Complete thesis - Murdoch University

Table 9.4: Principles for the evaluation of Action Research (based on Anderson et al (1994) andKrefting (1991))ValidityCriterionOutcomeProcessDemocraticCatalyticDialogicCredibilityTransferabilityDependabilityConfirmabilityAddressed byDid it solve the problem?Was the activity educative and informative?Was the research undertaken in collaboration with all involvedwith the problem under investigation?Did the research transform the realities of those involved?Could the research be discussed with peers in different settings?prolonged and varied field experience; time sampling; reflexivity(field journal); triangulation; member checking; peer examination;interview technique; establishing authority of researcher; structuralcoherence; referential adequacynominated sample; comparison of sample to demographic data;time sample; dense descriptionaudit; dense description of research methods; stepwise replication;triangulation; peer examination; code-recode procedureaudit; triangulation; reflexivityone cycle are addressed and ‘solved’ in another. The Reflection sections of Chapters6 and 7 exemplify this process, while this chapter addresses the extent to which theproblem as a whole was ‘solved’Process Was the activity educative and informative? Reflecting on the suitability of datacollection, and modifying strategies in order to enrich the data are seen as mechanismsthat address process validity. It can be seen that the data collection for Cycle 1 wasnot very sophisticated and did not include a detailed ‘story’ from participants. Thiswas addressed in subsequent cycles, enabling the voice of the participant students to beheard, thus enriching the value of their involvement. Learning is identified as an explicitoutcome of this research. The professional growth of the researcher as educationalist isevident from the reflections on each cycle and the increased sophistication of subsequentintervention planning, implementation and interpretationDemocratic Was the research undertaken in collaboration with all involved with the problemunder investigation? The multiple perspectives of the students are represented, ingeneral, through their own words. Colleagues acted as ‘critical friends’ by offering feedbackand providing alternate perspectives from which to view the data. The studentsthemselves can be seen to be learning skills other than technical ones – almost despitethemselves. This is clearest in the (chronological) excerpts taken from the reflectivejournals (in Appendix C and discussed in Chapter 8)402