Action Research A Methodology for Change and Development

ACTION RESEARCH IN THE EVALUATION OF A NATIONAL PROGRAMME 167
that the published reports over the next year cover a much larger proportion
of the issues related to the five ICT Test Bed themes. The back-up strategy
of carrying out our own independent qualitative studies has proved to
be essential, however, most of all because it means that we have no need to
attempt to pressurize staff of the ICT Test Bed schools to take part. Action
research in ICT Test Bed is essentially, and importantly, a voluntary activity.
Integrating action research in the evaluation with ICT Test Bed project work
In May 2004, at the same time as we made some important changes in the
design of the qualitative studies and split the roles of facilitator and independent
evaluator in one of the clusters, we found the need to look again
at the relationship between the evaluators and those supporting the project
itself (LEA personnel and members of the Becta team).
Shortly after we started work on the evaluation the DfES transferred its
management to Becta, the organization that was already responsible for
leading the implementation of the ICT Test Bed project. I was aware that
there were serious implications for the independence of the evaluation in
having it managed by the agency whose work in leading the project we
were, in part, contracted to evaluate. I took various very specific steps to try
to draw a demarcation line between the evaluation and the project itself,
such as: developing a separate evaluation ‘brand’ for materials we gave to
schools/colleges and our publications; communicating always with the
manager of the evaluation at Becta rather than the manager of the project;
and dealing directly with schools rather than ever going through the Becta
support officers who were working with each cluster. At first my approach
was interpreted by some Becta staff as a form of empire building, particularly
in relation to the ‘branding’ as the project itself had nothing equivalent.
However, once I had fully explained the reasons, our Becta manager
and the project staff appreciated the importance of signalling our independence.
They strongly supported us, for example, in the need to use our
ICT Test Bed Evaluation identity on the Becta research website – a considerable
achievement given the insistence of website managers in all companies
on presenting a single corporate identity.
However, the curious features of a research design, incorporating both
‘internal’ and ‘external’ elements and, in the former, adopting the most participatory
approach possible – action research – made this separation result
in a dislocation of the action research activity from the development activity
in the schools and colleges. The ‘support for development’ role that
Becta was undertaking would more normally in other projects have been
part of the role of the action research facilitator – as it was in the PALM
Project. When we began to find that some heads were not supporting their
staff’s action research activities, and seemed to be regarding action research
as an optional extra with no integral connection with development work in