1 / 58

Action Research

Action Research. The research process. Values, world view. Value claims. Research question. Epistemology. Knowledge claims. Research review. Discussion. Interpretations explanations. Theories. Concepts. Results. External validity. Episte- mological lens. Method.

rock
Download Presentation

Action Research

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Action Research

  2. The research process Values, world view Value claims Research question Epistemology Knowledge claims Research review Discussion Interpretations explanations Theories Concepts Results External validity Episte- mological lens Method Findings Data analysis Research design Constructs, variables Records Internal validity Investi- gative lens Observedevents and objects Data collection

  3. Research method The researchmethod: A strategyofenquiry A wayoffindingempirical data abouttheworld Eachresearchmethodbuildon a setof underlying philosphicalassumptions, thechoiceofmethodinfluencethewayresearcherscollectthe data. Specificresearchmethodsimply different setof skills and practices.

  4. Qualitativeresearch • Qualitativeresearchallowstheresearchers to see and understand thecontextwithinwhichdecissions and actionstakeplace. It is thecontextthathelpsexplainwhysomeoneacted as theydid. And thiscontext (or multiple context) is best understood by talking to people.

  5. Action research • Action researchaims to solvecurrentpractical problems whileexpandingscientificknowledge • The action resercher is concerned to createorganizationalchangeand simultaneously to studytheprocess. • The researcherenters a real-worldsituation and aimsboth to improve it and to acquireknowledge

  6. Action Research • «Action researchaims to contibute to thepracticalconcernsofpeople in an intermediateproblematicsituation and to the goals ofsocialscience by joint collaborationwithin a mutuallyacceptableethicalframework» Rappoport (1970)

  7. Traditionallyscientificmethodsbasedon 3 fundamental pronciples: reductionism, repeatability and refutation • Canscientificmethods be applied to material which is not homogeniousthrough time? • The limitationofstudyingcomplex real socialevents in a laboratory, theartificality to splitout single behavioral elements from an integrated system • Informants becomeactiveparticipants in theresearch

  8. The historyof Action Research in IS • The TavistockInstituteof Human Relations 1950’s • Automatisationbut less productive • Sociotechnicalapproach Enid Mumford • Autonomousgroups • Concensus • Scandinavian tradition • Critical perspectiv: Workplace Democracy • Iron & Metal union project Kristen Nygaard • «Data avtalen» • Toolperspective: support workexpertice, mutual learning • Participatory Design • Etnografic studies: Thickdescriptions -> focusonworkpractices • Computer SupportedCollaborativeWork (CSCW) • Workpractice + Collaboration • Individual & collective

  9. Action Research • Socialreality is continuoslybeingcreated and recreated in a socialprocess. The crucial elements in a researchapproachwhichwork in a specificsocialsituationare (Agyris et al 1982): • A collaborativeprocessbetweenresearchers and people in a situation • A processofcriticalinquiry • A focusonsocialpractice • A deliberateprocessofreflectivelearning

  10. What is actuallybeingresearched? • Themesreplaceshypotheses • Who is researcher, who is participants? • Mergingtherolesofthetwo • How do youknowhow to stop? • The fluxofevents and ideaswhichconstitutetheresearchsituationwillcontinue to evolvethrough time • Write up theresultsmight reveal whether or not a strong case has beenmade… • How canresults be conveyed to others or transfered to othersituations?

  11. Representations of the action research cycle (A: McKay, 2000; B: Susman and Evered, 1978; C: Burns, 1994; D: Checkland, 1991)

  12. Connecting research interest and problem solving: Integrated model Kay and Marshall (2001)The dual imperatives of action research.

  13. Connecting research interest and problem solving: Parallell model Action research Theory building

  14. The Action Research Cycle

  15. Diagnosing refers to the joint (researcher and practitioner) identification of situated problems and their underlying causes. During this phase, researchers and practitioners jointly formulate a working hypothesis of the research phenomenon to be used in the subsequent phases of the action research cycle. Action planning is the process of specifying the actions that can improve the problem situation. Typically, this process includes specifications of IT-prototypes based on problems discovered in the diagnosing phase. Intervention refers to the implementation of the intervention specified in the action planning phase. Action Research cycle

  16. Evaluation entails the joint assessment of the intervention by practitioners and researchers. This is typically done in the practical problem situation in which the initial diagnosis was conducted. Specifying learning denotes the ongoing process of documenting and summing up the learning outcomes of the action research cycle. These learning outcomes should constitute knowledge contributions to both theory and practice, but they are also recognized as temporary understandings that serve as the starting point for a new cycle of inquiry. AR cycle continue

  17. Principles for Canonical Action Research (Davison et al (2004) • AR praised for the relevance of its results • Depending of context • To whom and what is the study relevant • Criticized for lacking methodological rigor • To be informed by principles that are accepted by a research community based on a theoretically base • Lack of distinction from consultancy • CAR iterative, rigorous and collaborative, involving a focus on both organizational development and the generation of knowledge

  18. Principles for Canonical action Research • the Principle of the Researcher–Client Agreement (RCA) • the Principle of the Cyclical Process Model (CPM) • the Principle of Theory • the Principle of Change through Action • the Principle of Learning through Reflection.

  19. Criteria for the Principle of the Researcher–Client Agreement (RCA) • Did both the researcher and the client agree that CAR was the appropriate approach for the organizational situation? • Was the focus of the research project specified clearly and explicitly? • Did the client make an explicit commitment to the project? • Were the roles and responsibilities of the researcher and client organization members specified explicitly? • Were project objectives and evaluation measures specified explicitly? • Were the data collection and analysis methods specified explicitly?

  20. Criteria for the Principle of the Cyclical Process Model (CPM) • Did the project follow the CPM or justify any deviation from it? • Did the researcher conduct an independent diagnosis of the organizational situation? • Were the planned actions based explicitly on the results of the diagnosis? • Were the planned actions implemented and evaluated? • Did the researcher reflect on the outcomes of the intervention? • Was this reflection followed by an explicit decision on whether or not to proceed through an additional process cycle? • Were both the exit of the researcher and the conclusion of the project due to either the project objectives being met or some other clearly articulated justification?

  21. Criteria for the Principle of Theory • Were the project activities guided by a theory or set of theories? • Was the domain of investigation, and the specific problem setting, relevant and significant to the interests of theresearcher’s community of peers as well as the client? • Was a theoretically based model used to derive the causes of the observed problem? • Did the planned intervention follow from this theoretically based model? • Was the guiding theory, or any other theory, used to evaluate the outcomes of the intervention?

  22. Criteria for the Principle of Change through Action •  Were both the researcher and client motivated to improve the situation? • Were the problem and its hypothesized cause(s) specified as a result of the diagnosis? • Were the planned actions designed to address the hypothesized cause(s)? • Did the client approve the planned actions before they were implemented? • Was the organization situation assessed comprehensively both before and after the intervention? • Were the timing and nature of the actions taken clearly and completely documented?

  23. Criteria for the Principle of Learning through Reflection • Did the researcher provide progress reports to the client and organizational members? • Did both the researcher and the client reflect upon the outcomes of the project? • Were the research activities and outcomes reported clearly and completely? • Were the results considered in terms of implications for further action in this situation? • Were the results considered in terms of implications for action to be taken in related research domains? • Were the results considered in terms of implications for the research community (general knowledge, informing/re-informingtheory)? • Were the results considered in terms of the general applicability of CAR?

  24. Action researchcont. • Collaboration with a group of people experiencing a problem • Researchers help to find what the problem is and implement possible solutions • An iterative cycle: diagnosing a problem, action planning, action taking, implementing, and evaluating outcomes. • Evaluation may lead to a new diagnosis, cycle is repeated. • Contribution to practical concerns in parallell with theory building • Vision: researchers have a vision on how the reality should be – not value free • Action research can be both positivist, interpretive, and critical

  25. Field researchmethods

  26. Whentheorganization is yourlaboratory

  27. Devideinto 3 • Compare Action Research with Case studies

  28. Devideinto 3 • Compare Action Research withParticipatoryObservation

  29. Health Information Systems Program - DHIS 2 • HISP a global action research network initiated in collaboration with University of Western Cape in1994 funded by Norad. • DHIS 2 is an open source software for reporting, analysis and dissemination of data for all health programs • Shared and integrated data warehouse for essential health data: information for action • Aggregate, events, and patient data • Generic and generative platform - supports a wide range of uses also beyond the health sector • Financed and endorsed by all Global Health agencies, WHO, Norad, Global Fund, PEPFARUnicef, Gates Foundation, GAVI, CDC • WHO collaborative senter • DHIS2 used in 88 countries in the Global South

  30. DHIS2 adoption by MoH 2018 Global footprint 2.28 billion people + 60 NGO’s, 58 PEPFAR countries, 60+ PSI countries, 10 global organizations

  31. Brief history of DHIS 2 • 1996: First implementation (MS Access) in South Africa • 2000 National standard in South Africa • 2005: DHIS 2 Java web-based development started • 2006: First DHIS 2 implementation in Kerala, India • 2010: First national online DHIS 2 implementation in Kenya, • then Ghana, Uganda, Rwanda • Norad core funding • 2012: Joint 3-donor (PEPFAR, Global Fund, Norad) effort to strengthen DHIS 2 use in countries • 2015: June 58 PEPFAR countries reporting through DATIM (DHIS2) • 50 countriesusing DHIS 2, national standard in 16 countries

  32. Action research: Capacity building through innovation • Develop sustainable information systems that empower communities and decision makers to improve coverage and quality of services • Action Research: Building knowledge on implementing HIS while building systems on the ground through partnerships. • HISP PhD school at University of Oslo: 55 PhDs graduated, 25 active • International Masters programs in South Africa, Mozambique, Malawi, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Sri Lanka (400 graduated) • Regional DHIS 2 Academies, 87 Academies since 2011, 4800 graduated • Online Academy: Fundamentals, PEPFAR, In country Data Use (Indonesia) Sustainability goals

  33. Action oriented multidisciplinary research VISION: • Develop sustainable information systems that empower communities and decision makers to improve coverage and quality of services • Strengthening national health information systems • Collaborating with Ministries of Health • Participatory design • Action Research: Building knowledge on implementing HIS while building systems on the ground through partnerships. • Research theme: Sustainable implementation • Interoperability • Architect(ing) • Scaling

  34. HISP Action Research approach

  35. Action researchcont. • Collaboration with a group of people experiencing a problem • Researchers help to find what the problem is and implement possible solutions • An iterative cycle: diagnosing a problem, action planning, action taking, implementing, and evaluating outcomes. • Evaluation may lead to a new diagnosis, cycle is repeated. • Contribution to practical concerns in parallell with theory building • Vision: researchers have a vision on how the reality should be – not value free • Action research can be both positivist, interpretive, and critical

  36. Research method The researchmethod: A strategyofenquiry A wayoffindingempirical data abouttheworld Eachresearchmethodbuildon a setof underlying philosphicalassumptions, thechoiceofmethodinfluencethewayresearcherscollectthe data. Specificresearchmethodsimply different setof skills and practices.

  37. Qualitativeresearch • Qualitativeresearchallowstheresearchers to see and understand thecontextwithinwhichdecissions and actionstakeplace. It is thecontextthathelpsexplainwhysomeoneacted as theydid. And thiscontext (or multiple context) is best understood by talking to people.

  38. What is happening here? • Why is it happening? • How has it come to happenthisway? • Whendid it happen?

  39. Research Design Values, world view Value claims Research question Epistemology Knowledge claims Research review Discussion Interpretations explanations Theories Concepts Results External validity Episte- mological lens Method Findings Data analysis Research design Constructs, variables Records Internal validity Investi- gative lens Observedevents and objects Data collection 43

  40. Research design Is aboutorganizingresearchactivity - includingthecollectionofdata - in waysthatare most likely to achievetheresearchaim.

  41. Research Design • Input: Research Question, Theory, Epistemological lens • Processsteps • Identify key concepts • Choose and justifymethod • Choose unit ofanalyis and levelofinvestigation • Connect research interestand problem solvinginterest • Construct instruments • Createhigh-level plan for intervention • Validateagainst research question • Output: Research Design (Investigative lens)

  42. Key choisesofresearch design • Researcher is independentvsResearcher is involved • Large samples vs Small numbers • Testing theoriesvsGeneratingthories • Experiemental design vsFieldworkmethods

  43. Model for qualitiveresearch design • Philosophicalassumptions • Research method • Data collectiontechnique • Data analysisapproach • Writtenrecord

  44. The roleoftheresearch questions • Theyorganizetheproject and give it direction and coherence • Theydelimittheproject, showingitsboundaries • Theykeeptheresearcherfocused • Theyprovide a frameworkwhenyouwrite up yourresearch • Theypoint to themethods and data thatwill be needed

  45. Focusing Research • Scrutinizing and clarifying our research – what are we really doing? • Research without focus is inefficient • We don’t do the things that really matters to us • We get isolated as we do not communicate what we are doing • The 7 steps on the next page: • Should make sense when writing a paper or a thesis • Should be done in the given sequence • Must result in no more than a title and 6 sentences • Must be aligned, e.g. the method must fit the research question • Can be repeated at any time • Will not in it self lead to excellent research

  46. The 7 Steps • State your main research problem motivating the research (one sentence) • State your main research question addressing the problem (one sentence) • Define the key concept used in the thesis (one sentence) • State your unit of analysis and empirical setting (one sentence) • State your research approach/method (one sentence) • State your main (expected) contribution (one sentence) • Write a title that communicates the essence of the research

  47. Qualitativeresearch: A focusontext Quantitativeresearch: A focusonnumbers Surveys Laboratory experiments Simulations Mathematical modeling Structuredequationmodeling Statistical analysis Econometrics • Action research • Case studyresearch • Etnography • GroundedTheory • Semiotics • Discurseanalysis • Narrative and metaphor

  48. Case study • A detailedstudyof a single social unit • The social unit is usuallylocated in onephysicalspace, thepeoplemaking up the unit beingdifferentiated from otherswhoarenot part ofit. The unit has clearboundarieswhich make it easy to identify • A case studycan be of a socialprocess, an organization, or anysocialprocess

More Related