Action research, science, and the co-optation of social research

Abstract

This paper centers on our argument that action research (AR) produces “better” research than orthodox social research but that AR is marginalized in “Northern” universities because it connects social research to social reform. The key viewpoints informing our work are easily stated but elaborate arguments are required to justify them. We argue that AR is the most credible and methodologically coherent way to create and apply reliable knowledge in social research.

Existing power structures prefer orthodox social research, not because it produces better research but because it does not interfere with existing social arrangements. The demand for social distance and objectification separates the researcher from the subject and prevents social research from becoming an instrument of social change. The dominance of these frameworks in university environments reveals that universities, in addition to being centers of learning, play an important role in replicating existing social arrangements (Noam Chomsky et al., 1997). We believe that AR's social change agenda, not its inferiority as social research, causes its marginality.