Action research facilitated by

universityschool collaboration
Rui Yuan and Icy Lee

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at University Library on December 24, 2016

While Action Research (AR) is promoted as a powerful route for teachers
professional development, different contextual challenges may arise during
the process; teachers may be helped to overcome these challenges with the
guidance of external facilitators. Drawing on data from interviews and the
teachers AR reports, this article explores how two EFL teachers conducted AR
by participating in a universityschool collaborative project. Findings of the
study show that with the scaffolding provided by university researchers, the
teachers changed their conceptions about research and coped with different
contextual constraints in their AR, leading to professional learning and
development. This study concludes with some implications about how AR
can be used to promote teachers continuing professional development.

Introduction In many EFL contexts where educational systems require language

teachers to enhance their professional development, Action Research
(AR) is widely perceived as a viable approach to helping teachers
develop their teaching practice and promote their professional
competency (Atay 2008; Gao, Barkhuizen, and Chow 2011). In AR,
action refers to intervention in an existing practice in particular
social contexts (for example classroom and school) to bring about
improvement and change, whereas research involves the systematic
observation and analysis of the change that occurs as a result (Burns
1999, 2009). In language teaching, previous research has reported
that teachers often lack knowledge of what AR is and how it can be
implemented (Rainey 2000), while the traditional conception of
research as an academic, large scale, statistical and technically difficult
activity (Borg 2010: 409)discourages them from conducting classroom
research. In some AR projects, an individualistic approach is adopted
with little contact with others outside of the classroom (Burns 2009).
Although such an approach can help teachers reflect on and improve
their teaching practice, they may encounter a range of challenges,
such as lack of research support and professional isolation (Wallace
1998; Gao etal. op.cit.) Therefore, in recent years, universityschool
partnerships have been proposed as an effective means of enhancing
teachers professional development through AR within a systematic
network of mutual learning and support (Day and Hadfield 2004).

ELT Journal Volume 69/1 January 2015; doi:10.1093/elt/ccu031  1

The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
Advance Access publication June 10, 2014
 Within a universityschool partnership, teachers can receive
constructive guidance and scaffolding from university researchers
and/or teacher educators, which can help enhance their research
knowledge and skills and enable them to absorb new ideas about
language teaching and learning (Wang and Zhang 2014). Besides, close
cooperation with researchers can help teachers cope with the challenges
that may arise from their work contexts and sustain their motivation
in AR. Focusing on two EFL teachers AR experiences in a university
school collaborative project in China, this study investigates how the
teachers navigated the challenges arising from AR with scaffolding
provided by university researchers. Such information is particularly
useful for teachers, school administrators, and teacher educators who
are interested in forming universityschool partnerships in their work
contexts in order to reap maximum benefits from AR as a powerful

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at University Library on December 24, 2016

route for teachers continuing professional development (Somekh
2006). The central question that guided the study is: How was the
teachers AR facilitated and enhanced by the scaffolding provided by the
university researchers?

Thestudy The collaborative project reported in this article lasted from September
The university 2010 to October 2011, involving a university research team (two
school collaborative researchers and eight research assistants who were PhD students and
project MA students) and 15 English teachers in Beijing, China. In August
2010, the research team sent an AR project invitation to the English
departments of different schools in Beijing, and 15 teachers from five
high schools agreed to participate with approval from their schools.
The project served as a critical platform during which the teachers
and researchers, each with clearly defined responsibilities (as outlined
below), set out to learn from each other and reflect on and enhance
their professional practice through reflection and research.
During the project, the teachers were encouraged to play an agentive
role in their own AR, with external assistance provided by the university
team as facilitators and collaborators. In the first two months, while
the teachers took the initiative in evaluating their teaching practice,
identifying research questions, and designing action plans, they gained
considerable support from the university researchers by participating
in a series of research seminars and workshops in which they engaged
in collective reflection about their teaching and learnt about the
methodology of AR (for example how to identify research questions and
consult relevant literature).
In the following ten months, the teachers, with assistance from the
university researchers, implemented their AR plans and conducted
research to monitor the effectiveness of their actions in relation
to students learning. On the one hand, the teachers continued to
participate in seminars and workshops given by the researchers
where they furthered their knowledge about AR (such as how to
analyse data and write AR reports) and engaged in project meetings
where they obtained constructive suggestions on their research
from the researchers. On the other hand, they engaged in in-depth
communication and close collaboration with the researchers through

2 Rui Yuan and Icy Lee

 school visits (by the researchers), telephone calls, and emails.
Furthermore, at least one research assistant was assigned to each
school and collaborated with the participating teachers in implementing
change. For instance, with the support of their research assistants,
some teachers designed and conducted pre- and post-tests to assess
whether students English proficiency had improved during the course
of the AR project. The researchers also encouraged the teachers
(particularly those from the same school) to observe each others
lessons, share their teaching resources, and exchange ideas through
daily interaction. Additionally, given the cyclic nature of AR, the
researchers guided the teachers to engage in ongoing self-evaluation
through which the teachers noted down their reflections about daily
practice and constructed AR reports at the beginning, middle, and end
of the project; these could lead to possible changes in their plans and

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at University Library on December 24, 2016

another cycle of AR. The teachers AR reports were included in the final
project book (together with the researchers reports) for critical scrutiny
and knowledge dissemination (McNiff 2013).

The research To yield context-specific and in-depth information about the research
participants phenomenon under investigation, this study adopts a case study
design focusing on two participating teachers: Flora and Clare
(pseudonyms), both native Chinese women, who were working in
the same school during the study. The two participants were chosen
through convenience sampling as the first author (a research assistant)
interacted with the teachers on a regular basis during the project. At the
time of the study, Flora had been teaching English for 17years, while
Clare had been an English teacher for eight years. The AR took place
in two Grade 11 classes each taught by Clare and Flora, with 35 and 34
students (aged between 15 and 17)in each class, respectively. Consent
was obtained from the teachers and their school before the study
commenced.

The teachers AR Before the project, the teachers felt dissatisfied with the quality of
projects teaching and learning in their classrooms based on their personal
observations; this gave them an impetus to participate in the AR project
to solve these practical problems and improve the effectiveness of their
teaching. In Clares class, despite students efforts to memorize new
words, they seemed unable to vary their vocabulary choices to express
specific ideas and feelings in their writing. Flora was concerned about
her students lack of interest in reading and their relatively weak
reading competence. Both teachers expressed concern about the lack
of interaction in the classroom, despite their attempts at encouraging
students participation through various activities.
By observing the students classroom behaviour and interviewing
some students about their learning needs, and with further reflections
and discussions with the researchers through project meetings, Clare
decided to focus on enlarging students vocabulary and fostering their
awareness of the accuracy of vocabulary use in writing, whereas Flora
planned to cultivate students reading interest and strategies through
reading authentic English books. Additionally, they both aimed to

Teacher development through collaborative action research 3

 promote students classroom participation and interaction. Arange
of new teaching activities were thus designed and implemented,
with input and suggestions from the researchers. For example, Clare
brought in popular music and movies to arouse students interest
and enhance their awareness of vocabulary in use. Flora guided her
students to read The Little Prince1 and provided specific training on
reading strategies, such as how to ask questions and make inferences.
Also, inspired by the idea of self-regulated learning, which had been
introduced by the researchers in a project meeting, she asked students
to keep a reflective journal to monitor their reading experience
(including their own reflections, feelings, and useful vocabulary and
language structures) in order to sustain their interest and help them
develop an ownership of their reading. At the same time, the teachers
conducted classroom research (for example a questionnaire survey and
interviews) to evaluate the effectiveness of their actions on students

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at University Library on December 24, 2016

learning and to make further improvements. Here, the researchers
provided individual scaffolding on the design of research instruments
as well as the process of data collection and analysis.

Data collection Data for this study were drawn from in-depth interviews with the two
and analysis teachers and their AR reports. Three semi-structured interviews were
conducted (in Chinese) at the beginning, middle, and end of the project.
The first interview aimed to gather background information about
their prior professional development experience, their current practice,
and their concerns and expectations about the AR project. The second
interview focused on the teachers actual AR experience, particularly how
they interacted with the university researchers in AR. The last interview
led the teachers to reflect on the whole journey of AR, specifically
whether and how they developed professionally through the project. The
teachers own AR reports were used to triangulate with the interview
data, adding to our understanding of the teachers AR experience.
The interview data were transcribed and analysed through a qualitative
inductive process (Strauss and Corbin 1998). First, the interview
transcripts were reviewed to identify the themes in relation to their
professional learning and development through their AR. These themes
were then compared, confirmed, and modified within and across
the two cases, which led to the final interpretation of the data. As for
the teachers AR reports, relevant ideas pertaining to the research
question were extracted to triangulate with the themes generated
from the interview findings. During the process of data analysis, the
two researchers conducted the coding independently, followed by
discussion to reach inter-rater agreement of over 80 per cent. The data
analysis results were sent back to the teachers for participant checking
and they agreed with the researchers interpretation.

Research findings In this section, we present salient findings to answer the research
question of how the teachers AR process was facilitated and enhanced
by their collaboration with the university researchers. The three
interviews are referred to as Int1, Int2, and Int3, and AR reports are
referred to as ARR.

4 Rui Yuan and Icy Lee

Dismantling the The scaffolding provided by the university researchers played a crucial
myth of research role in challenging the teachers original beliefs about research. At the
beginning of the project, the teachers lacked knowledge of (action)
research and how it could be integrated into teaching, thinking that
research was very remote from their classroom practice:
Research is like a myth which seems distant to us school teachers.
(Clare, Int1)
Flora held the belief that teachers were just passive consumers and
users of research knowledge, instead of producers as advocated in AR
(McNiff op.cit.):
I used to think research is owned by scholars; teachers only read their
findings and try to apply them into our classrooms. (Flora, Int1)

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at University Library on December 24, 2016

These beliefs, therefore, created some psychological barriers for the
teachers in conductingAR:
I am not certain about my abilities. Am Ithe researcher type? Ionly
know about teaching. (Clare,Int1)
I thought Ineed to do some experiments with statistical analysis,
which really scared me. (Flora, Int1)
In addition to the seminars and workshops in which the teachers learnt
about the methodology of AR, their collaboration with the researchers
helped them lessen their anxiety about research and enhance their
understanding of AR. For instance, while Clare collaborated with the
research team in designing new activities to help students learn new
vocabulary through classroom participation, she also invited some
researchers to observe and videotape her lessons, which were followed
by post-lesson conferences where they collectively reviewed the lesson
and exchanged ideas for further improvement. The researchers not
only shared their suggestions, but also demonstrated some techniques
which could help Clare analyse her own teaching:
From the meetings, Ilearned to be more analytical by paying
attention to students reactions to my teaching and my own language
and gestures, which served as an important source of data in
evaluating my AR and indicate possible ways for improvement.
(Clare, Int3)
Therefore, Clares previous fear about research as distant and
mysterious was allayed as she realized that research can be owned and
conducted by teachers in their daily practice (Clare,ARR):
I realized AR does not have to be an experiment with sophisticated
research techniques. Teachers can manage it perfectly by making
systematic changes to their teaching with ongoing evaluations, just
like what we did with a video camera. (Clare, Int2)
In Floras case, while she exchanged ideas with the research team on
her lesson design to improve students reading strategies, she was
not sure how to evaluate her AR in relation to students learning.
After discussing this with the researchers in project meetings, they

Teacher development through collaborative action research 5

 came up with the idea of reflective writing by inviting students to
write about their reading experience and personal reflections (in
Chinese), which could not only help students evaluate their own
reading progress, but also shed light on the effectiveness of her AR.
By consulting related research literature, Flora designed a reflective
frame with specific guidance for students in terms of the structure
and content of what was to be written, which was further improved
with input from the researchers. After collecting data from students
through the reflective frame, however, Flora faced another challenge
in analysing the large amount of qualitative data, which was initially
quite overwhelming. By consulting the researchers, especially the
research assistant, she learnt how to sort out, code, and make sense
of the data in a systematic and inductive way. In order to enhance
the validity of her research, she also invited the research assistant to

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at University Library on December 24, 2016

offer comments on the results of data interpretation. The findings
generated from students reflective writing turned out to be useful,
which led to positive changes in Floras teaching (for example
bringing more text types to meet students different needs). Thus, the
collaboration with the researchers through the process of AR helped
Flora form a better understanding of the symbiotic relationship
between teaching and research:
AR brings teaching and research together, which is teacher-friendly
in helping us solve practical problems and generate new ideas for
change. (Flora, Int3)
Moreover, the teachers worked closely with the university researchers
in the process of AR report writing, in which they shared their insights
generated from AR and made comments on the improvement of each
others reports. Their reports (together with those of other project
members) were included in the final project book which sought to
disseminate their ideas and experiences to a wide community of
language teachers. Clare and one researcher were also invited to an
international conference to present their collaboration through AR and
outline how it benefited the teachers professional development. All the
above experiences overturned the participants prior perception that
teachers were passive recipients of research knowledge, and helped
them develop a new self-understanding as teacher researchers and
knowledge producers through AR (McNiff op.cit.):
What we can generate from our research might not only be useful to
us, but it might be of relevance to researchers and teachers in other
contexts. (Clare, Int3)

Coping with With the scaffolding provided by the university team, the teachers also
contextual coped with a number of contextual obstacles, such as time constraints,
constraints a lack of collegial support, and a rigid curriculum. To begin with,
the teachers found it difficult to engage in collaborative activities (for
example seminars and group meetings) due to a lack of time, and
the university team was able to provide timely support. For instance,
Clare recalled an incident where she obtained enormous help from the
research assistant:

6 Rui Yuan and Icy Lee

 Once Ihad to skip a group meeting because of school duty. My
research assistant then brought me the meeting materials during
his visit. He also helped me understand how to analyze students
questionnaire data, which saved me a lot time. (Clare, Int3)
Another challenge the teachers faced was the lack of support from
colleagues. As Flora and Clare were the only teachers who took part in
the project, they felt uncomfortable because what they did differed
from the practices of their colleagues:
Sometimes I feel a bit tiring and lonely to change my teaching and
conduct research to see how it works. Some colleagues may also have
some queries and doubts about what I am doing. (Clare, Int2)
With the encouragement and suggestion of the university researchers,
the teachers attempted to overcome their feelings of isolation by sharing

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at University Library on December 24, 2016

their ideas and teaching resources with their colleagues, and inviting
them to observe their lessons. Indeed, the support and guidance of the
researchers brought the teachers a sense of assurance and confidence,
despite their initial fear about opening up their classrooms to other
colleagues:
I used to think it was a bit scary to ask my colleagues to observe
my lessons. However, the researchers involvement and guidance
gave me strength to show my colleagues that what we are doing
is meaningful, which can help students improve their language
abilities. (Flora, Int3)
In addition, the research team also organized some activities, such
as demonstration lessons and experience-sharing in the participating
schools, which were open to all English teachers from local schools.
In these activities, the participants could disseminate their research
findings and share their personal reflections with other colleagues from
their own and other schools. For instance, in Clares demonstration
lesson, she showcased her new practices in teaching reading, which
presented learning opportunities for observing teachers to embrace
different ideas and provoked discussion on the teaching of reading in
the school (Int3). With the university researchers help, the participating
teachers were also able to arouse their colleagues interest inAR:
After knowing about my research experience, some colleagues
became intrigued by the idea of AR. One colleague told me she tried
to do a survey in her class to find out students perceptions and needs
about English learning. (Flora, Int2)
Thanks to the guidance provided by the researchers, the participating
teachers were able to cope with the challenges arising from their initial
sense of isolation as the only action researchers in their school.
Another contextual constraint the teachers had to grapple with arose
from the rigid curriculum. By collaborating with the university team,
the teachers tried to align their AR with the predetermined curriculum.
For instance, while Flora felt constrained by the curriculum which
diverged from her endeavour to enhance students language abilities
through reading authentic English books, she discussed this conflict

Teacher development through collaborative action research 7

 with the researchers during project meetings and school visits. As a
result, she continued to use the prescribed textbook but incorporated
interactive tasks to develop students reading strategies:
The researchers helped me see how to make the best out of the
difficult situation in AR. While Icovered the textbook content, Ialso
helped my students acquire different reading strategies, which they
could integrate in their reading after class. (Flora, Int3)
Overall, with the researchers guidance and support, the teachers
formed a better understanding of the contextual constraints and learnt
how to integrate AR into their practice, which led to their emerging role
as a change agent:
Through the project, Iimproved my understanding of AR and the
contexts in which Iwork. Ihope in the future, more colleagues can

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at University Library on December 24, 2016

work together and form a school-based AR community to bring
changes to our practice. (Clare, ARR)

Insights for This study demonstrates that AR can be a critical source for language
language teacher teachers professional empowerment. Several implications can be
development drawn, which throw light on the implementation of AR in language
teachers professional practice in similar contexts.
To begin with, our study suggests that in some contexts (for example
EFL) it might be difficult for teachers to carry out AR given the heavy
shackles created by various constraints, such as a lack of research
knowledge and skills, and the rigid school curriculum. By forming
a universityschool partnership, university researchers can play an
important role in helping teachers break these shackles and conduct
AR in their embedded contexts (Day and Hadfield op.cit.). In our
study, the university researchers served as facilitators who not only
organized various professional activities (for example seminars and
project meetings) to enhance the teachers knowledge of research, but
also offered scaffolding for teachers to help them deal with the obstacles
in AR. More importantly, the researchers served as collaborators by
sharing their research expertise and perspectives, and encouraging
teachers to take on the role of reflective and agentive practitioners
(Wallace op.cit.). This form of universityschool collaboration,
different from the traditional top-down approach in which university
researchers mainly give instructions and offer advice while teachers
remain as passive recipients, can reap great benefits for teachers by
developing their reflective abilities and research competence.
However, a note of caution needs to be sounded about the delicate
collaborative relationship as shown in this study. On the one hand,
due to the traditional unbalanced power relationship between school
teachers and university researchers, there is a danger that teachers
might be downgraded to the followers or junior partners of the
researchers (Johnston 2009). On the other hand, while it is natural
and important that the teachers turn to researchers for help in
difficult times, there is also a risk that the teachers might become too
dependent on the university researchers and lose their ownership of

8 Rui Yuan and Icy Lee

 AR. Thus, it may be necessary to make explicit the responsibilities/
roles of both teachers and researchers in AR at the beginning of the
project. It is also important to establish and maintain an open channel
of communication through formal (for example group meetings and
research seminars) and informal (for example emails and school visits)
means so that the two parties can constantly engage in negotiation of
meaning on an equal basis (Somekh op.cit.). Moreover, in providing
guidance for teachers AR, researchers should create a space for
teachers to engage in independent thinking and reflection (Wang and
Zhang op.cit.). For instance, when difficulties emerge, researchers can
pose stimulating questions for teachers to explore possible solutions
without giving direct answers. In this way, teachers can develop their
professional competence and agency, and bring ongoing changes and
improvement to their practice as action researchers.

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at University Library on December 24, 2016

Furthermore, while this project did not directly involve school
administrators and leaders, our study suggests that a supportive school
environment is also crucial for the successful implementation of AR and
its continuing development. As our study shows that teachers may be
bogged down with heavy workloads and constrained by the rigid school
curriculum, school administrators can provide practical and moral
support for teachers to facilitate AR (Hargreaves 2000), for example by
giving them autonomy for experimenting with innovative ideas; allowing
flexibility in their work schedule; and offering necessary resources
(in terms of funding and facilities) for their collaborative activities. In
addition, while our project occurred between a university research team
and 15 English teachers, it could create a ripple effect that would facilitate
the long-term professional development of the participating teachers as
they gradually embrace a leading role by involving their colleagues and
the school administrators in ongoing school-based AR. As indicated by
our follow-up communication with the teachers, after this project ended,
while they tried to promote the idea of AR at the school level through
experience-sharing, they also collaborated with other colleagues to
engage in a new cycle of AR to explore how to promote students writing
competency. Also, teachers could work with school administrators to
collectively examine and improve the curriculum structure and better
cater to the learning needs of students through ongoing AR.

Conclusion In conclusion, despite its small sample size which makes the
generalization of findings difficult, the study makes a contribution to
language teacher education research by illustrating how two language
teachers reaped the benefits in terms of their professional growth
through AR with scaffolding provided by university researchers.
We believe their experience can be relevant to language teachers in
similar EFL contexts. While university-supported AR projects are not
a prerequisite for establishing professional learning communities, our
study shows that AR supported by universityschool collaboration can
help teachers systematically reflect on what they are doing and why
and how they are doing it, which provides a strong impetus for their
continuing professional development (Burns 2009). That said, teachers
cannot always rely on external assistance in their ongoing professional

Teacher development through collaborative action research 9

 development. With the research knowledge and abilities teachers gain
through their AR facilitated by university researchers, it is hoped that
they can be empowered to carry out school-based improvement without
external help.
Final version received March 2014
Note
1 The Little Prince is a story book written by French
writer Antoine de Saint-Exupry, which describes
the adventurous experiences of a young prince
who travels to Earth from a tiny asteroid.
References
Atay, D. 2008. Teacher research for professional
development. ELT Journal 62/2: 13947.
Borg, S. 2010. Language teacher research
engagement. Language Teaching 43/4: 391429.
Burns, A. 1999. Collaborative Action Research for
English Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Burns, A. 2009. Action research in second
language teacher education in A. Burns and
J. C. Richards (eds.).
Burns, A. and J. C.Richards (eds.). 2009. The
Cambridge Guide to Second Language Teacher
Education. New York, NY: Cambridge University
Press.
Day, C. and M.Hadfield. 2004. Learning through
networks: trust, partnerships and the power of action
research. Educational Action Research 12/4: 57586.
Gao, X., G.Barkhuizen, and A.Chow. 2011.
Nowadays, teachers are relatively obedient:
understanding primary school English teachers
conceptions of and drives for research in China.
Language Teaching Research 15/1: 6181.
Hargreaves, A. 2000. Four ages of professionalism
and professional learning. Teachers and Teaching:
Theory and Practice 6/2: 15182.
Johnston, B. 2009. Collaborative teacher
development in A. Burns and J. C. Richards (eds.).
10 Rui Yuan and Icy Lee
McNiff, J. 2013. Action Research: Principles
and Practice (third edition). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Rainey, I. 2000. Action research and the English as
a foreign language practitioner: time to take stock.
Educational Action Research 8/1: 6591.
Somekh, B. 2006. Action Research: AMethodology
Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at University Library on December 24, 2016
for Change and Development. New York, NY: Open
University Press.
Strauss, A. and J.Corbin. 1998. Basics of Qualitative
Research (second edition). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Wallace, M. 1998. Action Research for Language
Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wang, Q. and H.Zhang. 2014. Promoting teacher
autonomy through universityschool collaborative
research. Language Teaching Research 18/2:
22241.
The authors
Rui Yuan is a PhD student in the Faculty of
Education at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
His research interests include teacher identity
and teacher development. His publications have
appeared in System, The Asia-Pacific Education
Researcher, and Language, Culture and Curriculum.
Email: ericyuanrui@gmail.com
Icy Lee is a Professor in the Faculty of Education
at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Her
research interests include second language writing
and language teacher development. She has
published extensively in these research areas.
Email: icylee@cuhk.edu.hk