Ethical Responsibilities of an Action Researcher

Ethics plays an important role in classroom action research.  Since the teacher/researcher is intimately involved with the participants in the study, he or she must take care not to expose them to harm or risk throughout the course of the research project.  Harmful or risky situations could include embarrassment, ridicule, or adverse consequences from parents, teachers and/or administrators caused by their participation in the study.  Because of this, procedures have been recommended by various organizations to protect participants from these unfavorable by-products of research.  The procedures recommend that the action researcher should:

·       obtain informed consent from the participants of the study and their guardians, 

·       protect the participants of the study from harmful outcomes of the research by maintaining their anonymity and/or confidentiality throughout the study,

·       verify that deceptive behaviors and practices are not performed to gather data for the study,

·       maintain his or her personal code of ethics for the duration of the study, 

·       identify and follow social principles that govern the community and society of which the researcher is a member, and

·       ensure the accuracy of the research data.

Armed with these ethical tenets, the action researcher should be able to conduct his or her study with the assurance that they have tried their hardest to ensure that their students will not be harmfully impacted by their participation in the research study.

When watching Doug’s video, it was clear that he attempted to follow the ethical principles when conducting his research.  He obtained written permission from the parents to conduct action research with their children as the research subjects.  Additionally, he informed the students about the action research project.  My concern is that he did not specifically state in his letter to the parents (1) what his action research project was, (2) how their children would be involved, and (3) how the results would be reported.  It was also not clear how specific he was when he described the project to the students.  During his project, he permitted students to control the dissemination of their data to other students, parents, and to Doug.  I was not sure if this control was given each time data was collected for the study and if the student was then singled out as a non-participant of the study.  These issues should have been discussed as he described his ethical procedures during the research project.  Finally, Doug stated that he did not use names or places in his report; he used pseudonyms or initials.  I believe that his use of initials breached student confidentiality agreements, because a student might be identified by their initials if the reader of the report knew where the study took place. 

In her video, Jeannette transgressed from the recommended ethical procedures in a variety of ways.  First, she did not want to tell anyone about her study.  To me, this means that the students and parents were not informed of the study and did not give their consent for participation.  Next, she violated the social principles of her community by not informing the administration and her co-workers about her research.  On some level, it feels like she is deceiving the administration, fellow teachers, students, and parents by secretly running the study without outside knowledge and approval. 

When the principal asked Jeanette about her findings, Jeanette should have had an appropriate answer prepared for such a situation.  Telling the principal that she did not want to talk about the study was not a valid response.  Jeannette could have told the administrator that she was in the middle of the research project and had not analyzed the data in order to give her valid results for the study.

Finally, Jeanette seems to be allowing her personal bias with regard to the basal program to interfere with her research.  Other teachers at her school had not noticed any issues with the program.  This bias may affect the accuracy of the data that she is collecting and analyzing for her action research project.  Because of the afore-mentioned ethical issues, Jeanette should stop and reflect on her implementation of the study before continuing any further.  The ethical issues that have been mentioned will work to invalidate her study.

Before starting my research study, I will develop a letter that describes the project in detail, including data that I will be collecting from the students, methods for data collection, confidentiality agreements relating to student involvement, and the reporting procedure for the project.  The letter will require a signature from the student and the student’s guardian.  In class, I will meticulously discuss the research study with the students.  I will emphasize that I want to receive honest responses during the surveys, journal entries, and focus group discussions.  Because I am asking for truthful feedback on my instructional methods, I will assure the students that they will not receive reprisals for their responses in the form of bad grades or punishments.  This topic will be specifically mentioned in the letter.  Following the class discussion, the letters will be sent home for students to examine with their guardians.  Hopefully, most letters will be returned with two signatures.  If the letter is returned and both signatures are not present, then the student will not be able to participate in the study. 

For the qualitative data collected during the student survey and journal entries, I will maintain the anonymity of the students by randomly distributing a code to each student participant.  I will not know the code for any of the students in my class.  The students will use their codes, instead of their names, for identification on the data collection items.  In this way, I can track a student’s progress through the research study, while not knowing exactly which student originated the artifact.

I will obviously be able to identify the students during the focus groups.  At this time, the students will re-assured that their comments will be used solely for the research project and will not have a harmful impact on their grades or any other classroom activity.  I am hopeful that my rapport with the students will make them comfortable enough to generate dynamic discussions during the focus groups.

The quantitative data of the study will be collected using the normal grading and reporting procedures implemented in my classroom.  Student test and quiz grades from the control and experimental classes will be used for the statistical analyses required for the research project, but specific student information should not need to be mentioned in the project report.

Finally, I plan to accurately report my data and my analysis of the data, even if it does not support the use of manipulatives in a secondary Algebra 1 classroom.  In my final report, any references to the students will be made in general terms or through the use of pseudonyms or the student codes assigned during the study.  By implementing these procedures, my research project should maintain the ethical standards needed to make the study valid.

Critique of the Case Study for the Curtis Elementary School

The following is my critique of the Curtis Elementary School Case Study:

1.     Area of focus

The area of focus for the Curtis Elementary School study was how Mr. Stewart was going to enhance student learning by teaching his students to construct meaning during reading.  Thus, the study concentrates on teaching and learning.  In addition, as the study takes place in Mr. Stewart’s classroom with his students, the study occurs within his locus of control.  Finally, all of the teachers in the school collectively agreed on the contents of this study.  As based on his initial comments in his write-up, he is passionate about improving his teaching methods to help his students construct meaning from reading.  He states that his previous approach of quantity over quality did not help the students do well on last year’s state assessment and he is looking forward to challenging his previous beliefs to help his students improve.  Thus, Mr. Stewart’s research study contains all of the principles needed for a well-defined area of focus.

2.     Research questions

Mr. Stewart’s research question was not clearly stated in the section labeled Research Question in his report.  He used the school research question which was stated in vague terms that were defined in previous sections of the report.  Because of this issue, I think that Mr. Stewart had problems when he collected data for the research.  He could have changed the research question from “What is the effect of an altered curriculum on student performance?” to “What is the effect of using “whatever program that he was going to use to improve reading in his classroom” on student performance as measured by statewide assessments and teacher-made tests that will be administered regularly throughout the year?”

3.     Locus of control

In spite of the vague wording of his research question, Mr. Stewart implemented the research study in his classroom and based the conclusions on the results of his students.  So, even though this research was being carried out throughout the school, he stayed focused on his locus of control and did not try to expand the study outside of his classroom. 

4.     Data Collection

In this case study, the research question focuses on the effect of updates to Mr. Stewart’s instructional methods for reading on student performance on statewide assessment tests and teacher-made tests administered during the year. 

Jonathon’s suggested data collection ideas include classroom observations, interviews with students, statewide assessment scores, and regular collection of student work.  In these suggested data collection methods, it is not clear whether he is collecting teacher-made reading tests, which are required to answer the research question; he only tells the readers that he will collect student work.  In addition, observations, student interviews, and additional student products may be useful for triangulation of the research data, but he does not discuss how this information will be used to help answer the research question.  In my opinion, the research question defines a quantitative research study, where the observations and interviews are not necessary to provide data for the research.

In the Data Collection section of the report, Mr. Stewart solely describes certain student products that he will be collecting for the study.  These products correlate with one item listed in his data collection ideas, his regular collection of student work.  In this section, he does not mention student interviews, observations, or statewide assessment scores which were previously discussed for data collection.  Additionally, the student products that he is collecting do not include the results from the statewide assessments or teacher-made reading tests, but are different types of reading evaluations based on the reading program that he wants to implement in his classroom.  Thus, if he bases his analysis on these data, he will not accurately answer the research question.

5.     Ethics

There is no evidence that Mr. Stewart faced any ethical challenges during his study.  However, in his write-up, he discusses a conversation between two students and in that anecdote one of the students’ names is mentioned.  In all other instances in the report, Mr. Stewart does not include children’s names.  I think that this might be a small break in confidentiality for the student.

6.     Reflective stance

Mr. Stewart discusses in detail how the new program, which focuses on vocabulary to help students construct meaning during reading, has helped improve his students reading comprehension.  However, he does not discuss how this program has affected his teaching in the classroom or how it has affected his ideas about teaching reading in ways to construct meaning.  In fact, he states “as I start the next cycle of my own research I will be ‘constructing meaning’ of my own about how children construct meaning.” Thus, in my opinion, Mr. Stewart’s reflective stance has not been verbalized in this case study.    

7.     Action

In the case study, Mr. Stewart explains several actions that are taking place in his classroom because of the action research project.  He describes one teaching change that he has implemented in which students are required to look up certain vocabulary words and replace them with words of similar meaning.  In addition, he describes several techniques that he plans to use as assessments of student learning.  These techniques include observations, reflections with students, and student journal entries.  He also states that he will continue on to another cycle of action research to keep improving students’ reading abilities in his classroom.

8.     Action-data connection

Mr. Stewart’s teaching action for vocabulary replacement was directly related to a passage from his data analysis where he discusses this activity.  Additionally, he used teacher observations and student reflections to collect much of the data mentioned in the data analysis of the case study.  Journal entries are an extension of the student reflections that Jonathon was already collecting.  Overall, Mr. Stewart’s actions are connected with his data analysis.

9.     Final Thoughts

While I am not convinced that Mr. Stewart’s research project answered the original research question, it seems that the new reading program implemented in this classroom helped his students’ reading and comprehension abilities.  Maybe in the next round of action research, he can work to answer the original question.

Data Collection Considerations

One item that I did not note in my previous blog posts was my description of manipulatives.  For the purposes of my classroom action research project, manipulatives are physical materials used to foster the learning of abstract ideas, particularly in math.  Algebra tiles, scale models, money, geometrically-shaped blocks, and math games are all examples of concrete objects that can be used in math to help students comprehend abstract principles and processes.  Calculators and other technological resources are not included in my definition of manipulatives, as technology is usually referred as a separate category of instructional method.  However, I would include math games on the computer as manipulatives pertaining to the math games category.

For this week’s lesson, I read the assigned literature and reflected on my biases for this research project.  Following this reflection, I decided on the following proposition statements (which include discussions concerning my biases following the proposition):

·       The use of manipulatives will increase the engagement of the students during instruction in Algebra 1, because they will be involved with hands-on activities that are fun.

o   I think that the students will enjoy the hands-on activities and will be more engaged in learning in comparison to their engagement when the teacher instructs using traditional teaching methods for mathematics.

·       The use of manipulatives in an Algebra 1 classroom will increase students’ understanding of abstract mathematical topics by providing concrete examples on which they can base their connections to the abstract ideas.  Thus, the quiz and post-test scores in my experimental class will be higher than the scores in my control class.

o   Research has shown that when concrete methods are first used to explain abstract mathematical ideas, students with and without learning disabilities are more able to comprehend the abstract ideas.  Thus, my bias would be to agree with the research.
 

·       The use of manipulatives as an instructional method will decrease behavioral problems in an Algebra 1 classroom, because the students will have their attention focused on the activities.

o   I believe that students who are bored and seeking attention can more easily disrupt a class during direct instruction than when the rest of the students are focused on an activity that they are enjoying.  In addition, if the pupil that usually disrupts the class is also interested in the activity that he is working on, then he is less likely to cause behavioral issues in the classroom.

·       The students will be more engaged in their Algebra 1 class through the use of manipulatives as an instructional method, because they will be in charge of their own learning during the activities using manipulatives.

o   When students are working on activities with manipulatives, they are in essence teaching themselves.  They are discovering new ideas or working out new mathematical processes in their own way, instead of being told about these ideas and processes by the instructor.  Students that are in charge of their own learning are more likely to pay attention in class and want to learn.
 

·       Using manipulatives in the Algebra 1 classroom will help improve learning for visual and tactile learners.

o   Since most secondary mathematical instruction seems to include direct instruction mixed with guided practice, diverse learners may have difficulties understanding topics in the way that they have been traditionally taught.  Using manipulatives during instruction should provide these students with additional methods to learn and understand the mathematical topics in Algebra 1.