Action research as the methodology

3.2.1 Use of action research in other projects

The methodology of action research has been employed and recommended in many research projects based in complex organisations, with the outcomes of the research being some sort of improvement in practice either for an individual or for a large group (or both). Molineux (2018) recommends it when managing change in an organisation; Kroeger, Beirne et al. (2015) link it to positive

outcomes in encouraging collaboration, especially in an educational environment; Loizou (2013) advocates it as a self-reflection tool for improving one’s own

learning and practice; Currie and Sorensen (2017) use it as a means of investigating the local, but with a view to providing relatable case studies for others to follow. It is also specifically linked to the democratisation of knowledge, through which practitioners can theorise and contribute to the evidence base in their professions (Wood, McAteer et al. 2019).

In this context, Wood, McAteer et al. (2019) assert that democratisation of knowledge is linked to the living of one’s value as a researcher, in authentic partnership with others, with this authenticity being linked to working “with participants in ways that are contextually and culturally relevant, and generate knowledge that enables people to take control of improving their own lives as they see fit” (p.8). A key part of knowledge democracy is therefore

51

acknowledging that different types of information hold different values depending upon a person’s cultural and social situation, and that multiple methods of

sharing knowledge (not just written forms and not just traditional academic forms of textbooks and journal articles) should be understood as valid and powerful. This particularly links to this research project, as the community of practice can take a number of forms, as highlighted in the literature review. It offers a platform for discussion in oral and online format, with any associated web resources being open to anyone with access to the internet. In this, anyone who is part of the community is able to take part, with content not restricted by membership of a particular group (e.g. current academic staff).

All of these recommendations link to the aims and objectives of this research project in terms of exploring the situation as it stands, identifying a community of practice, facilitating its development, and providing a platform and output from which others can learn.

3.2.2 Overview of action research

Unlike other approaches, in which researchers generate theory and practitioners apply it, action research centres on praxis and empowers the practitioner to research their own practice, as a way of holding themselves accountable for their work. Therefore, whereas in traditional, empirical, positivist approaches to social science research, the subject is studied externally, from the outside, action researchers study from within. Where control groups may be employed in

approaches where the researcher is viewing a subject group from the outside, in action research the researcher is influencing the group as a result of being part of it. It is a popular approach in situations where the researcher is not searching for a specific answer to a question, rather wishing to improve a practical

professional situation (McNiff 2010).

The action research approach of McNiff and Whitehead (2002) was the first considered for this project. This is based upon the notion of the researcher living their own educational theory and in knowledge as a “living process” (p.18). Cycles of action and reflection take place, linked to the researcher living their role and implementing initiatives to try and improve it. However, it was ultimately decided that it would not suit the overarching aims and was too closely aligned with autoethnography approaches such as narrative self-study

52

writing (Hayler 2011), whereby a researcher examines one’s own memories and experiences in relation to their role, but does not look at the wider situation of a workplace. Although the researcher wished to improve her own practice, and this was a key aim, she also wished to provide more research-led outcomes for

others to be able to recognise and follow and be able to investigate the situation across York St John University. Further to this, an outcome of the research was to locate a community of practice, if it existed and the focus on the self would not allow for this wide-ranging and institutional outcome. An alternative

approach was needed which would make space for action and reflection, but also build in capacity for institutional investigation and the transferability of the

methods used for others to use. Reflection was important to this project, but not only focused on the self. Reflection in relation to the community in which the research was taking place was vital, and the methodological approach needed to account for this too. A way of encompassing this mix of self-study and

institutional change was offered by the approach to action research taken by Herr and Anderson (2015).

Herr and Anderson (2015) analyse the different approaches which make up the wider action research method, viewing action research as an “umbrella term” for existing methods such as practitioner research, cooperative inquiry,

emancipatory praxis, and teacher research (pp. 2-3), but assert that action is central to all of them, this action usually being ongoing, rather than one specific intervention. These cover a number of subject areas, such as science, business, technology and health. Those linked to education are the ones taken forward in this project.

Given that action research has these many lenses, that proffered by Herr and Anderson (2015) as appropriate for educational research and with ongoing action and evaluation is chosen here. This lens measures the validity of an action

research project through a number of factors, including the education of the researcher and the participants, changes in practice in the workplace (or equivalent) in which the project takes place, and the generation of new

knowledge. All of these are important factors in this project and help to increase the chances of long-term, structural change with ongoing evaluation.

53

3.2.3 The position of the researcher in action research

In choosing a methodological approach for this project, within the lens of

pragmatism, the position of the researcher as a practitioner within the institution had to be taken into account. This was in terms of acknowledging bias and power relations, which made the methodology of action research appropriate. The

pragmatic approach can be used with a number of methodological frameworks and it is compatible with an action research methodology as it takes account of the unique needs of a specific group with members with diverse needs and also acknowledges them as a source of positive change (Greenwood, Levin 1998).

The use of a case study within an action research methodology has been used in complex situations, in order to recommend a specific intervention to potentially resolve issues or improve workflows, and although this project does not use case study methods, it does align with some of its principles in terms of investigating one setting in depth, providing a relatable account for others:

While action research is seldom statistically generalizable, the knowledge it generates can be transferred beyond the research setting[…]A dissertation may represent the documentation of a successful collaboration and be used as a case study of not only the process, but also the product of the collaboration. (Herr, Anderson 2015, p.6)

This study is therefore in a position to provide a relatable ‘case study’ for other academic settings, and organisations in which information literacy is vital to operations, in terms of both the methods employed and the eventual outcome of the community of practice.

McManners (2016) employed this combination, with an action research ethos encompassing a prescriptive case study analysis, in identifying issues in the workflows of a part of the aviation sector and, therefore, a likely solution. This was followed by engagement with members of that community in order to enact that potential solution as an intervention. This mirrored key aspects of this research project and also used McNiff’s action research approach (McNiff, Whitehead 2002) and the work of Yin (2014) in forming the case study within action research.

This pragmatic, action research, approach to research suited this project as the objectives included a wish to understand a situation as it stood before an

54

intervention (how information literacy is evident in the practice, values and teaching of academics and other professional staff at York St John University), the extent to which the issues raised by individuals were evident across the institution (where information literacy is evident in the practice, values and teaching), and an intervention design which addressed these (the facilitation of a community of practice, should it be found to exist): both providing an insight into the current situation and informing the form and content of an intervention to improve it. The principles of action and reflection can be incorporated into the community of practice, which helps with the long-term sustainability of the proposed changes in practice.

Action researchers tend to be ‘insiders’ to the subject of a project; indeed, they may be the subject themselves. This suits the position of the researcher in this project, who is wishing to improve both her own practice as an academic liaison librarian, and to enact actions which will improve information literacy for both staff and students at the university, especially focusing on staff development in information literacy in order to facilitate and influence its embedding in

curriculum design. In this, there is a wish to learn on the part of the researcher, and a wish to educate participants where such occasions arise.

The notions of power and values inherent in information production and

dissemination, identified as part of critical information literacy in this thesis (i.e. the acknowledgement that political, cultural and societal structures have an impact on the information produced, published and made available; this in turn leads to information privilege for some sections of society (Elmborg 2012)), also needed to be taken into account in the methodology of this project. Action research was therefore a suitable methodology to employ, as it is an approach through which taking action can “promote social change and social analysis” (Greenwood, Levin 1998, p.6), linking to the critical information literacy concerns addressed in the literature review section; that those working in higher education need to consider the power structures behind the publication of any piece of information:

Action research aims to increase the ability of the involved community or organization members to control their own destinies more

effectively and to keep improving their capacity to do so. (Greenwood, Levin 1998, p.6)

55

Steps such as self-reflection and peer review help address and acknowledge issues of bias. Issues of bias come in to play as the researcher is not outside of the project and her presence within the research situation needs to be accounted for and incorporated into the research process and evaluation. Herr and

Anderson (2015) respond to this by looking at the specific point at which the researcher is embedded in the project. Through identifying where this position is for the project in hand, the researcher can put in sufficient checks and balances to ensure validity and rigour.