Background to the methodology

Research of this kind (Action Research) can be embarked upon both collaboratively and through participative action (Koshy, 2009). The research is situation-based and context specific (Atkins and Wallace, 2012). The research allows for the development of reflections based on interpretations made by the participants (Zuber-Skerritt, 1996). This results in knowledge that can be applied to solve a problem, and to improve an existing set of practices that call for change (McNiff, 2013).

129 Within the action research collective, the emancipatory strain of action research is strongly coupled with many of the professional objectives and products of this study. Grundy (1987) suggests that emancipatory action research can assist participants to better understand structural and interpersonal constraints that in many cases prevent them from interacting freely and with fewer limitations. These limitations are often barriers to the development of technology learning when practices are enacted without a more balanced sense of autonomy, social justice, and self-determination (Grundy, 1987; Giroux, 1986). The emancipatory style of action research centres on constructing a system of meaning in order to guide a process that collects information from a variety of different sources, makes sense of the data, and adopts a purpose of setting free the participants by means of praxis-based solutions (see Table 3.2) (Kincheloe, 2003).

Table 3.2 Emancipatory Action Research (Kincheloe, 2003)

Steps for Emancipatory Action Research 1. Constructing a system of meaning

2. Understanding dominant research methods and their effects 3. Selecting what to study

4. Acquiring a variety of research strategies 5. Making sense of information collected

6. Gaining awareness of the tacit theories and assumptions which guide practice 7. Viewing teaching as an emancipatory, praxis-based act.

The process of creating praxis-based solutions is galvanised by the addition of reflection (Cohen et al., 2007). Reflections allow the researcher to make sense of a variety of data sources and to incorporate elements such as group cultures, language and discourse, social structures, and behaviours, actions, and practices (Kemmis and Taggart, 1992, McNiff, 2002). They aim to give groups the ability to take control over their lives by promoting appropriate change that is based upon research strategies that challenge and question given value systems (Habermas, 1987; Giroux, 1986). The literature on older people’s acceptance and trusted use of technology suggests that mandatory and imposed practices withdraw many elements of choice (Charness and Boot, 2009, McMillan, Avery, and Macias, 2008).

130 Thus in a general ideological sense the inborn endeavour to develop emancipation is aligned with Lewin’s (1946) view of a critical praxis that evolved cooperation and reduced exploitation.

Since Action research has a broadened set of inclusions, some scholars tend to describe what the process does not involve rather than stating what it is. Kemmis and McTaggart (1992) explain that their view of action research thinking and reflection is not analogous with the normal everyday thinking that everyone does. Instead it is a systematic process that collects evidence so that reflections are exacting and meticulous in their detail. They state that action research is more than simply problem solving, but rather it is a problem that also identifies and poses problems in addition to unravelling them. Furthermore, there is greater emphasis on understanding within contexts, and prescribing alterations that incorporate changes to values and beliefs, and transformations of theories and practices (Noffke and Zeichner, 1987).

This chapter has so far described the methodological background that has been used in this research. It outlines the processes that were arranged for a qualitative approach of this kind. There is an explanation of the interpretive research methods that have been chosen, which forms the rationalization for the manner in which the data and evidence have been accumulated.

This research draws its methodological characteristics from what Winter (1996) describes as the six key principles of action research (Table 3.3). These principles are woven into the approach taken for this study.

Table 3.3 Principles of Action Research (Winter, 1996)

Principle Description

Reflexive Critique The practice of becoming conscious of our own perceived predispositions

Dialectical Critique Observing and perceiving the associations and interactions between the components that comprise different phenomena in a given context

Collaboration The inclusion of all views and ideas as a standard for understanding a given situation Risking Disturbance Subjecting those processes and ideas that are taken for granted and offering them for

evaluation and analysis

Creating Plural Structures Developing various explanations and analyses, instead of a single commanding version Theory and Practice

Internalised

Seeing theory and practice as two mutually supporting yet corresponding segments of the transformational process

131 The process is inclusive, allowing the researcher to be genuinely inquisitive as part of the thorough analysis and reflection of information. Action research involves comparing a range of conditions and effects by means of a spiral of steps, incorporating reflection over iterations so as to compose a circle of planning, action and fact-finding that is derived from an evaluation and contrast of the elements examined (Atkins and Wallace, 2012). Action research has as a central purpose the objective of solving a specific problem and providing a framework or a set of guidelines that assist in the pursuit of better practice (Denscombe, 2010). It can focus upon actions taken that are set against a reflective understanding of those actions (Reason and Bradbury, 2007; Atkins and Wallace, 2012). In this sense it is an appropriate method for improving the actions of certain groups and cohorts that could provide the guidelines for large-scale change (McNiff and Whitehead, 2005). It is described as a research style that aims to bridge the gap between research and practice by means of training and education (James, 1988; Stenhouse, 1979; Somekh, 1993).

Much of the literature on action research is heavily tailored towards a teaching and learning setting (Kemmis and McTaggart, 1992). The word classroom is often used to discuss the virtual environment that surrounds the reflective aspects of the research development (Grundy, 1995). Such descriptors strongly resonate with the idea that older people are looking to resolve their technology-based trust and choice issues by means of an educational vessel that allows for existing life experiences to integrate with technology-driven changes (Crane, 2014). Action research is therefore an appropriate framework to deal with specific concerns that are acknowledged by local people, to amend customs, and to utilize those changes to decipher problems (Goff, 2007; Crane, 2006; Reason and Bradbury, 2007).