The Nature of Action Research
Five features that make action research research
| Feature | What it means |
|---|---|
| Empirical | Knowledge comes from sense experience; data takes the form of test scores, field notes, questionnaire responses |
| Systematic | Follows a five-step scientific method |
| Valid | Findings are based on fact and evidence |
| Reliable | Methods, conditions, and results can be repeated |
| Multi-form | Takes basic or applied form |
Five steps of the systematic method
- Identify the problem
- Review the information
- Collect data
- Analyse data
- Draw conclusions
Two kinds of validity
- Internal validity: can the results inside this study be interpreted accurately?
- External validity: can the results be generalised beyond this study?
Basic vs applied
- Basic research: extends knowledge
- Applied research: solves an immediate practical problem
Action research sits firmly on the applied side, though it builds on basic research findings.
A common worry from new teacher-researchers is that their classroom inquiry does not look like real research. The worry is misplaced. Action research has the same five features that mark any disciplined research, applied to practitioner questions and practitioner data.
Research is empirical
Action research is empirical because empiricism is the idea that knowledge comes from sense experience. The teacher does not theorise from the armchair. The teacher gathers data.
The data does not have to be quantitative. Useful data takes many forms: test scores, field notes, responses to questionnaire items, video recordings of a lesson, samples of student work, observation notes from a colleague. What makes the work empirical is that the teacher’s claims are tied back to what was actually observed, not to what the teacher thought ought to be true.
This matters in a context where teaching judgments are sometimes treated as personal opinion. An empirical claim is harder to wave away. “I think students do better in groups” is a hunch. “When I ran the same lesson in groups versus individually for two weeks, the group version produced a 12 point average gain on the same quiz” is data.
Research is systematic
Action research follows a five-step scientific method.
- Identify the problem. State what you are studying in a sentence.
- Review the information. Find out what others have learned about similar problems.
- Collect data. Run the planned change and gather evidence.
- Analyse data. Look for patterns and counter-evidence.
- Draw conclusions. State what you now believe and how confident you are.
The systematic part is what separates research from a hunch. A teacher who jumps from problem to conclusion without going through the middle steps is making a guess, even if the guess turns out to be right.
The order is not rigid. The teacher may loop back to refine the problem after the literature review, or revise the data plan after early collection. But all five steps appear somewhere in a serious project.
Research should be valid
Validity is the requirement that the findings be based on fact or evidence rather than on the researcher’s preference. The literature distinguishes two kinds.
Internal validity is the extent to which the results within the study can be interpreted accurately. A teacher who claims that a new method improved test scores has internal validity only if other plausible explanations have been ruled out. Maybe the test was easier. Maybe the students had reviewed the material the night before. Maybe a stronger teacher took over for a week. Internal validity is about being honest with the data.
External validity is the extent to which the results can be generalised. A finding from one classroom of 30 students in one school may or may not transfer to another classroom in another setting. Action research often has limited external validity, and that is fine. The point is to change the practice in the studied setting, not to publish a universal law.
For a practitioner study, internal validity is the priority. External validity is a bonus.
Research should be reliable
Reliability concerns the replicability and consistency of methods, conditions, and results. If another teacher tried the same approach with similar students, would they see similar results? If the same teacher ran the cycle again next term, would the data look comparable?
Reliability is hard in classrooms because students change, terms differ, and the teacher learns from the first round. But the discipline of writing down the method clearly, keeping notes consistently, and reporting honestly all push the work toward reliability.
A teacher whose method changes mid-cycle without being recorded has produced a finding nobody can replicate, including the teacher.
Research can take a variety of forms
The literature splits research into two big buckets.
Basic research. The primary purpose is to extend knowledge. A study of how children acquire language is basic research. It may eventually inform teaching, but the immediate goal is understanding.
Applied research. The primary purpose is to solve an immediate, practical problem. A teacher’s study of why her Class 9 students misunderstand a particular concept is applied research.
Action research sits firmly in the applied bucket. The teacher is not trying to add a new theory to the field. The teacher is trying to fix something specific. That said, action research draws on basic research. The literature review step pulls in findings from researchers who were doing basic work, and the teacher uses those findings to plan the applied change.
Empirical, systematic, valid, reliable, and varied in form
Empirical means tied to observed data. Systematic means following a clear method. Valid means findings rest on evidence. Reliable means the work can be repeated. Varied in form means research can be basic (extending knowledge) or applied (solving a problem). Action research is applied research that meets all five.
Why this matters for the classroom researcher
A teacher who understands these five features has answers when a colleague or administrator dismisses the work as “just an experiment.” The work is not just an experiment. It is empirical because the teacher gathered data. It is systematic because the teacher followed a method. The teacher addressed validity by considering alternative explanations. The teacher addressed reliability by keeping notes another teacher could read. And the teacher chose an applied form because the goal was to change practice in this classroom.
This is what separates a serious project from a hunch dressed in research vocabulary.