Lewin is generally considered to be the originator of a research approach that proved the effectiveness of democratic participation, reflective thinking, discussion and decision making by ordinary people, which in the 1930’s (Adelman, 1998) he called action research. Revans’ work in the 1940’s created the philosophy behind action learning (Welskop, 2013). In the 1990’s the combining of action research and action learning was officiated and the field of Action Learning Action Research (ALAR) came about (Zuber-Skerritt, 2009).
18
Since its original emergence, action research has become a hybrid of different approaches definitions and applications (Hart & Bond, 1995) creating considerable confusion. As an emergent genre within the family of action research, the defining of action learning has also not been without confusion as it often means different things to different people (Welskop, 2013). The combining of action learning with action research brings about comments and questions about the similarities between the two (Wood & Zuber-Skerritt, 2013). For this reason these concepts will be defined as they are implicit in this research.
In this enquiry, Action Research (AR) is seen as a systematic approach that enables people to find effective solutions to problems they confront in their everyday lives (Stringer, 2014). It is a cyclical iterative process of action and reflection on and in action (Zuber-Skerritt, 2009) that has the capacity for developing confidence in practical situations where there is uncertainty (McNiff, 2013). Action research integrates research and action and theory and practice while creating knowledge and improving practice (Reason & Bradbury, 2007) and always makes its results public (Coghlan &
Brydon-Miller, 2014). Ebersohn et al (2010) distinguish four types of action research, technical, practical, participatory and emancipatory, and describe how the type of action research is determined by the contextual variables within which the research takes place. As this research took place in a variety of contexts, it was decided to describe the research design as AR.
In this enquiry, Action Learning (AL) is seen as a way of learning from and through actions and experience, then taking action as a result of this learning (Zuber-Skerritt, 2009). Action learning is about asking critical questions, learning from and with colleagues while working on matters of mutual concern, sharing experiences and critically reflecting on these. Marsick and O’Neil (2010) discuss four schools of action learning: scientific, experiential and critical reflective and tactical.
Reflection on this research showed how learning took place as a natural outcome of the collaborative transformational process. In addition, the two common elements found in all the schools of AL (Marsick & O' Neil, 2010) were present in this inquiry, namely opportunity for discussion that included frequent use of practical and undefined problem solving. These reflections led to the decision to describe the learning that took place in the inquiry as AL.
Action Learning Action Research (ALAR) as an integrated concept of inquiry, using AL processes and AR principles, was adopted as the research design. ALAR combines the benefits of experiential learning with the academic values of rigour and publication, found in action research (Zuber-Skerritt, 2009).
19
Aiming to enable the transformation of occupational therapy vocational rehabilitation services in public healthcare, the researcher recognised ALAR as a positive approach to a complex problem.
There was also evidence that South African occupational therapy researchers were using action research (du Toit & Wilkinson, 2010) and specifically in relation to vocational rehabilitation (van Niekerk et al., 2006). Lorenzo et al (2006) also advocate the importance of learning in the real life situation for South African occupational therapy students, which is a fundamental attribute of action learning. ALAR is an emancipatory way of changing a situation so that it empowered the people concerned to take responsibility for their own destiny through self-directed learning and leadership (Zuber-Skerritt, 2009).
Considering the definitions of ALAR draws attention to its collaborative participatory dimension (Pedler & Burgonye, 2008), its focus on practical problems for which practical solutions are sought (Ebersöhn et al., 2010) and the ability of participants to be active constructors and interpreters of experiences, to personalise knowledge and make it relevant to practices (Zuber-Skerritt, 2009). The following characteristics of ALAR were found in this enquiry:
The aim of developing solutions to practical problems (Brockbank & McGill, 2004). In this study the practical problem was the inefficient vocational rehabilitation services of occupational therapists in public healthcare.
The focus on change and its inherently transformative and developmental characteristic which created new knowledge as change happened (Brook, 2010). This study aimed to transform vocational rehabilitation practices and develop associated skills of occupational therapists in public healthcare.
The cyclical process of strategic planning, implementing action plans, evaluating and observing the outcome and critical reflection on the results to make decisions for the next cycle. Repeating the cycles of planning, action, reflection and observation as often as necessary to address the problem (Pedler & Burgonye, 2008). In this study, the observe-plan-act-reflect cycles were found as phases in the larger research design, within the collaborative research team’s transformational planning and as multiple cyclical processes when addressing specific practice problems.
The participation of all role players and a democratic grounding allowing an equal partnership between the researcher, an outsider and insider participants. In this enquiry, the researcher became a member of a pre-existing insider group, the Vocational Rehabilitation Task Team, sharing the same transformational goals.
20
It was an interactive form of knowledge development with constant interaction between theory and practice (Zuber-Skerritt, 2009). In this enquiry, the insider group identified the issues, concerns and problems that were instrumental in deciding how to address these and identified who was to take part in the actions to transform. All generated knowledge was disseminated and shared within the local context.
The primary focus in ALAR is that people learn best when they do it themselves (Pedler & Burgonye, 2008) and that decisions are best implemented by those who helped to make them (O' Brien, 2001).
This focus echoes the basic principles of adult education, that adults learn by doing and solving problems they associate with their reality and that they need real time feedback (Moon, 2004). ALAR bridges the gap between learning and action, theory and practice and research and development (Zuber-Skerritt, 2009), with the definitive aim of transforming practice.