Action research has a number of limitations. It may be accused of lacking precision because of a reliance on subjective judgements. For the same reason the risk of bias is high, especially when teachers are involved in evaluating their own practice. In addition, although they may sometimes prove to be generalisable, the findings of action research are usually limited to the setting in which the research is conducted.
Validity and reliability
Validity refers to the accuracy, trustworthiness, or credibility of data and research findings, while reliability refers to the consistency of data gathered over a period of time (Mills, 2000). In action research meticulously kept records and documentation of results, often over an extended period of time, can help to provide support for the conclusions reached, and may contribute to reliability and validity. The assistance of a
critical friend to provide feedback on all phases of the project may also help to minimise bias (Arhar, Holly & Kasten, 2001; McNiff &Whitehead, 2005).
In action research, triangulation is often used to assess both the validity and reliability of collected data and its interpretation. Triangulation is a method of bringing together different types of evidence from different sources (in the present study, interview responses, observational fieldnotes and transcripts, and reflective journals) for comparison and crosschecking (Best & Kahn, 2006; Mills, 2000). Triangulation of recorded data is believed to reduce subjectivity. Evidence from the different sources is compared, and convergence or divergence noted. Examining an issue from different angles is considered to lead to greater depth of understanding. The different sets of data are opened up for discussion in order to argue and justify the veracity of interpretations. Where the different sources converge, the interpretation is considered to be more credible. In cases of divergence, evidence can be checked against recordings and transcripts. It is desirable that the parties involved discuss points of disagreement, preferably under neutral chairmanship (Arhar, Holly, & Kasten, 2001; Elliott, 1991; Kember, 2000).
The term triangulation has also been used to refer to the bringing together of multiple voices. In educational action research this usually means the voices of teachers, students, observers, and fellow participants (Kember, 2000). According to Altrichter, Posch, and Somekh (1993) triangulation gives a more detailed, balanced picture of a situation, makes contradictions visible, allows a deeper interpretation, and breaks the “hierarchy of credibility” by giving equal status to all participants. However they also state that triangulation requires a great deal of effort to set up, and that many teachers see it as threatening.
Generalisability
Generalisability refers to the applicability of research findings to different contexts and settings (Mills, 2000). Best and Kahn (2006) suggest that in order to address the issue of external validity and the limited generalisability of findings in action research, the researcher should acknowledge the need to replicate the study and its findings. Scott and Weeks (1998) believe that it is time to “demystify” the notion that external validity, replication, and generalisation are essential in educational research.
They believe that research that is interpretively sensitive to specific contexts, conditions, individuals, and interactions is equally valid. Scott and Weeks consider research to be an ongoing dialogical process in which both personal and academic reflections play a vital part. Evans, Lomax, and Morgan (2000) prefer the term “transferability” to that of generalisability. McNiff and Whitehead (2005, p. 92) contend that it is “impossible … to produce concrete proof” that research findings are credible and trustworthy, and suggest that production of reasonably valid evidence is enough. Somekh (2006) claims that:
… knowledge acquired from qualitative research is generalisable to similar settings … and … knowledge acquired from research involving close partnerships with participants is quickly validated and appropriated by those in similar settings who recognise its immediate usefulness (p. 3).
3.8 Conclusion
This chapter has examined the theoretical aspects of action research methodology, with a particular focus on the features and challenges of action research involving collaborative partnerships between teachers and teacher educators. A detailed account of the more practical aspects of the current research is provided in the next chapter, Embarking on the Research Journey.
CHAPTER FOUR
EMBARKING ON THE RESEARCH JOURNEY
Because action research is a methodology that closely involves participants in a social situation it is necessarily strongly influenced by their values and culture. The history of the group, its traditions, the kinds of tools it uses to mediate its activities, its dominant discourses and regimes of truth, the institutional structures in which it is framed and the political constructions of power and ideology that enable and constrain its activities, all play a part in determining how action research methodology is shaped to the group’s purposes and the kinds of knowledge that are generated by action research projects (Somekh, 2006, p. 31).
In this chapter the research design for the present study is introduced, and the practical aspects of setting up the research process are outlined. The selection of the school that was to become the research site is briefly explained, as is the recruitment of the participating teachers. Ethical considerations pertaining to the study are discussed and the delimitations of the study are outlined. The chapter then sets out the specific methods of data collection and analysis pertaining to the study, and concludes with a brief overview of the four cycles of action research.