Action Research A Methodology for Change and Development

ACTION RESEARCH IN THE EVALUATION OF A NATIONAL PROGRAMME 173
Reflections on future possibilities
The process of writing this chapter has been generative of considerable
reflection. Rereading the data from the early days of the project and reviewing
the stages we have gone through within the central team, our analysis
of problems as they arise and the necessary actions we have taken, has
revealed the extent to which we, as a team, are engaging in our own action
research into both elements of our work: our facilitation of the teachers’
action research and our conduct of the evaluation as a whole. The close
working relationships established in the central qualitative team, of whom
Di, Cathy and I have now worked together for five years, and Andy and I
have collaborated at various times over many years prior to the two years
on ICT Test Bed, have made it possible to address even the most problematic
and emotionally draining issues arising from our work directly and
honestly, providing each other with considerable support.
Lots of questions emerge
How can we best take forward the process of cross-case analysis, in particular,
can we draw the teachers into this process, perhaps by producing succinct
summaries of the outcomes and asking them for comments?
Methodologically, we need to involve them in this process if we can,
because analysis from the outside only will necessarily screen out some
important insights. But will teachers who have already given up so much of
their time be interested in this meta-analysis (especially remembering that
on the whole the PALM teachers appeared not to be)?
Could we make better use of the action research support materials we
developed in the first year. Could these be used by research leaders in their
current form or should they be reduced and rewritten in a simpler form.
Such a decision would need to be taken carefully as there is a danger of
reducing the materials to little more than outline ‘tips’.
There is also the question about how best we can report the outcomes
of the teachers’ action research in future reports. In our next Annual Report
we want to present the outcomes of the quantitative and qualitative
research holistically rather than in two separate parts. For the first two years
this was not possible as the year two quantitative data were not available to
make comparisons with year one data. Next year we will need to find the
best way of presenting the outcomes of both strands integrally, in an appropriate
form. Will it also be important to integrate the outcomes of the
action research with these other two strands, rather than presenting them
in a separate chapter as we did in the 2004 report? And how will that influence
our choice of the most appropriate form and tone of reporting?
The ICT Test Bed Evaluation steering group members have already said
that they would like us to conduct a follow-up interview study with those