This issue of Educational Action Research, the fourth in the 2016 volume, marks a significant point in the history of the journal because this is the last time Educational Action Research will publish four issues per year. From the next volume (vol. 25) we will move to five issues per year. This change has arisen because of an increase in the number of publishable submissions we have received and is an indication that action research as a cross-disciplinary approach to equitable change is flourishing. It is also an indication that Educational Action Research is seen as a useful place for a dynamic community of authors to share their work and contribute to an ongoing dialogue about the practices and principles of action research in a range of disciplines and a variety of geographical, social and political settings. This success is a tribute to both the quality of writing of our authors and also the commitment of our reviewers who, as we do every year, we thank through acknowledging their contribution in the final part of this issue. All journals – and Educational Action Research is no exception – are dependent on reviewers to give their time to reviewing and often re-reviewing all of the articles which are ultimately published by the journal, and indeed many more that do not, for differing reasons, make it to publication. Without the generosity of reviewers we would not be able to exist.
We have a total of 12 original articles in this issue, which are followed by a book review, a dedication to a departing editor and, as already mentioned, a list of our reviewers in this issue of Educational Action Research. The original articles come from a range of disciplinary backgrounds, adopt a variety of approaches to action research and employ a similarly diverse range of conceptual and theoretical frameworks. There are a number of common threads in this collection of articles, including: practical knowledge; individual, organisational and systemic change; human rights; participatory action research; and emancipation. The first of this collection of original articles is authored by Sanderse and is entitled ‘Aristotelian Action Research: Its Value for Studying Character Education in Schools’. Locating this work in the broader context of differing traditions of action research, Sanderse makes an argument for what is described as a ‘fourth approach’; one rooted in the work of Aristotle, and in particular concerned with the concepts of phronesis and praxis. These concepts have long been of interest to readers of this journal and Sanderse goes on to apply them to the theme of character education.
The theme of teacher learning is continued in the second of this group of articles, ‘Experiencing Action Evaluation’s Cyclic Process: Partnering Conflict, Reflection, and Action’ authored by Burrows and Harkness. In this article, teacher learning and development is linked to two other concepts common to readers of Educational Action Research, namely reflection and reflexivity. The authors emphasise that these processes, whilst beneficial, can also be unsettling for action researchers. This issue of the emotional responses to change is the main focus of the next article, entitled ‘Student-teachers’ Emotional Needs and Dichotomous Problem-solving: Non-cognitive Root Causes of Teaching and Learning Problems’. In this article, Soslau shows how the degree and form of practical learning of teachers in action research is influenced by the extent to which their emotional needs are met.
The fourth article in this issue is authored by Lohnes Watulak, who takes a critical perspective on the concept, and practices of reflection, through the discussion of a project in which inquiry groups were established to develop the digital literacy of pre-service teachers. This article, entitled ‘Reflection in Action: Using Inquiry Groups to Explore Critical Digital Literacy with Pre-service Teachers’, uses socio-cultural theory to critique the practical approaches taken to teaching the concept of digital literacies. Practical change and development is also explored by Lofthouse, Flanagan and Wigley, in their case with a particular focus on the establishment of partnerships between people with differing professional roles and expertise. Their article ‘A New Model of Collaborative Action Research; Theorising from Inter-professional Practice Development’ shows how partnerships between people from different professional backgrounds provide benefits which make them worth the time and effort that it takes to establish them.
The issue of collaboration, partnership and professional learning and development is then picked up by Elo who, in an article entitled ‘The Benefits and Challenges of Enterprise Education: Results from an Action Research Project in the Third Grade in Finnish Basic Education’, shows how collaborative action research is not only beneficial for the professional development of individuals, but can also be a means for changing organisations. The topic of ‘practical knowledge’ is linked to emancipation, another issue of popular interest to action researchers, in the seventh article in this collection entitled ‘English Language Teachers Becoming More Efficacious through Research Engagement at their Turkish University’ by Wyatt and Dikilita. These authors explore how the use of action research as a part of the professional development of university teachers had positive effects on their sense of self-efficacy and their practical knowledge, and can thus be considered to be emancipatory.
This idea of practical knowledge is addressed in a different manner by Walther, whose article entitled ‘Developing an “Ethics for Neuroscientists” Course: Between Emancipation, Practicality, and Postmodernity in Educational Action Research’, draws on postmodern theory to critique concepts of emancipation. This is illustrated through the development of the ethics course, a course established to counter the misuse of research. The issue of ethics and action research is also drawn on in the ninth article by Gombert, Douglas, McArdle and Carlisle. In their article entitled ‘Reflections on Ethical Dilemmas in Working with So-called “Vulnerable” and “Hard-to-reach” Groups: Experiences from the Foodways and Futures Project’, the authors discuss some of the implications of this project for our understanding of the ethical component of action research and how these relate (or do not) to ethical guidelines.
Van Peursem, Samujh and Nath author the tenth article, entitled ‘A Programme for Future Audit Professionals: Using Action Research to Nurture Student Engagement’. The authors provide an analysis of the conduct and effects of the implementation of a university programme intended to encourage more active involvement of auditing students in their studies. The article outlines how this initiative contributed to higher level learning and, significantly, also to the breakdown of social and technical barriers in the classroom.
The penultimate article in this issue critically examines the South American tradition of human rights education. Authored by Tavares and entitled ‘Human Rights Education and the Research Process: Action Research as a Tool for Reflection and Change’, the article examines projects undertaken with an agenda of human rights education and examines the potential for action research to play a part in this aspiration. This article, which raises issues of participation and equitable change, is followed by another that critically examines the concept of participation. This final article, authored by Santos and entitled ‘Re-signifying Participatory Action Research (PAR) in Higher Education: What Does “P” stand for in PAR?’, problematises the very basis of what is claimed to be participatory action research as applied in higher education. Drawing from Arendt, Santos challenges us to reconsider how we understand and view participation. We follow this article with our latest book review, in which Tara Webster-Deakin reviews Jean McNiff’s 2014 Writing and Doing Action Research.
As the final part of this editorial we would also like to give our thanks for all the work of Marie Brennan on the journal, another long-lasting editor who has recently resigned from her role as co-editor on the journal. Marie has been an active member of the editorial team of Educational Action Research for over 20 years, having been one of the co-editors of the journal for the past eight years, and a member of the international advisory board for the 12 years prior to that. Marie is currently seeing her final group of articles through the review process, following which she will step down as one of the co-editors, although we are delighted that she will be continuing her association by returning to previous role as a member of the International Advisory Board. From all of us at Educational Action Research we thank you for everything you have done for the journal and wish you the best of luck in your retirement. To offer our thanks we are delighted to be able to publish a dedication to Marie written by Susan Groundwater-Smith.
On behalf of the editors