EDLD 579 Action Research Methods 3 units Instructor: William R. Torbert Office Hours: By appt. Torbert@bc.edu 617-965-7214 Dates: The first major session: June 10-12, 4-9pm; June 13 1-7pm. The second major session: July 21-23, 4-9pm. In addition, there will be a 2-hour conference call on August 3 Course Description In this course, students read about, directly engage in, and write three papers using 1st-, 2nd-, and 3rd-person action research methods. For example, students research and write an autobiography in which they examine their life to date in terms of developmental theory as well as the next developmental actions they may wish to take (1st-person research). Each student will also analyze voice recordings of parts of different class sessions and write a paper to be shared with the rest of the class about the group’s issues in evolving toward a “community of inquiry” (2nd-person research). And each student will write a final paper on an action research topic of their own choosing in journal article format (3rd-person research, at best illustrating how 1st-, 2nd-, and 3rd-person research interweave and contributing to the student’s qualifying paper or dissertation). Course Objectives/Student Outcomes Students will: • • • •
Become familiar with 1st-, 2nd-, and 3rd-person action research methods through the readings, through in-class practices, and through the three papers they write. Learn to understand the distinctions between 1st-, 2nd-, and 3rd-person action inquiry. Gain an understanding of developmental theory by using this lens to examine personal life experiences to date. Demonstrate competence using action research methodology by writing a final, potentially publishable action research paper.
Textbooks/Required readings Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. 2008 (2nd Edition). The SAGE Handbook of Action Research: Participatory Inquiry and Practice. London: SAGE. Torbert & Associates, 2004. ACTION INQUIRY: The Secret of Timely and Transforming Leadership. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
AH 7/20/05
1
Torbert, W. 1991. The Power of Balance: Transforming Self, Society, and Scientific Inquiry. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage. Additional articles will be handed out in class.
Course Requirements/Activities Treating the class as a real-time research/practice process. From the first moment of the first class meeting, each participant is asked to take the role of observant participant (research/practitioner, action inquirer) in relation to the class itself. Each action one takes is an expression of one's inquiry, power, artistry, efficacy, and relationship to fellow participants and to some, perhaps-only-implicit, vision. Am I speaking merely in order to pursue my own personal agenda? Am I speaking to meet the apparent demands of the course or conform to my inferences about the norms of the group? Am I listening and speaking in a way and with a timing intended to help group decision-making and performance, while also promoting inquiry into and possibly the transformation of my own or others’ existing assumptions and patterns of action? Am I listening and speaking in ways that improve the effectiveness of myself, other members, and the class as an organizational learning system? What evidence counts, how does each of us count evidence in real time, and how do we count evidence in reflection and via statistical analysis? Although there will be role plays and/or discussions of readings and theory during parts of each class, the primary question is how to generate a first-, second-, and third-person atmosphere of real-time research/practice at every moment of class time. Therefore, it is imperative that students attend every single class if they are to understand and contribute constructively to the group’s development. Also, we will be recording and taking turns partially transcribing each meeting, as well as taking turns writing 2nd-person research papers about the meetings, in order to explore different facets of what we actually do as compared with what we envision and intend to do. Activities outside class time. Outside class time, each participant will: a. Do the common readings for the next class session. b. Develop the class agenda & lead discussion of the readings for one session. A schedule for these activities will be created during the first class session. c. Write three papers during the course: The first-person paper will focus autobiographically and in first-person voice on one’s own personal transformations and current developmental challenges and is to be shared only with the instructor (unless the writer chooses otherwise). First draft is due June 8 (e-mail as attachment to Torbert@bc.edu . AH 7/20/05
2
The second-person paper will focus: 1) on the group’s development and current challenges and 2) on the author’s challenges in becoming a more inquiring/effective/timely contributor to group transformation, as both of these are grounded in and reflected by the episode transcripts and session summaries that each student does for a different session. This paper is typically written in a combination of first-, second-, and third-person voices and is shared with the class as a whole by June 29 or August 2. This paper is an example of 2nd-person action research, serving both as a diagnosis and as an intervention. The third-person paper will be designed for possible publication. I will generate a series of linked, likely topics that could lead either to one paper or several (with co-authorship to be determined by who continues work on the papers after the conclusion of the course), and we as a class will enter into dialogue about who will take each topic. This paper will be due on August 17. All three papers should explicitly explore the theoretical meaning of the events reported/recounted (referring to developmental theory in particular and any other course and social science theories the student chooses), as well as the methodological strengths and limits of the conclusions drawn. But only the third-person paper need be presented in academic journal style.
Assessment Plan/Grading Criteria/Rubric Each of the three papers will count 25% apiece toward final grades, and the final 25% of the grade will be determined by participants’ contributions to their own learning and to the development of the class as a whole (as assessed by them). Participants are welcome to propose alternative assessment strategies and practices, with the stipulation that we not devote more than half an hour of class time to reconstructing assessment structures and processes. Course Outline / class dates (or session numbers) The course will be conducted in two major sessions, and the homework is assigned in terms of each of those sessions, as well as a final paper due later. The first major session includes 21 hours of class time (June 10-12, 4-9pm; June 13 1-7pm). The second major session includes 15 hours of class time (July 21-23, 4-9pm). In addition, there will be a 2-hour conference call on August 3, with individual calls to students thereafter. For the first major session, students read all of Action Inquiry, plus the following: • • •
Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. 2008. Instroduction. Handbook of Action Research. Harrison, R. 1995 Consultant's Journey. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. pp 1-28 Zooey, 1999, “Confronting (one’s own) power at work and at home” Unpublished course paper, Boston College (reproduced with author’s permission).
AH 7/20/05
3
• • • • •
Ellis, C. & Bochner, A. 2000. Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity. In Denzin & Lincoln, The Handbook of Qualitative Research Thousand Oaks CA: Sage, pgs. 733-768. Kegan, R. 1994. In Over Our Heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Pp 137-153. Kantor, D. The Four Player Model of Conversation Taylor, S., Rudolph, J. & Foldy, E. 2008. Teaching reflective practice in the action science/action inquiry tradition: Key stages, concepts, and practices. In Reason & Bradbury (Ed.s) Handbook of Action Research. Heron, J. & Reason, P. 2008. Extending epistemology within a co-operative inquiry. In Reason & Bradbury (Ed.s) Handbook of Action Research.
For the second major session, students read all of The Power of Balance, plus: • • • • • • •
Torbert, W. 2000. Transforming social science: Integrating quantitative, qualitative, and action research. In F. Sherman & W. Torbert (Ed.s), Transforming social inquiry, transforming social action, Boston, Kluwer, 67-92. Schein, E. 2008. Clinical Inquiry/Research. In Reason & Bradbury. Chambers, R. 2008. PRA, PLA and pluralism: Practice and theory. In Reason &Bradbury (Ed.s) Handbook of Action Research. Martin, A. 2008. Action research on a large scale: Issues and Practices. In Reason & Bradbury. Ludema, J. & Fry, R. 2008. The practice of appreciative inquiry. In Reason & Bradbury Ed.s),, Handbook of Action Research Wakeford, T. et al. 2008. The jury is out: How far can participatory projects go toward reclaiming democracy? In Reason & Bradbury. Friedman, V. 2008. Action science: Creating communities of inquiry in communities of practice. In Reason & Bradbury (Ed.s).
Bibliography / references / additional readings General sources for action research Shani et al (Ed.s), Handbook of Collaborative Management Research. NY: Sage, 2007. Sherman & Torbert, Transforming Social Inquiry, Transforming Social Action: New paradigms for crossing the theory/practice divide in universities and communities. Boston: Kluwer, 2000. Woodman & Pasmore, Research in Organizational Change & Development series. Greenwich CT: Jai Press The Addison-Wesley Series in Organization Development International Journal of Action Research Journal of Applied Behavioral Science Journal of Management Inquiry Journal of Organizational Change Management Management Learning: The International Journal for Managerial and Organizational Learning and Development Qualitative Inquiry Philosophical sources of action research Abram, D. 1996. The Spell of the Sensuous. New York: Vintage. Argyris, C. Putnam, R. & Smith, D. 1985. Action Science: Concepts, methods and skills for research and intervention. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bernstein, R. 1985. Beyond Objectivism and Relativism: Science, hermeneutics and praxis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
AH 7/20/05
4
Gadamer, H. 1982. Truth and Method. New York: Crossroad. Goffman, E. 1974. Frame Analysis. New York: Harper & Row. Habermas, J. 1984/1987. The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol.s I & II. Boston:Beacon. Hallward, P. 2003. Badiou: A subject to truth. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Heron, J. 1998. Sacred Science: Person-centered study of the spiritual and the subtle. Ross-on-Wye UK: PCCS Books. Lundberg, C. & Young, C. 2005. Foundations for Inquiry: Choices and Tradeoffs in the Organization Sciences. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press. Malin, S. 2001. Nature Loves to Hide: Quantum physics and the nature of reality, a Western perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Polanyi, M. 1958. Personal Knowledge. New York: Harper. Senge, P. 1990. The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday Currency. Varela, F., Thompson, E. & Rosch E. 1991. The Embodied Mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Wilber, K. 1998. The Marriage of Sense and Soul: Integrating science and religion. New York: Random House Exemplars and methodological discussions of action research Argyris, C. 1970. Intervention Theory and Method. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley. Argyris, C. 1980. Inner Contradictions of Rigorous Research. San Diego CA: Academic Press. Argyris, C. 1994. Knowledge for Action. San Francisco CA: Jossey-Bass. Cameron, K. & Quinn, R. 1999. Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley. Flyvbjerg, B. 2001. Making Social Science Matter. Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press. Freire, P. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder & Herder. Garreau, J. 2005. Radical Evolution: The promise and peril of enhancing our minds, our bodies – and what it means to be human. New York: Doubleday. Heron, J. 1996. Cooperative Inquiry: Research into the human condition. London: Sage. Ogilvy, J. 2000. Creating Better Futures: Scenario planning as a tool for a better tomorrow. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press. Reason, P. & Rowan, J. 1981. Human Inquiry: A Sourcebook of New Paradigm Research. London: Wiley. Reason, P. 1995. Participation in Human Inquiry. London: Sage. Scharmer, O. 2007. Theory U: Leading from the future as it emerges. Cambridge MA: Society for Organizational Learning. Schein, E. 1999. Process Consultation Revisited. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley. Senge, P., Scharmer, C., Jaworski, J., & Flowers, B. 2004. Presence: Human purpose and the field of the future. Cambridge MA: Society for Organizational Learning. Torbert, W. 1972. Learning from Experience: Toward Consciousness. New York: Columbia University Press. 1st- and 2nd-Person Research/Practice Exemplars Bateson, M. 1984. With a Daughter’s Eye: A Memoir of Margaret Mead and Gregory Bateson. New York: Plume/Penguin. Harrison, R. 1995 Consultant's Journey. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Johnson, D. 1994. Body, Spirit and Democracy. Berkeley CA: North Atlantic Books.
AH 7/20/05
5
Meents, J. 2006. Acres of Diamonds: A Heuristic Self-Search Inquiry into Intuition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Calgary, Canada. Raine, N. 1998. After Silence: Rape and My Journey Back. New York: Crown. Reinharz, S. 1979. On Becoming a Social Scientist. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Scholes-Rhodes, J. 2002. From the Inside Out: Learning to presence my aesthetic and spiritual ‘being’ through the emergent form of a creative art of inquiry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Bath UK. Seeley, C. 2006. Wild Margins: Playing at work and life. University of Bath UK. Torbert, W. 1976. Creating a Community of Inquiry: Conflict, Collaboration, Transformation. Chichester UK: Wiley Insterscience.
Confidentiality, transparency, and accountability. The dialectic of building a trusting openness among research participants; of building a safe container through confidentiality; and requiring timely accountability among participants is a key practice to master in real-time action research. In this class, participants are asked to commit (1) to observing the strictest, most trustbuilding ethic of professional confidentiality in regard to one another’s statements and practices within the course, and (2) to exploring any alleged lapses publicly within the class. This means, at minimum, that: a. outside class time, members will talk with one another about other course members or research participants not present only for the purposes of inquiring into our own assumptions and exploring how to approach the members who are not present more inquiringly and effectively; b. members will never discuss any course events, or any personal information they have learned through the course about another member or a research subject, with persons outside the course in such a way as to make who did or said what identifiable. Grade of Incomplete: The grade of Incomplete (“I”) may be recorded to indicate (1) that the requirements of a course have been substantially completed but, for a legitimate reason, a small fraction of the work remains to be completed, and, (2) that the record of the student in the course justifies the expectation that he or she will complete the work and obtain the passing grade by the deadline. It is the student’s responsibility to explain to the instructor the reasons for non-completion of work and to request an incomplete grade prior to the posting of final grades. Students who receive a grade of incomplete must submit all missing work no later than the end of the tenth week of the next regular semester, otherwise the “I” grade will become a permanent “F.” Requests for Accommodation: Reasonable accommodations in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act will be made for course participants with disabilities who require specific instructional and testing modifications. Students with such requirements must identify themselves to the University of San Diego Disability Services Office (619.260.4655) before the beginning AH 7/20/05
6
of the course. Every effort will be made to accommodate students’ needs, however, performance standards for the course will not be modified in considering specific accommodations.
AH 7/20/05
7