maximising the impact of practitioner research · maximising the impact of practitioner research...

Maximising the impact of practitioner researchA handbook of practical advice

Paul Davies, Mary Hamilton and Kathryn James

PRLI handbook 28/11/07 18:13

Published by the National Research andDevelopment Centre for Adult Literacyand Numeracy

This document is also available in pdfformat from www.nrdc.org.uk

For information on alternative formats,or to give feedback on the content and accessibility of this publication,please contact:

Publications

NRDC

Institute of Education

20 Bedford Way

London WC1H 0AL

Telephone: +44 (0)20 7612 6476Fax: +44 (0)20 7612 6671email: [email protected]

ISBN: 978-1-905188-58-1

©Crown Copyright 2007

Extracts from this publication may be used or reproduced for non-commercialresearch, teaching or training purposes on condition that the source isacknowledged.

NRDC is a consortium of partners led by the Institute of Education, University ofLondon (see back cover for a list ofmembers) and is part of the Faculty ofPolicy and Society at the IoE.www.ioe.ac.uk

Design: www.chapmandesign.netPrint: dsi colourworksPhotos: Phil Meech


MAXIMISING THE IMPACT OF PRACTITIONER RESEARCH

HANDBOOK

3

Foreword 5

Introduction 6

1 Getting started 9

Making and taking opportunities 9Establishing a working definition of research 10Deciding what is achievable 12Discussion points 13

2 Maintaining momentum 15

Keeping ownership 15Keeping to the ‘rules’ 15Skills training 16Three types of support 16Discussion points 17

3 Writing up, publishing and dissemination 18

Writing up 18Publishing and dissemination 18The rippling process 19Discussion points 19

4 Conclusions 20

Critical review

This report was critically reviewed by:

Judith Hinman, NRDC, Institute of Education,University of London

David Mallows, NRDC, Institute of Education,University of London

Loraine Powell, Department for Innovation,Universities & Skills

Contents


4



HANDBOOK

5

Engaging practitioners in research andencouraging reflective practice are central toNRDC's remit. The Practitioner-Led ResearchInitiative (PLRI), which ran from 2004 to 2006,supported 17 groups of literacy, language andnumeracy (LLN) practitioners in designing,developing and completing hands-on research anddevelopment projects. These projects addressedpolicy priorities in Skills for Life and importantmessages have emerged which will help in thefuture development of the strategy. The projectswere carried out in three rounds, with each roundhaving a clear theme:

• Round one: New ways of engaging newlearners;

• Round two: Understanding purpose andperseverance – learners’ aspirations andcommitment to learning;

• Round three: Creativity in teaching andlearning.

The NRDC has drawn on its experiences of co-ordinating and supporting the work of theseprojects to produce this handbook. It is foreveryone who would like to conduct small-scaleaction research projects within their ownorganisation: from senior managers to individualteachers or teams planning to work collaboratively.It is a practical guide on how to initiate and managepractitioner-research programmes. Makingresearch work in practice is not simple: ideas donot always flow smoothly or automatically betweenthe worlds of research and practice. To optimisethe transfer process, practitioners need activeengagement with research processes togetherwith collaboration and dialogue with full-timeresearchers. Well-supported and resourcedpractitioner research is best placed to developpractice because it encourages critical andreflective inquiry. It throws light on, explores andchallenges accepted practices and received

wisdom from the inside as well as the outside. Itprovides the opportunity to recognise and usepractitioners’ knowledge, and to identify andpromote innovative practices, which mushroomconstantly in so many places. This guide offersguidance on the process and is realistic aboutproblems which might occur.

Those interested in finding out more about NRDCsPractitioner-Led Research Initiative, should referto the following publications, all available via theNRDC website: http://www.nrdc.org.uk

• New Ways of Engaging New Learners: Lessonsfrom round one of the practitioner-led researchinitiative, edited by Mary Hamilton and AnitaWilson, published 2006. This publication bringstogether the final reports of the first round ofthe PLRI.

• Practitioners Leading Research, compiled andedited by Mary Hamilton, Paul Davies andKathryn James, published 2007. Thispublication brings together the final reportsfrom rounds two and three of the PLRI.

• Practioner-Led Research Initiative Impact Report,Mary Hamilton and Kathryn James, published2007. This web-only publication looks at thefindings that came out of the PLRI.

I commend this handbook to you. I hope you willfind it both useful and enjoyable as a guide to yourown practitioner-research initiatives.

Ursula Howard, Director, NRDC

Foreword


6


HANDBOOK

The main purpose of this handbook is to offer apractical guide to those who plan to initiate andmanage practitioner-research programmes. It isbased on our experiences of co-ordinating andsupporting the work of practitioner-researchers ina wide range of fields which have included adult,school and community learning. It also draws onongoing work with postgraduate students,especially those who have to undertake asignificant work-based study as part of a mastersdegree or diploma course.

Our interest in developing a practitioner-researchculture arises from our view that ideas do notalways flow smoothly or automatically between theworlds of research and practice. This is, of course,an opinion shared by many and partly accounts forthe increase in the number of practitioner-research programmes that exist not just in the UKbut in Australia, Canada, the USA and elsewhere.The wider literature reporting on experiences ofpractitioner research suggests that it can be aneffective way of engaging full-time researcherswith practitioners and vice versa.

In the UK many high profile education and socialpolicy initiatives now feature a practitioner-research element amongst their key requirements.The thinking behind this is to encouragepractitioners and their organisations to looktowards research as a means of providing theinformation they need to both develop theirservices and tackle the challenges they might faceas they do so.

We believe that in order for practitioners to beinvolved with research requires more than justbeing exposed to research findings. Rather, theyneed active engagement with research processestogether with collaboration and dialogue with full-

time researchers. In other words, evidence in andof itself does not necessarily result in change. It iscrucial who disseminates this evidence, who feelsit to be important and how it is understood to berelevant to practice. Engaging practitioners inresearch will ensure that the work done is relevantand geared to their needs. It will increase thesense of ownership of, and commitment to, theresearch itself, and to any development and otherpolicy and practice proposals which are based onthe research. It also enables full-time researchersto become more familiar with the type ofinformation practitioners require and the range ofways in which research findings might be packagedand communicated.

In addition to focusing on individual practitioners,an important aspect of many practitioner-researchprogrammes is to also engage the seniormanagement of organisations in the programme,thereby increasing their involvement in andawareness of research activities, agendas andoutcomes. The purpose of this is to encouragethem to provide the essential infrastructures forpractitioner research including, for example,release from teaching to allow them to carry outtheir studies. Moreover it is equally important thatsenior managers become more active indisseminating such research and act on itsoutcomes.

With an appropriate amount of support from full-time researchers, practitioners can normallyundertake very successful research. Many regardtheir newly acquired research skills as a usefuladdition to their overall professional competence,particularly important in the light of the newqualifications standards for teachers introduced inSeptember 20071. Others become more interestedin research and there are a growing number who

Introduction

1 See www.lifelonglearninguk.org for details.



HANDBOOK

7

are recruited onto full-time research projects andeither permanently work for researchorganisations or develop careers whereby theymove between research and practice as variouscontracts start and finish.

Doing practitioner research

Although there are numerous advantagesassociated with practitioner research there are anumber of difficulties which need to beacknowledged. Perhaps decisions have to bemade whether to alert practitioners at the outsetabout these or whether it is better to offer supportto them as they emerge.

Practitioner research naturally appeals most tothose practitioners who have an existing propensityto do, or interest in, research. They are often theenthusiasts in their field who are interested inexploring complexities and dilemmas. However,just because there are individuals in anorganisation who are keen to do research does notnecessarily mean that they work in organisationswhich have a research culture. (There may be moreof a target setting and achieving culture, forexample.) Although there have been manyattempts to narrow the divide, many practitioner-researchers will eventually discover that althoughtheir research findings might be receivedenthusiastically by their immediate colleagues,others in their organisation and a wider interestedcommunity, they may not necessarily lead tochanges in practice.

Research can seem like a very complex andsophisticated activity whose very appeal is that it isperceived as more academically demanding thanroutine day-to-day activities. It is this difference or‘breath of fresh air’ that we are told is one of themost appealing aspects to practitioners.Unfortunately, for some practitioners the

experience of actually doing research is somewhatless exciting. Work-based projects can be excitingand innovative, but a lot of the demands of theproject are better described as management,scheduling, co-ordinating, easing person-to-person difficulties, and so on. Practitioners aresometimes disappointed to find that thedescription most commonly applied to practitionerresearch is ‘worthwhile but time consuming’.Because many studies can only be completed byabandoning some of the more innovativeapproaches, settling on sample sizes which areless than originally desired, and collecting datawhich does not lead to particularly‘groundbreaking’ conclusions, some practitionerswonder whether what they have done deserves thetitle ‘research’.

Finally, when the practitioner-research project hasbeen completed, and even if the practitioner is toldthat it is a very thorough and worthwhile piece ofwork, there are many in the research ‘community’who may not attach that much significance to it.The status of practitioner research is variable, andthis has major implications for how the research ispublished and disseminated.

This handbook attempts to provide useful, practicaland realistic advice for those who managepractitioner-research programmes whilst alsoacknowledging that this is a contested area withcompeting views about what practitioner researchis, how it should be done, who should do it andwhat the point of it all is. For example, is it thequality of the end product, the findings in theresearch report or the quality of the learningexperience that is the most important thing,irrespective of the actual findings?

One approach is to regard full-time, academicresearch as the ‘gold standard’ against whichpractitioner research should be always judged.


8


HANDBOOK

Another is to regard practitioner research as asimilar but different activity which has its own setof success criteria. From time to time, each ofthese perspectives is applied to differentpractitioner-research situations in this handbook.

When supporting practitioner researchers we haveoften found the metaphor of the ‘research journey’a useful way of describing the experience ofplanning a study, finding a direction, negotiatingdelays and detours before eventually arriving at thedestination. Consequently, this handbook is dividedinto the following sections which reflect thedifferent phases of such a journey.

1. Getting started2. Maintaining momentum3. Writing up, publishing and disseminating4. Conclusions

There are many resources available for thoseinterested in practitioner research. Acomprehensive list of these resources is availablein the NRDC publication Practitioners leadingresearch (2007) edited by Mary Hamilton, PaulDavies and Kathryn James. Available atwww.nrdc.org.uk



HANDBOOK

9

1 Getting Started

This section examines three main issues:

1. Making and taking opportunities to do

practitioner research

2. Establishing a working definition of research

3. Deciding what is achievable

Making and taking opportunities

Attracting a field of good quality practitioners andpotential researchers is an obvious factor in asuccessful practitioner-research programme.There is a definite need to offer some attractive‘carrots’ which make the prospect of doingresearch appealing, rewarding and achievable.Some practitioner-research programmes withwhich we have been involved have been relativelyunsuccessful, mainly because they had limitedappeal and were considered to be just an additionalburden.

Hamilton has identified five models of practitioner research (see page 11) and thesevary according to:

• The amount of professional development theyexplicitly provide;

• The nature and amount of external support;• The extent to which the research projects

are embedded in the practitioners’organisations.

Furthermore and very importantly, they havedifferent funding implications for stakeholders.

Practitioner-research programmes can provideseveral things. They can:

• Help develop a research or evaluation culture

within organisations or a professional field ofpractice;

• Assist organisational development;• Encourage professional development;• Develop collaborative patterns of working;• Lead to the production of useful research

‘products’ such as networks, websites and, ofcourse research reports.

It would be a very successful programme indeedwhich achieved all of these in equal measure, andperhaps it would be useful to prioritise these bothwithin the programme as a whole and for theindividual practitioner researchers.

Part of the process of attracting a good field ofapplicants for a practitioner-research programmeis to make this range of benefits visible to potentialapplicants, for some have narrow and indeedstereotypical images of what research is and whatit does. Consequently, practitioners tend torespond to a practitioner-research invitation whenthey can see the opportunity to obtain at least someof these benefits. The ‘ideal case’ scenario for anattractive practitioner-research programme mightinclude the following.

An ‘ideal’ practitioner-research programme

1. An experienced and high profile organisingteam based on, for example, a university wellknown for its work in this field.

2. Internal organisational support from seniormanagers who are keen for their staff toundertake practitioner research and thenuse the findings.

3. A work-based problem or issue whichpractitioners think can be better managed orprovided for as a direct result of research. 3


10


HANDBOOK

4. An adequate level of research support andfunding which gives the impression thatpractitioner research is valuable and worthinvesting time and effort in. Described by oneof our practitioner researchers as the ‘wowfactor’.

Establishing a working definition of research

It is hard to pin down an exact definition of whatpractitioner research actually is. Furthermore,practitioner researchers (even within a single field)can come from a variety of both academic andoccupational backgrounds and have very differentviews about the nature of research and what it triesto do. Some hold strong views about theappropriateness of particular research traditionssuch as the ‘scientific’ method or the qualitativeapproach. Others do not necessarily favour anyparticular methodology and favour basing theirstudies on a mixed package of:

• Questionnaire surveys;• Semi-structured interviews; • Case studies.

Action research is sometimes popular with thosewho are teaching and have the opportunity to usetheir classrooms as places where the effect ofsmall changes can be recorded and analysed.

Practitioner researchers can also have a range ofviews about what they think research can actuallyachieve. This can vary in terms of ambition from:

High Ambition >>> Low Ambition

Provide the solution Contribute to ourto the problem. understanding of

the problem.

Practitioners are attracted to both ends of thisspectrum. Some regard the ‘low ambition’ focus asnot worthy of the term research, whilst others arerelieved they are not under the pressure of havingto find the answer to a tricky problem. Indeed itwould appear that most new comers to practitionerresearch have no clear idea about what their workmight offer the knowledge-base in general.However, they tend to be far clearer about whattheir study might contribute to their workplace.This ranges from:

High Impact >>> Low Impact

Intend the research to No particularconvince others about expectation abouta solution they already impact. More interest inknow. general learning from the

research experience.

Most of the practitioner researchers with whom wehave worked have been comfortable with the factthat no particular definition of, or approach to,research was promoted. Instead they wereencouraged to:

• Start from their comfort zone of previousperceptions and experiences of research;

• Appreciate that there are a variety of definitionsand approaches;

• Appreciate that the greater the variety ofmethods they considered using, the greater wasthe range of research topics that were open tothem.

An important part of this early phase is to help thepractitioners adopt a research perspective in a verygeneral sense. This is best illustrated by the workwe did in supporting them to consider critically,and sometimes re-define, some of the notions theyhad about research. For example:



HANDBOOK

11

Model 1: Practitioners are employed as members of the

research team in externally funded research

projects, working in their own or others’

organisations.

Follows rhythms and aims, and ethos of fundedresearch rather than professional developmentneeds or organisational priorities. Dependingon the balance of expertise in the project,practitioners may take on an ‘apprenticeship’role or a ‘consultancy’ role. Can be good for‘first step’ research experience. Highlystructured, offering a sense of contributing to abigger research effort, opportunities fordialogue with researchers, good fordisseminating existing research. Can beexploitative (researchers on the cheap) or leadto practitioners mainly being used to facilitateaccess to research sites and to collect data.

Model 2:Practitioners carry out small-scale projects

as part of professional development in the

context of initial teacher education or

masters-level programmes.

High on professional development links andformal training, low on organisational links,relevance and embedding; often fragmented,necessarily small-scale, no development of aprofessional community unless a critical massof students working alongside each other ornetworked together.

Model 3: Practitioner-led group research projects or

‘research circles’, often supported by external

research consultants.

Promoted in Scandinavia and Canada. Groupswork with expert research consultant (as inWard and Edwards, 2002). 2 As developed todate, low on formal professional development, can be low on embeddedness and researchculture links unless institutional support is

given. A number of examples of this approachin Australia and Canada, both successful andunsuccessful. Groups are highly dependent onresearch consultant for quality of experience.

Model 4: Research and practice networks, organising

conferences and other events for debate and

sharing of good practice; publishing

practitioner-oriented journals.

These exist in the UK, Canada and Australia.Good on dissemination and encouraging senseof professional culture that includes research.Unless supplemented by other forms ofsupport, can only share existing researchexperience (e.g. practitioners already enrolledon postgraduate courses and researchdegrees), doesn’t expand or embed theresearch culture beyond active minority. Suchnetworks already exist in the UK.3

Model 5: Whole institutional approach. Research

expert attached to a providing organisation,

works in situ with selected members of staff

on a project chosen by the organisation and

participating staff members as being relevant

to their goals and interests.

Common model at school-level and someexamples from Australia and the US. Given thatthe size of provider staff group is crucial, wouldit work in a college or community-basedprovider? Could include studying existingresearch to explore how might be relevant toown organisational setting as well asgenerating new research funding.

2 Ward, J. and Edwards, J. (2002) Learning Journeys: LearnersVoices. London: Learning and Skills Development Agency.3 RaPAL: Research and Practice in Adult Literacy, seewww.literacy.lancaster.ac.uk/rapal; ALM: Adults LearningMathematics, see www.alm-online.org; NATECLA: NationalAssociation of Teaching English and other CommunityLanguages to Adults, see www.natecla.org.uk

Five models of practitioner research


12


HANDBOOK

Notion 1

Notion – Research is usually difficult and bestdone by full-time researchers.

Support message – An achievable project(from the point of view of a practitioner withlimited research experience and resources) isnot necessarily intellectually less demanding.

Implication for practitioner research – Thepractitioners liked stretching themselves buttowards a goal that was attainable.

Notion 2

Notion – Research findings have to besignificant and wide ranging.

Support message – Change can also comeabout through a process of small steps.

Implication for practitioner research – Most practitioners work in situations where there isonly limited scope for change. Small stepsrather than wide ranging reforms might bebetter suited to organisational practices andculture.

On the other hand, there is also the risk that the distinctions between research and practicemight not be separated sufficiently and thecharacteristics of the research perspective mightbe lost.

Notion 3

Notion – Research and organisationalmanagement (such as monitoring andinformation processing) are more or less thesame, it is mainly the language that isdifferent.

Support Message – Information is viewedmore critically in research. The nature of theinformation, its source and how it is gatheredare all potentially problematic. Researchersare happy to convey complexity and do notnecessarily strive after a single judgement orsolution.

Implication for practitioner research – Thequality of research methods are vital. Datagathering is different from routine informationprocessing although there may be somesimilarities.

Deciding what is achievable

A very important question at the core of managingand supporting practitioner-research programmesis how much guidance should be given to thepractitioners. This is particularly difficult wherethe very things about which the practitioners aremost enthusiastic and which provide the mainmotivation for them to do research, are also thevery things that to an experienced researcher aremost likely to cause them problems.



HANDBOOK

13

A number of responses are possible if this situationarises at the start of a practitioner-research project.

Response Positive Effect Negative Effect

‘Nip the Problem solved and Damages problem avoid knock-on enthusiasm and in the bud’ difficulties motivation

‘Don’t rock Maintain enthusiasm Simply postponethe boat’ and motivation dealing with the

difficulties

‘Let events Enable them to Wasted time,take their experience the damaged course’ research ‘journey’ confidence

In practice a mixture of all three responses wereused during the early phase of setting the researchprojects up and much depended on:

• the relationship we had with the practitioners;• how closely they wished to work with us and;• the other research support they were likely to

receive.

However, we usually provide our practitioner-researchers with:

• Fairly clear frameworks; • Deadlines whose significance is stressed;• The promise of early support visits to review the

start they have made.

In most cases, events do take their course andmost of the projects did appear to experience aphase where ideas (sometimes unrealistic) aretossed about followed by a phase where theemphasis is placed on what is feasible andachievable.

So practitioner research is in some respects not sodifferent from full-time research in that the formthe project eventually takes is somewhat moremodest in ambition than was the original idea.During this process of abandoning some of theinitial ideas and settling on a version that isreduced in size, two main issues tend to arise.

1. Sample size – in particular, if original sampletargets are missed, is the sample that is actuallyachieved good enough?

2. Reassurance that the more manageable andless complex amended version is stillsophisticated enough to deserve the title of aresearch project.

Discussion points

Some experienced researchers plan theirstudy in only a general sense anticipating thatmany of the more detailed decisions are bestleft until the study has started and they aremore aware of the opportunities and obstaclesthey might face. To what extent shouldpractitioner researchers be encouraged toplan in detail before they begin their study?Can they also delay some specific decisionsuntil later?

One of the devices used to help practitioner-researchers achieve a manageable researchfocus is to encourage them to produce a shortlist of quite specific key research questions.This usually enables them to complete theirstudy but it can also mean that their findingsare of limited value to the wider audience. Justhow specific should key research questions be?


14


HANDBOOK



HANDBOOK

15

2 Maintaining momentum

This section looks at four main issues which are to

some extent interrelated:

1. Keeping ownership

2. Keeping to the ‘rules’

3. Skills training

4. Three levels of support

Keeping ownership

One of the main reasons for encouragingpractitioners to do their own research is to enablethose working in the field to view research as anaid to professional and organisational developmentand not something that is detached from day-to-day work issues and which is chiefly the concern ofthose who work in academic communities.Consequently, whilst it is important to providepractitioners with guidance and general support, itis vital not to become the key decision maker in theproject and so demote the practitioners to aposition of research assistant or apprentice.

Being able to offer the practitioner advice, whilstalso feeling comfortable in standing back so thatthey retain ownership of the research, can bedifficult. Much depends on how those who supportpractitioner research actually view it. Fourpossible examples of support viewpoints are:

1. It is much like post-graduate supervision wherethe practitioner or ‘student’ is helped to meetthe criteria of a post-graduate research degree.

2. It is a semi-academic exercise where meetingthe research criteria as mentioned in the pointabove is of lesser importance than theproduction of a thorough, clear report whose

findings are related to the evidence collectedand have some value for practice.

3. It is a process of acquiring research skills andexperience by undertaking a project in asupportive environment. The key element hereis not the status of the findings but helping thepractitioner to learn from the process.

4. It is a distinct form of research which althoughdrawing on traditional research approaches andtechniques needs to be viewed as havingcharacteristics and uses of its own. It may wellnot meet all the criteria of post-graduateresearch but its worth cannot be judged only byfull time academics. Its value to otherpractitioners is of immense importance too.

Keeping to the ‘rules’

Many practitioner researchers come to theirprojects with a clear preference about how theywish to do it. Others, of course, have more of anopen mind and seek some fundamental advicefrom the very start.

Practitioner researchers with a preference cannormally be placed anywhere on a spectrum rangingfrom those who like traditional survey-typequantitative approaches to those who favour morequalitative, ethnographic styles. Occasionally, thereare those who are keen to try out more creativetechniques which are sometimes more literary instyle, such as presenting data in the form ofimaginary letters, or which take advantage of newtechnology such as collecting data through theongoing use of ‘blogs’. Sometimes, these newtechniques carry a degree of risk because theirappeal is mainly due to their innovative nature ratherthan their effectiveness in actually doing the job.


16


HANDBOOK

To a large extent the preferences about how to dothe research are a product of the type of work thepractitioners do. For example, many of thoseinvolved in a programme of practitioner researchoffered to teachers of adult literacy, numeracy andESOL wished to use qualitative techniques toinvestigate complex issues such as learnerconfidence, motivation and so on.

Whatever approach is being taken by thepractitioner researchers, we have found it useful tocontinually remind them that each decision theymake as their study unfolds needs to be cross-referenced to some form of general checklistwhich hopefully will help ensure quality and enablethem to keep to whatever set of ‘rules’ are guidingthem. Such a decision checklist might looksomething like the following:

‘Rule’ ‘Decision-check’

What is your original Will this help or hinderpurpose? your ability to fulfil this

purpose?

Who is the audience? Will this help or hinder your ability to influence this audience?

What is your schedule? What impact will this have on your schedule?

What are the key How will this effect theprinciples underpinning rigour of your study?your data collection methods e.g. validity, reliability, triangulation, etc?

Whilst some practitioners feel ‘safe’ working withinsuch a checklist, others view it as rathermechanical and are keen to explore routes wherethere is a greater degree of risk.

Skills training

Practitioners who opt to do research usually bringmany actual, or at least potential, research skillswith them. However, almost all appear to benefitfrom having some skills training, ideally throughsome formally arranged programme, but at thevery least by some ad hoc ‘just-in-time’ shortsessions, just before they are about to embark on aparticularly technical phase of their study. Themain topics about which practitioner researchersappear to have appreciated skills training in are:

• Sample sizes, particularly how these are relatedto quantitative and qualitative methods;

• Questionnaire design – there is a tendency fortheir first attempts to be either too simplistic ortoo lengthy and complex;

• How to categorise qualitative data;• Notions such as validity and reliability –

distinguishing sound evidence from othermaterial they may have collected;

• Research ethics – obtaining permission,explaining purpose, anonymity, confidentialityand so on.

Three types of support

One of the most fascinating aspects of practitionerresearch is the range of people who take part. Theycome from a variety of walks of life and have differentexperiences, academic backgrounds and are usuallyat different stages of their careers. Unlike maturepeople who undertake work-based studies as part ofa masters degree and who to some extent or otherhave opted to put themselves under the direction oftheir tutors, it might be inappropriate to viewpractitioner researchers as students. Perhaps thebest description is colleagues who are contributing aparticular type of experience and expertise to a jointproject. Consequently, establishing the workingrelationship is vital.



HANDBOOK

17

Speaking of his experience of working with us, onepractitioner explained that he was not sure at theoutset what type of support he needed, but inretrospect he felt he and his team of practitionershad benefited from:

• Inspiration• Confidence• Practical support.

Inspiration – the sense they were taking part in animaginative and significant programme that valuedthe contribution practitioners could make by doingtheir own research.

Confidence – feeling that their ability to do theresearch (or to develop the skills during the courseof it) was recognised and formed the foundationupon which their relationship with, in this case, theuniversity was based.

Practical support – the continual input of practicaladvice, reminders, check-ups that came from theprogramme which enabled the practitioners tokeep on course and, as important, keep in touchwith the university.

The most important point, therefore, is to ensurethat those staff who support practitioner researchvalue it as a legitimate research strand. This is notalways easy because as has been mentioned onseveral previous occasions, there are contestedviews held by full-time researchers about the roleand status of practitioner research. However, mostof the practitioners do want to develop theirresearch skills and are very keen to learn from theexperiences of full-time researchers. Consequently,guidance and constructive criticism is far betterthan an ‘anything goes’ approach. It is probably theatmosphere that is created before the constructivecriticism is given which is the vital thing.

Discussion points

A major challenge faced by practitionerresearchers (almost by definition) is findingenough time to do their study when thedemands of their job are normally their toppriority. Some have said that deadlines, follow-up emails and so on, have provided thenecessary prompts to make sure they keep totheir schedule. Just how much monitoring ofthe progress being made by practitionerresearchers is appropriate?

One way in which practitioner researchers canmake their job easier is to use some of thedata collecting and processing they do as partof their job as material for their researchstudy. Is this a good idea and what are theimplications for objectivity? Also is there anethical issue here too?


18


HANDBOOK

3 Writing up, publishing and dissemination

Writing up

This tends to be the part of the process whichproduces the most difficulties for practitioner-researchers and where they do need a substantialamount of guidance. Most practitioner-researchers do seem to benefit from some directadvice about the various ‘dos and don’ts’ of dataanalysis and report writing. This is possibly thephase of practitioner research where therelationship drifts more towards the tutor:postgraduate student style.

Some of the key issues which have tended to comeup time after time are:

• Analyse, don’t just describe;• Make links explicit – use an ‘audit trail’;• Avoid too many major messages – find a central

thread or argument;• Practice using categories;• ‘A shame to waste it’.

Publishing and dissemination

Publishing and dissemination are very important topractitioners, as the reports and feedback eventsthey attend represent not just the end of theresearch process, but tangible evidence that theirresearch has to some extent or other beensuccessful. The key point is since many of thepractitioners are not very familiar with thepractices of academic publishing anddissemination, they can find this final part of theprocess rather drawn out and frustrating.

Support, or at least communication andexplanations, is crucial at this time because this isthe stage where the work of the practitionersleaves the relatively comfortable and supportiveworld of the host institution and is exposed to thecritical eye of the outside world. This is especiallythe case where the intention is to publish theirresearch findings in widely circulated reports, onwell-known websites and through high-profile

Analysis is not just a list of what you have collected, it’s the reasons that explain thepatterns.

Because you have ‘lived’ with the data you know how it is all related. The new reader doesn’t.Create a trail between questions – data – interpretations – findings.

Most readers will pay far less attention to what you write than you did in writing it. You needto ‘hook’ them. A single central message makes your work more accessible and providesyou with a framework to which you can attach more minor points.

These are the building blocks of much qualitative research. Quantitative research is relativelyeasy in the sense that there are usually agreed mathematical procedures. Developingcategories is more open to criticism – practice your skills.

You may have collected data that does not make a major contribution to your study. Don’tforce it into the report just because you have it. In this case more may be less.

Analyse, don’t just describe

Make links explicit

Too many messages

Using categories

‘Shame to waste it’

Issue Guidance given



HANDBOOK

19

conferences. The prestige of having your findingspublished and disseminated in this way does comeat a price and practitioner researchers need to beprepared for this.

Prestige Scrutiny

High High

Low Low

The impact made by publishing and disseminatingthe research findings varies depending whetherthe audience is:

1. The immediate team and other closecolleagues;

2. The organisation as a whole;3. The wider community.

Impact of Value

findings attached

Immediate team High Very important

Whole organisation Some Important

Wider community Modest Limited

The rippling process

The impact made by practitioner research can bedescribed as having a ‘ripple effect’ where thegreatest interest is shown by immediate colleagueswith a diminishing amount of impact made as theresearch messages move outwards.

The extent to which practitioner-researchmessages actually move outwards partly dependson the perceived importance of the topic and partlyon the steps taken by the practitioners to publicisetheir work. This usually depends on:

• Their sense of the worth of their findings;• A confidence which they either brought to the

research or which has developed during thecourse of the research;

• Their interest in developing a profile within theirfields of practice and research;

• Whether they wished to use their research as ameans of career advancement.

Discussion points

During the writing up phase practitioner-researchers often send in drafts forcomments. Are there any differences in thetype and style of the comments you wouldmake on such a draft compared to thecomments you would make to an assignmenthanded in by a post-graduate student?

Practitioner-research reports could potentiallybe read by a wide range of audiences. To whatextent should practitioners be encouraged towrite for the needs of any particular audience?

>>

>>


20


HANDBOOK

4 Conclusions

Although we have been co-ordinating andsupporting the work of practitioner researchers fora number of years and in a wide range of settings,it is difficult to be exact about the role and value ofpractitioner research. The level of interest shownin practitioner research, which is often referred toby policy-makers as developing a research orevaluation culture, is often at its highest when anew initiative is launched and practitioners areencouraged to participate in its development. Insome cases practitioners welcome this opportunityand enthusiastically embrace the chance tocontribute to the aims and objectives of theinitiative by developing their own research skillsand feeding back their findings into the policy anddecision-making systems. On other occasions,however, there is more scepticism amongstpractitioners who interpret the call to developpractitioner research or evaluation skills as anattempt to encourage them to become part of amonitoring or target setting culture.

At the start of this handbook it was explained howpractitioner research is an activity about whichthere is a range of views and whose status in thewider research community is variable but probablymodest. At the moment it appears that the processvalue of doing practitioner research, that is thelearning or developmental impact on the individualresearchers, is probably greater than the productvalue, that is the findings contained in the finalreport and the other dissemination channels.

Enhancing the product value is clearly important ifpractitioner research is to break away from its‘interesting to do but not that significant’ status.This, of course is easier said than done but anumber of small steps may make an importantcontribution. Two amongst these are:

• Research – Practitioner networks such asRaPAL (see: www.literacy.lancs.ac.uk/rapal/)

whose publications, meetings and conferencescan be used to spread the word aboutpractitioner research.

• Academic practices – including publishedpractitioner-research reports on course readinglists, in the bibliography of papers, etc. Invitingpractitioner researchers to contribute toundergraduate and postgraduate courses.Including practitioner research as a research‘type’ in research methods courses.

A different approach might be to shift the attentionaway from what full-time researchers think ofpractitioner research to what full-time seniormanagers in organisations think of practitionerresearch: why they allow, enable and/or encouragetheir staff to do it and what they hope theorganisation will gain in return.

We have carried out some limited research in thisarea and it seems that although managers speakof the value of the research findings, they are alsointerested in practitioner research as:

• A means of obtaining additional funding;• A form of staff development;• A ’perk’ given to a valued member of staff;• PR – i.e. the prestige of having links to a

university.

Thus there is a tendency amongst some managersto be more enthusiastic about participating in aprogramme of practitioner research than actuallyusing the findings it produces.


Practitioner researcher Positive in terms of both research Negative – feel alienated fromprocess and value of the research research process and attach little findings. Strengthen links between value to findings. Research seen as research and practice. having limited value for practice.

Employing organisation Value practitioner research as an Practitioner research tolerated buteffective means of organisational attach little value to it. Mainly seen and professional development. Staff as a condition for obtaining funds.involved in decision making through Research viewed as a means of research. monitoring staff performance.

External research Develop a network of practitioner Practitioner research used as a wayconsultant researchers whose work is of developing the career aspirations

promoted by consultant. of consultant.


HANDBOOK

21

Consequently, practitioner research can beportrayed as an exciting and rewarding partnershipbetween individuals, their employing organisationsand the external research consultants. On theother hand, if the commitment is not there, and if

from the outset people view practitioner researchas inherently ‘second rate’, its reputation isunlikely to be enhanced by the experience. Thefollowing table describes potential best and worstcase scenarios.

Best-case scenario Worst-case scenario


22


HANDBOOK

Notes


NRDC

Institute of Education

University of London

20 Bedford Way

London WC1H 0AL

Telephone: +44 (0)20 7612 6476

Fax: +44 (0)20 7612 6671

email: [email protected]

website: www.nrdc.org.uk

NRDC is a consortium of partners led by the Institute of Education,University of London with:• Lancaster University• The University of Nottingham• The University of Sheffield• East London Pathfinder• Liverpool Lifelong Learning

Partnership

• Basic Skills Agency at NIACE• Learning and Skills

Network • LLU+, London South

Bank University • National Institute of

Adult Continuing Education• King’s College London• University of Leeds

Funded by theDepartment forInnovation,Universities and Skillsas part of Skills forLife: the nationalstrategy for improvingadult literacy andnumeracy skills.


maximising the impact of practitioner research · maximising the impact of practitioner research...

Documents