Action research: Two levels

1. Action research: Two levels Sigurlina Davidsdottir Penelope Lisi

2. Context • Two researchers have worked with four schools since 2000 to help with self-evaluations • We have used “deliberative democratic evaluation”: • Inclusion (everyone interested can participate) • Before the evaluation, discussions about what to evaluate, evaluation questions, etc. (dialogue) • After data is in, discussions about what to do with them (deliberation)

3. What to expect (Fullan, 2001) • 1. Data is collected • Decisions are made on which processes will be looked at • A few teachers take on the main bulk of the job • A few teachers evaluate their own work, still limited • 2. Increased cooperation • Groups begin to cooperate and discuss each others’ viewpoints • A few options appear and are discussed when making decisions • Cooperation leads to more teacher job satisfaction • 3. Changes in school structure • More than just changes in teaching practice • Problems discussed and solved within the groups and the school • Changes in practice are based on data • 4. Changes leading to better teaching and learning • When the first three levels are in place, the bulk of the job can now concentrate on what happens in the classrooms

4. What actually happened • Exactly what Fullan said: • Ist year: groping around for methods. • A few teachers active • A few more taka a positive stand, little action • 2nd year: much more cooperation • Groups begin to meet regularly for discussions • Cooperation across departments • Increased teacher job satisfaction • 3rd year: Data driven decision making • Evaluation methods are now the norm • Quite some work is being done within departments • 4th year: Grassroots initiatives • Teachers want help with action research within their classrooms

5. What is needed for self-evaluation in schools to be successful? • Teachers “own” the evaluation, feel that this is their job • “Discussions with peers have been key here” • School culture values self-evaluation • “Strong, positive associations between staff and principal encourage us to try out new approaches” • Context is conducive to cooperation • “Major changes are discussed with teachers” • Teacher development is facilitated • “The school provides us with time for development in our jobs” • School authorities support the evaluation efforts • “Without support from our principal this would not have been possible” • Teachers are enthusiastic about new approaches • “We are beginning to understand that this does not hurt and data can be a tool in our hands”

6. Action research on two levels • What was done on the school level was action research in itself: • Teams from the schools met and decided: • What would be evaluated • What would be the major evaluation questions • How to collect data to answer them • When data was in, the teams decided: • What the data was telling them • How to go about making a development plan • How to evaluate the results • Then the individual departments wanted more: • Help in doing their own action research projects • Making data help them at their own classroom level