I learned many things from this course, especially
in the beginning when I learned what action research WAS and WAS NOT. From the Dana text, I learned that that
action research differed from traditional educational research in that action
research empowers principal-researchers to pose problems and then formulate
inquiries intended to problem solve those issues whereas traditional research
is something that educational leaders would implement from outside sources to
solve an issue (Dana 2009). The role of
a principal has changed so much from that of a rather detached manager to that
of a truly integrated and involved instructional leader. Action research allows school staff to seek
out answers to their wonderings and inquiries and utilize a wide variety of
data, both qualitative and quantitative, to apply to the inquiry.
Action research also does not stop with one
inquiry. It is something that is ongoing
and ever-changing. I realized from my
own assignment in week 3, as I posted my inquiry on my blog, that coming to the
end of this initial action research cycle would more than likely lead me to
another and then another. As I
collaborated with my colleagues in my cohort and discussion group, I found that
they were learning the same thing—essentially coming to the same realization
about the continuous nature of action research.
When you find that one thing works, you continue trying to improve it or
move onto another area of need. When you
find that something did not work in your action research, you take another path
and try to improve it or find something better to apply to an area of need.
From the web conferences, I was able to dismiss my
initial idea for an action research topic which was to investigate our school
configuration (elementary, intermediate, middle, and high school) and compare
it to schools with similar demographics that had a more traditional
configuration (elementary, middle, and high school). Through Dr. Abshire’s clarifications, I knew
that my topic lent itself to a more traditional research model because once our
district made the decision to change models or stay the same, I had nothing but
data and no action to take. Meetings
with my site supervisor helped solidify this conclusion. He guided me to conduct my action research on
something that had more immediate implications for our school improvement plan
and our student population. Because of
these things, I changed my action research inquiry to finding out if our
district-purchased online reading intervention program significantly helped
improve our LEP students’ reading scores.
This will provide a more natural path in action research that will lead
to more inquiries and wonderings.
This course was incredibly challenging for me, but I
felt that I really benefited from all of the collaboration required with my
colleagues. I never thought I would ever
forge such great professional relationships with people in an online
course! However, we started a Facebook
page in our last class (EDLD 5311) and my colleagues have been an invaluable
resource in feedback through that page, our blogs, and our discussion
boards. We really utilized the
technology we had learned to create and use in EDLD 5311 for this class and it
has shown me how many ways school leaders can create multiple avenues of
communication for all stakeholders .
Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I learned
numerous techniques for improving my action research plan as well as for
evaluating my research. The Harris text
provided me with clear diagrams that helped me understand everything from the
action research cycle to clear methods for sustaining school improvement such
as the Nominal Group Technique, the Delphi Method, and Force Field Analysis
(Harris 2010). These techniques provided
multiple opportunities for collaborative decision-making and reflective
processes in a thoughtful, well planned way that I think would be simple to
implement with PLC time. These truly had
an impact on my action research itself as well as how I see myself as a future
principal-researcher.
References
Dana, N. F. (2009). Leading with passion and knowledge: The principal as action
researcher. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press, a Joint Publication with the
American Association of School Administrators.
Harris, S., Edmonson, S., & Combs, J. P. (2010). Examining what we do to improve our schools: 8 steps from analysis
to action. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
