action research and advantages

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples

What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples

Published on January 27, 2023 by Tegan George . Revised on January 12, 2024.

Table of contents

Types of action research, action research models, examples of action research, action research vs. traditional research, advantages and disadvantages of action research, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about action research.

There are 2 common types of action research: participatory action research and practical action research.

• Participatory action research emphasizes that participants should be members of the community being studied, empowering those directly affected by outcomes of said research. In this method, participants are effectively co-researchers, with their lived experiences considered formative to the research process.
• Practical action research focuses more on how research is conducted and is designed to address and solve specific issues.

Both types of action research are more focused on increasing the capacity and ability of future practitioners than contributing to a theoretical body of knowledge.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Action research is often reflected in 3 action research models: operational (sometimes called technical), collaboration, and critical reflection.

• Operational (or technical) action research is usually visualized like a spiral following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”
• Collaboration action research is more community-based, focused on building a network of similar individuals (e.g., college professors in a given geographic area) and compiling learnings from iterated feedback cycles.
• Critical reflection action research serves to contextualize systemic processes that are already ongoing (e.g., working retroactively to analyze existing school systems by questioning why certain practices were put into place and developed the way they did).

Action research is often used in fields like education because of its iterative and flexible style.

After the information was collected, the students were asked where they thought ramps or other accessibility measures would be best utilized, and the suggestions were sent to school administrators. Example: Practical action research Science teachers at your city’s high school have been witnessing a year-over-year decline in standardized test scores in chemistry. In seeking the source of this issue, they studied how concepts are taught in depth, focusing on the methods, tools, and approaches used by each teacher.

Action research differs sharply from other types of research in that it seeks to produce actionable processes over the course of the research rather than contributing to existing knowledge or drawing conclusions from datasets. In this way, action research is formative , not summative , and is conducted in an ongoing, iterative way.

As such, action research is different in purpose, context, and significance and is a good fit for those seeking to implement systemic change.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Action research comes with advantages and disadvantages.

• Action research is highly adaptable , allowing researchers to mold their analysis to their individual needs and implement practical individual-level changes.
• Action research provides an immediate and actionable path forward for solving entrenched issues, rather than suggesting complicated, longer-term solutions rooted in complex data.
• Done correctly, action research can be very empowering , informing social change and allowing participants to effect that change in ways meaningful to their communities.

Disadvantages

• Due to their flexibility, action research studies are plagued by very limited generalizability  and are very difficult to replicate . They are often not considered theoretically rigorous due to the power the researcher holds in drawing conclusions.
• Action research can be complicated to structure in an ethical manner . Participants may feel pressured to participate or to participate in a certain way.
• Action research is at high risk for research biases such as selection bias , social desirability bias , or other types of cognitive biases .

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Normal distribution
• Degrees of freedom
• Null hypothesis
• Discourse analysis
• Control groups
• Mixed methods research
• Non-probability sampling
• Quantitative research
• Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Research bias

• Rosenthal effect
• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Selection bias
• Negativity bias
• Status quo bias

Action research is conducted in order to solve a particular issue immediately, while case studies are often conducted over a longer period of time and focus more on observing and analyzing a particular ongoing phenomenon.

Action research is focused on solving a problem or informing individual and community-based knowledge in a way that impacts teaching, learning, and other related processes. It is less focused on contributing theoretical input, instead producing actionable input.

Action research is particularly popular with educators as a form of systematic inquiry because it prioritizes reflection and bridges the gap between theory and practice. Educators are able to simultaneously investigate an issue as they solve it, and the method is very iterative and flexible.

A cycle of inquiry is another name for action research . It is usually visualized in a spiral shape following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”

Sources in this article

We strongly encourage students to use sources in their work. You can cite our article (APA Style) or take a deep dive into the articles below.

George, T. (2024, January 12). What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved March 28, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/action-research/

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education (8th edition). Routledge.

Naughton, G. M. (2001).  Action research (1st edition). Routledge.

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, what is an observational study | guide & examples, primary research | definition, types, & examples, guide to experimental design | overview, steps, & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

Action Research: Steps, Benefits, and Tips

Introduction

History of action research, what is the definition of action research, types of action research, conducting action research.

Action research stands as a unique approach in the realm of qualitative inquiry in social science research. Rooted in real-world problems, it seeks not just to understand but also to act, bringing about positive change in specific contexts. Often distinguished by its collaborative nature, the action research process goes beyond traditional research paradigms by emphasizing the involvement of those being studied in resolving social conflicts and effecting positive change.

The value of action research lies not just in its outcomes, but also in the process itself, where stakeholders become active participants rather than mere subjects. In this article, we'll examine action research in depth, shedding light on its history, principles, and types of action research.

Tracing its roots back to the mid-20th century, Kurt Lewin developed classical action research as a response to traditional research methods in the social sciences that often sidelined the very communities they studied. Proponents of action research championed the idea that research should not just be an observational exercise but an actionable one that involves devising practical solutions. Advocates believed in the idea of research leading to immediate social action, emphasizing the importance of involving the community in the process.

Applications for action research

Over the years, action research has evolved and diversified. From its early applications in social psychology and organizational development, it has branched out into various fields such as education, healthcare, and community development, informing questions around improving schools, minority problems, and more. This growth wasn't just in application, but also in its methodologies.

How is action research different?

Like all research methodologies, effective action research generates knowledge. However, action research stands apart in its commitment to instigate tangible change. Traditional research often places emphasis on passive observation , employing data collection methods primarily to contribute to broader theoretical frameworks . In contrast, action research is inherently proactive, intertwining the acts of observing and acting.

The primary goal isn't just to understand a problem but to solve or alleviate it. Action researchers partner closely with communities, ensuring that the research process directly benefits those involved. This collaboration often leads to immediate interventions, tweaks, or solutions applied in real-time, marking a departure from other forms of research that might wait until the end of a study to make recommendations.

This proactive, change-driven nature makes action research particularly impactful in settings where immediate change is not just beneficial but essential.

Action research is best understood as a systematic approach to cooperative inquiry. Unlike traditional research methodologies that might primarily focus on generating knowledge, action research emphasizes producing actionable solutions for pressing real-world challenges.

This form of research undertakes a cyclic and reflective journey, typically cycling through stages of planning , acting, observing, and reflecting. A defining characteristic of action research is the collaborative spirit it embodies, often dissolving the rigid distinction between the researcher and the researched, leading to mutual learning and shared outcomes.

Advantages of action research

One of the foremost benefits of action research is the immediacy of its application. Since the research is embedded within real-world issues, any findings or solutions derived can often be integrated straightaway, catalyzing prompt improvements within the concerned community or organization. This immediacy is coupled with the empowering nature of the methodology. Participants aren't mere subjects; they actively shape the research process, giving them a tangible sense of ownership over both the research journey and its eventual outcomes.

Moreover, the inherent adaptability of action research allows researchers to tweak their approaches responsively based on live feedback. This ensures the research remains rooted in the evolving context, capturing the nuances of the situation and making any necessary adjustments. Lastly, this form of research tends to offer a comprehensive understanding of the issue at hand, harmonizing socially constructed theoretical knowledge with hands-on insights, leading to a richer, more textured understanding.

Disadvantages of action research

Like any methodology, action research isn't devoid of challenges. Its iterative nature, while beneficial, can extend timelines. Researchers might find themselves engaged in multiple cycles of observation, reflection, and action before arriving at a satisfactory conclusion. The intimate involvement of the researcher with the research participants, although crucial for collaboration, opens doors to potential conflicts. Through collaborative problem solving, disagreements can lead to richer and more nuanced solutions, but it can take considerable time and effort.

Another limitation stems from its focus on a specific context: results derived from a particular action research project might not always resonate or be applicable in a different context or with a different group. Lastly, the depth of collaboration this methodology demands means all stakeholders need to be deeply invested, and such a level of commitment might not always be feasible.

Examples of action research

To illustrate, let's consider a few scenarios. Imagine a classroom where a teacher observes dwindling student participation. Instead of sticking to conventional methods, the teacher experiments with introducing group-based activities. As the outcomes unfold, the teacher continually refines the approach based on student feedback, eventually leading to a teaching strategy that rejuvenates student engagement.

In a healthcare context, hospital staff who recognize growing patient anxiety related to certain procedures might innovate by introducing a new patient-informing protocol. As they study the effects of this change, they could, through iterations, sculpt a procedure that diminishes patient anxiety.

Similarly, in the realm of community development, a community grappling with the absence of child-friendly public spaces might collaborate with local authorities to conceptualize a park. As they monitor its utilization and societal impact, continual feedback could refine the park's infrastructure and design.

Contemporary action research, while grounded in the core principles of collaboration, reflection, and change, has seen various adaptations tailored to the specific needs of different contexts and fields. These adaptations have led to the emergence of distinct types of action research, each with its unique emphasis and approach.

Collaborative action research

Collaborative action research emphasizes the joint efforts of professionals, often from the same field, working together to address common concerns or challenges. In this approach, there's a strong emphasis on shared responsibility, mutual respect, and co-learning. For example, a group of classroom teachers might collaboratively investigate methods to improve student literacy, pooling their expertise and resources to devise, implement, and refine strategies for improving teaching.

Participatory action research

Participatory action research (PAR) goes a step further in dissolving the barriers between the researcher and the researched. It actively involves community members or stakeholders not just as participants, but as equal partners in the entire research process. PAR is deeply democratic and seeks to empower participants, fostering a sense of agency and ownership. For instance, a participatory research project might involve local residents in studying and addressing community health concerns, ensuring that the research process and outcomes are both informed by and beneficial to the community itself.

Educational action research

Educational action research is tailored specifically to practical educational contexts. Here, educators take on the dual role of teacher and researcher, seeking to improve teaching practices, curricula, classroom dynamics, or educational evaluation. This type of research is cyclical, with educators implementing changes, observing outcomes, and reflecting on results to continually enhance the educational experience. An example might be a teacher studying the impact of technology integration in her classroom, adjusting strategies based on student feedback and learning outcomes.

Community-based action research

Another noteworthy type is community-based action research, which focuses primarily on community development and well-being. Rooted in the principles of social justice, this approach emphasizes the collective power of community members to identify, study, and address their challenges. It's particularly powerful in grassroots movements and local development projects where community insights and collaboration drive meaningful, sustainable change.

Key insights and critical reflection through research with ATLAS.ti

Organize all your data analysis and insights with our powerful interface. Download a free trial today.

Engaging in action research is both an enlightening and transformative journey, rooted in practicality yet deeply connected to theory. For those embarking on this path, understanding the essentials of an action research study and the significance of a research cycle is paramount.

Understanding the action research cycle

At the heart of action research is its cycle, a structured yet adaptable framework guiding the research. This cycle embodies the iterative nature of action research, emphasizing that learning and change evolve through repetition and reflection.

The typical stages include:

• Identifying a problem : This is the starting point where the action researcher pinpoints a pressing issue or challenge that demands attention.
• Planning : Here, the researcher devises an action research strategy aimed at addressing the identified problem. In action research, network resources, participant consultation, and the literature review are core components in planning.
• Action : The planned strategies are then implemented in this stage. This 'action' phase is where theoretical knowledge meets practical application.
• Observation : Post-implementation, the researcher observes the outcomes and effects of the action. This stage ensures that the research remains grounded in the real-world context.
• Critical reflection : This part of the cycle involves analyzing the observed results to draw conclusions about their effectiveness and identify areas for improvement.
• Revision : Based on the insights from reflection, the initial plan is revised, marking the beginning of another cycle.

Rigorous research and iteration

It's essential to understand that while action research is deeply practical, it doesn't sacrifice rigor . The cyclical process ensures that the research remains thorough and robust. Each iteration of the cycle in an action research project refines the approach, drawing it closer to an effective solution.

The role of the action researcher

The action researcher stands at the nexus of theory and practice. Not just an observer, the researcher actively engages with the study's participants, collaboratively navigating through the research cycle by conducting interviews, participant observations, and member checking . This close involvement ensures that the study remains relevant, timely, and responsive.

Drawing conclusions and informing theory

As the research progresses through multiple iterations of data collection and data analysis , drawing conclusions becomes an integral aspect. These conclusions, while immediately beneficial in addressing the practical issue at hand, also serve a broader purpose. They inform theory, enriching the academic discourse and providing valuable insights for future research.

Identifying actionable insights

Keep in mind that action research should facilitate implications for professional practice as well as space for systematic inquiry. As you draw conclusions about the knowledge generated from action research, consider how this knowledge can create new forms of solutions to the pressing concern you set out to address.

Collecting data and analyzing data starts with ATLAS.ti

Download a free trial of our intuitive software to make the most of your research.

• Statistics Tutorials
• Calculators
• Book Recommendations

Advantages and Disadvantages of Action Research

Action research is a technique in which a client and an action researcher work together to analyze a problem and build a solution based on the assessment. One of the main aspects of action research is the partnership between the researcher and the client to address key problems. We now list some of the advantages and disadvantages of the action research method.

Advantages of Action Research:

• It encourages folks who haven’t been involved in research to show an interest in it.
• Instead of being passive objects, it describes people as active participants.
• Participation in groups fosters motivation and maintains interest.
• The participants can relate to the research’s focus.
• The research findings are being tracked alongside the actions in order to provide timely feedback.
• It is a suitable and acceptable strategy for use in social and medical contexts.
• Making sure your company research is practically applicable is one of the key benefits of conducting action research. Action research can help to improve the effect and reputation of business research within the business community since it involves engaging with individuals in business organizations.
• It helps participants and researchers to be self-aware.
• The conclusions from this study might be useful in other, comparable locations and circumstances.

Disadvantages of Action Research:

• The difficulty of doing action research is one of its key drawbacks.
• Its nature and definition are not well defined.
• Generalizing conclusions beyond the local situation may not be valid.
• It could take a lot of time for little reward.
• Such projects may run across professional, and cultural barriers.
• The ethical problems need to be managed and addressed carefully.

I have always been passionate about statistics and mathematics education.

I created this website to explain mathematical and statistical concepts in the simplest possible manner.

If you've found value from reading my content, feel free to support me in even the smallest way you can.

Share this article

Recent posts, what is a frequency distribution table (with examples), what is a two way table (with examples), what is a relative frequency histogram (with examples), what is joint relative frequency (with examples), what is split half reliability (with examples), popular categories.

Mode Formula for Class 10 (Grouped Data)

Examples of manipulated variables (definition + examples), recent comments.

About     Privacy Policy © Copyright - All Things Statistics

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research Research Tools and Apps

Action Research: What it is, Stages & Examples

The best way to get things accomplished is to do it yourself. This statement is utilized in corporations, community projects, and national governments. These organizations are relying on action research to cope with their continuously changing and unstable environments as they function in a more interdependent world.

In practical educational contexts, this involves using systematic inquiry and reflective practice to address real-world challenges, improve teaching and learning, enhance student engagement, and drive positive changes within the educational system.

This post outlines the definition of action research, its stages, and some examples.

Content Index

What is action research?

Stages of action research, the steps to conducting action research, examples of action research, advantages and disadvantages of action research.

Action research is a strategy that tries to find realistic solutions to organizations’ difficulties and issues. It is similar to applied research.

Action research refers basically learning by doing. First, a problem is identified, then some actions are taken to address it, then how well the efforts worked are measured, and if the results are not satisfactory, the steps are applied again.

It can be put into three different groups:

• Positivist: This type of research is also called “classical action research.” It considers research a social experiment. This research is used to test theories in the actual world.
• Interpretive: This kind of research is called “contemporary action research.” It thinks that business reality is socially made, and when doing this research, it focuses on the details of local and organizational factors.
• Critical: This action research cycle takes a critical reflection approach to corporate systems and tries to enhance them.

All research is about learning new things. Collaborative action research contributes knowledge based on investigations in particular and frequently useful circumstances. It starts with identifying a problem. After that, the research process is followed by the below stages:

Stage 1: Plan

For an action research project to go well, the researcher needs to plan it well. After coming up with an educational research topic or question after a research study, the first step is to develop an action plan to guide the research process. The research design aims to address the study’s question. The research strategy outlines what to undertake, when, and how.

Stage 2: Act

The next step is implementing the plan and gathering data. At this point, the researcher must select how to collect and organize research data . The researcher also needs to examine all tools and equipment before collecting data to ensure they are relevant, valid, and comprehensive.

Stage 3: Observe

Data observation is vital to any investigation. The action researcher needs to review the project’s goals and expectations before data observation. This is the final step before drawing conclusions and taking action.

Different kinds of graphs, charts, and networks can be used to represent the data. It assists in making judgments or progressing to the next stage of observing.

Stage 4: Reflect

This step involves applying a prospective solution and observing the results. It’s essential to see if the possible solution found through research can really solve the problem being studied.

The researcher must explore alternative ideas when the action research project’s solutions fail to solve the problem.

Action research is a systematic approach researchers, educators, and practitioners use to identify and address problems or challenges within a specific context. It involves a cyclical process of planning, implementing, reflecting, and adjusting actions based on the data collected. Here are the general steps involved in conducting an action research process:

Identify the action research question or problem

Clearly define the issue or problem you want to address through your research. It should be specific, actionable, and relevant to your working context.

Review existing knowledge

Conduct a literature review to understand what research has already been done on the topic. This will help you gain insights, identify gaps, and inform your research design.

Plan the research

Develop a research plan outlining your study’s objectives, methods, data collection tools, and timeline. Determine the scope of your research and the participants or stakeholders involved.

Collect data

Implement your research plan by collecting relevant data. This can involve various methods such as surveys, interviews, observations, document analysis, or focus groups. Ensure that your data collection methods align with your research objectives and allow you to gather the necessary information.

Analyze the data

Once you have collected the data, analyze it using appropriate qualitative or quantitative techniques. Look for patterns, themes, or trends in the data that can help you understand the problem better.

Reflect on the findings

Reflect on the analyzed data and interpret the results in the context of your research question. Consider the implications and possible solutions that emerge from the data analysis. This reflection phase is crucial for generating insights and understanding the underlying factors contributing to the problem.

Develop an action plan

Based on your analysis and reflection, develop an action plan that outlines the steps you will take to address the identified problem. The plan should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART goals). Consider involving relevant stakeholders in planning to ensure their buy-in and support.

Implement the action plan

Put your action plan into practice by implementing the identified strategies or interventions. This may involve making changes to existing practices, introducing new approaches, or testing alternative solutions. Document the implementation process and any modifications made along the way.

Evaluate and monitor progress

Continuously monitor and evaluate the impact of your actions. Collect additional data, assess the effectiveness of the interventions, and measure progress towards your goals. This evaluation will help you determine if your actions have the desired effects and inform any necessary adjustments.

Reflect and iterate

Reflect on the outcomes of your actions and the evaluation results. Consider what worked well, what did not, and why. Use this information to refine your approach, make necessary adjustments, and plan for the next cycle of action research if needed.

Remember that participatory action research is an iterative process, and multiple cycles may be required to achieve significant improvements or solutions to the identified problem. Each cycle builds on the insights gained from the previous one, fostering continuous learning and improvement.

Explore Insightfully Contextual Inquiry in Qualitative Research

Here are two real-life examples of action research.

Action research initiatives are frequently situation-specific. Still, other researchers can adapt the techniques. The example is from a researcher’s (Franklin, 1994) report about a project encouraging nature tourism in the Caribbean.

In 1991, this was launched to study how nature tourism may be implemented on the four Windward Islands in the Caribbean: St. Lucia, Grenada, Dominica, and St. Vincent.

For environmental protection, a government-led action study determined that the consultation process needs to involve numerous stakeholders, including commercial enterprises.

First, two researchers undertook the study and held search conferences on each island. The search conferences resulted in suggestions and action plans for local community nature tourism sub-projects.

Several islands formed advisory groups and launched national awareness and community projects. Regional project meetings were held to discuss experiences, self-evaluations, and strategies. Creating a documentary about a local initiative helped build community. And the study was a success, leading to a number of changes in the area.

Lau and Hayward (1997) employed action research to analyze Internet-based collaborative work groups.

Over two years, the researchers facilitated three action research problem -solving cycles with 15 teachers, project personnel, and 25 health practitioners from diverse areas. The goal was to see how Internet-based communications might affect their virtual workgroup.

First, expectations were defined, technology was provided, and a bespoke workgroup system was developed. Participants suggested shorter, more dispersed training sessions with project-specific instructions.

The second phase saw the system’s complete deployment. The final cycle witnessed system stability and virtual group formation. The key lesson was that the learning curve was poorly misjudged, with frustrations only marginally met by phone-based technical help. According to the researchers, the absence of high-quality online material about community healthcare was harmful.

Role clarity, connection building, knowledge sharing, resource assistance, and experiential learning are vital for virtual group growth. More study is required on how group support systems might assist groups in engaging with their external environment and boost group members’ learning. 

Action research has both good and bad points.

• It is very flexible, so researchers can change their analyses to fit their needs and make individual changes.
• It offers a quick and easy way to solve problems that have been going on for a long time instead of complicated, long-term solutions based on complex facts.
• If It is done right, it can be very powerful because it can lead to social change and give people the tools to make that change in ways that are important to their communities.

Disadvantages

• These studies have a hard time being generalized and are hard to repeat because they are so flexible. Because the researcher has the power to draw conclusions, they are often not thought to be theoretically sound.
• Setting up an action study in an ethical way can be hard. People may feel like they have to take part or take part in a certain way.
• It is prone to research errors like selection bias , social desirability bias, and other cognitive biases.

LEARN ABOUT: Self-Selection Bias

This post discusses how action research generates knowledge, its steps, and real-life examples. It is very applicable to the field of research and has a high level of relevance. We can only state that the purpose of this research is to comprehend an issue and find a solution to it.

At QuestionPro, we give researchers tools for collecting data, like our survey software, and a library of insights for any long-term study. Go to the Insight Hub if you want to see a demo or learn more about it.

LEARN MORE         FREE TRIAL

Frequently Asked Questions(FAQ’s)

Action research is a systematic approach to inquiry that involves identifying a problem or challenge in a practical context, implementing interventions or changes, collecting and analyzing data, and using the findings to inform decision-making and drive positive change.

Action research can be conducted by various individuals or groups, including teachers, administrators, researchers, and educational practitioners. It is often carried out by those directly involved in the educational setting where the research takes place.

The steps of action research typically include identifying a problem, reviewing relevant literature, designing interventions or changes, collecting and analyzing data, reflecting on findings, and implementing improvements based on the results.

MORE LIKE THIS

In-App Feedback Tools: How to Collect, Uses & 14 Best Tools

Mar 29, 2024

11 Best Customer Journey Analytics Software in 2024

17 Best VOC Software for Customer Experience in 2024

Mar 28, 2024

CEM Software: What it is, 7 Best CEM Software in 2024

Other categories.

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible pp 9–16 Cite as

Action Research

• David Coghlan 2  
• Reference work entry
• First Online: 01 January 2023

362 Accesses

Action research is an approach to research which aims at both taking action and creating knowledge or theory about that action as the action unfolds. It starts with everyday experience and is concerned with the development of living knowledge. Its characteristics are that it generates practical knowledge in the pursuit of worthwhile purposes; it is participative and democratic as its participants work together in the present tense in defining the questions they wish to explore, the methodology for that exploration, and its application through cycles of action and reflection. In this vein they are agents of change and coresearchers in knowledge generation and not merely passive subjects as in traditional research. In this vein, action research can be understood as a social science of the possible as the collective action is focused on creating a desired future in whatever context the action research is located.

• Action research
• Development
• Emancipatory research
• Participatory research

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Banks, S., & Brydon-Miller, M. (2018). Ethics in participatory research for health and social well-being . Abingdon: Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Bradbury, H. (2015). The Sage handbook of action research (3rd ed.). Sage: London.

Bradbury, H., Mirvis, P., Neilsen, E., & Pasmore, W. (2008). Action research at work: Creating the future following the path from Lewin. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), The Sage handbook of action research (2nd ed., pp. 77–92). London: Sage.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Bradbury, H., Roth, J., & Gearty, M. (2015). The practice of learning history: Local and open approaches. In H. Bradbury (Ed.), The Sage handbook of action research (3rd ed., pp. 17–30). London: Sage.

Brydon-Miller, M., Greenwood, D., & Maguire, P. (2003). Why action research? Action Research, 1 (1), 9–28.034201[1476–7503(200307)1:1].

Article   Google Scholar  

Chevalier, J. M., & Buckles, D. J. (2019). Participatory action research. Theory and methods for engaged inquiry (2nd ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.

Coghlan, D. (2010). Seeking common ground in the diversity and diffusion of action research and collaborative management research action modalities: Toward a general empirical method. In W.A. Pasmore, A.B.. (Rami) Shani and R.W. Woodman (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development (vol 18, pp. 149–181). Bingley: Emerald.

Google Scholar  

Coghlan, D. (2016). Retrieving the philosophy of practical knowing for action research. International Journal of Action Research, 12 , 84–107. https://doi.org/10.1688/IJAR-2016-01 .

Coghlan, D. (2019). Doing action research in your own organization (5th ed.). London: Sage.

Coghlan, D., & Brydon-Miller, M. (2014). The Sage encyclopedia of action research . London: Sage.

Coghlan, D., & Shani, A.B.. (Rami). (2017). Inquiring in the present tense: The dynamic mechanism of action research. Journal of Change Management , 17, 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2017.1301045 .

Coghlan, D., Shani, A.B.. (Rami), & Hay, G.W. (2019). Toward a social science philosophy of organization development and change. In D.A. Noumair & A.B.. (Rami) Shani (eds.). Research in organizational change and development (Vol. 27, pp. 1–29). Bingley: Emerald.

Gearty, M., & Coghlan, D. (2018). The first-, second- and third-person dynamics of learning history. Systemic Practice & Action Research., 31 , 463–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-017-9436-5 .

Greenwood, D., & Levin, M. (2007). Introduction to action research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Heron, J., & Reason, P. (1997). A participatory inquiry paradigm. Qualitative Inquiry, 3 , 274–294.

Heron, J., & Reason, P. (2008). Extending epistemology within a cooperative inquiry. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), The Sage handbook of action research (2nd ed., pp. 366–380). London: Sage.

Huxham, C. (2003). Actionresearch as a methodology for theory development. Policy and Politics, 31 (2), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557303765371726 .

Koshy, E., Koshy, V., & Waterman, H. (2011). Action research in healthcare . London: Sage.

Lonergan, B. J. (2005). Dimensions of meaning. In B. J. Lonergan (Ed.), The collected work of Bernard Lonergan (Vol. 4, pp. 232–244). Toronto: Toronto University Press.

Marshall, J. (2016). First person action research: Living life as inquiry . London: Sage.

Owen, R., Bessant, J., & Heintz, M. (2013). Responsible innovation: Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society . London: Wiley.

Pasmore, W. A. (2001). Action research in the workplace: The socio-technical perspective. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), The handbook of action research (pp. 38–47). London: Sage.

Revans, R. W. (1971). Developing effective managers . London: Longmans.

Revans, R. (1998). ABC of action learning . London: Lemos& Crane.

Schein, E. H. (2013). Humble inquiry: The gentle art of asking instead of telling . Oakland: Berrett-Kohler.

Shani, A.B.. (Rami), & Coghlan, D. (2019). Action research in business and management: A reflective review. Action Research . https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750319852147 .

Susman, G. I., & Evered, R. D. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23 , 582–601. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392581 .

Torbert, W. R., & Associates. (2004). Action inquiry . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Whitney, D., & Trosten-Bloom, A. (2010). The power of appreciative inquiry: A practical guide to positive change . Oakland: Berrett-Kohler.

Williamson, G., & Bellman, L. (2012). Action research in nursing and healthcare . London: Sage.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Trinity Business School, University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland

David Coghlan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Coghlan .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

Vlad Petre Glăveanu

Section Editor information

Webster University Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

Richard Randell

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Coghlan, D. (2022). Action Research. In: Glăveanu, V.P. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90913-0_180

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90913-0_180

Published : 26 January 2023

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-90912-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-90913-0

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

How Action Research Can Improve Your Teaching

Do you ever find yourself looking at a classroom problem with not a clue in the world about how to fix it? No doubt, teaching art is difficult. Sometimes the issues we face don’t have easy solutions.

One method that is worth looking into is action research. In action research, a teacher takes the time to analyze a problem and then cycles through specific steps to solve it. If you’re struggling with a problem in your classroom, this might be the perfect strategy to try!

What is action research?

Simply put, action research describes a research methodology used to diagnose and address problems. In a school setting, the teacher plays the role of the researcher, and the students represent the study participants. Action research is a meaningful way for a teacher to find out why students perform the way they do.

The term, “action research,” was coined in 1933 by Kurt Lewin to describe a scenario in which a researcher and participants collaborate to solve a specific problem. Donald Schön  developed this idea further with the term, “reflective practitioner,” to describe a researcher who thinks systematically about their practice.

Educators have taken both of these ideas into the classroom to better serve their students.

Here is a look at the basic structure of an action research cycle. You might notice it looks a lot like the Design Thinking Process.

• The teacher recognizes and wonders about a problem in the classroom.
• The teacher thinks about possible reasons students are having trouble.
• The teacher collects and analyzes data.
• The teacher comes up with solutions to try.
• The teacher analyzes the solution.

In this model, if the first solution is not effective, the cycle starts over again. The teacher recognizes what remains of the problem and repeats the steps to collect more evidence and brainstorm new and different solutions.

Download What Is Action Research?

Download Now!

Because the process is cyclical, the teacher can loop through the steps as many times as needed to find a solution. Perhaps the best part of action research is that teachers can see which solutions have made a real impact on their students. If you’re looking for an even more in-depth take on the topic, The Art of Classroom Inquiry: A Handbook for Teacher-Researchers  by Hubbard and Powers is a great place to start.

Action research can be as informal or formal as you need it to be. Data is collected through observation, questioning, and discussion with students. Student artwork, photographs of your classroom at work, video interviews, and surveys are all valid forms of data. Students can be involved throughout the whole process, helping to solve the problem within the classroom. With a formal study for a university, there will be requests for permission to use student data through the Institutional Research Board (IRB) process.

How can action research be implemented in your classroom?

I discovered action research while working on my higher degree. Using action research allowed me to find real solutions for real issues in my classroom and gave me my topic of study for my dissertation at the same time!

The problem I chose to address was how to engage students in an analog photography course in the digital age.

I broke my classes into two groups. I taught the district curriculum to one group and an altered curriculum to another. In the altered version, I included big ideas and themes that were important to students such as family, identity, and community.

To gather data, I observed, compared the quality of the photos, and conducted student interviews. I found students were much more engaged when I switched the projects from a technical study (i.e., demonstrating depth of field) to a more personal focus (breaking the teenage stereotype.)

What are the benefits of action research?

Using action research in my classroom allowed me to involve students in the curriculum process. They were actively more engaged within the classroom and felt ownership of their learning.

I was able to show them that teachers can be lifelong learners, and that inquiry is a powerful way to enact change within the classroom. The students cheered me on as I was writing and defended the results of my study. Plus, I was able to connect with them on a personal level, as we were all students. Furthermore, my teaching practice became more confident, and my understanding of art education theory deepened.

Conducting action research also allowed me to become a leader in my community. I was able to present a way to be a reflective practitioner within my classroom and model it for other teachers. I shared my new knowledge with the other art teachers in my district and invited them to try their own informal studies within their classrooms. We were able to shift our focus from one of compliance to one of inquiry and discovery, thus creating a more engaging learning environment for our students.

Action research provides a way to use your new knowledge immediately in your classroom. It allows you to think critically about why and how you run your art classroom. What could be better?

What kinds of issues are you facing in the classroom right now?

What kind of research study might you be interested in conducting?

Magazine articles and podcasts are opinions of professional education contributors and do not necessarily represent the position of the Art of Education University (AOEU) or its academic offerings. Contributors use terms in the way they are most often talked about in the scope of their educational experiences.

Alexandra Overby

Alexandra Overby, a high school art educator, is one of AOEU’s Adjunct Instructors. She immerses herself in topics of photography practice, visual ethnography, technology in the art room, and secondary curriculum.

Get the Scoop: AOEU Insider Tips For Your Next Art Education Conference

What Artist Are You? Take This Kindred Artist Quiz Today to Find Out!

Lights, Camera, Action! 8 Easy Ways to Elevate Your Art Teacher Video Presence

Blast from the Past: 17 Fascinating Things Veteran Art Teachers Remember Doing

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

2 Action Research as a Process for Professional Learning and Leadership

ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS

• What is the role of action research in professional learning and leadership?
• What are the educational contexts that action research takes place?
• What are the critiques of action research as a methodology?
• What are the basic stages of an action research project?

In the previous chapter, we were able to explore the idea of action research, the purpose of action research, and the theoretical underpinnings of action research. Hopefully, you now have a good understanding of the landscape of action research and the contours in which it can take shape in educational contexts. It is important to emphasize that the primary aim of conducting action research in an educational context is to study and improve upon an educator’s, or group of educators’, practice. This chapter will explore some of the practical aspects of action research, in particular, the forethought and planning required to engage in a successful action research experience.

As we begin to transition from the theoretical to the more practical aspects of action research, we want to provide a few questions to consider:

• How does the epistemological, ontological, and theoretical basis of action research fit with your pedagogical philosophy in the classroom? Will using action research require any paradigmatic shifts in how you approach your pedagogy?
• What are the pedagogical benefits of using action research in your educational context?
• What are the most significant affordances and challenges of using action research in your educational context?

After considering the questions above, we think it is important from a practical standpoint to consider and situate action research as part of an educator’s responsibility to professional learning and leadership.

Action Research as Professional Learning and Leadership 

Thus far, we have made the case that action research is a useful methodology for educators because it formalizes a process you already use to improve your pedagogy; but how does it benefit you as a professional and your professional identity? In Becoming Critical Carr and Kemmis (2003) list characteristics of action research that make it integral to critical professional learning for educators. We have summarized their five characteristics of action research as a methodology for educators:

Five Characteristics of Action Research as a Methodology for Educators

• action research rejects positivist notions of rationality, objectivity, and truth and instead has an openness to competing possibilities for effective pedagogical practice in educational contexts;
• action research employs educators’ reflective and interpretive categories, and uses the language of educators as a basis for educators to explore and develop their own pedagogical theorizing;
• action research allows educators’ unrealized self-understandings to be discerned by analyzing their own practices and understandings;
• action research connects reflection to action, enabling educators to overcome barriers to pedagogical change through awareness of social and systemic factors influencing their educational context;
• action research involves deep consideration of theory and practice and to demonstrate this critically self-reflective action, researchers develop and organize knowledge in which truth is evidenced through its relation to practice.

To synthesize these five characteristics in terms of practical knowledge, we think it is important to now consider a “so what?” type of question. After learning these characteristics, why would an educator engage in action research for the purpose of professional learning or leadership? The following five principles correspond to the five characteristics above:

Why an Educator would Engage in Action Research

• the development of an educator’s pedagogy is not about developing a set of “surefire” technical competencies; it is concerned with finding the most effective practices for the students in their educational context;
• one way for educators to be consistently informed on pedagogy and increase their skills is through actively being involved in a culture of inquiry that dually relies on the latest educational research and their own classroom to spark new inquiry;
• by doing action research, educators are engaged in the process of hypothesizing, theorizing, and developing self-knowledge related specifically to their practice;
• when educators engage in action research, they develop agency and gain control of knowledge, and address questions for themselves, instead of being subservient to the knowledge enacted on their educational context;
• when educators are engaged in research, educators are naturally engaged in educational theorizing because they are reflecting on practice systematically and critically, to close the distance between educational theory practice, which many educators feel (Hopkins, 2003).

Professional learning in education takes many forms. Action research is unique in the realm of professional learning because it is tailored to the educator’s real time pedagogical foci, issues, or needs. Professional learning opportunities often fail to meet the expectations of educators because they are meant for large groups of teachers, either based on a school, topic, subject, or course. Even at the course level of professional learning, while the content may be the same for each teacher, the students and educational context are different for each teacher – which creates unique challenges that educators want to address through their professional learning. One advantage of traditional professional learning sessions is the group aspect, or collaborative thinking that takes place. Action research is flexible enough that collaborative inquiry could be part of the process, and educators could include colleagues as part of their research. In many ways, action research not only contributes to professional learning, but also provides professional leadership to colleagues.

Professional leadership in education, or teacher leadership, also takes many forms. Danielson (2007) lists teacher leadership in her framework for teaching, as one of several professional responsibilities for educators. Educators who engage in action research and share their findings, are working to impact professional learning, and subsequently student learning, beyond their classrooms. Engaged educators who attain and continue to receive recognition in the teaching profession invest a lot of time and energy to stay informed and further develop their skills. Danielson (2007) notes that these educators are in a prime position to exercise leadership among their colleagues. Often times educators view conferences and professional learning sessions as the only opportunities to further develop their skills and become leaders among their colleagues. However, Danielson (2007) goes on to describe a distinguished educator as someone who engages in a combination of seeking “out opportunities for professional development and makes a systematic effort to conduct action research” (105). In this way, professional learning is a part of the action research process that engages educators in reflection and conversations outside of their educational context, while also potentially providing an alternative lens to analyze their data.

Data-driven decision making by administrators, teachers, and teams of educators, often facilitated by teacher leaders, is a prevalent practice in schools that impacts educator performance and student learning. This sort of professional learning through collaborative inquiry provides vital contextual data to improve pedagogy in classrooms and throughout the school. Sagor (2010) defines collaborative action research as ”the team inquiry process, when a group of individuals who are a part of a specific PLC, grade-level, or teacher learning team engage in inquiry and research.” These teams can become a means for collaboratively engaging in action research and developing data that is relative to the school. Data is most valuable to an educational context when it is deeply relatable and relevant to the specific educational context. Data specifically related to the educational context can increase a school’s capacity to focus on curricular and instructional strategies with the greatest potential to support student learning. In an effort to spark professional leadership, and as we discuss the process of action research in future chapters, please discuss with colleagues the potential action research projects in your own classroom and think about how to leverage those toward your school’s PLC, professional learning, or school-wide improvement plans. Thinking about your action research in this way adds another layer of purpose and makes action research a truly valuable process for improvement throughout your educational context.

What Will Action Look Like in My Classroom?

Now that we have discussed the relevance of action research for professional learning and leadership, it may be a little easier to conceptualize an action research project, or perhaps you already have an idea ready to start. O’Leary (2004) provides a useful list of processes related to action research that could help you think about your initial plans. Here are some questions to think about related to the processes of an action research project:

• Does it address a practical problems(s)? Educators typically identify a practical problem in their educational context that has multiple possible ways to be addressed. The impetus to improve professional practice prioritizes change.
• Does it generate knowledge? Generating knowledge promotes change. By addressing this practical problem, you will generate knowledge.
• Does it enact changes in your pedagogy/classroom/school? The changes generated by the knowledge will be useful to enact change relatively close to the conclusion of the research project.
• Is it participatory? Action research is participatory, and the primary researcher is involved in the action, potentially along with other researchers and stakeholders.
• Could it be a cyclical process? Action research is a cyclical process that results from emerging knowledge. Once better situational understanding is gained through research, a change can be implemented and researched again, resulting in an evaluative practice that reciprocates between informed action and critical reflection.

I want to emphasize that this is one of interpretations of the processes involved in the action research process, and you should adapt these basic processes to fit your needs as an educator and researcher. These processes will also become clearer in purpose as we discuss the contexts for action research.

The Contexts for Considering Action Research

Action research can take place in many professional settings and contexts. As we think about some of those contexts we will focus on the most common in educational settings. I have also provided some examples for research in each context.

Improving Classroom Practice

These projects are conducted by educators in their classroom context and focus on pedagogical, curricular, or instructional aspects of their practice. Examples could include:

• How can Socratic questioning improve engagement in class discussions?
• Who participates more in my class?
• How can integrated social studies and ELA lessons improve students’ reading scores?
• Will learning diaries in mathematics lessons enhance students’ conceptual understanding?
• How can Flipgrid help connect student interests to content standards?

Examining an Educational Theme

These projects allow educators to examine new ideas or themes that they have encountered in professional learning opportunities. Examples could include:

• How can I implement personalized learning in my classroom?
• Can I integrate all subjects into a problem-based inquiry project?
• In what ways do Breakout Box activities prepare students for content-based learning?
• Do exercise balls help students focus longer while sitting at their seats?

Educational Context Focus

These projects focus on interaction between humans and the ecological space of the context. Examples could include:

• How can using non-letter grades improve communication with parents?
• How can we increase engagement at parent meetings?
• Does going outside and doing yoga improve student focus in the afternoon?
• What is the effect of eliminating homework?
• Does presenting to community members, outside the school community, improve engagement or motivation for group projects?
• What anti-bullying strategies reduce verbal teasing?

Implementing a New Initiative Based on Policy or Research

These projects are sparked by new policy or research data or are related to district or state-wide initiatives. These are often group or collaborative projects. Examples could include:

• What are the best methods to prepare teachers for a school-wide one-to-one device launch?
• Do weekly meetings help support first-year teachers?
• Adopting the new formative assessment framework for inquiry-based learning.

Critiques of Action Research

Action research is a fairly new form of acceptable educational research; therefore, educators should be aware of some of the common critiques you may hear when presenting or sharing your research. These critiques can also be easily dealt with in the planning and development of your action research project. The following are three of the most common critiques of action research.

Critique #1: Action research lacks rigor and trustworthiness in comparison to other methodologies…

The rigor of a research project is shaped by the manner in which data collection and analysis are conducted in the research process. For example, rigor can develop in data collection by using a variety of research methods to collect data (discussed further in Chapter 6). Sharing data with critical friends and colleagues, or triangulating the data, would demonstrate rigor in the data analysis process. Issues of trustworthiness are raised around the question: Can you be/maintain objectivity when you are conducting research on your own practice? Trustworthiness can be viewed as the strength of the inference made possible by the given research study. Trustworthiness can be achieved primarily through triangulation of data (multiple sources of data) and a clear description of context, participants, processes, and analysis which allows for transferability as a reader. Maintaining a rigorous data collection and analysis process will help with trustworthiness, but also being clear in your epistemological stance and positionality from the beginning of the project also contributes to trustworthiness. Rigor and trustworthiness can easily be addressed through developing a research plan and sticking to it. Adherence to ethical research (IRB) will also add to trustworthiness, we will discuss this in a later chapter.

Critique #2: Action research findings are not generalizable to other educational contexts…

Generalizability is often a concern for quantitative researchers who are trying to solve problems across large portions of the population. Simply put, the action researcher is not concerned with generalizable data that can provide answers to other educators in different contexts (However, it is great if this happens!). The action researcher is primarily concerned with generating knowledge based on the actions within their own situated context. Action research findings are generalizable only within specific situations and within that specific educational context, which is described and considered as part of the research process. Sharing findings could be applicable to educators who are interested or who are in similar circumstances, either locally, nationally, or globally.

Critique #3: Action research is based on a deficit model…

The problem-solving nature of action research may give an appearance that it is based on a deficit model. This is not necessarily the case; however, if researchers are not conscious of deficit thinking or deficit models of thinking, it is possible to engage in action research based on perceived student deficits. From my perspective, developing strategies for solving a problem within a situation with the sole purpose of improving practice is not rooted in deficit thinking, especially if they really generate knowledge. Regardless, researchers need to be aware of deficit thinking and make sure their research questions do not rely on assumptions about students’ weaknesses based on demographic groupings.

What’s Ahead? Thinking about the Stages of Action Research

The models of action research presented in Chapter 1 all described action research as a cyclical process. It is exciting to think about a cyclical process of professional learning to improve your practice; however, it can also be overwhelming to think about the process. We think it is helpful to have some awareness of what may happen during the project, represented in distinct stages, to provide an overview of the whole process. This will help you plan more efficiently, but we think it is also important to be flexible and understand that your project does not always need to follow that order. Here is what to expect:

• Identifying a topic in the educational context
• Reviewing related literature
• Revising the topic
• Developing a research question
• Plan research activities
• Collect data
• Analyze data
• Action implementation
• Reflection on action
• Report, share, or document.

Each of these steps has some brief considerations, yet I would like to discuss these steps in three broad areas of focus due to the overlap of these considerations.

Topic Development

• Researching in Action

Action Implications

Identifying and developing a topic that is important and relevant to your practice is vitally essential. Your topic not only shapes the area of educational knowledge you will contribute to, but it will also shape your research question. It is usually helpful to identify and write down three to five potential topics. In addition to writing the topic down, describe why each topic is important or relevant to you, your practice, your students, and/or your educational context. Then, if you are still having a hard time deciding on a topic, write down the intended benefits for you, your practice, your students, and/or your educational context. It may also be helpful to discuss your ideas with others, to help focus your thoughts and provide another perspective on the feasibility of completing a study on a particular topic, its relevance and implications for practice.

Once you have identified a topic, it is important to conduct a literature review (discussed fully in Chapter 3) to find out what the field of education has researched in regards to your topic. This will help you understand what we know and don’t know about your topic. Once you have conducted a thorough literature review you will feel capable of potentially revising your topic to reflect the knowledge base, and possibly narrow the scope of your project for your own purposes.

Lastly, you will be able to develop a research question (discussed fully in Chapter 4) based on your topic, the reviewed literature, and your intended outcomes.

Researching Action

After you have thoroughly vetted a topic and developed a research question, you will be ready to begin the process of researching your topic in your educational context. In consideration of your research question, you can begin to plan your research activities—when  and how you will conduct the research in your educational context (Chapter 4). This will include a timeline of activities. You will then begin planning your data collection (Chapter 5) methods and fit those into your timeline. You will also need to think about a proposed process, or order for analyzing your data. This may seem strange; however, it helps contribute to the rigor and validity of your study to have a plan that fits within your epistemological stance.

Once your plan is set, you can begin the data collection process. After data collection, you can begin the analysis of the data (Chapter 6).

After you have analyzed your data, you should have some indication as to implications for your research question. You will have the opportunity to reflect on the research, take action, and eventually share or report your findings. Many of you will have reason to change an action in your educational context, whether it is the following week, the next semester, or next school year. This is where the cyclical process of action research can take shape.

Action Research in Action: A Vignette

As a classroom teacher, I was often engaged in action research without realizing it, and typically this process began from reflection. As a graduate student, weekly reflections on the required readings in my Teachers as Researchers course prompted me to identify issues in my classroom to address, either through pedagogical changes or adjustments to my curriculum. In a less formal way, action research naturally emerged as part of my yearly evaluations with administration. In one particular year, after reflecting on my own practice, I realized (rather, admitted) that my junior-level English students did not enjoy our classroom novel studies, resulting in a lack of engagement and poor performance for many of them. The ‘start and stop’ method—where students read a chapter, then stop to either discuss the chapter or take a quiz—did not replicate how people read books, and it is no wonder that it destroyed my students’ desire to engage with the novels they were assigned. This is where action research emerged—I established a driving question for my own classroom problem: How can I adapt whole novel studies to reflect the natural reading process, take into account each students’ reading level, and improve overall reading performance and engagement?

The next step in this process was to find research that already existed on whole novel studies in the classroom and use that information as a catalyst for my own research. I read several examples of alternative methods to whole novel studies, but most of what I could find was based on a middle school classroom. This was good news! It meant, on a large scale, my action research would have a place in the broad educational context by filling an existing void in the information available to classroom teachers. On a small scale, this meant other teachers in my own department could benefit from what I design since a lack of resources exists in this area.

After reading several examples of alternative methods, I adapted the practices that seemed to fit best with my own students and created my own version of how to work with whole novels in the high school English classroom. I implemented this method in two different courses, one of which was considered an ‘advanced’ course, with students at all different reading levels. I tracked their progress in multiple ways and recorded the information on spreadsheets for future use. After a successful first attempt at changing my practice, I presented the findings to my colleagues at a department meeting, and many adapted my method to use in their own classrooms.

Though this example of action research does not reflect a formalized project, it speaks to how teachers naturally engage in the process of questioning and problem-solving to create change for their students. It also demonstrates the value in what teachers discover in their own classrooms. Researchers are often criticized for being too far removed from classroom practice to really understand what teachers need; but teacher researchers have the opportunity to be their own guide and to potentially influence teacher praxis in positive and practical ways.

Action Research Copyright © by J. Spencer Clark; Suzanne Porath; Julie Thiele; and Morgan Jobe is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

No internet connection.

All search filters on the page have been cleared., your search has been saved..

• All content
• Dictionaries
• Encyclopedias
• Expert Insights
• Foundations
• How-to Guides
• Journal Articles
• Little Blue Books
• Little Green Books
• Project Planner
• Tools Directory
• Sign in to my profile My Profile

• Sign in Signed in
• My profile My Profile

Action Research: The Advantages and Limitations of Practice in Responding to Poor People’s Voices Through Microfinance

• By: Irene Banda-Mutalima
• Product: Sage Research Methods Cases Part 2
• Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd
• Publication year: 2018
• Online pub date: January 03, 2018
• Discipline: Sociology
• Methods: Action research , Participatory action research , Theory
• DOI: https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781526442215
• Keywords: livelihoods , loans , microfinance , microfinance institution , rural communities , rural community , small business , urban communities , urban community , Zimbabwe Show all Show less
• Online ISBN: 9781526442215 Copyright: © SAGE Publications Ltd 2018 More information Less information

This case study highlights the importance and limitations of practice on participatory action research. Action research is concerned with action and learning as core themes. In participatory action research, the research community brings in their expertise and participates with the researcher to bring about new knowing while aiming to achieve change. The practitioner researcher has the advantage of basing their research vision on the practice they aim to research on and drawing from those experiences. At the same time, they need to be able to lay aside their value judgments, honed by practice, in order to allow other voices to inform the research. The challenge is maintaining the balance between drawing from those resources and separating themselves from what they know in order to objectively collect and analyze research data. This case study uses data from my 2016 PhD thesis to discuss the research journey with a rural community in Zimbabwe and an urban community in Zambia within the context of providing microfinance loans. The research focus was to listen, learn, and allow the voices of poor people to inform a new approach to lending money for livelihoods support. However, the research lenses were tinted by my experiences as a microfinance practitioner, and this affected and almost deviated the research trajectory. As I recovered from this setback and concluded my research, I learnt the reality of carrying value judgments into the research. This was inevitable, and I needed to have internalized ways of checking the influence of those judgments on the research. Most importantly I learnt the value of taking in all that comes through the research process as outcomes that warrant consideration. I also learnt the value of frequent reference to the methodology protocols as designed at the outset, and consciously accommodate adaptations informed by emerging data.

Action Research: The Advantages and Limitations of Practice in Responding to Poor People’s Voices Through Microfinance

Learning outcomes.

By the end of this case, students should be able to

• Demonstrate how gaps learnt by practitioners as part of their day-to-day work can trigger questions that lend themselves to participatory action research as an approach
• Recognize the need for stepping back from practice to allow objectivity in analysis and take into account new information not familiar in practice
• Utilize opportunities that illuminate elements of research inquiry in order to formulate research questions
• Understand the importance of exploiting all information to hand and emerging data to inform and develop the research process in an ongoing praxis as part of the ethos of participatory research

Starting the Research

In its early days, microfinance was known as microcredit and defined a service that provided access to micro-credit or very small loans to low-income individuals who otherwise would have no access to credit. Microfinance services now include a whole range of financial services such as savings, insurance, money transfer, and micro-pensions. The emergence of this service was favored as a poverty reduction strategy on the assumption that increased access to much-needed capital would improve the micro and small businesses that low-income people conducted, and in turn increase their incomes for better livelihoods. As a microfinance practitioner, I worked with the notion that people living in poverty were active in the marketplace doing some kind of business to earn a living in the absence of paid formal employment. I agreed with conventional knowledge that for a variety of reasons, there was little or no access to credit services for these micro and small businesses, and this limited the extent to which they could grow their businesses. Incremental incomes to help them move out of poverty could only be assured if their businesses were growing. Conventional banks are often averse to lending to these small businesses due to the low returns compared to the high risks. Thus, microfinance presents a solution that seemed appropriate in bridging the financing gap that would propel poor people’s businesses to growth, thereby increasing their incomes.

I worked for a microfinance institution that strategically located itself in poor neighborhoods, as most do, and targeted micro-and small businesses. Typically, these would be a woman selling vegetables from their homestead or by the roadside; an individual running an Internet café; an artisan producing household furniture; or an small engineering firm dealing in sophisticated gadgets or software. The owners of these microenterprises would typically be more concerned with their own day-to-day survival and therefore mostly classified as poor. We used proxy methods to identify and target poor people for microfinance loans. These methods would include assessing the number and nutritional value of meals they had in a day, whether they could afford basic services like health and taking children to school, level of household goods or assets they had, and the type of business they conducted. With the right targeting, we provided credit to increase business earnings for improved livelihoods and pathways out of poverty.

Using Practitioner Knowledge to Identify Research Gaps

In the early years, impact assessments on our clients revealed positive changes that had taken place in their lives, and attributed these to the microfinance intervention. While this was good news, I remained skeptical about our capacity to sustain positive results in poor people’s lives for the long term. The basis of my skepticism was that two crucial outcomes were expected of microfinance managers, and these were not complimentary, but often at odds with one another: the efficient running of microfinance institutions and ensuring that microfinance work translated into transformative outcomes in poor people’s lives. In practice, tracking livelihood improvements was far removed from management focus where decisions were made. Managers were more concerned with the wellbeing of their institutions as well as meeting external stakeholder expectations such as reporting to donor and/or investors and regulatory compliance.

Across the industry, microfinance suffered from various challenges including weak management capacity to ably sustain microfinance institutions ( Lascelles, 2008 ). In my practice, I noted that the welfare of poor clients was mostly a subject of scrutiny in as far as loan repayments were concerned and not necessarily whether our services were indeed moving them out of poverty. As I scoured other literature, I found increasing criticism regarding the efficacy of microfinance. Occasionally, I took time away from my management responsibilities to visit clients with field staff. A conversation with one loan officer was very revealing. She told me that her client selection criteria were not necessarily on the basis of the poverty status of the client but more on their capacity to re-pay the loan. She felt that since her performance would be judged by the quality of her loan portfolio signified by the level of loan repayments, it was in her best interest to avoid people she considered risky, and inadvertently, these happened to be poor people. They constituted the reason for our existence, but clearly were being avoided. This finding was corroborated by a study done on 112 Loan Officers of 21 MFIs in Burundi whose findings were that “on average Burundian loan officers’ preferences are not shaped by the pro-social mission of microfinance … wealthier applicants are preferred to the poorer … ” ( Sagamba, Shchetinin, & Yusupov, 2013 , p. 188).

Though our aim was to help people move out of poverty, the methods we used were skewed toward managing institutional risks associated with serving poor people. For example, serving poor people in groups enabled the institution to ride on community cohesion as one way of securing the loan in the absence of usable collateral. Self-selection among group members served to exclude those considered untrustworthy, and thus ensured loan repayments for the benefit of the institution. Also one loan officer was able to attend to several people in a group, thereby containing institutional costs. Criticisms ensued with some studies showing that clients were unhappy with working in groups and being made to recover money from their delinquent group members. Others questioned the efficacy of microfinance in poverty reduction and called it a failed model ( Mahajan, 2007 ).

We had offered pre-designed products that served institutional needs but seemed short on responding to the articulated needs of poor people. As long as they were paying consistently, we did not prod further. Then they started defaulting on their loan repayments. Good clients became “delinquents,” and we sought ways of collecting what they owed us. Some of the aggressive collection methods fueled further criticism on the deleterious effects of microfinance ( Wilson, 2007 ). I felt the need to hear poor people’s voices and generate new ways of responding to their changing circumstances. I was also aware of the general discourse in development that places great importance on listening to and responding appropriately to poor people’s voices ( Narayan, Chambers, Shah, & Petesch, 2000 ). My ensuing frustration triggered my desire to pursue research, with a component that would inquire on how poor people’s voices could inform my practice.

Selecting a Research Methodology

I sought a research process that would enable me to create dialogue space with a poor community in order to listen and learn as they informed the design of a loan product that would meet their business needs. I would then provide such a loan and continue dialogue through a few loan cycles to facilitate mutual learning and hopefully a change in my microfinance practice. Participatory action research appealed to me because it allows gathering of data “about a social system while simultaneously attempting to change [it]” ( Detardo-Bora, 2004 , p. 241). I had read and understood the planning-action-evaluation spiral of action research. This starts with identifying a general research idea to reach a certain objective followed by planning the course of action and then executing the plan. The researcher then pauses to evaluate the outcomes of the action. Information gleaned from the outcomes informs a subsequent spiral of planning, action, and evaluation.

As a researcher, I had mooted the research idea and needed to figure out how to carry it out. Action research principles recommend a fact-finding process at planning stage, from which action steps can flow. The evaluation following first action determines whether the objective has been achieved and also provides insights to inform next action step or modify overall plan before moving on to next action step as the need may be ( Lewin, 1946 , p. 38). Subsequent cycles become a function of how those insights provide enough of a basis to inform a continuation into the next cycle. The first cycle therefore is just as informative as subsequent cycles.

Generating Research Questions

In identifying the research problem, I had noted that though microfinance loans are meant to improve poor people’s lives, their design and delivery tend to be skewed toward the needs of the microfinance institution with little input from poor people. With critics questioning the efficacy of microfinance, I felt the need to locate the voices of poor people in microfinance. In planning for the research, the aim therefore was to ascertain how poor people’s voices could inform microfinance practitioners in the design and delivery of appropriate loan products. And so my initial research question was as follows:

• How can poor people’s voices inform microfinance practice in the design and delivery of appropriate loan products?

At the time of starting the research, my role as a microfinance practitioner had changed as I had moved from my country Zambia, and I was no longer in direct contact with the poor people who needed loans. My first inclination therefore was to identify a community with previous microfinance interactions, and enable them to inform a loan process. With hindsight, this thinking and approach, would have omitted an important component of the research: how poor people inform processes that contribute to their livelihoods. After all, this whole research was about the impact of microfinance on poor people’s lives, and not about microfinance.

Having clarified that, I sought literature on how poor people articulate their livelihood needs so as to have an informed starting point. The literature review highlighted challenges that poor people experience in articulating their needs and therefore limitations to constructively inform processes that benefit them. These challenges include limited capacity to recognize root causes of poverty, limited education and competence to negotiate livelihood solutions, and systems and structures that alienate them. With this understanding, I still needed to find a community with whom I would explore poor people’s voices informing their livelihood solutions as part of a participatory action research process.

Fortuitously, it was my practice that helped the research move forward. A rural community in Zimbabwe that had achieved food security in time of drought requested the microfinance network I worked for to provide microfinance services. As we did not have an office in Zimbabwe at the time, a decision was made to assess the viability of setting up a community-driven microfinance initiative whose activities would be monitored remotely. I saw this as a research opportunity to find out how this community had informed processes that ultimately led them to food security. This inquiry led to the formulation of what became my first research question:

Analysis of this first question would lead me to the second question (originally the first question):

Sadly, microfinance activities were unable to start in this community as the assessment concluded that remote monitoring of such activities would still require some level of expert support within the community, and this was lacking. However, for my research, this community provided insights on important elements that helped them influence livelihood decisions and actions.

In analyzing the data that I had collected in the rural community, I noted gaps that I could not fill from the information I had collected. For example, the village had secured food security by going back to hardy grains like millet, which could withstand the arid nature of the region. Clearly these hardy crops had been part of this community before and I supposed their relegation had had some impact. Also, I realized that this region had experienced drought in prior years, and yet, it was the drought in this particular year (2004) that triggered remedial actions that culminated in food security. I needed to understand the story in order to make sense of the data I had, and I recognized my own limitations: my practice did not have the tools to analyze that information as we did not delve that deeply into poor people’s lives. I turned to my supervisors who helped me learn about cultural historic activity theory (CHAT or activity theory) as a possible analytical lens. This was the innovation I brought into research on microfinance.

How I used Cultural Historic Activity Theory (Activity Theory)

Activity theory is a tool that enables analysis of human activity within the context of their socio-cultural and socio-historical environment ( Nardi, 1996 ). Engeström uses the following diagram to explain what he calls a human activity system, which is the unit of analysis for activity theory ( Figure 1 ).

Figure 1. A human activity system.

Engeström (2001) .

In this diagram, the outcome of the activity system is the reason for the activity. The subject uses mediating artifacts (tools and signs) within a defined historical and cultural context, and a defined community with rules and a way of operating to reach the desired outcome. The following diagram shows how I utilized this schematic in analyzing the Zimbabwe rural community ( Figure 2 ).

Figure 2. The rural Zimbabwe human activity system.

I started by reviewing the history and culture of the community—the subject—especially as it related to food security. In doing this analysis, I needed to gather more data through literature review. I used search engines especially “google” and “google scholar” to locate relevant literature. I also used JSTOR, the digital library. The new data I collected provided a deeper understanding of the historicity and culture of the community as the subject. I was able to get a sense of their rules and how the community was organized. For example, I gathered that the community had strong structures that had a common link to their ancestors—a strong factor that unified the community and buttressed the culture. The paramount Chief and village headmen had a responsibility to ensure that the communities did not fall into hardships. The structure allowed for points of recourse for the community members.

Also there were divisions of labor with clear mutual benefits—they often worked together in parties. This happened when they needed to build the house of a community member or to prepare a field—it was a community undertaking. Thus, there was a strong sense of mutuality. In analyzing the tools and signs as mediating artifacts, I learnt that the community was inherently farmers and so used those inherent skills and necessary inputs to get to their objective. I also learnt terms like “object-motive” to denote the fact of the unified motive between the community and the leaders, which helped move them in tandem to one goal—food security. In delving into their history, I learnt that the dynamics of industrialization had influenced shifting agricultural production from traditional grains like millet and sorghum to maize—a new crop that was introduced to the region and was ill-suited for the arid climate. Thus, perpetual drought became the disturbance that triggered a need for new ways of securing livelihoods.

I also wanted to understand the peculiarity of the 2004 drought compared to previous year droughts. What was it about this drought that triggered action? As I reviewed the data I had collected, I realized that in the previous years, this community had managed to get by with dwindling harvests. However, in 2004, the gravity of the famine caused them to do things they had not done before: they ended up foraging the forest for tubers and other wild vegetation that they could eat. These data led me to understanding the concept of “critical incident.” Edvardsson explains: “for an incident to be defined as critical, the requirement is that it can be described in detail and that it deviates significantly, either positively or negatively, from what is normally expected” ( Edvardsson, 1992 , p. 18). I realized the critical incident had triggered action, and this knowledge helped me to appreciate the potential of vexing situations becoming normative as people adapt. It therefore made me think about what happens with livelihoods when there is no critical incidence, and informed my thoughts regarding locating proxies for triggers within community dialogue spaces. These data were useful in informing the planning process and defining the first action in the research.

Emerging Research Design

I was thus able to design my research as indicated in Table 1 :

In the selection of the urban community, my circumstances had changed again, and I was back in Zambia. I knew of a community that I had worked with before and had been part of a community-driven microfinance initiative. I thought they would be a good fit for the research. Early conversations with this group mirrored the analysis of the rural community in Zimbabwe using activity theory. In responding to the first question of how this urban community had influenced actions that benefit their livelihoods, it became clear that their urban existence did not provide the same support systems that the rural community had. The community members had come into the urban areas from different ethnic groups, and this stripped them of shared cultural and historical connectedness. Their livelihoods were based on either finding employment or engaging in petty businesses wherever opportunities arose. To a large extent, this community depended on external factors for their livelihoods. As urban dwellers, almost all of them had migrated from their villages in pursuit of paid employment. Unemployment attracted other interventions from the government and donors. This support was not consistent and made their livelihoods very precarious. Rural to urban migration had opened them up to dependency on structures that were beyond their control, and did not give them necessary points of recourse. The following diagram shows that ( Figure 3 ).

Figure 3. A livelihoods continuum ( Banda-Mutalima, 2016 ).

I noted that community leaders in this urban area were chosen either by government functionaries or donors who sought to build grassroots structures. The commitment of these leaders to the community welfare did not seem to provide for reliable livelihood support as the group that participated in the research consistently lamented.

The Emerging Analytical Framework

A comparison of the two data sets identified the necessity of community dialogue spaces that would help navigate the livelihoods landscape. This culminated into an analytical framework that defined a community dialogue space with the following characteristics:

• The Context : The community context should enable individual and collective agency. Individuals should have enough space within which to articulate their needs.
• The Structure : The structure should enable community members to know how to handle vexing situations, who to go to, and provide a dependable point of recourse.
• The Object-Motive Alignment : The motives of the leaders and those being led need to be aligned to ensure commonly owned solutions that are mutually beneficial.
• Ability to Identify Problems : The community should have the right competence to identify underlying livelihood problems to come up with appropriate solutions that last.
• The Action Trigger : To avoid relying on critical incidences, communities should be able to define acceptable livelihoods. This points to strong and benevolent leadership that would determine certain livelihood standards below which action would need to be taken.

The Enemy in Me—Deviating From the Methodology

The next action step in the research was with the urban group to inform the design and delivery of the loan product they preferred in response to the second research question:

During the research, I had unwittingly internalized how the research would work out on the basis of my microfinance practice. The Group Loan process follows a cyclical pattern where the first step is group formation followed by assessment of loan amounts needed. Once the loan is given, field staff monitor repayment and review the group for coherence in order to provide higher loans once existing ones had been paid off. Consequent cycles attract incremental loan amounts as the group continues to cohere to the satisfaction of the microfinance institution. Group coherence serves as loan collateral in the absence of usable assets that can serve as collateral ( Figure 4 ).

Figure 4. Group loan process in microfinance.

This visual representation played into my application of the research methodology, and I planned to go through at least 2 loan cycles with the urban community. The information gathered would inform the research process in designing a better loan product. My internalization of this part of the research was wholly dependent on my microfinance experience and did not take into account the research trajectory as outlined in the research plan.

The group proceeded to design the type of loan they wanted to suit their needs. They also designed a follow-up process that would trigger the second loan cycle with the idea of learning through these processes. I noted that group members varied loan conditions on the basis of what they knew about microfinance loans and not necessarily on the basis of their needs. For example, previous loans had been given as a factor of the savings they would have made. Those that had saved the equivalent of US$10 would be given US$20. The group felt that amount was too little though they could not justify from their business situation why they needed the larger loans they asked for. For this research, they increased the repayment period to 9 months as opposed to the 6 months they had previously been allowed. Again there was little justification on that variance. From my experience, these modifications would not have been allowed. In any case, microfinance products were pre-packaged and not necessarily offering poor people options for variations. However, in the interest of responding to their voices to allow for learning, the research process allowed these variations.

The group had earlier formulated rules to govern the way they conducted their affairs. This is normally a standard expectation for groups in microfinance. One of the requirements was the 1-hr weekly meetings to provide feedback on their businesses and to discuss any other pertinent issues. However, the group members stopped meeting consistently once they got the loan. In time, they stopped meeting altogether though they repaid the loans in full. I was concerned that the research outcomes would not be achieved in terms of getting to the second and third loan cycle, as I imagined the research methodology would have been. By stopping the meetings, the group had effectively ended the research and therefore subsequent loan cycle would not happen. I had not prepared myself to conclude the research in this way. I was distraught.

Getting Back on the Tracks

I shared my frustration with my supervisors and in that conversation I realized that what had happened was an important outcome that I needed take into account in my data analysis. It is at this point that I realized that my focus had been influenced by the cyclical nature of the group lending process in microfinance, and this had inadvertently become to me a representation of the research methodology. In so doing, I had deviated from the research trajectory that I had set at the beginning. This realization brought me back on track, and my research trajectory reflected the following table ( Figure 5 ).

Figure 5. Participatory action research spirals.

I was then able to proceed with analysis using the analytical framework I had developed from comparing findings of analysis of the two communities using activity theory. I was able to conclude the research.

The Advantages and Limitations I Experienced

In recognizing the challenge of microfinance interventions that target livelihood improvements without engaging those living with poverty, I had identified a gap that I could inquire on in the research. Because I wanted to listen to poor people’s voices, the choice of participatory action research seemed appropriate and with it a recognition of critical barriers that poor people experience in articulating their needs. These informed the focus of the fact-finding mission in rural Zimbabwe to respond to the first research question. My microfinance practice could not help me analyze these data, and I found a solution in using activity theory, normally used in the education field. The input of my supervisor was critical in this regard. The findings from the rural community informed the overall plan and helped develop the research design. I brought an innovation into the research through the use of activity theory, which had not been used in microfinance before and largely used in education. Activity theory enabled me to ask the critical question of how to enliven poor people’s voices, which ordinarily would have little or no purchase. Understanding the context of the communities where poor people live highlighted the extent to which those voices can influence actions that benefit them.

In this research, I realized that the urban group had a very weak support system. The dialogue space I had created for the research was going to be temporary. The fact that group members stopped meeting after they got the loan, underscored the temporariness of this dialogue space. On the other hand, the rural community in Zimbabwe had a much stronger support system and inherent livelihood solutions based on farming. Their dialogue space was part of their culture and food production part of their heritage as farmers.

In the final analysis, I was able to conclude my research with a variety of key findings such as:

• Identifying the value of genuine dialogue space where poor can influence actions that are beneficial to them.
• Recognizing that due to limited capacity to understand root causes of poverty, and lack of informed competence to negotiate livelihood solutions, the efficacy of poor people’s voices would be compromised even where notional dialogue space was afforded.
• Recognizing the need for intra-community dialogue that would generate livelihood needs for dialogue with service providers like microfinance institutions.
• Appreciating that microfinance practitioners are beholden to the expectations of their institutions and that ensuring social impacts would always take second place. Thus, it would be important for them to engage with community leaders that have access to functional community dialogue spaces for livelihood support. This is indicated in the following diagram ( Figure 6 ):

Figure 6. Microfinance interacting with communities ( Banda-Mutalima, 2016 ).

As I reflect on this process, I realized that the combination of my frustration with microfinance and the passion to find better options for poor people served to cloud my judgments and almost derailed the research because I temporarily shifted from the research protocols. When I started the research process, I was clear about how I would observe the planning, action, and evaluation process in pursuit of action research principles. However, once I got to the part of providing the loan, the habit of practice kicked in and I expected to go through the full lending process through several cycles.

I had also taken for granted the community’s willingness to participate in the research and assumed they would stick with it till the end we had agreed on. I was quite oblivious to their realities and in my drive to transform my practice had internalized outcomes that would have worked against the spirit of the research to learn from whatever outcome I would be presented with. I came to terms with the voluntary aspect of research participants as an outcome of the research. In the final analysis, I appreciated the advantage that practice offered me in identifying the gaps that triggered the research. I also learnt how to step back from what I know to allow interaction with the research data through the research process.

Exercises and Discussion Questions

• 1. Microfinance managers are expected to ensure proper management of their institutions as well as oversee services that bring about transformation in poor people’s lives. Discuss this dichotomy in the context of research. What would be the key considerations?
• 2. Though participatory action research was the preferred methodology, engaging poor people’s voices became a challenge. The researcher realized that poor people’s circumstances posed serious limitations to effective participation. Discuss other research options that could have served the purpose.
• 3. This research developed an understanding of community dialogue spaces that can enable poor people to articulate their needs in order to influence beneficial processes. How would poor people go about ensuring they are heard and that their voices influence decisions for their benefit?
• 4. This case pointed to the concept of critical incident as a trigger for action. Discuss your experiences with situations that show critical incidences in play and how those compare with what is discussed in this case.
• 5. The urban community that received a loan they had prescribed stopped meeting as agreed once they got the loan. What do you make of that and how would you have dealt with it?
• 6. Analysis using activity theory enabled a deeper understanding of the historic and cultural context of the communities, which had a bearing on arriving at livelihood solutions. Discuss the use of activity theory in this regard and what the outcomes might have been in its absence.

Further Reading

Web resources, sign in to access this content, get a 30 day free trial, more like this, sage recommends.

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile so that you can save clips, playlists and searches

• Sign in/register

Navigating away from this page will delete your results

Please save your results to "My Self-Assessments" in your profile before navigating away from this page.

Sign in to my profile

Sign up for a free trial and experience all Sage Learning Resources have to offer.

You must have a valid academic email address to sign up.

Get off-campus access

• View or download all content my institution has access to.

Sign up for a free trial and experience all Sage Research Methods has to offer.

• view my profile
• view my lists

Innovative Education in VT

A blog exploring innovative, personalized, student-centered school change

Why do action research?

5 benefits of doing action research in the classroom.

Teachers are constantly tinkering, creating, learning, and growing. Action research is a slightly formalized version of what skilled teachers do every day.

By honoring action research as systematic professional inquiry, we empower teachers to improve their practice. It’s easy to get started undertaking a small, powerful action research project in your classroom. Let’s see what it can look like.

What it looks like and why it’s worth it

Classrooms are complex social environments. In addition to subject matter and developmental expertise, teachers possess very specific knowledge about the learning dynamics of a classroom. Teachers understand that everything from the culture of the school to the current dating status of particular class members may influence the success of a lesson.

This complexity means that large-scale education research has limited applicability on a day-to-day basis. There are just too many contextual factors affecting the implementation of any generalized approach. This means that most of the daily dilemmas of teaching, top-down policies and large-scale research are not detailed or nuanced enough to be useful.

Here are 5 benefits of doing action research in the classroom

1. action research powers professional growth.

Action research is a powerful form of teacher-driven professional development.

In Action Research for Professional Development , Jane McNiff suggests starting with the question “How do I improve my work?” She argues that action research is fundamentally a professional improvement strategy.

At the Middle Grades Institute each summer, participants seeking graduate credit use the Institute to launch their action research. Then, they present their findings to peers at a statewide gathering in January of each year.

2. Action research makes change manageable

Action research helps teachers focus on one aspect of their practice they would like to improve. Specific questions and a finite time period bind each iteration. This ensures natural pauses for reflection and planning.

Victoria Smith, a Language Arts teacher at Crossett Brook Middle School in Waterbury, Vermont, focused her research on a single unit where she experimented with a choice model which had been inspired by the art teacher at her school .

Michael Crocker, at The Cabot School, in Cabot VT, focused his research on a single day. He examined whether and how digital devices could enhance a field trip.

In the rapidly shifting world of education, action research helps prioritize which changes are worthy of extra attention. Action researchers pick a slice of their practice and dive into the research literature, then they use data to evaluate success and draw conclusions.

3. Action research promotes collaboration

The systematic nature of action research promotes purposeful collaboration.

A team from Hazen Union Middle School, in Hardwick, Vermont, sought to create a new interdisciplinary unit called “I Belong,” so they worked together on an action research project to document and study the results .

Educators can also collaborate between schools to share and compare related approaches. Check out this study looking at how student goal-setting is enhanced by digital tools , conducted by educators from Wallingford Elementary School and Shrewsbury Mountain School, in central Vermont.

4. Action research loves being shared

If you’ve ever wondered how to improve a certain aspect of your practice, then it’s entirely likely another teacher is wondering how to improve that exact same aspect of their own practice.

Get together and share

The Middle Grades Conference each January provides a venue for discussing action research and professional learning by teachers from around the state. Educators prepare presentations showcasing their driving question as well as the method they used to investigate it. They also prepare a short summary of their findings. The topics they pursue impact not only their own teaching but also intersect with issues and initiatives affecting teachers statewide.

Educators at Mill River Union High School showcased both the qualitative —

and quantitative —

nature of their action research project. It examined the effect of formal professional development on the amount and nature of tech integration at the school.

In my experience, it is one of the best conferences to attend or at which to present. It’s a low-key way for educators to be seen as and receive recognition for, being experts in their classrooms. It also gives educators a way to peer into other classrooms and see solutions to common issues in teaching.

Get a chance to publish

Sam Nelson, a social studies teacher at Shelburne Community School in Vermont, recently published his action research in the journal Middle Grades Review . The article details his evolution in creating opportunities for students to practice within a proficiency-based learning environment.

5. Action research can power systems change

The share-ability of action research makes it a useful vehicle for influencing school and district policy, as argued in this ASCD article, Guiding School Improvement with Action Research .

That Mill River Union High School study on the effectiveness of professional development allowed the team to document the positive impact of intensive professional learning. The results allowed them to  advocate for continued support moving forward.

Similarly, a team at Lamoille Union Middle School pioneered Student Led Conferences at the school. Their thorough data collection showed nearly unanimous support by parents and students, providing a strong rationale to expand the practice.

Experts in systemic change recognize that rapid cycles of experimentation and evaluation are more effective than detailed long term action planning. Some schools are even incorporating action research into their evaluation system.

The call to action (research)

Imagine the transformative potential if all teachers have the time and support to conduct action research. In the mean time, I hope that you have the chance to engage in professional inquiry that will benefit you, your teaching, and your students.

Next week, we’re going to break down the action research process into workable steps, so that wherever you are with your practice, you can begin designing your own small, manageable action research project to power up your teaching. Until then, consider the starting point, and think of one aspect of your teaching practice you’d like to improve.

What will you research?

Related posts.

How to get started with action research

Unpacking a great action research project

#vted Reads: with Alex Shevrin Venet

Top 10 ways to spend a snow day

#vted Reads: The Successful Middle School

What's your inquiry question?

• ← 8 methods for reflection in project-based learning
• Assessment in Proficiency-Based Classrooms →

Life LeGeros

Life has worked in various roles in K-12 education, including classroom teacher, assistant principal, math department head, state agency administrator, and school board teacher representative. His dissertation focused on the impact of math teachers' knowledge on the growth of their students. He believes in teacher leadership, student empowerment, and challenging the status quo. He loves being immersed in tech-rich and outdoor environments, though not simultaneously. Find him on Twitter @lifelegeros.

4 thoughts on “ Why do action research? ”

Pingback: Phys ed 2.0: More learning, less suffering - Innovation: Education

I get a lot of information, thanks

thanks for post.

Action research is very relevant in business because there is always room for improvement with running a business. Action research offers opportunity for continued ideas. In business, the goal is to improve processes. Action research is beneficial in settings in which continued improvement is the focus.

Thanks for sharing

What do you think? Cancel reply

• Privacy Policy

Pros and Cons of Action Research

Action research.

            Action research involves methodical observation, data collection for purposes of reflection, decision-making, and development of efficient strategies in the classrooms. Action research consists of phases including selecting an area of focus, data collection, data organization, analysis and interpretation of data, study of professional literature, and the last step is taking action. This study aims at analyzing the pros and cons of action research. This will aid in understanding the benefits accrued by practitioners as well as shortfalls of action research.

What is Action Research

Action research is a process of practitioners checking their work to confirm if it is as good as they want. As action research is done by, the practitioner is often referred to practitioner-based research or even self reflecting practice as it entails checking the effectiveness of work done personally (Dick 440). Action 5 research is not a replacement of quasi-experimental research but acts as a means of finding out results where other research paradigms may not be effective. This is due to the difference in the conditions inherent with different research conditions for the choice of a research paradigm to be utilized. Action analysis is primarily used to examine an ongoing situation in a work environment, for example. A choice of a research paradigm depends on it being able to meet the methodology and goals of the research.

Advantages of Action Research

Action research, as a paradigm, was mainly used for the improvement of the teaching profession, which is the main reason for pros and cons of action research examples being centered on education. Action research pros use action analysis as a basic method for improving the efficiency of service delivery in a sector in meeting needs and demands. Action research can be carried out in a teaching organization to allow teachers to recognize their weaknesses and improve on them in order to increase student experience. It will also aid in improving the effectiveness of teaching as a measure of making teachers efficiency in imparting knowledge and development on the students. Action research also aids in the building of a professional culture in the profession of the practitioners. This is possible owing to the better understanding of the practices in the profession that will be effective in meeting the needs and inculcated by practitioners for the development of the culture.

Action study also has the benefit of the the problem-solving skills of the professional within and without their service centers. For teachers, this is possible through an interactive process of the augmented process of the teachers to be analytical in the course of taking part in research. Action research aids teachers to be more reflective of the situation they are faced in and the ability of meeting the requirements of the students. Another prerequisite for action research is critical analysis of own teaching styles and methods. The consequence of incorporation of critical evaluation of teaching styles, analysis, and reflection results in the ability of the teachers to solve problems.

Action research has the ability of sharpening reasoning abilities of the practitioner and aids them in the development of measures of self monitoring to augment performance effectiveness. Through action research, teachers become more aware of their teaching practices, the difference between practice and beliefs, thoughts, feelings, and learning of their pupils. This allows them to tailor their teaching in a well reasoned and with high skill to meet the learning requirements of their pupils. Action research also aids in the ability of teachers to focus on student explanation and conceptions. This is brought about by the fact that action research involves collecting data on student’s understanding and thinking, making teachers understand the students better (Calhoun 33)

The research base of practitioners augments with participation in action research. This is due to collection of literature in literature review part of the action research on the main objective of the research. In teaching profession, the teacher will have a better understanding of the teaching process and will enable them to improve their teaching methods even if they do not eventually conduct the research. The other advantage of is that it aids in the general development of the work environment as it leads to the development of better work practices and strategies for service delivery and duty performance. There is involvement in action research groups in the course of participation in action research that leads to the generation of a new social setting. This is whereby ne relations are created, establishment of dialogue and profession practices, challenging and translating to change and modification. This change results in better practices and beliefs in the profession, which results on better development of the profession and creation of an effective workforce (Balnaves & Caputi 45).

Action research aids in improvement of confidence among practitioners in the course of the performance of their duties. As an example, action research augments a teacher’s confidence through learning various ways they are able to change lives and the importance of their jobs and it improves their confidence in their teaching ability. This improved confidence by the teachers gives them professional self-assurance, which is a main factor in the ability of continuous development of the teaching profession. The main way this is developed by action research is having better knowledge of education issues, formulating significant matters on the issues, and reviews them for the development of education practices (Balnaves & Caputi 24s).

In regards to the teaching profession, the other advantage of action research is that it is regarded as the only viable and coherent way of addressing curriculum development, evaluation and professional development. This is duty to the critical nature of action research on the state of the teaching profession as there is the application of critical theory for the completion of action (Dick 430).

Disadvantages of Action Research

The main disadvantage of action research is that the practitioner evaluates himself or herself. There is a risk in the benefits of action research in this case on the student selection criteria, objectivity in selecting the participants by the practitioner. There may raise a problem in action research if there exists coercion or voluntary selection of the participants is also a problem, honesty in the answers given by the participants is also in doubt, this is due to the presence of fear of repercussions that may arise after the research. This reduces the ability of action research to meet the required needs as there may not be presented the true picture of the situation because of personal evaluation by the teacher (Coghlan,  & Brannik 23).

The other disadvantage of action research is the validity in writing and presentation of the final report by the practitioner. A practitioner may not give a correct report owing to matters that may not be good for the profession including a conclusion that may be critical of their methods of practice. The practitioner may not be willing to write this in the final report; hence, the validity of the report will be in doubt. The other matter is the objectivity in writing of report, as the practitioner may not be able to separate personal issues, and write the report in an objective manner as these touches on his /her profession. This will also affect the ability to deliver a report that is objective, efficient, and of high quality. The last matter for this assertion is if the practitioner will be willing to take corrective action on findings of the report. A recommendation for a change in teaching style may not augur well with the educator because many people love the status quo and there is a very strong resistance to change in all workplaces (Parsons & Kimberlee 29).

The other disadvantage of action research is that the results in action research cannot be generalized. The results can only be applicable to the portion of the population studied and the exact system. The other disadvantage of action research is that it is more difficult to conduct than conventional research as it takes longer and requirements refinement of the methodology as the research continues.

In conclusion, action research has a number of advantages including improved effectiveness, culture development, increases learning and improved confidence for the development of the practitioner in effective service delivery . However, action research has a number of disadvantages including lack of isolation between action research and personal issues, harder than conventional research, lack of generalization and objectivity problems. Despite the stated setbacks, action research has far more advantages than disadvantages making in an effective tool in augmenting service delivery, development of professionalism and the creation of better policies and rules at the workplace. Understanding of the workplace environment and the practitioners as well as quality of service are the other benefits accrued from action research making it an important component in organizational development.

References;

• Balnaves, M., & Caputi, P., 2001, Introduction to quantitative research methods, California: Sage Thousand Oaks.
• Calhoun, E., 1994, “ How to Use Action Research in the Self-Renewing School.” Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Coghlan, D., & Brannik, T., 2005, Doing Action Research in your Organisation , London: Sage Publicaions.
• Dick, B,. 2006, Action Research Literature, Action Research , 4(4), 439-458.
• Dick, B., 2004, Action Research Literature: Themes and Trends, Action Research , 2(4), 425- 444.
• Parsons, D., & Kimberlee, S., 2002, Teacher as Reflective Practitioner and Action Researcher . Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Related Posts

Anton kreil – trading masterclass course: an over-review, the legal path: navigating road accident claims with..., these are the best chess openings for black, how to edit an essay well, busted for dui your comprehensive guide to legal..., navigating legal waters: a guide on when to..., how to tackle and resolve website challenges, how to choose the right it service provider..., distance learning: shaping the landscape of modern education, what happens in divorce court understanding the legal....

Hi How can i reference this?, the date, author?

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Please enter an answer in digits:

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples

What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples

Published on 27 January 2023 by Tegan George . Revised on 21 April 2023.

Table of contents

Types of action research, action research models, examples of action research, action research vs. traditional research, advantages and disadvantages of action research, frequently asked questions about action research.

There are 2 common types of action research: participatory action research and practical action research.

• Participatory action research emphasises that participants should be members of the community being studied, empowering those directly affected by outcomes of said research. In this method, participants are effectively co-researchers, with their lived experiences considered formative to the research process.
• Practical action research focuses more on how research is conducted and is designed to address and solve specific issues.

Both types of action research are more focused on increasing the capacity and ability of future practitioners than contributing to a theoretical body of knowledge.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Action research is often reflected in 3 action research models: operational (sometimes called technical), collaboration, and critical reflection.

• Operational (or technical) action research is usually visualised like a spiral following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”
• Collaboration action research is more community-based, focused on building a network of similar individuals (e.g., college professors in a given geographic area) and compiling learnings from iterated feedback cycles.
• Critical reflection action research serves to contextualise systemic processes that are already ongoing (e.g., working retroactively to analyse existing school systems by questioning why certain practices were put into place and developed the way they did).

Action research is often used in fields like education because of its iterative and flexible style.

After the information was collected, the students were asked where they thought ramps or other accessibility measures would be best utilised, and the suggestions were sent to school administrators. Example: Practical action research Science teachers at your city’s high school have been witnessing a year-over-year decline in standardised test scores in chemistry. In seeking the source of this issue, they studied how concepts are taught in depth, focusing on the methods, tools, and approaches used by each teacher.

Action research differs sharply from other types of research in that it seeks to produce actionable processes over the course of the research rather than contributing to existing knowledge or drawing conclusions from datasets. In this way, action research is formative , not summative , and is conducted in an ongoing, iterative way.

As such, action research is different in purpose, context, and significance and is a good fit for those seeking to implement systemic change.

Action research comes with advantages and disadvantages.

• Action research is highly adaptable , allowing researchers to mould their analysis to their individual needs and implement practical individual-level changes.
• Action research provides an immediate and actionable path forward for solving entrenched issues, rather than suggesting complicated, longer-term solutions rooted in complex data.
• Done correctly, action research can be very empowering , informing social change and allowing participants to effect that change in ways meaningful to their communities.

Disadvantages

• Due to their flexibility, action research studies are plagued by very limited generalisability  and are very difficult to replicate . They are often not considered theoretically rigorous due to the power the researcher holds in drawing conclusions.
• Action research can be complicated to structure in an ethical manner . Participants may feel pressured to participate or to participate in a certain way.
• Action research is at high risk for research biases such as selection bias , social desirability bias , or other types of cognitive biases .

Action research is conducted in order to solve a particular issue immediately, while case studies are often conducted over a longer period of time and focus more on observing and analyzing a particular ongoing phenomenon.

Action research is focused on solving a problem or informing individual and community-based knowledge in a way that impacts teaching, learning, and other related processes. It is less focused on contributing theoretical input, instead producing actionable input.

Action research is particularly popular with educators as a form of systematic inquiry because it prioritizes reflection and bridges the gap between theory and practice. Educators are able to simultaneously investigate an issue as they solve it, and the method is very iterative and flexible.

A cycle of inquiry is another name for action research . It is usually visualized in a spiral shape following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”

Sources for this article

We strongly encourage students to use sources in their work. You can cite our article (APA Style) or take a deep dive into the articles below.

George, T. (2023, April 21). What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 25 March 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/action-research-cycle/

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education (8th edition). Routledge.

Naughton, G. M. (2001).  Action research (1st edition). Routledge.

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, primary research | definition, types, & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, what is an observational study | guide & examples.

• STEM Ambassadors
• School trusts
• ITE and governors
• Invest in schools
• STEM careers inspiration
• Benefits and impact
• Our supporters
• Become a STEM Ambassador
• Request a STEM Ambassador
• Employer information
• Training and support
• STEM Ambassadors Partners
• Working with community groups
• Search icon
• Join the STEM Community

What is action research, and why do it?

STEM learning

Action research in education is research carried out by teachers in their own schools and classrooms.

It is useful in several ways:

• action research can provide one of the highest levels of structured personal reflection for a teacher in terms of their own practice.
• for those teachers who want to try something out, but don’t know how well it will suit their children, school, wider environment or their teaching style, it provides evidence of impact.
• you may come across a great idea, programme or other innovation, backed by evidence of success elsewhere, but wonder whether this would work in your school? Action research can provide this evidence. The evidence can then be used to persuade colleagues, as well as senior management, to roll out the innovation beyond your own classroom, and even beyond your own school.

As with any research, you need to spend time working out exactly what it is you want to know, and create a research question that provides a tight focus for your data collection. You may find it easy to start with quite a broad research question, then list a series of ‘sub questions’ from which to select.

How do you collect your evidence?

Use similar methods to more formalised research, but tailored to meet your school’s needs. For example, you can devise simple questionnaires; paper-based or online, using tools such as Survey Monkey, to collect information and perceptions. Questionnaires can be sent to pupils, teachers, parents and governors both before and after the implementation of a new strategy.

The questionnaire design is crucial. It is always a good idea to pilot the questionnaire with a small number of people, before unleashing it on all your intended audience. This way, you can find out whether the questions are measuring what you intended them to measure. Questions should be carefully crafted to ensure that they will successfully measure the successes and difficulties faced by the implementation of the innovation/strategy.

You may also wish to collect data/evidence via classroom observations. To avoid simply watching ‘everything’ that is happening in a classroom during the innovation, try to devise an observation schedule. Models exist which can be adapted and tailored to suit your needs, and to focus on the appropriate aspects of your innovation. Involving colleagues in observations is also beneficial. They can check whether the schedule is effective in achieving its aims, and to add to your data/evidence.

Interviews with pupils and/or colleagues are another effective way of collecting data. This is a much more time-consuming approach, as the data often needs transcribing, then analysing to categorize responses. However it does provide rich in-depth results.

Questions should be carefully crafted to ensure that they will successfully measure the successes and difficulties faced by the implementation of the innovation/strategy.

Whatever methods are used, always ensure that you are completely open with everyone involved about the purposes of your research, your intended methodology, and the use of the data you collect. All data should be reported anonymously, unless permission has been given otherwise. People are generally much more likely to answer questions openly and honestly, if given and reported anonymously.

Eight top tips for carrying out your own action research:

• stay small, stay focused
• identify a clear research question (e.g. What is the impact of X on Y?)
• be realistic about what you can do; also be aware that wider change begins with you
• plan carefully
• set a realistic timescale
• involve others – as fellow researchers, as observers
• ensure good ethical practice.
• concentrate on learning, not on the outcomes of action

(From McNiff & Whitehead (2002) Action Research: Principles and Practice)

You can find out more about action research from the following sources and courses:

• Leading Innovation in the primary classroom
• Teachers as Researchers
• Leading Action research in Science Education
• Action Research in Education – Carol Davenport describes how action research can be used as part of a continuous professional development programme.

Action Research: Three Approaches

Benefits of action research, individual teacher research, collaborative action research, schoolwide action research, reflecting on action research.

Allen, J., J. Combs, M. Hendricks, P. Nash, and S. Wilson. (1988). “Studying Change: Teachers Who Became Researchers.” Language Arts 65, 4: 379–387.

Calhoun, E. F. (1992). “A Status Report on Action Research in the League of Professional Schools.” In Lessons from the League: Improving Schools through Shared Governance and Action Research: Vol.2 . Athens, Ga.: Program for School Improvement, College of Education, UGA.

Carr, W., and S. Kemmis. (1983). Becoming Critical: Knowing through Action Research . Geelong, Victoria: Deakin Press.

Corey, S. M. (1953). Action Research to Improve School Practices . New York: Teachers College Press.

Glickman, C. D. (1990). Supervision of Instruction: A Developmental Approach . Boston: Allyn Bacon.

Holly, P. (1991). “Action Research Within Institutional Development: It's Becoming Second Nature to Us Now.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.

Holly, P. (1992). Comments made during an Action Research Workshop in Ames, Iowa.

Joyce, B. R. (1991). “Doors to School Improvement.” Educational Leadership 48, 8: 59–62.

Lewin, K. (1947). “Group Decisions and Social Change.” In Readings in Social Psychology , edited by T. M. Newcomb and E. L. Hartley. New York: Henry Holt.

Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving Social Conflicts: Selected Papers on Group Dynamics . New York: Harper and Row.

Oja, S. N., and L. Smulyan. (1989). Collaborative Action Research: A Developmental Approach . London: Falmer Press.

Rogers, D., R. Haven-O'Donnell, S. Hebdon, and F. Ferrell. (1990). “Lessons on Relating Research, Reflection, and Reform from Three Researcher/Practitioner Projects.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.

Sagor, R. (1991). “What Project LEARN Reveals about Collaborative Action Research.” Educational Leadership 48, 6: 6–10.

Schaefer, R. J. (1967). The School as a Center of Inquiry . New York: Harper and Row.

Sirotnik, K. A. (1987). “Evaluation in the Ecology of Schooling.” In The Ecology of School Renewal: The Eighty-Sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education , edited by J. I. Goodlad. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Strickland, D. S. (1988). “The Teacher As Researcher: Toward the Extended Professional.” Language Arts 65, 8: 754–764.

Tikunoff, W. J., and J. R. Mergendoller. (1983). “Inquiry as a Means to Professional Growth: The Teacher as Researcher.” In Staff Development: Eighty-Second Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education , edited by G. A. Griffin. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Whitford, B. L., P. C. Schlechty, and L. G. Shelor. (1987). “Sustaining Action Research Through Collaboration: Inquiries for Invention.” Peabody Journal of Education 64, 3: 151–169.

Emily F. Calhoun directs The Phoenix Alliance, based in St. Simons Island, Georgia. A specialist in language arts and action research, she divides her time between extensive school renewal programs and research on teaching and action research.

ASCD is a community dedicated to educators' professional growth and well-being.

Let us help you put your vision into action., from our issue.

To process a transaction with a Purchase Order please send to [email protected]

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Creating a Corporate Social Responsibility Program with Real Impact

• Emilio Marti,
• David Risi,
• Eva Schlindwein,
• Andromachi Athanasopoulou

Lessons from multinational companies that adapted their CSR practices based on local feedback and knowledge.

Exploring the critical role of experimentation in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), research on four multinational companies reveals a stark difference in CSR effectiveness. Successful companies integrate an experimental approach, constantly adapting their CSR practices based on local feedback and knowledge. This strategy fosters genuine community engagement and responsive initiatives, as seen in a mining company’s impactful HIV/AIDS program. Conversely, companies that rely on standardized, inflexible CSR methods often fail to achieve their goals, demonstrated by a failed partnership due to local corruption in another mining company. The study recommends encouraging broad employee participation in CSR and fostering a culture that values CSR’s long-term business benefits. It also suggests that sustainable investors and ESG rating agencies should focus on assessing companies’ experimental approaches to CSR, going beyond current practices to examine the involvement of diverse employees in both developing and adapting CSR initiatives. Overall, embracing a dynamic, data-driven approach to CSR is essential for meaningful social and environmental impact.

By now, almost all large companies are engaged in corporate social responsibility (CSR): they have CSR policies, employ CSR staff, engage in activities that aim to have a positive impact on the environment and society, and write CSR reports. However, the evolution of CSR has brought forth new challenges. A stark contrast to two decades ago, when the primary concern was the sheer neglect of CSR, the current issue lies in the ineffective execution of these practices. Why do some companies implement CSR in ways that create a positive impact on the environment and society, while others fail to do so? Our research reveals that experimentation is critical for impactful CSR, which has implications for both companies that implement CSR and companies that externally monitor these CSR activities, such as sustainable investors and ESG rating agencies.

• EM Emilio Marti is an assistant professor at the Rotterdam School of Management (RSM) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
• DR David Risi is a professor at the Bern University of Applied Sciences and a habilitated lecturer at the University of St. Gallen. His research focuses on how companies organize CSR and sustainability.
• ES Eva Schlindwein is a professor at the Bern University of Applied Sciences and a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Oxford. Her research focuses on how organizations navigate tensions between business and society.
• AA Andromachi Athanasopoulou is an associate professor at Queen Mary University of London and an associate fellow at the University of Oxford. Her research focuses on how individuals manage their leadership careers and make ethically charged decisions.

Partner Center

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Biden Signs Executive Order to Expand Research on Women’s Health

The president said that improving women’s health was crucial to ensuring a healthy, stable economy.

Biden Signs Executive Order to Boost Women’s Health Research

The executive order is aimed at addressing the underrepresentation of women in health research..

We’ve launched the first ever White House initiative on women’s health research to pioneer the next generation of scientific research and discovery in women’s health. Think of all the breakthroughs we’ve made in medicine across the board, but women have not been the focus. And today — [applause] today, we’re jumpstarting that investment by dedicating $200 million in the National Institutes of Health to tackle some of the most pressing health problems facing women today. With the executive order I’m about to sign, I’m directing the most comprehensive set of executive actions ever taken to improve women’s health — ever taken. And I’m going to ensure that women’s health is integrated and prioritized across the entire federal government. It’s not just in women’s health, not just at N.I.H., the National Science Foundation or the Defense Department, the Environmental Protection Agency. I mean, across the board. This is really serious.

By Zolan Kanno-Youngs

Reporting from Washington

President Biden on Monday signed an executive order to expand the federal government’s research into women’s health, including midlife conditions like menopause, arthritis and heart disease, as well as issues specifically affecting women in the military.

In what the White House described as the “most comprehensive” action by a president on women’s health research, Mr. Biden directed federal agencies to ensure that they are using federal funds to research health conditions and diseases that disproportionately affect women.

Standing alongside the first lady, Jill Biden, and Vice President Kamala Harris, Mr. Biden said improving women’s health was crucial to guaranteeing a healthy, stable economy.

“There’s not a damn thing a man can do a woman can’t do,” Mr. Biden said. “To state the obvious, if you want to have the strongest economy in the world, you can’t leave half of the country behind.”

Carolyn M. Mazure, a psychologist and a professor at the Yale School of Medicine, who is the chairwoman of the White House initiative on Women’s Health Research, told reporters on Sunday night that health conditions like heart disease, Alzheimer’s, menopause and fibroids would be a focus of the expanded research effort.

“I’m not even a betting woman,” said Maria Shriver, the former first lady of California, who also attended the event, “but I’ll bet today that this is the first time a president of the United States has ever signed an executive order that mentions the words ‘menopause’ and ‘women’s midlife health’ in it.”

After the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022 and the Alabama Supreme Court ruled last month that frozen embryos should be considered children , threatening in vitro fertilization, the Biden campaign has increasingly accused Republicans of undermining women’s health. During his State of the Union address this month, Mr. Biden said such decisions would motivate women to vote in the November election, while also saying his White House would commit to investing in women’s health in the year ahead.

“You can’t lead America with old ideas and take us backwards,” Mr. Biden said, adding, “To lead the land of possibilities, you need a vision for the future laying out what we can and should do and what we’re going to do.”

Mr. Biden’s executive order will require agencies to report annually their investments in women’s health research and to study ways that artificial intelligence can be used to advance such research. The National Institutes of Health will increase by 50 percent investments in small businesses focused on women’s health. The Defense Department also plans to invest $10 million to learn more about cancers and mental health issues affecting women in active military service.

The White House has called on Congress to pass a plan to invest $12 billion to create a new fund for women’s health research at the National Institutes of Health. In the meantime, the executive order signed on Monday directed the N.I.H. to spend $200 million on women’s health research. Dr. Biden traveled to Cambridge, Mass., last month to announce the first step of the women’s health initiative: $100 million to support women’s health researchers and start-up companies.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs is a White House correspondent, covering President Biden and his administration. More about Zolan Kanno-Youngs

Skip to Content

Researchers take major step toward developing next-generation solar cells

A technician installs solar panels on the roof of the building which houses the University of Colorado Center for Innovation and Creativity in Boulder.  (Credit: Glenn Asakawa/University of Colorado)  

• Share via Twitter
• Share via Facebook
• Share via LinkedIn
• Share via E-mail

The solar energy world is ready for a revolution. Scientists are racing to develop a new type of solar cell using materials that can convert electricity more efficiently than today’s panels. 

In a new paper published February 26 in the journal Nature Energy, a CU Boulder researcher and his international collaborators unveiled an innovative method to manufacture the new solar cells, known as perovskite cells, an achievement critical for the commercialization of what many consider the next generation of solar technology.

Today, nearly all solar panels are made from silicon, which boast an efficiency of 22%. This means silicon panels can only convert about one-fifth of the sun’s energy into electricity, because the material absorbs only a limited proportion of sunlight’s wavelengths. Producing silicon is also expensive and energy intensive.

Enter perovskite. The synthetic semiconducting material has the potential to convert substantially more solar power than silicon at a lower production cost.

Michael McGehee

“Perovskites might be a game changer,” said Michael McGehee , a professor in the Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering and fellow with CU Boulder’s Renewable & Sustainable Energy Institute. 

Scientists have been testing perovskite solar cells by stacking them on top of traditional silicon cells to make tandem cells. Layering the two materials, each absorbing a different part of the sun’s spectrum, can potentially increase the panels’ efficiency by over 50%.

“We're still seeing rapid electrification, with more cars running off electricity. We’re hoping to retire more coal plants and eventually get rid of natural gas plants,” said McGehee.  “If you believe that we're going to have a fully renewable future, then you're planning for the wind and solar markets to expand by at least five to ten- fold from where it is today.” 

To get there, he said, the industry must improve the efficiency of solar cells.

But a major challenge in making them from perovskite at a commercial scale is the process of coating the semiconductor onto the glass plates which are the building blocks of panels. Currently, the coating process has to take place in a small box filled with non-reactive gas, such as nitrogen, to prevent the perovskites from reacting with oxygen, which decreases their performance.  

“This is fine at the research stage. But when you start coating large pieces of glass, it gets harder and harder to do this in a nitrogen filled box,” McGehee said. 

McGehee and his collaborators set off to find a way to prevent that damaging reaction with the air. They found that adding dimethylammonium formate, or DMAFo, to the perovskite solution before coating could prevent the materials from oxidizing. This discovery enables coating to take place outside the small box, in ambient air. Experiments showed that perovskite cells made with the DMAFo additive can achieve an efficiency of nearly 25% on their own, comparable to the current efficiency record for perovskite cells of 26%. 

The additive also improved the cells’ stability. 

Commercial silicon panels can typically maintain at least 80% of their performance after 25 years, losing about 1% of efficiency per year. Perovskite cells, however, are more reactive and degrade faster in the air. The new study showed that the perovskite cell made with DMAFo retained 90% of its efficiency after the researchers exposed them to LED light that mimicked sunlight for 700 hours. In contrast, cells made in the air without DMAFo degraded quickly after only 300 hours. 

While this is a very encouraging result, there are 8,000 hours in one year, he noted. So longer tests are needed to determine how these cells hold up overtime. 

“It’s too early to say that they are as stable as silicon panels, but we're on a good trajectory toward that,” McGehee said. 

The study brings perovskite solar cells one step closer to commercialization. At the same time, McGehee’s team is actively developing tandem cells with a real-world efficiency of over 30% that have the same operational lifetime as silicon panels. 

McGehee leads a U.S. academic–industry partnership called Tandems for Efficient and Advanced Modules using Ultrastable Perovskites (TEAMUP). Together with researchers from three other universities, two companies and a national laboratory, the consortium received $9 million funding from the U.S. Department of Energy last year to develop stable tandem perovskites that can feasibly be used in the real world and are commercially viable. The goal is to create tandem more efficient than conventional silicon panels and equally stable over a 25-year period. 

With higher efficiency and potentially lower price tags, these tandem cells could have broader applications than existing silicon panels, including potential installation on the roofs of electric vehicles. They could add 15 to 25 miles of range per day to a car left out in the sun, enough to cover many people’s daily commutes. Drones and sailboats could also be powered by such panels.  

After a decade of research in perovskites, engineers have built perovskite cells that are as efficient as silicon cells, which were invented 70 years ago, McGehee said. “We are taking perovskites to the finish line.  If tandems work out well, they certainly have the potential to dominate the market and become the next generation of solar cells,” he said. 

• Climate & Environment

News Headlines

Related articles.

Organic farms decrease and increase pesticide use, study finds

Why water must be at the heart of climate action

Water in the West: Documenting the change

• Arts & Humanities
• Business & Entrepreneurship
• Education & Outreach
• Health & Society
• Law & Politics
• Science & Technology

Campus Community

• Administration
• Announcements & Deadlines
• Career Development
• Getting Involved
• Mind & Body

Events & Exhibits

• Arts & Culture
• Conferences
• Lectures & Presentations
• Performances & Concerts
• Sports & Recreation
• Workshops & Seminars

Subscribe to CUBT

Sign up for Alerts

Administrative eMemos

Buff Bulletin Board

Events Calendar

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Press Releases

Department of Homeland Security Unveils Artificial Intelligence Roadmap, Announces Pilot Projects to Maximize Benefits of Technology, Advance Homeland Security Mission

DHS Will Launch Three Pilot Projects to Test AI Technology to Enhance Immigration Officer Training, Help Communities Build Resilience and Reduce Burden for Applying for Disaster Relief Grants, and Improve Efficiency of Law Enforcement Investigations 

WASHINGTON – Today, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas and Chief Information Officer and Chief Artificial Intelligence Officer Eric Hysen announced the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) first “Artificial Intelligence Roadmap.” The roadmap details DHS’s 2024 plans, including to test uses of the technologies that deliver meaningful benefits to the American public and advance homeland security, while ensuring that individuals’ privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties are protected.

As part of the roadmap, DHS announced three innovative pilot projects that will deploy AI in specific mission areas. Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) will test AI to enhance investigative processes focused on detecting fentanyl and increasing efficiency of investigations related to combatting child sexual exploitation. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will deploy AI to help communities plan for and develop hazard mitigation plans to build resilience and minimize risks. And, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will use AI to improve immigration officer training.

“The unprecedented speed and potential of AI’s development and adoption presents both enormous opportunities to advance our mission and risks we must mitigate,” said Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas . “The DHS AI roadmap and pilots will guide our efforts this year to strengthen our national security, improve our operations, and provide more efficient services to the American people, while upholding our commitment to protect civil rights, civil liberties, and privacy. What we learn from the pilot projects will be beneficial in shaping how the Department can effectively and responsibly use AI across the homeland security enterprise moving forward.”

The roadmap lays out DHS’s initiatives in AI, describes the potential of AI technologies across the Department, and offers clearer visibility into the Department’s approach to AI, while underscoring the Department’s commitment to responsible utilization.

The AI roadmap outlines three lines of effort DHS is using to guide its work:

• Responsibly leverage AI to advance Homeland Security missions while protecting individuals’ privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties – DHS is committed to ensuring that its use of AI fully respects privacy, civil liberties, and civil rights, is rigorously tested to avoid bias, disparate impact, privacy harms, and other risks, and that it is understandable to the people we serve.  
• Promote Nationwide AI Safety and Security – Advances in AI will revolutionize the delivery of essential goods and services upon which Americans rely. AI can create tremendous efficiencies and benefits for citizens, but it can also present new and novel risks. To protect U.S. cyber networks and critical infrastructure, DHS will help govern the safe and responsible development and use of AI.   
• Continue to lead in AI through strong cohesive partnerships – DHS will foster strong relationships with private sector, academia, State, Local, Territorial, and Tribal governments, international partners, non-government organizations, research institutions, and thought leaders to accelerate the development and deployment of AI solutions tailored to the unique challenges faced by the DHS. In line with the DHS’s commitment to transparency and visibility into the Department’s vision for AI and to ensuring responsible use, DHS will continue to share information and engage with communities, advocates, and partners to demonstrate responsible AI use.  

DHS’s three new pilot programs will allow the Department to assess the efficacy of AI in improving its mission capabilities. Each pilot team is partnering with privacy, cybersecurity, and civil rights and civil liberties experts throughout their development and evaluation process. This work will inform Department-wide policies on AI governance. DHS offices and agencies submitted dozens of proposals for consideration to the Chief AI Officer, who selected three pilots that would best support evaluating the effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLM) and Generative AI technology at DHS. 

The new pilot programs announced today will:

• Transform Security Investigative Processes, Unlock Data-Driven Insights, and Improve Mission Outcomes – HSI’s pilot project will strengthen their investigative processes by introducing a LLM-based system designed to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of summaries investigators rely upon. The LLM-based system will leverage open-source technologies to allow investigators to more quickly summarize and search for contextually relevant information within investigative reports. The pilot could lead to increases in detection of fentanyl-related networks, aid in identification of perpetrators and victims of child exploitation crimes, and surface key patterns and trends that could further HSI’s vital work.   
• Bolster Planning Assistance for Resilient Communities – FEMA will launch a GenAI pilot to create efficiencies for the hazard mitigation planning process for local governments, including underserved communities. Hazard mitigation plans are not only a foundational step that communities can take to build their resilience but can be lengthy to produce and challenging for communities that lack resources to do so. The pilot will specifically support State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial governments’ understanding of how to craft a plan that identifies risks and mitigation strategies as well as generate draft plan elements—from publicly-available, well-researched sources — that governments could customize to meet their needs. This pilot could lead to more communities having the ability to submit grant applications for funding to become more resilient and reduce disaster risks.  
• Enhance Immigration Officer Training through Generative AI – United States Citizenship and Immigration Services is developing an interactive application that uses GenAI to improve the way the agency trains immigration officer personnel. USCIS will generate dynamic, personalized training materials that adapt to officers’ specific needs and ensure the best possible knowledge and training on a wide range of current policies and laws relevant to their jobs. The goal is to help enhance trainees’ understanding and retention of crucial information, increase the accuracy of their decision making process, and limit the need for retraining over time.

The roadmap and announcement of pilot programs are the latest in the Department’s ongoing AI initiatives.

In February, Secretary Mayorkas and CIO Hysen announced the Department’s first-ever hiring sprint to recruit 50 AI technology experts to help build teams that will help better leverage AI responsibly across strategic areas of the homeland security enterprise. These include efforts to counter fentanyl, combat child sexual exploitation and abuse, deliver immigration services, secure travel, fortify our critical infrastructure, and enhance our cybersecurity. DHS has received a strong response to date and is in the process of reviewing. interviewing, and hiring AI technologists to support mission-enhancing initiatives. The Department continues to accept applications on dhs.gov/AI .

Last year, DHS established the Department’s first AI Task Force and named CIO Hysen its first Chief AI Officer. Informed by the Task Force’s work over the past 11 months, DHS has identified areas where AI can enhance the effectiveness of the Department’s efforts — helping pave the way for this roadmap and these new projects. The Task Force’s focus is on DHS’s entire mission space. For instance, it is working to enhance the integrity of our supply chains and the broader trade environment by helping deploy AI to improve cargo screening, the identification of imported goods produced with forced labor, and risk management. The Task Force is also charged with using AI to better detect fentanyl shipments, identify and interdict the flow of precursor chemicals around the world, and disrupt key nodes in criminal networks.

The Department’s latest efforts follow President Biden’s Executive Order (EO) “ Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence ,” signed in October2023. The EO directed DHS to promote the adoption of AI safety standards globally, protect U.S. networks and critical infrastructure, reduce the risks that AI can be used to create weapons of mass destruction, combat AI-related intellectual property theft, and help the United States attract and retain skilled talent, among other missions. The President has directed DHS to establish an AI Safety and Security Advisory Board to support the responsible development of AI. This Board will bring together preeminent industry experts from AI hardware and software companies, leading research labs, critical infrastructure entities, and the U.S. government. This Board will issue recommendations and best practices for an array of AI use cases to ensure AI deployments are secure and resilient.

To read the DHS AI Roadmap, visit the DHS Artificial Intelligence Roadmap webpage .

To learn more about how DHS uses AI technologies to protect the homeland, visit  Artificial Intelligence at DHS .

• Secretary of Homeland Security
• Science and Technology
• Artificial Intelligence (AI)
• Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
• Homeland Security Investigations (HSI)
• U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)

Transforming the understanding and treatment of mental illnesses.

Información en español

Celebrating 75 Years! Learn More >>

• About the Director
• Advisory Boards and Groups
• Strategic Plan
• Offices and Divisions
• Careers at NIMH
• Staff Directories
• Getting to NIMH

Decoding the Mind: Basic Science Revolutionizes Treatment of Mental Illnesses

By Linda Brady, Margaret Grabb, Susan Koester, Yael Mandelblat-Cerf, David Panchision, Jonathan Pevsner, Ashlee Van’t-Veer, and Aleksandra Vicentic on behalf of the NIMH Division of Neuroscience and Basic Behavioral Science

March 21, 2024 • 75th Anniversary

Follow the NIMH Director on

For 75 years, NIMH has transformed the understanding and treatment of mental illnesses through basic and clinical research—bringing hope to millions of people. This Director’s Message, guest written by NIMH’s Division of Neuroscience and Basic Behavioral Science , is part of an anniversary series celebrating this momentous milestone.

The Division of Neuroscience and Basic Behavioral Science (DNBBS) at the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) supports research on basic neuroscience, genetics, and basic behavioral science. These are foundational pillars in the quest to decode the human mind and unravel the complexities of mental illnesses.

At NIMH, we are committed to supporting and conducting genomics research as a priority research area . As the institute celebrates its 75th Anniversary , we are spotlighting DNBBS-supported efforts connecting genes to cells to circuits to behavior that have led to a wealth of discoveries and knowledge that can improve the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of mental illnesses.

Making gene discoveries

Medical conditions often run in families. For instance, if someone in your immediate family has high blood pressure, you are more likely to have it too. It is the same with mental disorders—often they run in families. NIMH is supporting research into human genetics to better understand why this occurs. This research has already led to the discovery of hundreds of gene variants that make us more or less likely to develop a mental disorder.

There are two types of genetic variation: common and rare. Common variation refers to DNA changes often seen in the general population, whereas rare variation is DNA changes found in only a small proportion of the population. Individually, most common gene variants have only a minor impact on the risk for a mental disorder. Instead, most disorders result from many common gene variants that, together, contribute to the risk for and severity of that disorder.

NIMH is committed to uncovering the role of genes in mental disorders with the aim of improving the lives of people who experience them. One of the many ways NIMH contributes to the discovery of common gene variants is by supporting the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC)   . The consortium of almost 1,000 scientists across the globe, including ones in the NIMH Intramural Research Program and others conducting NIMH-supported research, is one of the largest and most innovative biological investigations in psychiatry.

Global collaborations such as the PGC are critical to amassing the immense sample sizes needed to identify common gene variants. Data from the consortium’s almost one million participants have already led to transformative insights about genetic contributors to mental illnesses and the genetic relationships of these illnesses to each other. To date, studies conducted as part of the consortium have uncovered common variation in over a dozen mental illnesses.

In contrast to common gene variants, rare gene variants are very uncommon in the general population. When they do occur, they often have a major impact on the occurrence of an illness, particularly when they disrupt gene function or regulation. Rare variants involving mutations in a single gene have been linked to several mental disorders, often through NIMH-supported research. For instance, a recent NIMH-funded study found that rare variation in 10 genes substantially increased the risk for schizophrenia. However, it is important to note that genetics is not destiny; even rare variants only raise the risk for mental disorders, but many other factors, including your environment and experiences, play important roles as well.

Because of the strong interest among researchers and the public in understanding how genes translate to changes in the brain and behavior, NIMH has developed a list of human genes associated with mental illnesses. These genes were identified through rare variation studies and are meant to serve as a resource for the research community. The list currently focuses on rare variants, but NIMH plans to continue expanding it as evidence accumulates for additional gene variants (rare or common).

Moreover, mental illnesses are a significant public health burden worldwide . For this reason, NIMH investments in genomics research extend across the globe. NIMH has established the Ancestral Populations Network (APN) to make genomics studies more diverse and shed light on how genetic variation contributes to mental disorders across populations. APN currently includes seven projects with more than 100 researchers across 25 sites worldwide.

Connecting biology to behavior

While hundreds of individual genes have been linked to mental illnesses, the function of most of these genes in the brain remains poorly understood. But high-tech advances and the increased availability of computational tools are enabling researchers to begin unraveling the intricate roles played by genes.

In addition to identifying genetic variation that raises the risk for mental illnesses, NIMH supports research that will help us understand how genes contribute to human behavior. This information is critical to discovering approaches to diagnose, treat, and ultimately prevent or cure mental illnesses.

An NIMH-funded project called the PsychENCODE consortium   focuses on understanding how genes impact brain function. PsychENCODE is furthering knowledge of how gene risk maps onto brain function and dysfunction by cataloging genomic elements in the human brain and studying the actions of different cell types. The PsychENCODE dataset currently includes multidimensional genetic data from the postmortem brains of thousands of people with and without mental disorders.

Findings from the first phase of PsychENCODE were published as a series of 11 papers   examining functional genomics in the developing and adult brains and in mental disorders. A second batch of PsychENCODE papers will be published later this year. These findings help clarify the complex relationships between gene variants and the biological processes they influence.

PsychENCODE and other NIMH-supported projects are committed to sharing biospecimens quickly and openly to help speed research and discovery.

Facilitating these efforts is the NIMH Repository and Genomics Resource (NRGR)   , where samples are stored and shared. NRGR includes hundreds of thousands of samples, such as DNA, RNA, and cell lines, from people with and without mental disorders, along with demographic and diagnostic information.

Another NIMH initiative to connect risk genes to brain function is Scalable and Systematic Neurobiology of Psychiatric and Neurodevelopmental Disorder Risk Genes (SSPsyGene) . This initiative uses cutting-edge techniques to characterize the biological functions of 250 mental health risk genes—within the cells where they are expressed—to better understand how those genes contribute to mental illnesses. By systematically characterizing the biological functions of risk genes in cells, SSPsyGene will empower researchers to learn about biological pathways that may serve as new targets for treatment.

Genes also affect behavior by providing the blueprint for neurons, the basic units of the nervous system. Neurons communicate with each other via circuits in the brain, which enables us to process, integrate, and convey information. NIMH supports many initiatives to study the foundational role of neural networks and brain circuits in shaping diverse mental health-related behaviors like mood, learning, memory, and motivation.

For instance, studies supported through a basic-to-translational science initiative at NIMH focus on modifying neural activity to improve cognitive, emotional, and social processing  . Similarly, another new funding opportunity encourages studies in humans and animals examining how emotional and social cues are represented across brain circuits  to help address a core deficit in many mental disorders. These studies will increase understanding of the biological mechanisms that support behavior throughout life and offer interventions to improve these functions in healthy and clinical populations.

Developing treatments and therapeutics

The gene discovery and biology-to-behavior programs described here will lay the foundation for delivering novel therapeutics. To be prepared to rapidly implement findings from this research, NIMH supports several initiatives to identify behavioral and biological markers for use in clinical studies and increase our ability to translate research into practice.

Through its therapeutics discovery research programs , NIMH advances early stage discovery and development studies in humans and early efficacy trials for mental disorders. Taking these efforts a step further, NIMH supports the National Cooperative Drug Discovery/Development Groups for the Treatment of Mental Disorders , which encourage public–private partnerships to accelerate the discovery and development of novel therapeutics and new biomarkers for use in human trials. Moreover, NIMH is one of several institutes and centers in the NIH Blueprint Neurotherapeutics Network  , launched to enable neuroscientists in academia and biotechnology companies to develop new drugs for nervous system disorders.

For the treatments of tomorrow, NIMH is building a new research program called Pre-Clinical Research on Gene Therapies for Rare Genetic Neurodevelopmental Disorders  , which encourages early stage research to optimize gene therapies to treat disorders with prominent cognitive, social, or affective impairment. In parallel, NIMH’s Planning Grants for Natural History Studies of Rare Genetic Neurodevelopmental Disorders  encourage the analysis of pre-existing data from people with rare disorders to learn about disease progression and enable future clinical trials with these populations.

NIMH's Division of Neuroscience and Basic Behavioral Science supports many different research projects that help us learn about genes and gene functions, how the brain develops and works, and impacts on behavior. By investing in basic neuroscience, genetics, and behavioral research, we're trying to find new targets for treatment and develop better therapies for mental disorders. We're hopeful these efforts will lead to new ways to treat and prevent mental illnesses in the near future and, ultimately, improve the lives of people in this country and across the globe.

Notification: View the latest site access restrictions, updates, and resources related to the coronavirus (COVID-19) »

JISEA Launches Sustainable Agriculture Catalyzer To Examine Cobenefits of Decarbonization

Research looks at how strategies to reduce emissions in agriculture lead to benefits in health, socioeconomics, and more.

The Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis (JISEA) has launched a new catalyzer—and it is changing the way you think about your food.

Catalyzers are two- to three-year seed research projects that develop research capabilities and collaborative networks centered around emerging clean energy challenges. The newest catalyzer, the Sustainable Agriculture Catalyzer, is diving into the agriculture industry and the effects decarbonization strategies can have on socioeconomics, resilience, and the environment.

"When it comes to decarbonization strategies, we are looking at the big picture," said Brittany Staie, catalyzer lead and agricultural decarbonization researcher at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). "We're going to bring different partners to the table to expand our understanding of the impact these solutions can have outside of emissions reductions."

Sustainable agriculture has long been a focus of JISEA's work, with the institute playing a key role in the maturation of agrivoltaics research at NREL. Over the past few years, the institute has convened experts to share their insights and perspectives on research priorities in the food systems space. Most recently, agricultural decarbonization was a featured topic at the 2024 JISEA Annual Meeting with a presentation from Jordan Lambert, director of Ag Innovation at Colorado State University Spur, about the progress that has been made in U.S. dairy production and the possibilities for future emissions mitigation.

"To make progress, we have to change the way we think about the challenge of emissions in agriculture," Lambert said. "By looking at the system as a whole, we can evaluate and compare where interventions can have the most impact and how efforts can complement each other and bring the most benefit."

The Sustainable Agriculture Catalyzer will now join and amplify JISEA's portfolio of agricultural decarbonization efforts.

Catalyzing Agricultural Research and Innovation

Agricultural production accounts for approximately 12% of total greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. This footprint, along with climate change, natural resource availability concerns, and a growing population, has motivated efforts across the country to develop and implement more sustainable, resilient processes.

Decarbonization strategies can address these concerns while opening the door to cobenefits for farmers, communities, and the environment. For example, reducing emissions can lead to reduced pollutants—clearing the air for communities surrounding agricultural production and providing health benefits. Cobenefits extend beyond health to impact factors like energy equity, food security, environmental justice, workforce development, educational opportunities, and more.

The Sustainable Agriculture Catalyzer is leading the analysis of these cobenefits, aiming to get a deeper understanding of the potential benefits, trade-offs, and barriers to implementation of the various mitigation solutions. By investigating the various aspects of agricultural production, the catalyzer will highlight achievable opportunities for optimizing cobenefits of decarbonization strategies.

"The implementation of decarbonization strategies becomes even more critical when you consider how far their benefits reach," said Jordan Macknick, lead energy-water-land analyst for NREL and member of the catalyzer team. "The catalyzer is working to identify and quantify these cobenefits to help guide future decarbonization planning in a way that prioritizes the needs of farmers and the surrounding communities."

A Vibrant Landscape To Grow

The Sustainable Agriculture Catalyzer is kicking off its efforts with a new publication that will guide the catalyzer's analysis and serve as a seminal publication in the agricultural decarbonization field overall. The NREL technical report qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed agricultural decarbonization solutions and pathways in the United States, providing a first-of-its-kind comprehensive look at the mitigation potential of strategies in various agricultural systems.

In the report, researchers uncovered the lack of mitigation strategies targeting the majority of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions—nitrous oxide (N 2 O) and methane (CH 4 ) emissions. Researchers also found significant opportunity for carbon sequestration in croplands but with significant barriers to implementation.

"This report highlights the leadership role that farmers and ranchers can have in the transition to a net-zero economy," said Austin Kinzer, agrivoltaics senior technical specialist with American Farmland Trust and co-author on the article. "We are encouraged by DOE's interest in collaborating across the energy and agriculture sectors to develop climate solutions that empower agricultural producers, strengthen farm viability, and promote an equitable energy transition."

The report identified a variety of cobenefits from agricultural decarbonization mitigation solutions, including increased crop yields and profits, reduced erosion, new sustainable workforce development opportunities from new agricultural technologies, and more. The Sustainable Agriculture Catalyzer will build off these findings by measuring these cobenefits to create a more holistic opportunity for prioritizing decarbonization implementation strategies. An informed approach will allow decision makers from farmers to policymakers to make better decisions.

Working Toward a Fruitful Future

The key to this catalyzer's success is in gathering collaborative input from the people who are at the forefront of implementing decarbonization strategies. Over the next few months, the catalyzer plans to host workshops to gain insights from farmers and other agricultural industry partners, including manufacturers and educational institutions, across the country.

As agricultural decarbonization research grows at NREL , the Sustainable Agriculture Catalyzer will serve as a coordinating force, bringing together the expertise from different sub-areas and drawing in diverse perspectives from partners along the way.

Read more about the Sustainable Agriculture Catalyzer and how to partner on future research.