Summary of course EDLD 5301

This course has opened my eyes to the process and benefits of action research. Before taking this course, action research was something I had never heard of before, but it makes so much sense. If you compare the process to traditional research you can see why the additional steps of action research are a more effective process. Traditional research can lead you to others’ information, while action research not only makes the research specific to your school and problem, it helps you plan, execute, and evaluate your action research plan. As Dana states, “(action research)focuses on the concerns of the practitioners (not outside researchers) and engages practitioners in the design, data collection, and interpretation of data around their question” (Dana 2009).

I have learned that administrative inquiry or action research is a process that administrators undertake to somehow improve a certain aspect of their profession. They can do this in a variety of ways- by researching literature, interviews, observations, or any other means that might shed more light on the area they are investigating. Another component of action research is the administrator or researcher takes action to make the necessary changes based on what they have learned from their research. “Whether you are studying to be a school administrator or are a veteran administrator with years of experience but faced with new educational challenges every day, administrator inquiry becomes a powerful vehicle for learning and school improvement” (Dana 2009).

From the video lectures Dr. Jenkins mentioned some of the pitfalls while doing action research. He mentioned the importance of staying focused on the issue. When researching any topic it is easy to lose focus and go off on tangents. He also mentioned that the purpose must be reasonable and feasible with regards to time, data, cost, and participants. Finally, he mentioned that the purpose must be ethical.
I also looked at two case studies from Dr. Johnny Briseno and Dr. Timothy Chargois. They are both doctoral graduates of the Lamar University and did action research projects for their dissertations. Both of these scholars are proponents of action research in that it is the most effective way to bring about positive change in your school. One thing I have learned, or at least have had reinforced by these interviews, is that action research is much more personalized to your school and its problems than traditional research.
From the video in week three I learned there are 8 steps to an action plan:
1. Examining work/ Setting the foundation
2. Analyzing Data (we examined 9 data gathering strategies)
3. Developing Deeper understanding- Additional data collection techniques- qualitative data, focus groups, active listening, etc
4. Engaging in self-reflection
5. Exploring Programmatic Patterns- asking the appropriate questions, identifying data patterns and gaps, learning to address equity issues
6. Determining Direction-working collaboratively to address action research questions, monitoring progress, assessing achievement
7. Taking Action for School Improvement- use appropriate steps or templates to guide the action research (ch 7 tools, and another in course resource section)
8. Sustaining Improvement- learning to use the tools from action research for ongoing professional improvement
The action plan can also be shown in the form of a template as follows:

Action Planning Template
Goal: What can I as a principal do to lessen the amount of bullying (including physical, psychological, and cyber) that goes on at my campus?
Action Steps
Person(s) Responsible
Timeline: Start/End
Needed Resources
Evaluation
Define if our stakeholders perceive bullying to be a problem
Sean Davis
Month of August
Interview Stakeholders (Administrators, Teachers, Staff, Students, Parents) on if they think there is a problem of bullying at our campus. I would also ask them what they think should be done about it.
From notes taken in all the interviews determine if the stakeholders perceive bullying to be a school wide problem that needs some type of intervention
Collect Data to give me more background and try and find success stories from other similar campuses whom have successfully dealt with (or lessened) bullying issues
Sean Davis
Months of September to October
Internet, Interview Administrators from other similar campuses, Articles and Literature about bullying.
A useful amount of notes taken and data collected from different sources.
Formulate Action Plan from data collected
Sean Davis with the assistance of Maria Dillon- General Director, and Ana Bonilla- School Psychologist
First half of November
Formulate Action Plan using data gathered and action plans that have worked in other schools which have been modified for our school population
Compare our plan to other plans from similar schools taking into account modifications for our student body
Collect Data on the number of bullying occurrences at our campus
Sean Davis, Ana Bonilla, Teachers
Second half of November and month of December
From student interviews and Teachers tabulations record how many bullying occurrences there are in a week
Notes and tabulations from teachers and student interviews
Implement Action Plan
Sean Davis, Ana Bonilla, Teachers, Parents
Month of January
Staff Development for teachers, workshops for Parents, workshops for students led by Teachers
Number of Teachers who have implemented the program, a completed parent workshop on bullying, completed student workshops on how to handle bullying issues led by the school Psychologist
Evaluate Action Plan
Sean Davis, Ana Bonilla, Teachers
Months of February and March
After program has been implemented re-interview students and teachers tabulations of bullying occurrences there are in a week
Data will be collected by Sean Davis and the School Psychologist and presented to the Staff during Staff Development
Continued Assessment
Sean Davis, Ana Bonilla Teachers
Remainder of school year
Interview students a month later, and then every three months and check teachers tabulations weekly bullying occurrences
Data will be collected by Sean Davis and the School Psychologist and presented to the Staff during Staff Development


After the action research plan has been finished, it is important to share the results with the stakeholders. In this case the stakeholders include the Administrators, Teachers, Parents, Students, and other research collaborators. When sharing results I will include the four points stated by Dana, “(1) provide background information, (2)sharing the design inquiry (procedures, data collection, and data analysis), (3)stating the learning and supporting the statements with data, (4)providing concluding thoughts”(Dana 2009). These results will be presented to stakeholders in a variety of ways. With Administrators and research collaborators I will provide a written report. With teachers I will provide a power point presentation during a staff development. For parents I will notify them by email in the weekly newsletter of the results as well as post the written report and power point presentation on our website (all of our parents are connected to internet). For our students we will have a general assembly sharing the results and celebrating their success in the program.
As working in SBDM committees is a large part of action research, we also discussed 3 different strategies to make decisions as a group- force field analysis, the delphi method, and the nominal group technique.
Force Field Analysis is a tool used to evaluate some type of proposal for change. One must facilitate “the group in brainstorming the possible driving and resisting forces of the potential change” (Harris 2009). This is broken down into 7 steps:
1. Describe the current situation.
2. Describe the proposed change.
3. Identify what will happen if no change occurs.
4. Identify the forces driving the proposed change.
5. Identify the forces resisting the change.
6. Determine whether the chance is viable.
7. If the change is viable, what is needed for implementation?

The Delphi Method is a method of coming to consensus that is very useful when working with a group. This method can be used with larger groups. Participants respond to different questions or issues that will go through 2 or more rounds. A facilitator will provide a summary with a rationale for the response. After each round there should be consensus on responses and they will eventually converge into a unifying consensus.
The Nominal Group Technique is another method used to come to group consensus on an issue. This method goes through the following 5 steps:
1. Without discussion individuals within small groups write perceived needs or issues
2. Individuals share with the small groups an issue at a time as a facilitator writes them down
3. The issues are discussed within the small groups
4. Numerical values are assigned to all perceived for all needs or issues
5. These are shared with the entire group

As an administrator I would use all of these strategies with the staff. They all seem to be effective methods for coming to consensus within a group. I would imagine that Force Field Analysis, Nominal, or Delphi might be more effective when dealing with different types of issues and depending upon who your audience is. This might also take some trial and error with the staff to see which is more effective.

I also had the opportunity to work with my Lamar colleagues and well as my site supervisor and school psychologist. From each of them I received quite a bit of positive feedback as well as suggestions and advice on where to find out more information to support my action research plan.

One area I would still like to learn more is in the area of motivating others to help execute your plan (especially teachers). Often teachers are bombarded with staff development and new methodologies they are asked to implement. Although I agree that it is important to continue research and implement new plans to improve and “update” education strategies and methodologies as well as individualize instruction. Many teachers become overwhelmed and reluctant to so much change. As the debates between the powers that be go back and forth between – phonics vs. whole language, cooperative learning vs. individualized instruction, student accountability vs. teacher accountability; teachers are caught in the middle. How do we keep teachers motivated to try out new programs and buy into new educational philosophies?
To continue building my applied knowledge in this area I will work closely with teachers and administrators who have been successful in this area. I will try and find out what administrators who have had success bringing about multiple changes in their schools have done. Is it by sharing the research with the teachers? Is it by including the teachers in the decision making process through SBDM committees? I will also find out from teachers why they buy into changes and new educational philosophies.

In conclusion, it has been a very informative course and I now have the tools to help me plan and execute an action research plan.


Dana, N.F. (2009). Leading with Passion and Knowledge: The Principal as Action Researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Harris, S., Edmonson, S., & Combs, J. (2009). Examining what we do to improve our schools: 9 steps from analysis to action. Larchmont, N.Y.: Eye on Education.