Syllabus

University of Massachusetts at Boston

College of Advancing & Professional Studies
Critical and Creative Thinking Program

Action Research for Educational, Professional, and

Personal Change
CrCrTh 693
Course description
This course covers techniques for and critical thinking about the evaluation of changes in educational
practices and policies in schools, organizations, and informal contexts. Topics include quantitative and
qualitative methods for design and analysis, participatory design of practices and policies in a framework of
action research, institutional learning, the wider reception or discounting of evaluations, and selected case
studies, including those arising from semester-long student projects.

Spring 2016 Syllabus, Taylor (hybrid section)

Components of the syllabus:

I. Quick access to key information and links that should be bookmarked on your
browser
followed by
II. Information to get started, orient yourself, and refer back to from time to time.
III. Contract: What is expected overall.
IV. Schedule of classes: What is expected each session and why -- how each session contributes to the
unfolding of the course (starting with list of links to specific sessions).
POST-IT the start of each component in your printed version of this syllabus

Instructor Peter Taylor , Critical & Creative Thinking Program

Email: [email protected]
Phone 617-287-7636
Office Wheatley 4th floor, room 170
Office hours (at Tuesday 2.00-3.40pm, Wednesday 7-8pm, Sign up at
http://bit.ly/pjthangout ptaylor.wikispaces.umb.edu/PTOfficeHours, or by arrangement
or in office):
Class time & location Tuesdays 4-6.45pm, 2/2-5/3; W 4-170 or by Hangout
URL for hangouts http://bit.ly/693hangout (except for work-in-progress presentation sessions)
Report glitches in using this form
online materials
BOOKMARK THIS! crcrth693.wikispaces.umb.edu, with a menu of useful links at the top right
1
Syllabus
BOOKMARK THIS! crcrth693.wikispaces.umb.edu/-/693checklist/xx
Personal checklist where xx = your last name in lower case, no hyphens or spaces). Each
checklist wikipage has links that provide Notes on each assignment and
Examples of previous students' work.

II. Information to get started, orient yourself, and refer back to from time to
time

The starting point for this course: Suppose you have an interest in one or more issues that you might delve
into and promote change on in an Educational, Professional, or Personal area -> Question: If you have good
ideas about how to make changes, how do you get others to adopt and/or adapt them or to collaborate with
you to develop the ideas?
Video introduction

POINTERS about the preparation assumed for this course (in lieu of formal prerequisites):
For CCT students, this course is best taken after Processes of Research and Engagement, but this
sequence is not mandatory.
This course introduces a range of tools and practices of research and writing, but the more Research
and Study Competencies developed before entering the course the better. You should be prepared to
make time outside class--at least 6.5 hours/week--for undistracted work on the course and to view
each assignment and each session in relation to the unfolding of learning during the course. (That is,
do not expect the syllabus and online links to allow you to cut to the chase about what to do for the
following day's class.)
Through your previous courses, you should have developed the disposition of experimenting with new
tools, even if not every one became part of your toolkit as a learner, teacher/facilitator of others,
and/or reflective practitioner. Through courses and other personal and professional experience you
should have an interest in one or more Educational, Professional, or Personal issues that you might
delve into with a view to promoting some needed change. Most importantly, you should be prepared
to address the question: "If you have good ideas [about changes to make] how do you get others to
adopt and/or adapt them?"

OVERVIEW: The preceding question captures the central motivation for the course in the CCT curriculum.
This question can also be expressed as: "How do you build a constituency around your idea? This concern
can lead you into evaluating how good the ideas actually are (with respect to some defined objectives) so
you can demonstrate this to others. It can also lead you to work with others to develop the idea so it
becomes theirs as well and thus something they're invested in. Action Research, in the "Cycles & Epicycles"
framework taught in this course, involves group facilitation, participatory planning, and reflective practice, as
well as systematic evaluation. Students from a variety of programs should find this course a suitable vehicle
to enhance your interests in educational, professional, or personal change.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES: By the end of the semester, you will have:

experienced, learned, and practiced a set of tools and processes to promote participation and
reflective practice (including your own participation);
learned to formulate informative comparisons as a basis for evaluations;
examined critically the evaluations of others (or the lack of the appropriate evaluations), including the
influences of political context on evaluation and research;
considered the ideal of participatory action research in relation to politics generated from below;
2
 undertaken a project in an area of your particular concern in which you design (and, optionally, carry
out) an Action Research process using the Cycles and Epicycles framework (and addressing the
items listed below under Requirements); and
(for doctoral students) positioned the approach in this course in relation to the wider field of Action
Research.

TEXTS and MATERIALS

Required: Schmuck, R. (either 1997 or 2006). Practical Action Research for Change. Arlington Heights, IL:
Skylight. (Used copies of old editions may be available via amazon.com)
Recommended: Taylor, P. and J. Szteiter (2012) Taking Yourself Seriously: Processes of Research and
Engagement Arlington, MA: The Pumping Station (Available from online retailers or as pdf from
http://thepumpingstation.org )
Online guidesheets duplicate pages in the text, so you can choose not to buy the text. If you buy the
printed or pdf text you can refer to that instead of reading the guidesheets online and you have a
reference work to consult after the course.

Recommended
to help with writing: Daniel, D., C. Fauske, P. Galeno and D. Mael (2001). Take Charge of Your
Writing: Discovering Writing Through Self-Assessment. Boston: Houghton Mifflin ("new" copies
available well below list price on amazon.com)
(See also Conlin; Elbow; Kanar; Perelman, et al.)
as a more detailed guide on technical matters of writing scholarly papers: Turabian, K. L. (1996). A
Manual For Writers of Term papers, Theses, and Dissertations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
(also in library's reference section).
bibliographic software for references (see Citation tools on library website)
if you are interested in facilitating group process: Schuman, S., Ed. (2006). Creating a Culture of
Collaboration: The International Association of Facilitators Handbook. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Readings for the course consist primarily of individual articles and book chapters, most of which can be
downloaded from password-protected page)

TECHNICAL SET-UP
Know your official @umb.edu student email address and password; Make the bookmarks in sect. I on your
browser; Simple edits on wikipages (optional); Set up access to online bibliographic databases ; Arrange
bibliographic software for references;
f2f students: Get UMB wifi on laptop if you have one & bring to sessions where noted in the Preparation
section;
online students: Prepare for meetings on hangout, including practicing screenshare (see
http://bit.ly/hangoutbrief ); establish reliable, undistracted access to the internet for class sessions (with
ethernet connection to wifi modem unless absolutely impossible)

WRITING SUPPORT: For graduate students, see http://cct.wikispaces.umb.edu/writingsupport.

ACCOMMODATIONS: Sections 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 offer guidelines for
curriculum modifications and adaptations for students with documented disabilities. If applicable, students
may obtain adaptation recommendations from the Ross Center (287-7430). The student must present these
recommendations to each professor within a reasonable period, preferably by the end of the Drop/Add
period.

3
CODE OF CONDUCT: The University’s Student Code of Conduct
(http://www.umb.edu/life_on_campus/policies/code ,
https://www.umb.edu/life_on_campus/policies/community/code ) exists to maintain and protect an
environment conducive to learning. It sets clear standards of respect for members of the University
community and their property, as well as laying out the procedures for addressing unacceptable conduct.
Students can expect faculty members and the Office of the Dean of Students to look after the welfare of the
University community and, at the same time, to take an educational approach in which students violating the
Code might learn from their mistakes and understand how their behavior affects others.

PLAGIARISM: Using another person's ideas or material you did not write without citing the source is
plagiarism and is unacceptable (see library guide and Academic Honesty policies ).

Students are advised to retain a copy of this syllabus in personal files for use when applying for
certification, licensure, or transfer credit.

This syllabus is subject to change, but workload expectations will not be increased after the
semester starts. (Version 25 Dec. 2015; changes after the start of the semester are marked in red)

III. Contract: What is expected overall

The course revolves around written assignments (and work-in-progress presentations) and
participation items. These items include active participation during class based on preparation
between classes, buddy check-ins and commentary on draft assignments, meeting with the instructor
on your assignments and projects, and more.
Your 693checklist wikipage (replica viewable as http://crcrth693.wikispaces.umb.edu/693checklist) and
links to it provide Notes on the assignments and Examples of previous students' assignments. The
Notes link, in turn, to more detailed guidesheets on using the tools, including templates where
relevant. These guidesheets duplicate pages in the text, Taking Yourself Seriously so you may choose
to refer to the printed text instead of reading these guidesheets online. If you do work online, be
prepared to click through to the notes and read the guidesheets before getting to the to-do part of any
assignment.
The written assignments are commented on, but not graded. Not grading keeps the focus on
interaction around written work. You are expected to read comments carefully, consult with the peer
commenter or instructor if you don't understand a comment they made, revise thoughtfully in response
to the comments, and resubmit until OK/RNR is received (=OK/ Reflection-revision-resubmission Not
Requested).
It is expected that you will spend at least 6.5 hours per session outside class time reading,
researching, and writing. The course works by building from assignment to the next so late
submissions detract significantly from the learning possible in class sessions. However, each student
can ask for extensions on two assignments or participation items, moving the due date as far back as
the last session. (No explanation is needed; simply email the instructor and insert the new due date on
your assignment checklist.) When you miss the due date, it is ok to submit it late, but if the submission
is more than 4 days overdue only the eventual OK/RNR, not the submission, count towards the
automatic B+ (see below)--So focus first on getting the remaining assignments and participation items
done on time.
Use a printout of your personal checklist wikipage (crcrth693.wikispaces.umb.edu/-/693checklist/xx) to
keep a log of assignments and participation items completed and to keep track of due dates. Do not
expect class-time or meetings with the instructor to be taken up reminding you. Similarly, if you get
behind, you take the initiative to submit a plan to catch up or reassure the instructors that you have, in
light of your other commitments, chosen to take the grading consequences of missing assignments or

4
 due dates. (Incompletes are given only in special circumstances [detailed here].)
Allowing a fraction of assignments to be skipped without penalty or explanation accommodates the
contingencies of your lives. If you reach the target of 7 writing/presentation assignments submitted
within 4 days of the due date, 5 revised until OK/RNR, and 27 participation items—and the goal is to
work with everyone to achieve that—you get at least a B+ and a rubric is used to determine B+, A- or
A. (This unusual but simple system is designed to keep the attention off grades and on
teaching/learning interactions. Read the Rationale and ask questions to make sure you have it
clear.)
Only if you do not get to the automatic B+ level, your points = 10 for each writing assignment (or
presentation) that is marked OK/RNR + 3 for each other writing assignment initially submitted by the
due date + 1 for each participation item fulfilled up to a maximum of 80.
Overall points are converted to letter grades as follows: The minimum grade for A is 96 points, for A-
is 90, for B+ is 80, for B is 72.5; for B- is 65; for C+ is 57.5; and for C is 50 points. (In theory it is
possible for a student to earn 104 points, but this would still be awarded an A.)

The different assignments and participation items are listed below so as to be explicit about the course
contract. Of course, to undertake these assignments and items, you need more information. You
should take into account the guidelines supplied on the Notes wikipage and the examples linked to
your checklist wikipage, as well as the overall expectations conveyed in the rubric below.

Written A. Action Research written assignments and work-in-progress presentations (2/3 of

grade)
Project = Design and report on (1500-2500 words) an Action Research Process related to an action or
intervention in a specific classroom, workplace or personal teaching/learning practice, an educational policy,
an educational institution, or a social policy. Your design should include all the aspects of the Action
Research Cycles and Epicycles , including:
how you will learn from evaluations of past changes or interventions like yours,
how you would facilitate the reflective and/or collaborative process in which a constituency comes to
join with you in shaping a change or intervention (or at least supporting your efforts), and
how you would evaluate the outcome with a view to expanding further the constituency for
adopting/adapting the change or intervention.
Carrying out the design is applauded, but not required. If you carry out the design (or some of it), you should
report both on what you have actually done and how you would proceed differently if you were to do it over.
It is important that you do not let implementing your action/intervention eclipse attention to designing the
other aspects of the Action Research.
The project is developed through a sequence of assignments:
A1. reflection on introductory action research in sessions 1&2, A2. initial description (based on
strategic personal planning), A3. KAQ, A4. evaluation clock, A5. initial work-in-progress presentation
with notes on research and planning, A6. narrative outline, A5revised. updated work-in-progress
presentation (taking into account comments on initial version and notes), A7. complete draft report,
and A7revised. final (1500-2500 words) report.
For doctoral students, each assignment should include an annotated bibliography entry that positions the
assignment and the approach in this course in relation to the wider field of Action Research.

Participation and contribution to the class process (1/3 of grade)

B. Building learning community through
prepared participation and attendance at class meetings(=13 items for hybrid sections; 8 items for
students in completely online sections)
5
 B2. "syllabus quiz" submitted in session 2 and
B3. Weekly buddy check-ins (see D1, below) (=3 items for 12 check-ins or 6 items for students in
completely online sections for 12 check-ins and longer notes in PD workbook on the check-ins).
C. Summaries of readings for sessions 9, 10, and 12 posted on session wikipage (=3 items)
D. Personal/Professional Development (PD) Workbook compiled throughout the semester (7 items), including:
D1. Weekly entries, perused at first conference or before mid-semester break, on a. possible
application of tools to your project and b. weekly buddy check-ins (2 items) (see also D3)
D2. worksheet on PD workbook and research organization submitted in session 6
D3. Whole PD workbook ready for perusal (e.g., as a shared google doc) at the end of the semester
(session 13)
D4. Annotated "Clippings" as posts on clippings wikipage (6 postings before session 13 = 2 items)
D5. Process review on the development of your work (due session 13) .
For CCT students this assignment is suitable for inclusion in the required Reflective
Practitioner's Portfolio because in it you identify the tools, practices, and perspectives from the
course that you intend to bring into your specific professional or personal endeavors.
E. Minimum of two in-office or phone conferences on your assignments, PD workbook, personal wikipage,
and project -- one before session 6; the other by session 10 (=2 items)
F. Peer commentary on your buddy's work in each 4-week period and on another student's draft report (=4
items for hybrid sections; 6 for fully online)

Students should aim for all writing and presentation assignments submitted on the due date and 5 OK/RNR
(=OK/ Reflection-revision-resubmission Not Requested), including the complete report, as well as 27
participation items fulfilled.
If you reach or exceed this target for both parts of the course grade, you get 80 points (which gives you an
automatic B+) and the following rubric is used to add further points.
For each quality "fulfilled very well" you get 2 points or 1 point if you "did an OK job, but there was
room for more development/attention." You get 0 points if "to be honest, this still needs serious
attention."
1. A sequence of assignments paced more or less as in syllabus (and revisions timely),
2. often revised thoroughly and with new thinking in response to comments.
3. Project innovative, well planned and carried out with considerable initiative, and
4. indicates that you will be able to move from design to implementation in your specific situation
(and for doctoral students, includes annotated bibliography entries that show you can position
the approach in this course in relation to the wider field of Action Research).
5. Project report clear and well structured,
6. with supporting references and detail, and professionally presented.
7. Active contribution to and reflection on process of learning from session activities around Action
Research and semester-long projects.
8. Ability to shift between opening out and focusing in as required to complete full Evaluation clock
9. Active, prepared participation and building the class as learning community.
10. PD workbook shows: Consistent work outside sessions,
11. deep reflection on your development through the semester and
12. map of the future directions in which you plan to develop.

IV. Schedule of classes: What is expected each session and why -- how each
session contributes to the unfolding of the course
1, Introduction to Action Research Cycles and Epicycles framework, 2/2
2, Introduction to Action Research Cycles and Epicycles, II , 2/9
6
3, Strategic Personal Planning, 2/16
4, Examining the background and evaluations of previous actions before pressing forward, 2/23
5, Formulating informative comparisons as a basis for evaluations, I, 3/1
6, Evaluations II & Constituency Building, 3/8
7, Work-in-progress presentations, I , 3/22
8, Reflection on your Experience as Novice Action Researchers, 3/29
9, Reflection on your Experience as Novice Action Researchers with the Considered Formulations from
Other Sources, II , 4/5
10, Influences of Political Context on Evaluation and Educational Research, 4/12
11, Work-in-progress presentations, II, 4/19
12, Generating politics from below in relation to Educational and Action Research, 4/26
13, Taking stock of course & of change: Where have we come & where do we go from here?, 5/3

Session 1 Introduction to Action Research Cycles and Epicycles, I

Preparation:
Purchase course texts
View video introduction
Read introduction to the syllabus
Review original instructor's portfolio and past evaluations for the course
Get set up technologically, including practice using google+ hangout
Accept the invitation to join the wiki and inform the instructor
See 693LiveMakeup if you miss this session (or any other synchronous session)
See discussion post on each session's wikipage for additional instructions (if any) before starting this and
each other session

Session:
Overview of course (from Course description through Learning Objectives in FrontMatter)
Freewriting and Think-Pair-Share on digesting the overview.
“When I try to digest the paragraphs and imagine what I will learn in the course, the
thoughts/experience/feelings that come to mind include…
The framework of Action Research Cycles and Epicycles is introduced through a compressed example of
Action Research performed by the class members during this session.
Case: Online students’ experience of the course to focus primarily on the subject, not the technology
Print out and use this worksheet to consider this case step-by-step.
At the end, complete the Critical Incident Questionnaire on the experience of the compressed example of
Action Research.

Follow-up:
Read and make notes on the Action Research Cycles and Epicycles framework, which you will need to
revisit several times over the course of the semester to appreciate fully.
View Video guided tour of course materials and processes
Complete the Syllabus Quiz and submit the resulting file to the instructor.
Connect with your Buddy for the first of the 4-week periods.
Hold your first Buddy Check-in before session 2; this should involve peer assistance in items on the
Syllabus Quiz, especially finding your way around the course materials, and articulating questions to
get the help you need.
7
Set up your PD workbook.
If you need help, post questions on the general discussion board for the course, or send them to the
instructor. In particular, don't spend more than about 5 minutes confused by the wiki.
Sign up for your first conference with the instructor, due before session 6.
Look ahead to what preparation is needed for the next session.
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session. Remember that work due in a session should be
submitted by time of the session. This means that you will always need to look ahead one week.

Session 2 Introduction to Action Research Cycles and Epicycles, II

Preparation:
Read Schmuck, 1997, p. vii-29; 2006, p. ix-29. Think about the relationship between his systematic
treatment of the topic and your experience in session 1.
Read final projects by Teryl Cartwright and one other alum of the course: Jan Coe, Alyssa Hinkell, Marie
Levey-Pabst, Alison Palmucci, John Quirk, Kathleen Thompson
(Optional) Listen to a recorded interview with an alum of the course about her experience with the course
(as a face-to-face student).
(Optional, but required for doctoral students) Read Noah Rubin's account of the pedagogy in this course.

Session:
Feedback on Critical Incident Questionnaire I.
Questions on Syllabus, course mechanics, uploading assignments to wikis and other technological
competencies
Discussion on use of AR cycles & epicycles framework (guidesheet) to review and analyze final projects by
alums of the course, including live guest alum, Teryl Carwright
Focused Conversation on Action Research experience to date

Follow-up:
Review Focused Conversation, handout
Reading on Focused Conversations: Stanfield, 6-29; (optional) Nelson, ..Focused Conversation for Schools
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session.

Work due this session:

B2. Syllabus quiz (emailed to instructor, with 693assignment in subject line)

Session 3 Strategic Personal Planning

applied to initial formulation of a course action research design project so it incorporates your wider personal
and life concerns (and thus recruits you firmly into your constituency)

Preparation:
Read Spencer, chaps. 5 & 7, Weissglass, "Constructivist Listening,"
Review Project reports from previous semesters (via wikipage)
For a preview of clustering and naming of clusters (which is part of Strategic planning), peruse vision
charts , but note that these are from the course as a whole, not from individuals.

Session:
Supportive Listening (a variant of constructivist listening) with buddy on one's hopes/fears/ideas/questions
re: educational, professional, and/or personal change
Strategic personal planning workshop (underlying the educational/organizational/personal change you want
to facilitate/promote)
8
 Supplementary guidelines for Strategic Personal Planning
In-Session drafting of initial description of AR design project

Follow-up:
Supplementary guidelines for Strategic Personal Planning
(for those interested in Strategic Participatory Planning, of which Strategic Personal Planning is a variant)
Materials from ICA Facilitators Manual, CEDAC, Our Economy, Taylor, "Epilogue," 204-210, Schmuck on
"cooperative" action research
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session.

Work due this session:

*A* Asmt. A1: 1st Reflection on your Experience as Novice Action Researchers in relation to the Considered
Formulations from Other Sources (in this case, the prescribed readings so far from Schmuck)

Session 4 Examining the background and evaluations of previous actions

before pressing forward
using tools and interactions with others to open up problems and focus in on needed inquiry

Preparation:
Read Entin, "Reflective Practitioner," Greenwald, "Learning from Problems."

Session:
Use of KAQ framework :
mini-lecture on KAQ framework
Draft some lines of KAQ for your project
Discuss your initial efforts with classmate or buddy and via discussion posts (which the instructor will
respond to)

Follow-up:
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session.

Work due this session:

*A* Asmt. A2: Initial Paragraph Overview of Project

Session 5 Formulating informative comparisons as a basis for

evaluations, I

Preparation:
Arrange new buddy for the next 4-week period
Read Goode article on the effects of a smoking ban ; Overview of relationship of evaluation to facilitation
of change; Guide to the Evaluation clock
(Optional for hybrid session) Listen to audio recording on using the Comparison steps (2-4) of the
evaluation clock

Session:
Use of the Comparison steps (2-4) of the evaluation clock to
analyze published evaluations of past actions (e.g., smoking ban clipping), then
design evaluations that may be part of students' projects
9
Follow-up:
Re-read guide to the Evaluation clock
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session.

Work due this session:

*A* Asmt. A3: KAQF assignment

Session 6 Evaluations II & Constituency Building

Preparation:
Topic for buddy check-in: Using the comparison steps (2-4) in the evaluation clock to design evaluation as
part of your project (Asmt. 4a)
Reading: Teryl Cartwright's project report for a review of approaches to Constituency building and Mike
Wienke's Constituency-building funnel
(Optional for hybrid section) Listen to recording of mini-lecture, to accompany text on statistical
formulations of comparisons and background assumptions

Session:
(Hybrid section only) Mini-lecture on statistical thinking, comparisons and background assumptions
Constituency building: An introduction to facilitation
Peer coaching on Evaluation clock assignment and its extension to students' Projects, wiki use, KAQF, and
PD workbooks.

Follow-up:
Review Facilitation Notes (in readings) to stimulate your thinking about developing skills in that area beyond
what is introduced in this course
Schedule second conference by session 10 to discuss your projects and use of evaluation clock
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session.

Work due this session:

A Asmt. A4a. Use the "stripped-down" version of the evaluation clock (comparison steps 0 to 5) design
evaluation as part of your project
E1. First conference must be completed before session 6 to discuss your Action Research ideas, the course
thus far, and your PD workbook (which you commenced working on after session 1; see D1.)
D2. Submit worksheet on PD workbook and research organization (you can use the template document:
crcrth693-PDworksheet-D2.doc)
D4. You should have at least two annotated web-"Clippings" on Clippings Page by this point in semester.

There is no spring break for this course.

Session 7 Work-in-progress presentations, I

Preparation:
Work-in-progress Presentation I on Project; post working title as discussion post; prepare visual aids and
hide as many toolbars as possible; (students from a distance only) practice using screenshare on google+
hangout; (f2f students only: rename as usual before emailing to instructor)
Note that this session does not use the regular hangout address

10
Session:
Visit hangout page to click on hangout URL for this session.
Work-in-progress Presentations on Project
Plus-Delta feedback on each presentation (on paper [f2f students] or via online form )

Follow-up:
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session.

Work due this session:

*A* Asmt. A5a, initial: Work-in-progress Presentation I on Project and A5b. Notes on Research and Planning
for Student Projects

Session 8 Reflection on your Experience as Novice Action Researchers

with the Considered Formulations from Other Sources, II

Preparation:
Read Schmuck, pages 29-146, Weiss, chapter 1, and (optional) Weiss, chapters 2 &4.
Preview Small group work roles.
(Optional for hybrid section) Video on work in heterogeneous groups: http://vimeo.com/16218630
(password-access)

Session:
(Hybrid section only) Video on work in heterogeneous groups: http://vimeo.com/16218630
Small group work on two activities: a) lessons about cooperative work and b) comparison of frameworks for
Action Research: Cycles and Epicycles vs. Schmuck's Co-operative Action research.
Critical Incident Questionnaire II on course to date

Follow-up:
Review if needed: video on work in heterogeneous groups: http://vimeo.com/16218630
Discussion post on this wikipage of your own synthesis from session activity a) and your own comparison
from activity b).
(optional) Read other accounts of Action Research: Madison Metropolitan School District, "Classroom action
research," Spina, "Six key principles," Winter, Learning from Experience
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session.

Work due this session:

*A* Asmt. A4b due: Use the full evaluation clock to design the evaluation part of your project.

Session 9 Reflection on your Experience as Novice Action Researchers

with the Considered Formulations from Other Sources, II

Preparation:
Arrange new buddy for the next 4-week period
Read at least three from Hitchcock & Hughes, Chap. 3, "Access, ethics, and objectivity," Chapter 5,
"Designing, planning and evaluating Research"; Greenwood & Levin, Chaps. 8 & 11, "Action research
cases," & "Action science and organizational learning"; Rokovich, et al., "Implementing change"; Jenkins,
"Action learning"; CEDAC, Our Economy; Greenwald, Learning from problems, Madison Metropolitan School
District, "Classroom action research" (and linked pages ), Penuel et al, , " Organizing Research and
Development," study of CIT , Rubin's account of the pedagogy in this course
11
Submit summaries for one reading to the discussion post for this session.
Read guidelines for dialogue process .
Read Feedback on Critical Incident Questionnaire II

Session:
Dialogue "Hour" session on our thinking and experience and questions about action research in contrast to
conventional research, drawing on readings and including issues about ethics of research and people’s
engagement in the situations being researched.

Follow-up:
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session.

Work due this session:

Participation Item C. Summary of one reading submitted to the discussion post for this session.

Session 10 Influences of Political Context on Evaluation and Educational

Research
Although it is not expected that your projects tackle the larger political context of making changes in
education (broadly construed) or draw on sophisticated theories about evaluation and educational change,
this Session put these areas on your maps.

Preparation:
Read at least one of:
Woodhead, "When psychology informs public policy,"
Hunt, "The dilemma in the classroom: a cross-sectional survey measures the effects of segregated
schooling,"
Metcalf, "Reading between the lines."
Muir, "Science rules OK: running societies the rational way,"
Rokovich, "Implementing change at SJUSD: an unfinished case study"
Submit summary for one reading to the discussion post for this session.

Session:
"Jigsaw" digestion and discussion of readings, with special attention to the ways that politics shapes
educational research and evaluation studies at the stages of: origins and design of the research; the
implementation; the interpretation of results; and their dissemination or application.

Follow-up:
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session.

Work due this session:

*A* Asmt. A6: Narrative Outline for Project Report
E2. Second conference with instructor on your assignments and projects, before Session 10.
Participation Item C. Summary of one reading submitted to the discussion post for this session.

Session 11 Work-in-progress presentations, II

(taking into account comments on previous presentation & notes on research & planning)

Preparation:
Work-in-progress Presentation I on Project; post working title on discussion post for the session; prepare
12
visual aids and hide as many toolbars as possible; (f2f students only: rename as usual before emailing to
instructor)
Note that this session does not use the regular hangout address

Session:
Visit hangout page to click on hangout URL for this session.
Work-in-progress Presentations on Project
Plus-Delta feedback on each presentation (on paper [f2f students] or via online form )

Follow-up:
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session.

Work due this session:

*A* Asmt. A5a, updated: Work-in-progress Presentation I on Project and A5b. Notes on Research and
Planning for Student Projects

Session 12 Generating politics from below in relation to Educational and

Action Research

Preparation:
Read at least two of:
Carr & Kemmis, Becoming Critical, CEDAC, Our Economy, Couto, " The promise," Greenwood, "Action
science and organizational learning," Taylor, "Epilogue," McLeod, et al., "Changing how we work," Senge et
al., "Fostering communities"
Submit summary for one reading to the discussion post for this session.
Review Facilitation Notes (in readings) to stimulate your thinking about the role of structured facilitation in
generating politics from below
(Optional for hybrid section) Video segment on Myles Horton and the Highlander Center, a longterm source
of educational and social change: http://vimeo.com/16215282 (password-access)

Session:
(Hybrid section only) Video segment on Myles Horton and the Highlander Center, a longterm source of
educational and social change: http://vimeo.com/16215282
Dialogue Process session on "Generating politics from below in relation to Educational and Action
Research," including participatory action research, theory in relation to action (incl. reflective practice), and
structured facilitation

Follow-up:
Look ahead to what work is due in the next session.

Work due this session:

*A* Asmt. A7: Complete Draft of Design Project (on peer share wikipage as well as your 693checklist
wikipage)
Participation Item C. Summary of one reading submitted to the discussion post for this session.

Session 13 Taking stock of course & of change: Where have we come &
where do we go from here?

Preparation:
13
Read Cashin, "Student ratings of teaching"
Review samples from previous years
Read: Tuecke, "Creating a wall of wonder," Rubin on the pedagogy in this course

Session:
Selected taking stock activity, either Historical Scan (aka Wall of Wonder) or Process Review or Practical
Vision of Future Personal and Professional Development or Sense of Place Map (Sense of Place Map)
Evaluation that starts with a self-evaluation (to be administered by survey gizmo ).
CAPS course evaluation

Follow-up:
Review previous semesters' evaluations
Read excerpts (TBA) from Stanfield, Courage to Learn, Stanfield, The Workshop Book

Work due this session:

*A* D3. PD workbook (on wiki) for perusal, including D5. Process review.
For CCT students the Process review is suitable for inclusion in the required Reflective Practitioner's
Portfolio because in it you identify the tools, practices, and perspectives from the course that you
intend to bring into your specific professional or personal endeavors.
*A* F. Make comments on draft design project of another student (not necessarily your buddy); upload
comments back to the peershare wikipage and email the author that you have done so.

One week after session 13

Work due:
*A* Asmt. A7 revised: Final Project report

V. Bibliography
(readings [except those marked not PPR] online using Wiki for course materials, [password-protected page])
# indicates additional texts on evaluation, action research, or facilitating group process (to be
borrowed from the library, interlibrary loan, or instructor).
## indicates useful readings to help in writing and revising.

Backer, T., J. Chang, A. Crawford, T. Ferraguto, D. Tioseco and N. Woodson (2002). "Case study and
analysis: The Center for the Improvement of Teaching, University of Massachusetts, Boston."
Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers #
(not PPR)
Calhoun, E. F. (1994). How to Use Action Research in the Self-Renewing School. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
(not PPR)
Carr, W. and S. Kemmis (1986). Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research. Geelong:
Deakin University Press., chapters 6 & 7 (up to p. 200)
Cashin, W. E. (1995) "Student Ratings of Teaching: The Research Revisited." IDEA Paper No. 32
CEDAC (Community Economic Development Advisory Committee) (1995). Our Economy: Our Future, Final
Report. York, Ontario: City of York.
Conlin, M. L. (2002). "The basics of writing: Process and strategies," in Patterns Plus: A Short Prose Reader
with Argumentation. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1-11. ##
Couto, R. A. (2001). "The promise of a scholarship of engagement." The Academic Workplace 12(2): 4, 6;

14
http://www.nerche.org/images/stories/publications/The_Academic_Workplace_-
_Vol._12_No._2_Spring_2001.pdf (viewed 8 July '10)
Daniel, D., C. Fauske, P. Galeno and D. Mael (2001). Take Charge of Your Writing: Discovering Writing
Through Self-Assessment. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.## (not PPR)
Elbow, P. (1981). Writing with Power. New York: Oxford Univ. Press ## (not PPR)
Entin, D. (2001). "Review of The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action." The Academic
Workplace 12(2): 13, 18; http://www.nerche.org/images/stories/publications/The_Academic_Workplace_-
_Vol._12_No._2_Spring_2001.pdf (viewed 8 July '10)
Greenwald, N. (2000). "Learning from Problems." The Science Teacher 67(April): 28-32.
Greenwald, N. (2000). Science in Progress: Challenges in Problem-based Learning for Secondary Schools #
(not PPR)
Greenwood, D. J. and M. Levin (1998). Introduction To Action Research: Social Research For Social
Change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (pp. 187-202 on PPR)
Hitchcock, G. and D. Hughes (1995). Research and the Teacher: A Qualitative Introduction to School-based
Research. New York: Routledge.(pp. 39-58 on PPR; pp. 77-112 on PPR)
Hunt, M. (1985). "The dilemma in the classroom: A cross-sectional survey measures the effects of
segregated schooling," in Profiles of Social Research: The Scientific Study of Human Interactions. New York:
Russell Sage,51-97.
Institute of Cultural Affairs, n.d., Facilitators Manual (excerpts on Strategic Participatory Planning). Toronto:
Canadian Institute of Cultural Affairs.
Isaacs W. (1999) Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together. New York: Currency.# (not PPR)
Jenkins, M. (2000). "Action learning: Taking the time it takes." Paper presented to the International
Association of Facilitators, Toronto, April 27 2000.
Kanar, C. (2002). "Improving your paragraph skills," in The Confident Writer. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 60-
88.##
Madison Metropolitan School District (2001). "Classroom action research."
http://oldweb.madison.k12.wi.us/sod/car/carhomepage.html viewed 8 July '10
Madison Metropolitan School District (2001). "Classroom action research starting points."
http://oldweb.madison.k12.wi.us/sod/car/carstartingpoints.html viewed 8 July '10
McLeod, M., P. Senge and M. Wheatley (2001). "Changing how we work." Shambhala Sun(January): 29-33.
Metcalf, S. (2002). "Reading between the lines." The Nation(Jan. 28): 18-22.
Muir, Hazel. 2008. Science rules OK: Running societies the rational way. New Scientist (24 May):40-43.
Nelson, J. (2001). The Art of Focused Conversation for Schools. Toronto: Canadian Institute of Cultural
Affairs. # (not PPR)
Penuel, W. R., B. J. Fishman, et al. (2011). "Organizing Research and Development at the Intersection of
Learning, Implementation, and Design ." Educational Researcher 40(7): 331-337.
Perelman, L., J. Paradis, E. Barrett (n.d.) The Mayfield Handbook of Technical and Scientific Writing.
http://www.mhhe.com/mayfieldpub/tsw/toc.htm ##
Pietro, D. S. (Ed.) (1983). Evaluation Sourcebook. New York: American Council of Voluntary Agencies for
Foreign Service. # (not PPR)
Rokovich, M. A., M. Stevens and J. Stallman (2000). "Implementing change at SJUSD: An unfinished case
study." Presented to the International Association of Facilitators, Toronto, April 27 2000.
Schmuck, R. (1997). Practical Action Research for Change. Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight. (not PPR)
Schuman, S., Ed. (2006). Creating a Culture of Collaboration: The International Association of Facilitators
Handbook. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass (on reserve, plus excerpts PPR)
Schwab, M. G. (1989?) Participatory Research with Third Graders: An Exploratory Study of School Lunch.
Senge, P., N. Cambron-McCabe, T. Lucas, B. Smith, J. Dutton and A. Kleiner (2000). "Fostering
communities that learn," in Schools That Learn. New York: Currency,459-465.
Spencer, L. J. (1989). Winning Through Participation. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt (Ch. 5; chap. 7)
Spina, S. U. (2002). "Six key principles of action research."

15
Stanfield, B. (Ed.) (1997). The Art of Focused Conversation. Toronto: Canadian Institute of Cultural Affairs.
(pp. 6-29; pp.30-37
Stanfield, B. (2000). The Courage To Lead: Transform Self, Transform Society. Gabriola Island BC: New
Society Publishers. # (not PPR)
Stanfield, B. (2002). The Workshop Book: From Individual Creativity to Group Action. Toronto: Canadian
Institute of Cultural Affairs.# (not PPR)
Stark, J. S. and A. Thomas (Eds.) (1994). Assessment and Program Evaluation. Needham Heights, MA:
Simon & Schuster. (#, in Healey stacks)
Taylor, P. J. (2005). "Epilogue," in Unruly Complexity: Ecology, Interpretation, Engagement. Chicago,
University of Chicago Press: 203-213.
Taylor, P. and J. Szteiter (2011) Taking Yourself Seriously: Processes of Research and Engagement
Arlington, MA: The Pumping Station
Tuecke, P. (2000). "Creating a wall of wonder with the TOP environmental scan." International Association of
Facilitators, Toronto, Canada, April 27 - 30 (iaf-world.org/iaf2000/Tuecke.PDF).
Turabian, K. L. (1996). A Manual For Writers of Term papers, Theses, and Disertations. Chicago: Univ. of
Chicago Press (not PPR; in Healey reference section)##
Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.# (not PPR)
Weissglass, J. (1990). "Constructivist listening for empowerment and change." The Educational Forum 54(4):
351-370. (PPR )
Winter, R. (1989). Learning from Experience: Principles and Practice in Action Research London: Falmer.#
(not PPR)
Woodhead, M. (1988). "When psychology informs public policy." American Psychologist 43(6): 443-454.

16