Editorial

Such is the rate of change in the life of Educational Action Research that it seems like no issue appears without there being some new announcement or recognition in the development of the journal. This is no exception and indeed we have two new pieces of news to announce. But before that, it is worth recognising, in this the first issue of 2018, the significant developments in the journal over recent years. It is not long ago that we first made the move to online submission and since then, we have been able to improve the speed of reviews. This has meant that more articles have been accepted and so, in 2017, we expanded the journal from 4 to 5 issues per volume. Not long after this, we moved to a system allowing accepted articles to appear online before appearing in print. These two developments mean that articles are now published quicker than they were previously.

Building on these successful developments, the editors have continued to consult about and reflect upon the nature of the journal. We serve an international, and importantly, interdisciplinary community. But it would be fair to say that not all members of this community feel that a journal titled ‘educational’ could be for them. Our conception of action research is that it results in learning, and so can be considered to be ‘educational’. Our linked conception of the journal is that it should serve the needs and interests of people who are undertaking action research, and learning from it, irrespective of the nature of their work or their profession. We would only ask that anyone submitting to the journal comments in their manuscripts on what they have learnt from and about action research from their work and deliberations. However, whilst we feel that this is a strong and coherent identity, we recognise that the title could still be seen as a cause for concern for some, and so we will continue to consult about, and look into the benefits and problems of a change in name.

But now on to the new news. The first announcement, which many may already have seen, is that Educational Action Research has agreed a sponsoring agreement with the social publishers foundation. This is a non-profit entity, the aim of which is to support action research (and related) projects around the world and to provide a place where this work can be published and shared more widely. The home page for this organisation can be seen at the following URL: www.socialpublishersfoundation.org. As a group of people committed to both the conduct of and publishing from action research, we, the editors, saw this as an important way to continue to support our community.

The second announcement concerns the introduction of a new form of writing to Educational Action Research. One of the things we look at is how popular these editorials are. We can tell by looking at the number of downloads that they tend to be widely read. The style, of providing an introduction to the articles in any given issue, along with a commentary on what this has to say about action research, seems to be working. And yet, as editors, we found that there were things that we wanted to communicate about action research, and indeed which others might want to as well, which would not necessarily fit in with this style of editorials, or indeed of our other article types. As a result, we are introducing a new form of writing which we are terming ‘Action Research Updates’. These are shorter pieces of writing intended to touch upon current issues relating to action research. These could include updates on events or projects, or as in the case of this first ‘action research updates’, commentaries on the political climate in which action research is being undertaken. This first ever ‘action research update’ has been written by Lonnie Rowell, a member of our editorial board, and is entitled ‘A Brief Update from across the Big Pond’s Troubled Waters: Beliefs, Science, Politics, and Action Research’. In reference to the UK history of Educational Action Research, Lonnie comments upon some of the political storms experienced in his home country of the USA, and makes the case for an approach to action research geared towards socially just change. We hope you enjoy this first example of an action research update, and if you have any thoughts about these articles, suggestions of the topics they might address, or if you would like to volunteer to write one feel free to contact us at the journal e-mail: [email protected].

In these editorials, we often like to point out how this collection of articles reflect some of the diversity of work done in the name of action research. This often is concerned with disciplinary differences, contrasting work in nursing, teaching, higher education, community development or social care (amongst others). This is in part a reflection on the diverse community we serve which I referred to earlier in this editorial. It is also true of this issue as well, although perhaps in a slightly different manner than normal. In this, the diversity is as much about the position of the author and their relationship to action research and to the subsequent arguments in their article (for more on this issue of positionality in action research see: Herr and Anderson 2005). The nature of these arguments, and the insights and learning arising from action research differ according to the nature of the relationship between people and their work. This can provide a wide diversity in the nature and scale of discussions between rich first-person accounts of attempts to change immediate contexts and practices through action research, through accounts of attempts to achieve this change collaboratively, by making the most of different people’s skills and expertise, to the application of wider system level changes.  As a result action research articles can vary enormously in the number of people whose lives and work are influenced in the action research described by authors. All are welcome here. But we also welcome contributions from people who want to take on big questions, perhaps as a part of these articles, or as something more abstract, more based on literature and the strength of ideas. This issue reflects much, if not perhaps all, of this diversity.

The first two articles which follow the action research update both, in some way, explore how relationships between practitioners in different professions, especially teaching and academia, can collaborate in action research. The first article of this issue, authored by Leeman, Koeven and Schaafsma and entitled ‘Inter-professional collaboration in action research’ provides an example of this from the Netherlands. This article uncovers some of the important features of such inter-professional work. The ways in which academics work with teachers is also analysed in the second article entitled ‘An Australian view of the academic partner role in schools’. The authors: Beveridge, Mockler and Gore draw on a substantial body of data, generated from a local initiative in which teachers and academics collaborated, to examine the role of the academic partner in action research.

The next pair of articles are both concerned with teacher development through action research. The third article in this issue has six authors namely: Wickstrom, Wilm, Mills, Johnson, Leonard and Larberg. This article ‘Learning from our own lessons: pre-service teachers’ narratives of teaching as an experiment’ provides an account of an initiative to develop Maths teaching in elementary schools. The authors present an analysis of teacher reflections and lesson plans to examine how taking an experimental view of lessons can be beneficial in developing teaching practices. The fourth article is entitled ‘Thinking like researchers: action research and its impact on novice teachers’ thinking’. In this, the authors, Davis, Clayton and Broome, present an analysis of data and show how teacher identity changes through the conduct of action research.

The next article in this issue tackles a central methodological concern of many action researchers, namely reflection. In this, the authors, Luttenberg, Oolbekkink-Marchand and Meijer, present a framework for reflection which incorporates four domains, namely: scientific, artistic, moral and technical reflection. They provide an account both of the design of this framework and the results they have had when putting it into practice. A second methodological examination is then provided in the sixth article in this collection. This article, authored by Pinner is entitled ‘Re-learning from experience: using autoethnography for teacher development’. In this article, the author presents a narrative examination of his own experiences, drawn from and tested through auto ethnographic methods. This combines two methodological approaches closely allied to action research, namely narrative inquiry and auto ethnography.

The next article also picks up on themes common in many other action research studies, or participant, or in education specifically, of student voice. This specifically provides an account of an action research study undertaken in a University in Turkey. This is authored by Uztosun, Skinner and Cadorath and is entitled ‘An action research study into the role of student negotiation in enhancing perceived student engagement during English speaking classes at university level in Turkey’. In this, the authors show how they developed student negotiation through their action research and describe how this subsequently enhanced student engagement. The eighth article is authored by Schabort, Sinnes and Kyle and entitled ‘From contextual frustrations to classroom transformations: female empowerment through science education in rural South Africa’. Although focussed specifically on science education, the authors raise wider themes about the complexities of trying to achieve change in action research, and how these complexities relate to social and organisational issues.

The final pair of articles in this issue are both written by authors using action research in universities. The ninth article in this issue is authored by Spencer and Molina and is entitled ‘Mentoring graduate students through the action research journey using guiding principles’. This article also addresses some of the themes of earlier articles in this issue, in that the authors show how they formed collaborative relationships through, and in support of their action research. They characterise this as being a form of mentoring based around a principled view of action research. The final article in this issue is authored by Walker and Loots. This article is entitled ‘Transformative change in higher education through participatory action research: a capabilities analysis’. In this, the authors raise some big questions for thinking about how the transformative potential of action research can be understood, and potentially enhanced, by taking a capabilities approach. This issue then concludes with book review. In this, Rigney reviews a 2016 book entitled ‘Introduction to Critical Reflection and Action for Teacher Researchers’.

Andrew Townsend