Amparo y un hombre de la religión: Pedro Polo

Action research has been utilised in the social sciences from as early as the 1950’s, as well as within and across various disciplines. Despite this, there are few definitive definitions of action research to be found in the literature. Moreover, a review of the current literature revealed that there is some discrepancy regarding the actual design (Keune, 1996:156; Cameron, et al., 2010:39). In much of the literature it seems that action research is seen as a synonym for ‘participatory research’ and frequently it is equaled with the various different participatory approaches²⁸ (Strydom, 2002: 419;

Cassano & Dunlop, 2005; Monette, et al., 2002:9). For the purpose of this study the researcher, referring to the work of Coenen, (1996:1); Wadsworth (1998:7) and Dick (2002:3), formulated the following functional definition of action research:

25 Cf. Chapter 3 depicting that, although similar processes and content were implemented for both sample groups, the actual outcome (final stage where there community projects were planned and initiated) differed according to the specific requirements and needs (section 3.5.3).

26 Cf. Chapter 1, section 1.5, Figure 1.

27 In this discussion the focus is primarily on action research within the field of social sciences.

However, where applicable, reference will be made to theological action research as depicted by Cameron, et al. (2010).

28 What action research has in common with these various ‘participative (action) research’ approaches or models is features of ‘learning by doing’, inclusiveness, multiple involvements (input from all affected parties) and real change, e.g. improved practices or life circumstances or transformation of social structures (Mitchell, 1968:2–3). What distinguishes action research (from mere participative action) is the emphasis on the actual research procedures and findings – i.e. using proper scientific methods to collect, examine and report on data. Furthermore, action research as a distinctive research design emphasises the non-negotiable significance of reflecting on and strict recording of the actual facts and findings (whilst participatory action is frequently utilised as methodology). Action research is called for first and foremost, when practitioners need to better their practices in real situations (rather than contrived, experimental studies) and for preliminary or pilot research (O’Brien, 1998:9).

Action research is a bottom-up form of experiential research, involving all relevant parties in a flexible spiral or cyclical process of examining current action or practices or social circumstances (which they experience as problematic or unsatisfactory) in order to rectify, change and improve it to the benefit of all involved, thus enabling the achievement of action – (social) change, improvement – and research – understanding, (scientific) knowledge – at the same time.

Alluding to the above descriptions and definition, the following comprehensive descriptive definition is formulated.

Action research

 Is a continuous investigative process focusing on practice situations (conditions of work and life of both social practitioners and the ‘ordinary people’ involved);

 Requires the establishment of inclusive partnerships (built on trust and respect) to enable the participation of both the researcher and the researched (and others involved) on a ‘subjective level’ – i.e. their experiencing of the situations;

 Is a flexible cyclical process of studying (examining) the system or practice, reflecting on the findings, experimenting with practice (acting in practice = praxis) and learning from these critical reflections (cf. Kemmis, 1985:36–38; Gilmore, Krantz & Ramirez, 1986:161);

 Leads to the building of theory (‘how to’ rectify, improve, change, transform, overcome) and the education of all involved, whilst simultaneously striving to better the real situation or to meet the identified need(s);

 Leads to social transformation;

 In the case of TAR, by means of theological dialogue between ‘insiders’ and

‘outsiders’, leads to the enhancement of the understanding of and articulation about “God in practice” – “…facilitating change in belief and action” (Cameron, et al., 2010:63–64).

Action research originated in the early 20^th century, with Kurt Lewin, a German social and experimental psychologist, generally considered the first to coin the term ‘action research’ in I944. Lewin described action research as “a comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action (that uses) a spiral of steps” (Kemmis, 1985:36), with each spiral composed of a cycle of planning; execution or action; fact-finding for the purpose of evaluating the

results of the second step; and revising the plan (Kemmis, 1985:36; O’Brien, 1998:11).

Apart from this cyclical nature, another three important characteristics of action research were put forward, namely “…its participatory character, its democratic impulse and its simultaneous contribution to social science and social change” (Kemmis, 1985:36).

A second significant contribution came from Eric Trist, a social psychiatrist at the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London.²⁹ Trist identified three basic principles of action research, namely that there should be direct collaboration between professionals and clients; that functional group relations form the basis for problem-solving; and that decisions are best implemented by those who help make them.

By the mid-1970s the field had evolved, revealing four mainstreams that had emerged: traditional,³⁰ contextural (action learning),³¹ educational³² and radical action research (O’Brien, 1998:12). Radical Action Research, rooted in “…Marxian

‘dialectical materialism’ and the praxis orientations of Antonio Gramsci, has a strong focus on emancipation and the overcoming of power imbalances” (O’Brien 1998:12).

Recognising that sustained improvement in people’s living conditions is possible only with their involvement from initiation to solving, as in the work of Paulo Freire,³³ radical action research strives for social transformation via an advocacy process to strengthen peripheral groups in society. This includes the empowerment of people by redressing inequality and redistributing power (Cassano & Dunlop, 2005:1–2) and, for practical theologians, the concept of “praxis … which they believe to be a new and profound way of doing theology … able to deal with gospel, tradition, culture, and social change all in perspective” (Bevans, 1992:65). Within the family of Radical Action Research falls the current more popular Participatory Action Research, found in

29 Trist and his group initially engaged in applied social research for the civil repatriation of German prisoners of war. Eventually involved in large-scale, multi-organisational problems, they sought to apply their research to systemic change in and between organisations by giving workers more control over their daily lives (O’Brien, 1998:12; Cameron, et al., 2010:40).

30 Traditional Action Research stemmed from Lewin’s work within organisations and encompasses the concepts and practices of Field Theory, Group Dynamics, T-Groups, and the Clinical Model.

31 Contextural Action Research (Action Learning), deriving from Trist’s work on relations between organisations, gave birth to the concept of organisational ecology, and the use of search conferences.

32 Educational Action Research has its foundations in the writings of John Dewey, the great American educational philosopher of the 1920s and 30s. After the decline of interest during the late 1950s, the work under John Eliot and Clem Adelmann of the Ford Teaching Project (1973–1976) – involving teachers in collaborative action research into their own practices – spurred renewed interest (Kemmis, 1985:37). Practitioners of educational action research mostly focus on development of curricula and professional development within educational institutions, emphasising the application of learning in a social context (O’Brien, 1998:12).

33 Educationalist Paulo Freire’s most well known works are Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1987) and Pedagogy of Hope (2006) (cf. Chapter 1, footnote 25).

liberationist movements;³⁴ in international development circles; and in Feminist Action Research.³⁵

It is not uncommon to find research processes gleaning features from different action research models. Much of Freire’s work was done in educational settings focusing on the development of curricula for adult learners, but at the same time liberating people from suppressive circumstances. Freire thus utilised both educational and radical actions research since he believed “…a democratic education cannot be realized apart from an education of and for citizenship” (Freire, 1998:90).³⁶

As will become evident, in this study features from both radical and educational action research have been utilised throughout, but more specifically in the development of the praxis framework (cf. Chapter 6). Prominent components in the definition of action research (section 2.6.1) are that of continuous (and recurring) processes of reflection, participation, learning or education and action. These and a number of other key elements will be discussed next.