Get Disseminating your action research: a practical guide to sharing the results of practitioner res
Craig A. Mertler
Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://textbookfull.com/product/disseminating-your-action-research-a-practical-guideto-sharing-the-results-of-practitioner-research-1st-edition-craig-a-mertler/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant download maybe you interests ...
Action Research in Education A Practical Guide Sara Efrat Efron
This practical and easy-to-use book offers professional educators of any academic level, subject area, or position the tools, techniques, and strategies to disseminate, share, publish, and promote the results of their action research projects and studies.
Acclaimed author Craig A. Mertler offers a clear-cut guide for practitionerresearchers, covering the following:
■ A robust overview of action research/practitioner research, including its characteristics, processes, and professional benefits;
■ Discussion of the main products for disseminating practitioner research, including written reports, presentations, and visual formats;
■ Delivery strategies for disseminating practitioner research, including refereed publications (both practitioner and scholarly), face-to-face and virtual presentations (conferences, local presentations, and elsewhere), as well as social media and electronic media, from blogs and podcasts to Twitter and LinkedIn.
Written for any educational practitioner in any role—from in-service and preservice teachers in PK-12 or higher education settings to scholars, administrators, policymakers, staff, graduate students, and other researchers—this book offers a pragmatic and motivational guide useful for any field of education in which practitioner research is component.
Craig A. Mertler is a Professor of Action Research and Quantitative Methods at Barry University, Miami, Florida, USA. He is the author of 28 other books.
The right of Craig A. Mertler to be identified as author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice : Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Mertler, Craig A., author.
Title: Disseminating your action research : a practical guide to sharing the results of practitioner research / Craig A. Mertler.
Description: New York : Routledge, 2024. | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2023026029 (print) | LCCN 2023026030 (ebook) | ISBN 9781032345093 (hbk) | ISBN 9781032345055 (pbk) | ISBN 9781003322498 (ebk)
Best Practices in Publishing Practitioner Research 103
Takeaways from this Chapter 106
References 107
7 Face-to-Face (and Virtual) Presentations 108
Why Present Your Research to Others? 108
Site-based Conferences 109
Virtual Conferences 111
Invited Presentations 112
The Conference Presentation Process 113
non-conference Presentations 117
Local Presentations 117
Practitioner Inquiry Communities 119
Best Practices in Presenting Practitioner Research 119
Takeaways from this Chapter 122
References 123
8 Social Media 125
Twitter 125 Facebook 128
Instagram 131
Linkedin 133
Best Practices in Sharing Practitioner Research via Social Media 137 Takeaways from this Chapter 141 References 142
9 Even More Options 144
Personal Websites 144
Alternative Written Forms of Sharing Research 147
Blogs 148
Zines 149
Editorials 150
Alternative non-written Forms of Sharing Research 151
Vlogs 151
Podcasts 151
YouTube and Vimeo 152
Best Practices in Sharing Practitioner Research via Alternative Strategies 154
Takeaways from this Chapter 156 References 157
10 Motivating Yourself to Share Your Practitioner Research 161
Revisiting the Original Question: Why Should You Be Concerned with Disseminating Your Research? 161
Importance of Sharing Results of Your Research 162
Realistic Expectations 164
A Final Word … Following Through and Following Up 166
Takeaways from this Chapter 169
170
Introduction
Why should you Concern yourself with Disseminating the Results of Practitioner Research?
What do you think of when you hear the word “research”? For many people, the word “research” evokes negative connotations for a variety of reasons. Some people have an innate aversion to the concept of research. The word itself tends to elicit feelings and thoughts of an esoteric process—one that many people, unless they were trained specifically in how to conduct research, find extremely foreign. Still others find it far removed from their work as professionals in virtually any industry or setting. They write it off as something that is engaged in and conducted only by scientists or perhaps university professors. From my experiences as a professor of education—specifically as a professor of educational research methods—over the course of three decades, I know firsthand that many graduate students in education tend to identify research methods courses as their least favorite aspect of their graduate programs. Admittedly, some graduate students are excited and look forward to any research methods course that they are required to take; however, a majority oftentimes save it as the last course that they have to take before completing their programs of study, due largely to feelings of apprehension and dread.
In contrast, I love research. I love the research process. I love jumping into the unknown, so to speak. I love the process of brainstorming and designing research, and collecting and analyzing data. I especially love when I reach conclusions near the end of a research study and then have to conjecture what that means for me, personally, and for the phenomenon that I am studying as we move forward. Research is how we learn
new things. Research is how we advance knowledge for the benefit of other people or conditions in our local and larger communities. Without research, and those individuals who conduct it, I shudder to think where we would be as a society.
Please understand that my goal with this book in front of you is not to dissuade the reader from engaging in research. Actually, it is quite the opposite. As I have done throughout my career, I want to encourage educational practitioners everywhere to engage with the research process, to embrace its beneficial aspects, and to realize the professional growth, learning, and improvement that can be realized through its applications. That being said, we also want to be sure not to exclude the critical component of sharing the results of that research.
The purpose of this book is to provide educational practitioners (e.g., teachers, administrators, and other school personnel—at all grade levels, subject areas, positions, and responsibilities) with strategies and other ideas for effective ways to disseminate, or otherwise share, the results of their action research projects and studies. The impetus for this idea stems from the fact that many practitioner-researchers fail to take advantage of opportunities to inform local, as well as not-so-local, colleagues of their creative and innovative problem-solving action research work. This likely occurs because of either not knowing how to share results of action research or being uncomfortable doing so … or, perhaps, a combination of the two.
This book is designed to assist educational practitioners at all levels (i.e., PK-16 and beyond), instructional content areas, institutional roles (e.g., faculty, administrators, and staff), and levels of experience who implement innovative approaches and conduct action research in those roles in formally disseminating and informally sharing the results of their strategic and systematic problem-solving initiatives. It is important to note that this book is not a presentation of theoretical or philosophical perspectives on disseminating the results of research. While this is important, it is not the focus of this book. This text consists of very practical and applied approaches, suggestions, and best practices for disseminating and sharing the results of practitioner research.
While the primary target audience for this book consists of practicing educators, it could also prove to be a valuable tool for university faculty. I say this for two very distinct reasons. First, this book can assist faculty in guiding graduate students to disseminate their graduate program research. This is particularly important for doctoral students in practitioner-based programs who do research that is designed to inform practice in their current context. University faculty could use this book as a
means of directing their students to find appropriate—and perhaps additional—outlets for sharing their practitioner research. Second, university faculty just might find this book helpful in terms of disseminating their own research, as well. While there is typically a focus in higher education for faculty to disseminate their research using traditional outlets (i.e., peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations), there exists alternative outlets for disseminating research work. While peer-reviewed publications and presentations are still highly important in the promotion and tenure-earning process, I believe that it is important to keep one simple fact in mind—the goal of disseminating research is to get your work in front of the eyes of as many people as possible. I would argue that we should not limit ourselves to only traditional forms of dissemination when there are other opportunities for extending the reach of our work.
Over my career, I have written, published, and presented extensively on the topic of action research and practitioner research and continue to do so to this day. Regardless of an individual’s preference among the terms “action research,” “practitioner inquiry,” or “practitioner research,” I am a firm believer in its capability to empower educators—in addition to practitioners in other fields—to seek small-scale, as well as large-scale, change and improvement. Further, I believe that an often-neglected component of the action research process is that of sharing the results of said practitioner research endeavors with local—and, sometimes, larger—communities of practice. This is an important aspect of practitioner research and should not be overlooked.
But why is sharing the results of your practitioner research important?
This is a very good question to pose, especially in light of the fact that many would argue that a main goal of action research is for the practitioner—as the researcher as well as the end-user of the research results— to benefit directly from that inquiry, for purposes of improving practice. I find this to be a legitimate, albeit limited, perspective on practitioner research.
A primary goal of any research is to change the world—however someone’s “world” might be defined. In the case of action research, the “world” we all hope to change is our local “world”—that is, our local communities. Educational practitioners who engage in the action research process are collectively trying to improve their practice, which ultimately results in better conditions and circumstances for their schools, their colleagues, their students, their families, and their local community as a whole— that is, their immediate world … the world around them. By not disseminating or otherwise sharing the results of action research, practitioners are, in essence, limiting the scope and potential reach of the impact that
their research might have. Conversely, doing so provides opportunities for the results of that research to extend beyond the local community and positively impact more individuals. While we admittedly conduct action research for our own individual and immediate benefits, overlooking the opportunity to influence others by sharing with them what we have learned essentially does an injustice to the process of conducting action research—or any form of research—in educational settings. The goal of this book and the strategies that lie within are to help facilitate just this sort of extension of experiential learning to other educational practitioners.
Of equal importance is another byproduct of not only engaging in practitioner research but also sharing the results as widely as possible. Typically, teachers and other educational personnel often have very limited influence over decisions made in schools and school districts. By engaging in practitioner research, and then sharing the results of that research, teachers and other professional educators are given the opportunity to share their voice. Individuals who often possess the authority to make decisions in educational institutions are those who have access to data and research findings. By engaging in and sharing practitioner research, practicing educators at all levels possess a degree of this authority due to the fact that they have conducted research and are in possession of data that can be shared and can help to influence decisions. The concept of providing educators their due voice in decision-making should not be taken lightly, and the dissemination of practitioner research holds a great deal of power and promise with respect to providing practicing educators their appropriate voice.
Section I provides a thorough description of action research/practitioner research—including its characteristics, process, and professional benefits, along with an overview (and example) of the process of conducting action research in educational settings. Section II offers a discussion of the main types or forms of products for disseminating practitioner research—written reports, presentations, and various visual formats. Section III presents numerous strategies for delivering the products of practitioner research— refereed publications, face-to-face (or virtual) presentations, social media, and other electronic media. Finally, Section IV provides arguably necessary “motivators” for practitioner-researchers to engage in various dissemination activities.
Section I An Overview of Action Research
Section I of the book introduces—or provides a review for readers who are familiar with—action research. In this chapter, you will learn about action research and how it is compared to other traditional forms of educational research. In addition, you will learn about several primary characteristics and qualities of action research to understand what action research is and what is not. Numerous benefits of action research are presented, along with a discussion of the differences between disseminating and sharing the results of research. In Chapter 2 , the cyclical process of conducting action research in applied educational settings is presented, along with a concrete example of contextualized, practitioner research.
Chapter One
What Is Action Research?
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION RESEARCH
Arguably, the word “research” tends not to conjure up feelings of happiness and contentment in most people. From my experience and in my opinion, professional educators are no exception to this fact. A majority of professional educators likely believe that research is best left to professional researchers and university professors—those people who conduct research for a living or are required to do so as part of their professional responsibilities. There is, of course, some degree of truthfulness and accuracy in this observation. However, I am a firm believer in the fact that research should be viewed as an ally to all of us in the teaching and learning process (Mertler, 2018). My main reason for that belief is due to the fact that research provides us with systematic mechanisms for collecting meaningful data (e.g., student data, teacher data, administrative data, program-level data, schoollevel data, etc.) and then using those data to provide us with a basis for a well-informed educational decision. The broad field of education has become one that is focused on data-informed decision-making. It matters little what role or responsibilities you hold in an educational institution or context—decision-making in educational contexts is no longer reliant solely upon “gut instinct and reaction.” Its basis and foundation lie in hard data, which should be most appropriately gathered from those who are on the front lines of the teaching and learning process (Mertler, 2018).
Research of any kind has its basis in the scientific method. Regardless of the field of study where research is being conducted, the scientific method is the foundation for the process we use to conduct research. In 1938, American philosopher and educator John Dewey described the scientific
method as a systematic process for thinking more objectively (Mertler, 2020). He delineated the process as a series of the following steps:
1. Clarify the main question inherent in the problem.
2. State a hypothesis, as a possible answer to the question.
3. Collect, analyze, and interpret information related to the question, so that it permits you to answer the question.
4. Form conclusions derived from the analysis of your data.
5. Use the conclusions to verify or reject your stated hypothesis (p. 7).
It is inappropriate to assume that all research studies follow these steps exactly, or in this exact order. As an example, some research studies do not formally state hypotheses, yet the other steps in Dewey’s process are still appropriate and applicable. Research studies of any kind will always share one important aspect of the process—collecting, analyzing, and interpreting information in the form of data. The result of this step consists of the information necessary to allow us to be able to address an initial question that we stated at the outset of the study.
Most of us have probably been introduced to the scientific method. Many of us may have had the opportunity to interact directly with it perhaps during our middle school years, when we were tasked with designing and conducting a science fair project (Mertler, 2018). We began that process by identifying a topic, then stating a question that we wanted to answer or a prediction (i.e., a hypothesis) that we wanted to test. We then designed some sort of “experiment” and collected our own empirical and original data. We somehow—likely, informally—analyzed our data, and then used those results as the evidence necessary to answer our original question or pass judgment on the prediction that we stated when we began our study. Ah … our initial foray into conducting our own research!
While there are numerous similarities between traditional educational research and action research that we will examine momentarily, there is one crucial difference. Rest assured that action research is educational research; however, it is the research that is conducted by educators for themselves (Mertler, 2020). Individuals who are—to some degree— removed from the situation and context that they are investigating often conduct traditional educational research. For example, university professors or graduate research assistants may conduct more traditional forms of research in education, often with an affiliation to a grant-funded project or graduate-level research. In contrast, action research is conducted by the individual or individuals who not only play an active role and who have a vested interest in the particular setting, but also in most instances
are responsible for identifying the problem being studied. Johnson (2013) has described action research as being a true systematic inquiry into one’s own practice [emphasis added]. In addition and more specifically, Mills (2018) defines action research as any systematic inquiry conducted by teachers, administrators, counselors, or others with a vested interest in the teaching and learning process or environment for the purposes of gathering information about how their particular operate, how they teach, and how their students learn. For example, action research allows teachers to study their own classrooms—e.g., their own instructional methods, their own students, or their own assessments—in order to better understand them and to be able to improve their quality or effectiveness (Mertler, 2020). It focuses specifically on the unique characteristics of the population with whom a practice is employed or with whom some action must be taken. This, in turn, results in the increased utility and effectiveness of research for the practitioner (Parsons & Brown, 2002).
One of the things that is crucial to the potential success of educational practitioners conducting action research in their local contexts is support from administrators at both the building and district levels. When professional educators decide to study their own practice for the purpose of seeking improvement, they are making a commitment to being courageous—in terms of striving to better themselves, stepping outside of their comfort zones, and perhaps even dealing with a few failures along the way (Mertler, 2019). As fantastic as it is to see these courageous educators in action, simply being courageous is not enough to ensure success. There needs to be support from administrators who value continuous improvement and place a premium on professional learning and growth. They need to support their teachers in trying new and innovative things to see if they can improve student learning, or teacher effectiveness. It should go without saying that they support training in the conduct of action research as a professional development activity (Mertler, 2013). In addition, they must be provided with the ample time necessary to implement this kind of professional work. Finally, moral and collegial support can also carry a great deal of weight and influence as a supportive administrative strategy.
It would logically follow, then, that administrative support of the act of disseminating or sharing the results of action research would be of equal importance. There are numerous ways in which this support can occur— many of which we will talk about later in the book. At this point, suffice to say that administrative support throughout the process of conducting contextualized action research is both necessary and critical.
At this point, I would be remiss if I did not discuss terminology and nomenclature. The term “action research” is often considered by many to
be synonymous with other terms, including classroom research, teacher research, teacher inquiry, practitioner inquiry, practitioner research … and there may be others. In my opinion, I believe that all of these terms are truly synonymous with each other. However, it is important to recognize that there may be others around the world who might disagree with me due to the fact that there are subtle differences between these various applied research concepts. However, when we utilize them in educational settings—and where we are focusing on solving problems and improving practice—I truly believe them to be synonymous. As a compromise, and in an attempt to be respectful to those whose opinions might differ from mine, let us agree to call these terms “metonyms”—meaning that each is a very close substitute for the others. Therefore, I will use the terms “action research” and “practitioner research” interchangeably throughout this book. Please know that I am referring to the identical practice of educational practitioners designing and conducting their own research on self-identified problems for the purposes of seeking improvement and change with respect to the phenomenon being investigated.
ACTION RESEARCH VERSUS TRADITIONAL EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
As mentioned previously, traditional educational research is routinely conducted by individuals who are somewhat removed from the environment or setting that they are studying. This certainly does not mean that those individuals are not committed to the topics and phenomena that they are studying; they are very interested in the ultimate results related to those studies, and work very diligently to study them as completely as possible. What I am implying is that they typically study students and teachers, schools, and educational programs with which they seldom have any specific personal involvement. At this point, let us review some of the basics of traditional research conducted in the broad field of education. Please note that this is not meant to be an exhaustive review of traditional educational research; in contrast, it is meant to provide a broad overview or brief refresher of various research methodologies and approaches. There are three basic categories of or approaches to conducting traditional educational research: quantitative research, qualitative research, and mixed-methods research. These three approaches to conducting educational research are primarily distinguished by the nature in which data are collected and analyzed. In addition, these research methodologies are based on different assumptions about how to best understand the world or a particular phenomenon of interest, or what comprises
the realities or perceptions held by different individuals. Although they should not necessarily be treated as mutually exclusive, let us initially examine each one individually. Generally speaking, quantitative research requires the collection and analysis of numerical data (e.g., test scores, ratings of perceptions or opinions, or frequency counts—i.e., numbers); qualitative research methodologies involve the collection and analysis of narrative data (e.g., observation notes, interview transcripts, or journal entries—i.e., words). Mixed-methods research includes approaches to research where both numerical and narrative data are collected and analyzed within the same study.
Quantitative research tends to work from broader ideas and ends with results that are more specific to a particular setting or situation. Researchers begin by stating research questions they wish to answer or hypotheses they wish to test, then collect data by measuring variables —typically small in number. For example, a quantitative research study might require the collection of data on elementary school discipline referrals and absenteeism (numerical variables) in order to answer the following research question: Are there differences in the rates and types of disciplinary problems and absenteeism in schools with a K–8 grade span versus those with other grade span configurations (e.g., K–6, 6–8)? (Mertler, 2020). Researchers must also specify a research design—the plan that will be used to carry out the study. Research designs may be described as being either nonexperimental or experimental. In nonexperimental research studies, researchers have no direct control over any variable in the study, either because the variables—or measurements of those variables—have already occurred or because it is not possible or ethical for any of the variables to be controlled or manipulated. Examples of nonexperimental studies include descriptive, comparative, correlational, and causal-comparative research. Descriptive studies simply report information about the frequency or amount of something that has occurred. Comparative studies build on descriptive studies by not only reporting the frequency of something, but then also comparing two or more groups on the variable(s) that have been measured. Correlational studies measure the degree to which two or more variables are related. Finally, causal-comparative studies (also sometimes referred to as ex post facto studies) compare groups—where group membership has been determined by something that occurred in the past (e.g., gender or class membership)—on subsequent data collected on another variable. In experimental research studies, the researcher actually has some degree of control over one or more of the variables included in the study; this variable may serve as an influence or cause of participants’ behavior. The variable over which the researcher has control is known as the
independent variable. Independent variables are those that are manipulated by the researcher—meaning that the researcher determines which participants in the study will receive which (of two or more) conditions. In the simplest experimental designs, there are two groups: the treatment group and the comparison group. For example, the treatment group would receive a condition that is seen as being new, innovative, or simply different; whereas, the comparison group would receive the condition that has typically been utilized in the past. The ultimate variable of interest—the behavior or performance, for example—is referred to as the dependent variable and is measured for both groups. The scores on the dependent variable (for each of the two or more conditions or groups) are then compared.
Data collected during quantitative research studies are numerical and, therefore, analyzed statistically. The analyses of quantitative data may include descriptive statistics, inferential statistics, or both. Descriptive statistics allow researchers to summarize, organize, and simplify large amounts of data. Specific techniques include the calculation of such statistics as the mean, median, mode, range, standard deviation, correlations, and standardized scores. The use of inferential statistics involves more complex mathematical procedures and enables researchers to test the statistical significance of the difference between two groups or the degree of relationship between two or more variables. Commonly used inferential statistical techniques include t-tests, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and regression. As mentioned, inferential statistics enable the researcher to test the size of the difference between groups or strength of the relationship between variables for statistical significance. Statistical significance refers to the extent to which the results of the statistical analysis (e.g., the treatment group scored higher than the comparison group) will enable researchers to conclude that the findings of a given study are large enough in the sample studied in order to represent a meaningful difference or relationship in the population from which the sample was selected.
In opposition to quantitative studies, qualitative research begins with observations that are much more specific, with the goal of making much broader conclusions at the end of the study. The focus of qualitative research is typically broader and much more holistic, focusing on a large number of potential variables. There is no attempt to control variables in a qualitative research study; researchers study the “world” as it exists. The research questions that guide qualitative research studies tend to be more broad and open-ended when compared to their quantitative counterparts. This, therefore, encourages the use of multiple types of measures and observations, such as observations with recorded notes, interviews with
recorded transcripts, and journals—all of which result in the collection of narrative data. This collection of a wide variety of data for the purposes of getting a more holistic picture of the topic or phenomenon that serves as the focus of the study also permits the researcher to engage in a process known as triangulation. Triangulation is the process of relating multiple sources and types of data in order to verify the accuracy and consistency of the observations made in a qualitative research study. Often, people will interpret “triangulation” as meaning that there must be three (as in tri-)—no more, no less—sources of data. This really is not accurate, as the specific number of sources or types of data should be dictated by the research situation at hand. It is for this reason that I sometimes prefer the use of the term “polyangulation” (since the prefix poly- is defined as “more than one or many”) (Mertler, 2020).
Similar to quantitative research, there are a variety of designs that can be used in a qualitative research study. These designs include phenomenology, ethnography, grounded theory, and case studies, among others. Phenomenological studies require that the researchers engage in a lengthy process of individual interviews in an attempt to fully and completely understand a particular research topic. Ethnographic studies attempt to describe social interactions between people in intact group settings. Grounded theory research studies try to discover a theory that somehow relates to a particular environment, situation, or setting. Finally, case studies are in-depth investigations of individual and specific programs, activities, people, or groups. Although all data will be narrative in form, the data collected during a qualitative research study may be quite diverse. These data are then analyzed by means of a process known as logicoinductive analysis, which is a thought process that makes use of logic in order to uncover patterns, trends, and themes across all the various types of data collected.
It is probably very obvious that quantitative and qualitative approaches to conducting educational research are quite different on a variety of levels. Decades ago, researchers in education treated the two approaches to research as if they were entirely independent of one another. Realistically, however, it makes some degree of sense that educational research studies could (and should) employ both types of designs and data. These types of studies are referred to as mixed-methods research studies. The distinct benefit of mixed-methods studies is that the combination of both types of data tends to provide a better and more thorough understanding of the research problem, as opposed to simply using one type of data in isolation. In other words, these types of studies essentially capitalize on the strengths of both quantitative and qualitative data. Mixed-methods
research studies have become widely accepted as an approach to investigating educational problems. There are three basic mixed-methods designs: explanatory sequential mixed-methods, exploratory sequential mixed-methods, and convergent parallel mixed-methods.
All of these diverse quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods designs are summarized in Figure 1.1, which also depicts how action research studies can consist of any of these various designs.
So, how does action research relate to educational research? Simply put—and to reiterate an earlier point—action research is educational research. Action research studies can use any of the designs—quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods—that have been discussed previously. I believe mixed-methods designs and action research studies to be very similar to one another, since they both often utilize quantitative and qualitative data, but that does not mean that action research studies must rely on a combination of types of data. The only real difference between action research and any of the approaches to conducting more traditional forms of educational research has little—if anything—to do with a specific approach, research design, or type of data, but rather rests solely in
Figure 1.1 Summary of Various Research Designs Used in Education Research Studies.
the underlying purpose for the research. The main goal of quantitative research is to describe and explain a research problem; that for qualitative research is to develop a holistic description of a research situation, often for the purposes of developing theory. The purpose of mixed-methods studies is similar to traditional quantitative research (i.e., to better understand and explain a research problem). However, the main goal of action research is to address local-level problems with the anticipation of finding immediate answers to questions or solutions to problems.
A final distinction between action research and more traditional forms of educational research resides in the fact that action research is largely about examining one’s own professional practice. Because this is the case, reflection is an integral part of the action research process—one that is not often or necessarily seen in more traditional forms of research. Reflection can be defined as the act of critically exploring what you are doing, why you decided to do it, and what its effects have been (Mertler, 2020). When professional educators engage in action research, they must become reflective with respect to the situation or circumstance they are studying and trying to improve.
WHAT ACTION RESEARCH IS AND IS NOT
There are numerous aspects of the process of engaging in the action research process that characterize its uniqueness as an approach to conducting educational research. It is important for educators—at all levels and professional positions—to have a sound, foundational understanding of exactly what action research is and is not. The following list is an attempt to describe what action research is (Mertler, 2020, p. 18). Action research is …
■ a process that improves education, in general, by incorporating change.
■ a process involving educators working together to improve their own practices.
■ persuasive and authoritative, since it is done by educators for educators.
■ collaborative; that is, it is composed of educators talking and working with other educators in empowering relationships.
■ participative, since educators are integral members—not disinterested outsiders—of the research process.
■ practical and relevant to educational practitioners, since it allows them direct access to research findings.
■ developing critical reflection about one’s teaching.
■ a planned, systematic approach to understanding the learning process.
■ a cyclical process of planning, acting, developing, and reflecting.
In order to truly understand what action research is, educators must also understand what it is not (Mertler, 2020, p. 19). Action research is not …
■ the usual thing that teachers do when thinking about teaching; it is more systematic and more collaborative.
■ simply problem-solving; it involves the specification of a problem, the development of something new (in most cases), and critical reflection on its effectiveness.
■ done “to” or “by” other people; it is research done by particular educators, on their own work, with students and colleagues.
■ the simple implementation of predetermined answers to educational questions; it explores, discovers, and works to find creative solutions to educational problems.
■ conclusive; the results of action research are neither right nor wrong but rather tentative solutions that are based on observations and other data collection and that require monitoring and evaluation in order to identify strengths and limitations.
■ A fad; good teaching has always involved the systematic examination of the instructional process and its effects on student learning. Teachers are always looking for ways to improve instructional practice, and although teachers seldom have referred to this process of observation, revision, and reflection as “research,” that is precisely what it is.
PROFESSIONAL BENEFITS OF ACTION RESEARCH
There are numerous professional benefits that can be realized through engagement with the action research process. These benefits include:
■ a focus on self;
■ the connection of theory to practice;
■ improvement of educational practice;
■ social justice advocacy;
■ educator empowerment, intellectual engagement, and voice; and
■ professional growth and learning.
Each of these will be briefly discussed next.
Focus on Self
I am often asked by educators why they should become involved with action research. The best answer that I can give has several components that often begin with the fact that action research deals with your problems and not someone else’s. In addition, action research is very timely; it can start whenever you are ready and can provide immediate results. Further, action research provides educators with opportunities to better understand—and, therefore, improve—their educational practice.
When multiple educators within the same context engage in action research, it can help promote the building of stronger relationships among colleagues with whom we work. Finally, in contrast to a traditional trial-and-error methodology, action research provides educators with alternative ways of viewing and approaching educational questions and problems, and with new ways of examining our own educational practices (Mertler, 2020).
Connection of Theory to Practice
Generally speaking, research is often used to develop theories, and those theories eventually help to determine best practices in the broader field of education. These best practices are then used to help teachers become more effective at providing learning experiences for their students. However, there is a fundamental breakdown and gap in this process. Most research and the resulting theories are not written for practicing educators. They are written for other researchers.
It could be argued that in professions where practice is heavily evidence-based, the people who do the research are also the people who use the research (Davies, 2016). However, this is not the case in the education profession. To reiterate an earlier point, most research in education is conducted by researchers or university professors, with the ultimate expectation that the results of those studies be used by practitioners in classrooms. As Davies (2016) explains, in the education profession, there is a fundamental breakdown in this process. He cites four major reasons for this:
1. Education research is not written for teachers. Arguably, the vast majority of educational research is written by researchers for other researchers. In addition, rewards in academia tend to be based on publishing lots of papers, getting lots of citations of those papers, and publishing in high-tier journals. None of these three things fosters the reading of a research article by a practitioner.
2. Many people experience difficulties with access to research. Unless educational practitioners have some sort of connection to a university, they oftentimes cannot get access to research articles that are only accessible through an institution’s library system. More and more, articles are being published online which, in theory, makes them more accessible to everyone worldwide. However, as is typically the case, when we find research articles online, we are forced to pay a fee that could be anywhere from $20 to $60 USD in order to download the article. I am not sure about you, but I do not know a lot of people—in any profession—who are willing to pay that much money to read a research article.
3. Education articles are too long and poorly written. I wholeheartedly agree that most education articles are entirely too long and tend to ramble on. I do take exception with the fact that Davies says that they are poorly written. I actually think that they are well written…. They are simply written for the wrong audience. Again, they are written for other researchers, and not for practitioners.
4. Educators suffer from a lack of expertise. Most published research is the result of empirical data collection and analysis. This often results in the use of advanced analytical strategies, whether they be quantitative or qualitative. Unfortunately, a majority of practicing educators do not possess the kind of expertise necessary to understand or comprehend these articles. In a similar vein, they often cannot tell if the research designs or methodologies that were employed were incorrectly done and full of flaws or were just altogether inappropriate. This is certainly not a criticism of practitioners; it is a simple observation. Therefore, if and when they encounter such research, they likely are getting lost in reading the article and abandon the effort altogether. Honestly, who can blame them.
As you have read earlier in this chapter, action research—where practitioners research their own problems and arrive at immediate solutions—is an incredibly viable and practical approach to bridging this gap.
Improvement of Educational Practice
As you have previously read, a main focus of action research is the improvement of educational practice. When educators are reflective about their practice, they are able to use the information that they collect to evaluate their current practices and make informed and valuable improvements. It is critical to realize that this often necessitates a shift in mindset.
Successful educators often believe that they have mastered their profession, and as long as they keep doing what has made them successful in the past, they will continue to be successful in the future. As we all know, this is not necessarily the case, as all sorts of things—including curriculum, pedagogies and instructional strategies, cultures, students, families, district or statewide initiatives, etc.—can and will change over time. By default, this necessitates that successful practitioners reflect on and change their own practice in order to meet head-on the changes that are outside of their control.
Social Justice Advocacy
In today’s educational climate, all of us are more focused on providing equal and fair educational opportunities to all students, regardless of their upbringing, social class, gender identification, race, ethnicity, and so on. We desperately need equal and fair opportunities so that all students with whom we interact have the potential to become the best members of society that they can be. Action research can serve as a wonderful mechanism for challenging injustices and valuing diversity (Mertler, 2020). Although this is considered a slightly different application of action research—commonly referred to as critical action research —that is beyond the immediate scope of this book, it is still worth mentioning as an important benefit of conducting action research in educational settings.
Educator Empowerment, Intellectual Engagement, and Voice
I know that I should not reveal any sort of preferential treatment, but these last two benefits are my favorites! In and of themselves, they make action research well worth the investment of time and effort by educational practitioners. I believe that action research is highly effective at cultivating and advancing the notion of educator empowerment. It seems that with each passing year, the educational climate in the US, as well as in other countries around the world, becomes more and more data-driven in the approach to education and decision-making. When educators collect data, analyze those data, and systematically reflect on their own teaching and their students’ learning—followed by the use of all of this acquired information to help guide better-informed educational decisions—they truly become empowered. This empowerment fosters the use of their own unique sets of expertise, talents, and creativity so that they can implement instructional programs that will best meet the needs of their students. The educators themselves become the appropriate judges to determine when
and where risk-taking and instructional change may be appropriate and beneficial. This constitutes a substantial shift in mindset, which I do not believe would be feasible were it not for the integration of action research into the profession.
As an extension of the notion of empowerment, when educators engage in this kind of work, they begin to assume different roles within their schools—for example, the roles of facilitator, supporter, coach, and mentor. While the skills and abilities of building- and district-level administrators will always be necessary and needed, the “locus of control” is essentially and fundamentally returned to the classroom level when teachers begin to assume these different roles. When a greater level of “control” is returned to the classroom teacher, the effectiveness of schools is enhanced and school improvement is promoted (Johnson, 2013). All of these things are widely important in terms of providing educators with a “voice at the table,” so to speak—representing an increase in power and influence in the process of data-informed decision-making. After engagement in the action research process and utilizing what educators have learned through this process, they become better informed, with the knowledge gained being immediately reflective of engagement in the research process. This effectively enables teachers and other educators to build capacity, regain a substantial degree of lost autonomy, and lend voice to their professional work (Vaughan & Mertler, 2020).
An additional benefit that accompanies an increased level of empowerment is a greater level of intellectual engagement with respect to all that goes on within classrooms, as well as within the school as a whole. The experiences and skills that educators gain through engagement in a process of reflective action research are beneficial not only within the parameters of that which they are critically examining, but are also transferable to other professional activities, including those daily activities associated with running an effective and efficient classroom. When there is a shift in school culture to a focus on improving practice through research, teachers are permitted—dare I say, even encouraged —to take risks and make changes to their instructional practice, whenever and wherever they believe it to be appropriate. In essence, the broader result of this process is that teachers and other educators have the capacity to become what Dana and Yendol-Hoppey (2019) refer to as “knowledge generators.” Teachers have been historically seen as “dispensers of knowledge,” as opposed to “generators of knowledge.” The professional knowledge that can be generated by considering and valuing the perspectives of educational practitioners through the application of action research has the potential to alter that landscape (Mertler, 2021).
Another random document with no related content on Scribd:
90. imbricata
91. imbecilla
92. β ... stricta
93. incarnata
94. inaperta
95. incana
96. inflata
97. jasminiflora
98. lachnœa
99. lateralis
100. lævis
101. β ... alba
102. Leea
103. leucanthera
104. Linnæa
105. β ... incarnata
106. lutea
107. β ... palida
108. magnifica
109. mammosa
110. β ... minor
111. γ ... tardiva
112. margaritacea
113. marifolia
114. Massonia
g r l
g r p
m r p
g r p
d l l
d r s
d l,b s
d l,b s
d r s
g r p
g r p
g r p
d l l
g r l
g l p
g l p
g s,b s
g s,b s
d l,b s
g l p
g l p
g l p
g r p
g r p,l
d l s
115. γ Massonia grossa d l s s
116. mediterranea
117. melastoma
118. mellifera
119. micranthos
120. minima
121. molissima
m r p
g l l
g r p
g r p
g r p
g l p
122. monadelphia
123. Monsoniana
124. mucosa
125. multiflora
126. Muscaria
127. nigrita
128. Nivenia
129. nudiflora
130. obbata
131. obcordata
132. obliqua
133. paniculata
134. parviflora
135. Patersonia
136. β ... coccinea
137. patens
138. pedunculata
139. pendula
140. penicillata
141. β ... alba
142. persoluta
143. β ... alba
144. γ ... conferta
145. perspicua
146. Petiveria
147. petiveriana
148. β ... aurantia
149. petiolata
150. phylicoides
151. physodes
152. β ... minor
153. pilosa
g l s
g l p
g r l
m r p
g s,b p,l
g r p,l
d s,b s
d r s
d l,b s
g r p,l
d r s
d r p
g r p
g l p,l
g l p,l
g r p
g r l
g r p
g l s
g l s
g r p
g r p
g r p
g l p
g l l
g l l
g l l
g r p,l
g r p
g r s
g r s
g r p
154. pilulifera
155. pinea
156. pinifolia
157. pinastri
158. planifolia
159. plumosa
160. Plukenetii
161. β ... nana
162. pregnans
163. pubescens
164. β ... minor
165. γ ... minima
166. pulchella
167. purpurea
168. pyramidalis
169. pyrolæflora
170. quadriflora
171. quadrata
172. radiata
173. β ... laxa
174. ramentacea
175. regerminans
176. retorta
177. β ... minor
178. rigida
179. rosea
180. rubens
181. sambucæflora
182. scoparia
183. Sebana aurantia
184. β ... lutea
185. γ ... viridis
g r p
g l l
g l l
g l l
g r p
g r s,p
g l s
g l s
g l,b s,l
g r p
g r p
g r p
g r p,l
d l l
d r p
g r p
d r p
g r l
d l s
d l s
g r p
g r p
d l,b s
d l,b s
g r s
d l l
g r p
g l p
m r p
g l l,p
g l l,p
g l l,p
186. δ ... fusca
187. serratifolia
188. sessiliflora
189. setacea
190. sexfaria
g l l,p
d l l
g l s
g r p
d r s
191. simpliciflora d l p
192. sordida
193. spicata
194. spumosa
195. spuria
g l p
g l l
g r p
g l p
196. stricta m r p
197. taxifolia
198. tenella
199. tetragona
200. Tetralix
201. β ... alba
d s,b l
d s,b p
g r l,p
h r p
h r p
202. thymifolia d r p
203. triflora
204. β ... rubra
205. tubiflora
206. β ... fissa
207. vagans
208. β ... alba
209. ventricosa
210. versicolor
211. verticillata
212. β ... tenuiora
g r p
g r p
g l p
g l p
h r p
h r p
g l,b l,p
g l l,p
g l l,p
g l l,p
213. vestita alba d l s
214. β ... purpurea d l s
215. β ... coccinea d l s
216. δ ... incarnata d l s
217. virgata
g r p
218. viridi-purpurea
219. viscaria
220. β ... stricta
221. vulgaris
222. β ... alba
223. γ ... plena
224. Uhria
225. umbellata
226. γ ... alba
227. urceolaris
228. Walkeria
m r p
g r l,p
g r l,p
h r p
h r p
h r p
g l l,p
m r p
m r p
g r l,p
g s,b l,p
Explanation of the Letters in the three Columns marked 1, 2, 3.
Col. 1st indicates their proper situation in winter, given for the vicinity of the Metropolis: d, dry-stove, or good airy greenhouse; g, greenhouse; m, half-hardy, and h, hardy. Col. 2d points at the shape of the blossom; by l, is designed long; r, round, or approaching; l,b and s,b, long or short, and bellied. Col. 3d shews by the letters l,p, and s, whether loam, peat, or sand, or what mixture of them, is the soil most proper for the propagation, of each.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK COLOURED ENGRAVINGS OF HEATHS; VOL. 1 ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
