lauvas, P. (1987) Promoting Reflective Teaching. Buckingham: Open University Press. Hargreaves, A. (1998) The Emotional Politics of Teaching and Teacher Development: with implications for educational leadership, International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1(4), pp. 315336. Hargreaves, D. (1996) Teaching as a Research-based Profession: possibilities and prospects, Teacher Training Agency annual lecture. London: TTA. Holly, M. L. (1987) Writing to Grow: keeping a personal-professional journal. Oxford: Heinemann Educational Books. Holly, M. L. (1989) Reflective Writing and the Spirit of Inquiry, Cambridge Journal of Education, 19, pp. 7180. Jackins, H. (1965) The Human Side of Human Beings. Seattle: Rational Island Publishers. Jackson, P. W., Boostrom, R. E & Hansen, D. T. (1993) The Moral Life of Schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Johnston, R. & Badley, G. (1996) The Competent Reflective Practitioner, Innovation and Learning in Education, 2, pp. 410. Korthagen, F. (1993) Two Modes of Reflection, Teacher and Teacher Education, 9, pp. 317326. Leitch, R. (1993) The Implications of Intra-psychic Reflection on the Professional and Moral Development of Teachers, paper presented to University of Exeter Conference on Moral and Spiritual Development, July, RIMSCUE Centre.

191

Ruth Leitch & Christopher Day

Lewin, K. (1946) Action Research and Minority Problems, in G. W. Lewin (Ed.) Resolving Social Conflicts. New York: Harper & Row. Lewin, K. (1952) Group Decision and Social Change, in G. W. Swanson, T. M. Newcomb & E. L. Hartley (Eds) Readings in Social Psychology. New York: Henry Heath & Co. Reprinted in S. Kemmis & R. McTaggart (1988) The Action Research Reader, 3rd Edn. Geelong: Deakin University Press. Lomax, P. (1986) Action Researchers Action Research; a symposium, British Journal of Inservice Education, 13, pp. 4250. Lomax, P. (1994) The Narrative of an Educational Journey or Crossing the Track, paper based on Inaugural lecture, Kingston University, January. Loughran, J. J. (1996) Developing Reflective Practice: learning about teaching and learning through modelling. London: Falmer Press. McNiff, J. (1992) Action Research: principles and practice. London Routledge. McNiff, J. (1995) Action Research for Professional Development. Bournemouth: Hyde Publications. Munby, H. & Russell, T. (1989) Metaphor in the Study of Teachers Professional Knowledge, in A. Oberg & G. McCutcheon (Eds) Theory into Practice, 29(3), pp. 5561. Peters, J. L. (1985) Research in Reflective Teaching: a form of laboratory teaching experience, Journal of Research and Development in Education, 18(3), pp. 5562.

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

Richardson, V. (1990) The Evolution of Reflective Teaching and Teacher Education, in R. T. Clift, R. W. Houston & M. C. Pugach (Eds) Encouraging Reflective Practice in Education: an analysis of issues and programs. New York: Teachers College Press. Russell, T. & Munby, H. (1992) Teachers and Teaching: from classrooms to reflection. London: Falmer Press. Schn, D. A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books. Shulman, L. (1987) Knowledge and Teaching: foundations of the new reform, Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), pp. 122. Sockett, H. (1993) The Moral Base for Teacher Professionalism. New York: Teachers College Press. Somekh, B. (1995) The Contribution of Action Research in Social Endeavours: a position paper on action research methodology, British Educational Research Journal, 21, pp. 339355. Stenhouse, L. (1975) An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development. London: Heinemann. Teacher Training Agency (1996) Teaching as a Research-based Profession, Promoting Excellence in Teaching. London: TTA Information Section. Tremmel, R. (1993) Zen and the Art of Reflective Practice in Teacher Education, Harvard Educational Review, 63, pp. 434458. Tripp, D. (1988) On Collaboration: teachers, self-assessment and professional journals, Cambridge Journal of Education, 18, pp. 313332. Van Manen, M. (1977) Linking Ways of Knowing with Ways of Being Practical, Curriculum Inquiry, 6, pp. 205288.

192

A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH Whitehead, J. (1989) Creating a Living Educational Theory from Questions of the Kind How Do I Improve My Practice? Cambridge Journal of Education, 19, pp. 4152. Whitehead, J., (1993) The Growth of Educational Knowledge: creating your own living educational theories. Bournemouth: Hyde Publications. Whitehead, J. (1996) Lecture Notes for EdD Session, University of Bristol, July 1996. Developed from a lecture, On a Better Way to Professionalism: living our values in our practice, Kingston University, July 1996. Zeichner, K. M. (1993) Action Research: personal renewal and social reconstruction, Educational Action Research, 1, pp. 199220. Zeichner, K. M. & Gore, J. M. (1990) Teacher Socialisation, in W. R. Houston (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Teacher Education. New York: Macmillan. Zeichner, K. M. & Gore, J. M. (1995) Using Action Research as a Vehicle for Student Reflection, in S. Noffke & R. B. Stevenson (Eds) Educational Action Research. New York: Teachers College Press.

Downloaded by [90.200.220.213] at 14:18 09 September 2013

193