Introduction:

What is action research

The term action research was first coined by social psychologist Kurt Lewin in 1948 and
proposed the idea of the researcher carrying out research within the natural setting of the
project to ensure that the recommended changes suggested as a result of the research
would be relevant to their particular context. Therefore, topics chosen for study would
always be directly related to the context of the issue. His process was cyclical, involving a
non-linear pattern of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting on the changes in the
social situations (Noffke & Stevenson, 1995, p. 2).

Lewin is credited with coining the term action research to describe work that
did not separate the investigation from the action needed to solve the
problem (McFarland & Stansell, 1993, p. 14)

Since this time, action research has become the cornerstone of professional development
in a variety of different settings such as education, social work, health and planning and
development. A huge body of literature is devoted to the discussion of action research in
these different contexts but similar themes can be found emerging from each of these
distinct fields or research. These themes can be summarized as validity, advantages to
the organization, practicality and continued practice.

Action research is a form of collective self-reflective inquiry undertaken by
participants in social situations in order to improve the rationality and justice of
their own social or educational practices, as well as their understanding of
those practices and the situations in which the practices are carried out The
approach is only action research when it is collaborative, though it is important
to realize that action research of the group is achieved through the critically
examined action of individual group members.(Kemmis & McTaggart , 1988)

The focus of this introduction will be to define the understanding of the term action
research within education and discuss its specific relevance to this project. Action
research can be defined as a detailed and thorough enquiry the purpose of which is to
refine current practice. The emerging evidence-based outcomes will then contribute to the
researching practitioners continuing professional development (Koshy 2005).

Action research differs from other forms of research in several crucial ways. Firstly, the
practioner themselves is also (usually) the researcher. This ensures that the practioner-
researcher is fully invested and committed to the project and is therefore more likely to
implement the changes that come as a result of the outcomes of the project. Additionally,
action research has a social dimension that is driven by the context of the project which
also means that any changes put in place will last longer as the group affected by the
change is usually the group instigating the changes in the first place. As action research
involves the researcher as a participant there is less emphasis on the exclusion of bias
thus easing the constraints on the researcher for remaining completely objective.

What is an improvement plan

The purpose of this project is to produce an improvement plan for a secondary school
science department. In order to understand the implications of this, one must first fully
ascertain the meaning and importance of improvement plans and their place in schools.
The most widely used definition of school improvement can be traced back to the
International School Improvement Project (ISIP) which states:

a systematic sustained effort aimed at a change in learning conditions and
other related internal conditions in one or more schools, with the ultimate aim
of accomplishing educational goals more effectively (van Velzen et al. 1985)

A school improvement plan is therefore a series of strategies that can be put into
place in order to raise student attainment by improving teaching and learning. Over
the past thirty years, school improvement through research has provided the
rationale for sweeping curricular and management changes within public education
by implementation of various governmental policies and reforms. A good example
of this would be a change from the National Curriculum to A Curriculum for
Excellence within Scotlands education system. Regardless of the context however,
the emphasis remains the same, improving student performance and achievement.

Conversely, there does seem to be some debate on whether the myriad of new
educational reforms have actually been effective. As stated by Fullan (1999)

Weve been innovating for student improvement for most of this century and yet the
extent to which this has resulted in improvement to the life chances of students is
debatable

One key factor in determining whether changes implemented will succeed is to
acknowledge the importance of establishing the change from within the organization
itself. This is in direct contrast with the reality of the situation which consists of
centralizing educational control. Therefore, the message is that all schools can
consistently improve using the same criteria and strategies regardless of context or
situation.

This is stated clearly in McLaughlins (1990) reanalysis of the Rand Change Agent
Study which explains how policies implemented at a regional or national level are
often less than successful because they fail to take into account the changes that
happen at school level. Each school is made up of unique communities and is
therefore relatively unpredictable and not especially vulnerable to central control.

One of the central findings of research in school effectiveness and school improvement is
the predominant importance of good leadership for instigating effective change. This is
made clear within the wealth of literature across different countries and different school
contexts pertaining to this particular area. (Ainscow et al. 1994, Hopkins et al. 1994, Stoll
and Fink, 1996). As stated previously, schools are made up of unique communities.
These communities are made up of individuals that each have their own personal agenda
(Sergiovanni, 1994b). A good leader should be able to reconcile these differences and
harness the diverse talents of the staff in order to pursue a common agenda in which the
objectives are relevant to each stake holder.

The role of an effective department head can therefore be seen as critical to executing an
improvement plan. Work by Harris et al (1995), Sammons et al. (1997), Siskin (1994) and
by Bell and Ritchie (1999) has highlighted the importance of middle managers as key-post
holders for bringing about change and improvement. The work of Sammons et al. (1997)
is particularly important as it stresses the importance of differences between departments
as a key factor that accounts variation in whole-school performance and as a result,
emphasizes the importance of exploring this differential effectiveness. These findings are
further developed in the work of Harris et al (1998) which suggests that subject leaders
can make a difference to attainment in their subject areas in much the same way a good
headteacher can contribute to a schools overall performance. .

Therefore, this study will be carried out by a subject leader who will use action research to
determine the most plausible strategies for continuing school improvement specifically
within the area of secondary science.

Context of study
Leadership of department past
Changes put in place to bring it up to the present
Targets for the future

Statement of the problem
Why is an improvement plan required at this stage
Change to autonomous management

Objectives
State them

Limitations of the study
Problems with sample size, demographic etc.

Literature review
What kinds of leadership exist
What is strategy
Why is strategy important
Link between type of leader and types of strategy
What is an improvement plan
Link between strategy and improvement plan


Data collection
Limitations of the study (Problems with sample size, demographic etc.)
What sort of data did you collect?
How did you collect the data?
Describe the methods used (include questionnaires, interviews, etc. in appendix).
Address why they are appropriate.
Describe resources needed.
Present a timeline.

Data analysis
Describe analysis procedures.
Discuss why these procedures are appropriate.
What happened?
What did you find? Describe in detail. You can use narrative, quotes from the data
sources, samples of student work, tables, and/or charts to
display your data and provide evidence for your findings.
You should relate these findings back to your research questions.
Modifications/Re-Analysis. Discuss possible alternatives, if appropriate.

Conclusion
What were the outcomes of your study?
Discuss your own interpretation of what happened and why.
What successes or difficulties did you have in carrying out this action research?
Address what you have learned from this study.

Implications
Summarize the question studied and the major issues involved.
Address the twists and turns experienced between original identified question and
results that were produced.
Identify the limitations of the study.
Discuss implications for other teachers practice and educational policy.
Describe recommendations for your future study.

Action plan
Recommended action you will take based on your findings.
Who is responsible?
Timeline.
Resources and materials.

References
Lewin, Kurt (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues Vol. 2, p. 34-46

Kemmis, S.; McTaggart, R. (1988) The Action Research Planner. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin
University Press.

McFarland, K.P., & Stansell, J.C. (1993). Historical perspectives. In L. Patterson,
C.M. Santa, C.G. Short, & K. Smith (Eds.), Teachers are researchers: Reflection and action. Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.

Noffke, S.E., & Stevenson, R.B. (Eds.). (1995). Educational action research: Becoming practically
critical. New York: Teachers College Press.

Koshy, Valsa (2005) Action Research for Improving Practice: A Practical Guide. London: Paul
Chapman Publishing

Van Velzen, W., Miles, M., Ekholm, M., Hameyer, U. and Robin, D. (1985) Making School
Improvement Work: A Conceptual Guide to Practice. Leuven: Belgium, ACCO.

Fullan, M. (1999) Change forces: The Sequel. Buckingham. Open University Press

McLaughlin, M. (1990) The rand Change Agent Study Revisited: Macro Perspectives,
Micro Realities. Educational Researcher 19(9)11-16

Ainscow, M. (1995). Would it work in theory? Arguments for practioner research and
thoerising in the special needs field. In Clark, C., Dyson, A. and Millward, A. (eds).
Towards inclusive schools?. London: David Fulton

Hopkins, D., Ainscow, M. and West, M. (1994) School Improvement in an era of Change.
London:Cassell

Stoll, L.and Fink, D. (1996). Changing Our School: Linking School effectiveness and
school improvement. Buckingham: Open University Press

Bell, D. and Ritchie, R. (1999). Towards Effective Subject leadership in the Primary
School. Buckingham: Open University Press

Harris, A., Jamieson, I. M., and Russ, J. (1995) A study of effective departments in
secondary schools. School Organisation. 15 (3) 283-299

Harris, A., Jamieson, I. M., and Russ, J. (1996) What makes an effective department?
School Leadership and Management. 15 (1) 7-9

Harris, A. (1998) improving ineffective departments in secondary school. Educational
Managament and Administration 26(3) 269-278

Sammons, P., Hillman. J., and Mortimore, P., (1994) Key characteristics of effective
schools. A Review of School Effectiveness Research. London: OFSTEAD

Siskin, L. (1994) Realms of knowledge: Academic departments in Secondary School.
London: Falmer Press

Sergiovanni, T. (1994a) Building communities in schools.San Francisco: Jossey Bass


Appendices
http://books.google.com.mx/books?hl=en&lr=&id=BMYNIYWaOCEC&oi=fnd&pg=PA99&d
q=school+improvement+plan+writing&ots=HnPGctaFCE&sig=CwOhM0Oesv2WyKiWaiCw
34_As7s#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com.mx/books?hl=en&lr=&id=A0W16OocxxIC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=s
chool+improvement+plan+writing&ots=8Mm8HKzr1Q&sig=yTukeHleGvn-btcgX1u-
4s4FapI#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/reports/sihande.pdf

https://www.nctm.org/uploadedFiles/Lessons_and_Resources/Grants_and_Awards/How%
20is%20Action%20Research%20Defined(1).pdf