Knowledge And Understanding About Conducting Research Before And After Participating In The Program

An application of the principles of action research for improving the teaching -learning activities. Associate Professor Dr. Kongsak Thathong 1 , Associate Professor Dr. Ngamnit Thathong 2 , Associate Professor Ladda Silanoi Assistant Professor Phairoth Termtachatipong, Assistant Professor Teerachai Nethanomsak Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, Thailand

INTRODUCTION National Education Act B.E 2542 (1999) has become effective since August 20, 1999. Learning reform is the vital part of all concern. Education shall be based on the principle that all learners are capable of learning and self-development, and are regarded as being most important. The teaching-learning process shall aim at enabling the learners to develop themselves at their own pace and to the best of their potentiality. The Act put its emphasis on the development of quality of human resources, life-long education for all, participation of all segments of society in education provision, and continuous development of the bodies of knowledge and learning processes. The recent teaching and learning methods were not enough to stimulate children’s thinking and action. In order to motivate children to think and act more efficiently, teachers should always develop effective learning processes by conducting classroom research for developing suitable learning for learners at different levels of education. Because classroom research is a systematic and reliable process to investigate knowledge and information in a context that needs to be improved and developed. Furthermore, both learners and teachers may benefit from research as part of the learning process and learn together from different type of teaching-learning media and other sources of knowledge (Office of National Education Committee, 1999). 2 Action research is focussed on the improvement and involvement of its participants (Carr & Kemmis, 1986; Kemmis & McTaggart, 1992). It attempts to involve participants in educational process through studying their own professional work collaboratively (Kemmis, 1988; Kemmis & McTaggart, 1992; Miller, 2002). The primary emphases of action research are action as a fundamental process or the improvement of practice, increasing understanding about practice in a collaborative group, and improving the situation in which the practice takes place (Zuber- Skerritt, 1992).

Kemmis and McTaggart (1992) suggest four steps in a self-reflective spiral of action research: planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. These steps provide basis on which participants can formulate new plans, new action, observation, and reflection, and repetition of the whole process until a satisfactory result is achieved. Action research emphasizes dissatisfaction in personal practice. It seeks to improve teaching practice by systematically trying alternative strategies in a search for more satisfactory practice.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purposes of this study were to enhance collaboration among the Faculty of Education and teachers and to study the outcomes of applying the principles of action research in a training process to foster the skills and ability of participants to conduct classroom research to improve their teaching- learning activities.

METHOD In conducting the study, the researchers employed documentary study, a literature review and a participatory workshop on classroom research using the principles of action research.

Documentary study was employed to study and understand literature, concepts, and related principles of classroom research. A participatory workshop on classroom research was conducted collaboratively to enhance group understanding through discussion; participants were encouraged to express their opinions and work together. 3

The Participants The researchers conducted a participatory workshop on classroom research at the Faculty of Education during May 8-9, May 16-17 and June 1-2 of 2002. 1. The participants were 5 lectures ( 3 males and 2 females) of the Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University and 2. 28 elementary school teachers from 8 schools in Khon Kaen Province. There were 4 male and 24 female teachers with an average age of 45 years. Their ages ranged from 33 to 55 years There were 25 teachers who finished B.Ed. and 2 teachers got M.Ed. There was only one teacher who didn’t finish a bachelor degree. 3. One participant observer was a graduate student in the Department of Educational Evaluation and Research Design, who observed and used semi-structured interviews with some participants to assist the researchers to reflect on the activities after completion and to validate these reflections.

Techniques for collecting data and monitoring the study In monitoring the study, the researchers employed various techniques for collecting data such as interviews, participant observations, journal writing, reflective writing, photographs and questionnaires.

Techniques for analyzing of data Data were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively, with the emphasis was placed on quantitative approach. The triangulation technique was used to cross-reference a number of participants’ perceptions of an event (Grundy & Kemmis, 1981). Data were cross-checked by interviewing participants using three different interviewers to determine the consistency of data. To ensure trustworthiness and confirmability, journal-writing reports were read, verified, and edited by participants for affirmation of statements as authentic ideas or viewpoints.

In analyzing qualitative data, 4 a process of interpretive approach was used to understand the essences of phenomenon under investigation by focusing on meanings of events and phenomena and the social events from every angle and considering it thoughtfully (Jeans, 1997; Comstock, 1982; Newman, 2000). Illuminative, formative, and summative evaluations were used to investigate the effectiveness of the participatory workshop on classroom research. During the ongoing workshop, participants were asked to reflect their opinions. Both open-and closed-ended questionnaires were used at the end of the participatory workshop on classroom research to assess the effectiveness of the workshop in terms of the participants’ outcomes. The participants were asked to indicate their opinions before and after participating in the workshop on classroom research using a five-point rating scale questionnaire. In scoring the instrument, numerical values of one through five were also assigned to each level of opinions on their knowledge and ability in conducting research: lowest (1), low (2), medium (3), high (4), and highest (5). Means (M) and standard deviations (SD) were computed for each item of the questionnaires. Wilcoxon signed test was used to determine significant differences between the means of participants’ knowledge and ability in conduction research before and after participating in the workshop on classroom research. If significant differences were found, it meant that their knowledge and ability on research were positively changed. In this study, quantitative data were used to investigate what aspects of participants’ knowledge and ability on research were changed over a period of time. These quantitative data were used to examine the distribution of an occurrence of an event or phenomenon. Qualitative approach was used in the reflecting phase so direct contact between the researchers and the participants were required.

RESULTS At the end of each phase of the participatory workshop on classroom research, all participants were asked to anonymously write their reflections. Every participant said that the workshop was worthwhile and necessary. They appreciated the friendly and democratic atmosphere of the workshop; the opportunity to develop and acquire skills in conducting classroom research; the opportunity to develop and enhance skills in collaborative work; and some of opportunity to participate in the workshop. They claimed that they also had the opportunity to develop skills in 5 interpersonal relations, collaborative work, and problem-solving. They also developed their ability to discuss, report, speak, and respond to feedback.

I think that I made the correct decision in joining this project. I gained a lot of benefits and I know myself better than before. (Extracted from a participant’s journal}

I used to participate in training on classroom research but I still can’t conduct a classroom research. I see the light at the end of the tunnel. I am very proud of myself to conduct a survey research. It is my first research report. (Extracted from a participant’s journal}

I would like to express my sincere thanks to this project. I have an opportunity to be a member of this group to receive training in conducting research. I have many responsibilities and have no money to register for training. I am very glad that I have a chance to conduct classroom research on my own. (Extracted from a participant’s journal}

I have made a right decision to participate in this project. I gained knowledge and enjoyed practicing collaborative work. I like activities and applied some activities to my students. (Extracted from a participant’s journal}

I gain a lot of experience and I don’t have to pay for participating in the workshop on classroom research. Everything is free. I really like materials, lunch, and coffee break. (Extracted from a participant’s journal}

I like every activity in this workshop especially coffee break and lunch. (Extracted from a participant’s journal}

In short, the participants were very satisfied with the classroom research activities. They gained a lot of experience and knowledge from these activities. They understand the principles of conducting research. In addition, the participants were asked to indicate their knowledge and ability in conduction research before and after participating in the classroom research activities in order to assess more of the participants’ outcomes by using 1 = lowest, 2 = low, 3 = medium, 4 = high, and 5 = highest. The results are indicated in Table 1 and Table 2.

Table 1 Comparison of participants’ knowledge and understanding about conducting research before and after participating in the program using Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test

before After Wilcoxon Mean SD Mean SD Z-value 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

1. Analysis of problem 1.96 0.89 3.68 0.69 -4.465* 2.Assessment of research topic 2.12 0.97 3.88 0.67 -4.354* 3.Identification of problem 2.08 0.97 3.88 0.67 -4.370* 4.Writing of research question 2.00 0.91 4.00 0.65 -4.331 5.Writing of research proposal 1.84 0.94 3.84 0.69 -4.361* 6.Research design 1.81 0.77 3.53 0.80 -4.325* 7.Constructing of instruments 2.04 0.88 3.92 0.65 -4.239* 8.Collection of data 2.04 1.17 4.00 0.64 -4.127* 9. Analysis of data 1.88 1.01 3.64 0.88 -3.662* 10.Presentation of data 2.00 1.22 3.64 0.91 -3.449* 11. Interpretation of data 1.88 1.17 3.60 0.91 -3.469* 12. Report writing 1.80 1.00 3.60 0.87 -3.766* Total 1.94 0.83 3.77 0.68 -4.373*

Table 2 Comparison of participants’ ability in conducting research before and after participating in the program using Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test

topic before After Wilcoxon Mean SD Mean SD Z- value 16 1. Analysis of problem 1.88 0.92 3.56 0.77 -4.362* 2.Assessment of research topic 1.84 1.00 3.72 0.74 -4.339* 3.Identification of problem 1.92 1.00 3.64 0.64 -4.364* 4.Writing of research question 1.76 0.72 3.76 0.66 -4.475* 5.Writing of research proposal 1.80 1.04 3.96 0.74 -4.426* 6.Research design 1.66 0.82 3.37 0.76 -4.337* 7.Constructing of instruments 1.99 0.91 3.75 0.73 -4.307* 8.Collection of data 2.00 1.08 4.00 0.71 -4.249* 9. Analysis of data 1.72 0.94 3.84 0.75 -4.434* 10.Presentation of data 1.80 1.04 3.72 0.74 -4.337* 11. Interpretation of data 1.64 0.91 3.68 0.75 -4.347* 12. Report writing 1.80 0.92 3.78 0.86 -4.428* Total 1.82 0.87 3.73 0.60 -4.373*

The results in Table 1 and 2 illustrated that the desirable characteristics of research were fostered and enhanced in participants after participated in the workshop on classroom research. All of knowledge and ability in conducting research were shifted up more than 1.5 on the rating scale, which indicated significant differences at the .05 level. However, all of the participants’ characteristics about research were improved.

CONCLUSIONS The results of this research show the effectiveness of the workshop on classroom research. These results also show that there are improvement and change of participants’ knowledge and ability in conducting research after participating in this project. Net working is also established. The participants were very satisfied with research activities. They gained a lot about working as a group. They knew how to work with other people and knew themselves better. They developed skills in conducting research to improve their teaching-learning activities. In addition, the benefits of this training project was not limited to personal development of teachers . Moreover, the principles but also have included the professional development and pedagogical strategies of action research could be applied to the training of academics to teach the research methodology at the tertiary level.

REFERENCES Carr, W. & Keemis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Knowing through action research. Geelong: Deakin University Press. Comstock, D (1982). A method of critical research, in E. Bredo& W. Feinberg, 17 (eds) Knowledge and values in social and educational research. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, pp. 370-390 Eisenhart, M. and Borko, H. (1993). Designing classroom research: Themes, issues, and struggles. Massachusets: Allyn & Bacon. Grundy, S and Kemmis, S (1981). Educational action research in Austalia: The stater of the art (overview). In S. Kemmis, R. McTaggart, G. Di Chiro, C. Henry, J. Mousley, & I. Robottom, (eds) The action research reader, Geelong: Deakin University Press Hopkins, D. (1993). A teacher's guide to classroom research (2nd edition.). Bristol, PA: Open University Press. Jeans, B. (1997). Education research: Problems, processes and methodology, A paper presented at the Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand. Keeves, J.P. (1997). Introduction: Methods and processes in education research. In J. P. Keeves (ed),Educational research, methodology, and measurement: An international handbook (2nd edition) Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (pp. 277-285). Kemmis, S. (1988) Action Research. in J.P. Keeves (ed), Educational research, methodology, and measurement: An international handbook. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (1992). The action research planner (3rd edition). Victoria: Deakin University Press. McKernan , J. (1996) . Curriculum action research , London: Kogan Page Limited. McMillan, J. H. (1996). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer. (2nd edition) New York: Harper Collins College Publishers. Miller, A.C (2002). Collaborative action research. South Florida Center for Educational Leaders. Webpage:http://www.fau.edu/divdep/coe/sfcel/define.htm (search date 12/3/2002) Newman, J.M.(2000). Action research: A brief overview. Forum:Qualitative social research (On-line Journal). Available at Http://qualitative-research.net/fqs. Vol. 1. No. 1. 2000, January. Office of National Education Committee. (1999). National Education Act B.E 2542. Bangkok: Prikwan Printing Co. Ltd. (In Thai) Zuber-Skerritt, O. (1992). Action research in higher education :Examples and reflection. London: Kogan page limited. Zuber-Skerritt, O. (1992). Professional development in higher education:A theoretical framework for action research. London: Kogan page limited.