Synthesisability and optimising exploratory action research for continuing professional development

Figures & data

Table 1. A comparison of the qualitative synthesis methods adopted by two studies.

	Chen (2016)	Chong and Reinders (2020)
Identify relevant sources	Review articles Studies Databases Journals Conference programmes and proceedings World Wide Web	Digital libraries and databases Major refereed journals World Wide Web Primary studies in book chapters
Identify keywords and search	Search string and source titles given in paper
Evaluation	Publication retrieval rate, screening procedures, exclusion rate and criteria justified against Qualitative Research Guidelines of Journals of Language Learning and Technology and TESOL Quarterly
Extraction tools	Not given	NVivo
Research synthesis: coding	Two coders closely collaborate. Agreement reached on procedures. Substantive face-to-face collaborative coding on five studies. Remaining 15 studies coded independently. Last, theoretical (thematic) coding occurred.	One coder identifies codes in 16 studies. Next, conceptual and descriptive themes and sub themes identified. Last, second author gave input.
Analysis and reporting	Memo writing, memo and code sorting, and theory writing.	Initial, focused, and axial coding. Memo writing and constant comparison.

Figure 1. A conceptual diagram representing proposed characteristics of an alternative research orientation- synthesisability.

Table 2. A table describing recommendations for operationalisation of synthesisable EAR for CPD.

Recommendation	Details
(1) Establish CPD initiatives	Leverage privileged status to obtain institutional support.
(2) Promote teachers’ choice	Ask teachers to propose research agendas of interest to them. Group topics thematically for synthesis across cohorts if necessary.
(3) Standardise support	Provide high levels of ongoing, standardised support. Assisting with study development and ethical matters like stakeholder collaboration will promote synthesisability through quality control.
(4) Clarify submission formats	Teachers submit standardised accounts.
(5) Diversify output formats	Produce outputs for different audiences. For example, a similar booklet to Champion Teachers: stories … for teachers, and a QRS for both research and teacher audiences.

Chen, Tsuiping. 2016. “Technology-Supported Peer Feedback in ESL/EFL Writing Classes: A Research Synthesis.” Computer Assisted Language Learning 29 (2): 365–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.960942.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chong, Sin Wang, and Hayo Reinders. 2020. “Technology-Mediated Task-Based Language Teaching: A Qualitative Research Synthesis.” Language Learning & Technology 24 (3): 70–86. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/44739.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar