CHAPTER FIVE

ACTION RESEARCH

DR KAY HARTWIG
GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY, AUSTRALIA

The term action research was coined by the social psychologist Kurt
Lewin in the 1940s to describe a particular kind of research that united the
experimental approach of social science with programs of social action to
address social problems. Lewin’s research aimed to promote social action
through democratic decision-making and active participation of
practitioners in the research process (Kember & Kelly, 1994, p. 2).

Kemmis and McTaggart (1998) defined action research as:

a form of collective self-reflective enquiry undertaken by participants in

social situations in order to improve the rationality and justice of their own
social or educational practices, as well as their understanding of these
practices and the situations in which these practices are carried out … In
education, action research has been employed in school based curriculum
development, professional development, school improvements programs
and systems planning and policy development. (p. 5)

Dick (1999) described action research as a family of research methodologies

which pursue action (or change) and research (or understanding) at the
same time. In most of its forms it does this by using a cyclic or spiral
process. Thus, action research is an emergent process, which takes shape
as understanding increases; it is an iterative process, which converges
towards a better understanding of what happens.

Gay (1987) believed the purpose of action research to be concerned with a

local problem and conducted in a local setting. He stated that it is not
concerned with whether the results are generalised to any other setting,
with the teacher very much a part of the process.
78 Chapter Five

The action research model enables teachers to work directly in their

classroom with other teachers and their students – in the natural setting. As
Ira Shor described, “it [research] happens everywhere else except every
day in the classroom, where it is needed” (as cited in Regelski, 1994/1995,
p. 65). Action research also provides the opportunity to work collaboratively
with other music teachers. Often music teachers work in isolation in their
school – isolation from general teachers and also other music teachers.
Kemmis and DiChiro felt that collaboration defines action research (as
cited in Miller, 1996) and Kemmis and McTaggart (1998) stated that the
approach is only action research when it is collaborative.

According to Kuzmich (1987) there is a gap between research studies and

their practical application in music education. Action researchers try to
close this gap between research and practice by creating a situation in
which practitioners define research problems and conduct research in such
a way that the outcomes are directly useful to classroom or other
educational situations (Kember & Kelly, 1994). Grundy and Kemmis
(1982) described action research as:

research into practice by practitioners, for practitioners … In action

research, all actors involved in the research process are equal participants,
and must be involved in every stage of the research … Action research of
any developed kind requires that the practitioners themselves control all
the aspects of the research process … The kind of involvement required is
collaborative involvement. It requires a special kind of communication …
which has been described as ‘symmetrical communication’ … which
allows all participants to be partners of communication on equal terms …
Collaborative participation in theoretical, practical and political discourse
is thus a hallmark of action research and the action research process. (p.
87)

Action research has been used in many settings including business,

industry and education. Carr and Kemmis (1986) defined educational action
research as a term used to describe a family of activities in curriculum
development, professional development, school improvement programs
and systems planning and policy development. These activities have in
common the identification of strategies of planned action, which are
implemented and then systematically submitted to observation, reflection
and change. Participants in the action being considered are integrally
involved in all of these activities, which makes this a collaborative
process. Practitioners of action research link the practical and the analysis
of practice into a productive and continuing developing sequence in
collaboration with others.
 Action Research 79

Action Research in Music Education

Is action research then a valuable methodology to be used in music
education research? Regelski (1994–1995) identified the central problem
of research application and educational change in music as arising from a
basic failure to take into consideration the situatedness of the teacher’s
unique world of experience. He believed that music education is carried on
as a craft, having no basis for practice other than the tacit theorising of
teachers who are apprenticed to teach as they were taught. While a craft
merely involves a repertoire of skills, a profession demands an
understanding of the concepts of that field of practice, the theory that
underlies it. Regelski stated that if music teachers are to be professionalised,
teaching praxis must be predicated on valid and reliable educational theory
and in light of a generally accepted knowledge base concerning music,
teaching and education.

Regelski believed that action research is concerned with asking questions

or stating problems in terms that the actors involved recognise as problems
and can relate to by critiquing their own praxis, as well as apply to
improving future praxis. He also believed that a turning toward action
research in music education will promote a democratic form of public
discussion allowing for an uncoerced flow of ideas and arguments.

Have there been many action research projects conducted in music

classrooms? Four examples are cited in this chapter. The first such
published paper included an action research project conducted by Beth-
Anne Miller (1996, p. 100–115), a music specialist: Integrating Elementary
Music Instruction with a Whole Language First-Grade Classroom. She
chose to use action research because she wanted this study to inform her
teaching. The collaborative and cyclical nature of the action research
model seemed to best describe her life as an elementary general music
teacher and best serve her in her role as teacher-researcher. She believed
that the collaborative nature of action research might be particularly
appealing to specialists, such as music teachers, who traditionally have
found themselves set apart from the mainstream of general classroom
teachers. An unexpected positive result of the study was a marked increase
in collegiality between classroom teachers and her. In the action research
project, she explored ways to integrate her music instruction with the core
curriculum without sacrificing the integrity of the musical agenda and was
curious whether integration would enhance learning and student
motivation. She collaborated with a first grade classroom teacher in
80 Chapter Five

planning and implementing integrated units based on the whole language

approach that were still focused on the basic music concepts of rhythm,
melody, harmony, articulation, dynamics and timbre. The study changed
Miller’s view of integration from one entity to varied manifestations with
different purposes, contexts, and educational functions. This informed her
teaching and clarified rationales and functions for curricular activities. It
also helped her move from a relatively authoritarian teaching role to a
more facilitative one. The study informed her teaching in both context and
style, as well as changing the whole context of her teaching.

Another music action research study is reported in The New Handbook of

Research on Music Teaching and Learning (2002), edited by Colwell and
Richardson. P. O’Toole, in 1994 conducted a study of power dynamics in
the choral rehearsal class and addressed the question of why anyone would
be willing to participate in the typical performance ensemble, in which the
individual’s opinions, thoughts and feelings are subordinated in favour of
the director’s opinions, thoughts and feelings. The research questions
focused on replacing the traditional power relations of the choral music
classroom with a series of three 8-week projects that implemented feminist
pedagogy in three choral ensemble settings. Working in collaboration with
two high school choral directors and her own choir, O’Toole used their
classroom concerns to design projects that would allow greater input from
students with respect to both individual responses and musical decision-
making. O’Toole attempted to involve the students’ feelings, needs and
reactions in the rehearsal setting through activities ranging from large
group discussion of the poetic text, journal entries about the rehearsals and
student interviews about their experiences. The data included field notes,
teacher interviews, student interviews, student-conducted interviews and
researcher journals. The narrative is juxtaposed with tales from classroom
events and with critical commentary, verbal snapshots of interesting
moments from the classroom projects and montages (a series of images
that play with the points of view established in the snapshots).

The action research methodology was also used in a study conducted by

Costley (1993). This project involved a group of secondary music
teachers, schools and the local professional development centre, and
focused on the development and monitoring of anti-sexist classroom
strategies and teaching materials. This action research used a spiraling
process whereby, after close monitoring of a classroom situation, teachers
accumulated evidence about a specific issue, which subsequently led to the
planning of action steps and then positive practical action for change in the
 Action Research 81

school situation. The spiral process was repeated as many times as it was
felt of value for the purposes of refining and focusing the specific issue. A
number of strategies arising from the project were proposed to suggest
possible practical ways for change including:
x teach ‘music’ rather than composers;
x gender issues, which only entreat a better deal for boys in music
education, should be carefully considered;
x adopt girl- and women-centred ways of thinking;
x create our own music in the new context so that a different voice
can now be heard.

Music in the Year 8 Classroom is the fourth study and was conducted by
Hartwig in 2009. Hartwig wanted to generate public discussion regarding
the teaching of year 8 music (the curriculum content and its delivery),
develop collegiality between music teachers and collect stories of
classroom events as well as students’ comments. In order for the published
report to obtain credibility amongst practising music teachers, she believed
the research had to be practical and involve the researcher (herself) not
only as an observer, but also an equal, active participant in the study. By
being involved and engaged in the classroom she would more likely, to a
certain extent, become an accepted part of the class. It should be noted that
it is not normal to have a second teacher in the classroom on a regular
basis. One aim was to be both teacher and researcher, at the same time, in
the classroom. As Paton (1987) explained:

Experiencing an environment as an insider is what necessitates the

participant part of participant observation. At the same time, however,
there is clearly an observer side to the process. The challenge is to combine
participation and observation so as to become capable of understanding the
experience as an insider while describing the experience for outsiders. (p.
75)

Paton, however, then stated “the ideal is to negotiate and adopt that degree
of participation which will yield the most meaningful data given the
characteristics of the participants.”

Atkin’s view (1989, p. 204) was that “not much progress in education is
likely to take place unless teachers become agents in the improvement of
their own practice.” Hartwig believed she needed to reflect on her own
practice in order to set an example to other music teachers. She hoped to
learn about her own practice and instead of playing the role of expert or
interventionist, “to model the process of engaging in dialogue about the
82 Chapter Five

‘concrete particularities’ of our own practice” (Crites, as cited in Clandinin

& Connolly, 1991, p. 268). Hartwig was not only an observer but also an
equal participant in the project in an attempt to capture the essence of
action research. McNiff, Lomax, and Whitehead (1996) stated that:

Action researchers are intent on describing, interpreting and explaining

events (enquiry) while they seek to change them (action) for the better
(purpose). (p. 13)

Action Research Design

There are many action research design models. Future researchers are
encouraged to consult some of these designs before selecting their preferred
model (for example, Cherry, 1999; Kemmis & McTaggart, 2000; McNiff
& Whitehead, 2006; McNiff, Lomax, & Whitehead, 1996; Mertler, 2006).

The model described in this chapter was devised by Zuber-Skerritt (1995,

p. 13), as shown in Figure 1. Zuber-Skerritt described action research as
“collaborative, critical and self-critical enquiry by reflective practitioners
who are accountable and make the results of their enquiry public.” Action
research is a cyclical process of planning, acting, observing and reflecting.
Planning includes problem analysis and strategic planning and involves
constructing a plan that is flexible so that it may cope with unforseen
issues. Acting means implementing the strategic plan in an action that is
deliberate and controlled. This practice means putting the ideas into action.
Observing includes monitoring and evaluating the action and its impact on
the participants and the stakeholders with the effects of the intended and
unintended action being documented. Reflecting on the evaluation results
means drawing practical and theoretical conclusions and planning the next
cycle of improvement or change in the action research spiral, in light of
the findings. These four phases are static steps yet “dynamic moments in
the action research spiral” (Cresswell, 2012, p.112) that are flexible and
allow the data to guide the research findings.

Originally Zuber-Skerritt had the arrows pointing downwards and then

sideways. She then changed the arrows to pointing upwards. This upward
spiral indicates continuous improvement of practice and extension of
knowledge – personal knowledge and knowledge in the field. The four
sections of planning, acting, observing and reflecting are not static steps
but as Zuber-Skerritt (1992, p. 112) described, “dynamic moments in the
action research spiral.”
 Action Research 83

Figure 1. Action research spiral (Zuber-Skerritt, 1995)

Zuber-Skerritt (1992) developed the CRASP model (see Figure 2) as a

way of describing the use of action research for professional development
in higher education. Although it was developed for the university level, the
model can be used in schools as it has at its heart that action research
might lead to a better understanding and improvement of learning,
teaching and staff development. This model defines the research model
that guided the Hartwig (2009) study.

Chan’s (1993) paraphrased version of the model (as cited in Zuber-

Skerritt, 1995) can be used as a guide when using the action research
methodology. Each of the headings from the model has been used and put
into the music education and music teacher context. The headings in the
model have been related to music education.
84 Chapter Five

Figure 2. CRASP model (Zuber-Skerritt, 1992)

Action research is:

Critical (and self-critical) collaborative inquiry by
Reflective practitioners being
Accountable and making the results of their inquiry public
Self-evaluating their practice and engaged in
Participatory problem-solving and continuing professional
development

ACCOUNTAB-
ILITY
Based on external
values
and evidence of
quality

RESEARCH
INTO
PRACTICE
CRITICAL
cycles of PROFESSION
ATTITUDE -ALISM
learning
based on professional improved
through
values, aims and experience and practice,
personal constructs of organisation
action research
effectiveness development,
reports, papers

SELF-
EVALUATION
reflection
 Action Research 85

Issues of the CRASP Model

Accountability.
As music teachers we need to become accountable for what is happening
in our music classrooms. Action research helps to ensure continuous
quality improvement. As teachers in the classroom carry out the research
this model is likely to bring about more accountability to students and
teachers. The published reports of the projects could form part of the on-
going responsibility for music teachers to provide accountability for the
effectiveness of their teaching programs in music. Music in some schools
has been considered a non-essential part of the curriculum or a ‘frill’
subject. If music teachers want to be seen as professional, and music a
valued part of students’ education, we must become accountable for our
subject and make public this accountability.

Critical attitude.
Action research helps encourage the development of critical attitudes
towards personal contacts, attributes, values and aims as well as a probable
relationship with students in learning. Action research projects endeavour
to encourage the development of critical attitude in music teachers. This
attitude encourages music teachers to become reflective practitioners and
then act on that reflection as well as working in collaboration with other
music teachers. It allows students to become a critical and vital part of the
learning.

Research into practice.

Action research provides a platform for music teachers to take ownership
and control of their teaching practice. Action research conducted by music
teachers can be more appropriate and meaningful than educational
research carried out by theorists. As well as being applicable to
practitioners action research can help build a body of knowledge that
contains the voices of the music teachers and their students.

Self-evaluation.
Action research encourages self-evaluation of teaching performance, of
individual courses and of whole programs by music teachers. This self-
evaluation can be done individually and collaboratively, with the process
bringing about improvement in teaching practice. Teaching and research
activities also need not be isolated as action research is an ideal way of
linking theory and practice together in music education. It can help make
music education relevant to students in the classroom today.
86 Chapter Five

Professionalism.
Regelski (1994–1995) suggested that music teachers need to be
“professionalised.” Action research can contribute to this professionalism
by encouraging music teachers to critically look at their own practice and
aim for improvement and then document this discovery. Music teachers,
by their own professional actions, can improve the attitudes towards music
education at their own school level, community level and then as a
combined group to state and national levels.

Triangulation for Action Research

Triangulation is the process of cross-checking the integrity of the
information accumulated by the researcher. It involves using multiple data
gathering techniques, strategies and sources to verify information about an
item of interest. Triangulation is “the process of comparing and justifying
data from one source against that from another … the message is simple –
use more than one observation technique in order to see whether your
results are consistent” (Kember & Kelly, 1994, p. 18). Multiple methods
and multiple sources of data collection should be used in any action
research project to authenticate the data. In relation to the Hartwig (2009)
research, the methods included: personal journals from the researcher and
the music teacher, observation notes, meeting notes, recorded interviews
of class music teachers and students, videotapes of classes and student
performances, student questionnaires and photographs. The method of
checking the validity of the observations and inferences was confirmed by
giving these to the music teacher for her reflective consideration; a
technique referred to as “respondent validation” (Zuber-Skerritt, 1992, p.
138).

Cohen and Manion (as cited in Zuber-Skerritt, 1992) offered another

definition:

Triangulation may be defined as the use of two or more methods of data

collection in the study of some human behaviour … triangulation
techniques in the social sciences attempt to map out, or explain more fully,
the richness and complexity of human behaviour by studying it from more
than one standpoint and, in so doing, by making use of both quantitative
and qualitative data. (p. 139)

Zuber-Skerritt recommended the use of this multiple method triangulation

as appropriate for a more holistic view of educational outcomes. Some
examples that meet the criteria of multiple method triangulation include:
 Action Research 87

the methods of data collection already mentioned; obtaining data from

various sources including one’s own reflections; the music teacher’s
reflections; data obtained from the students; and data input from other
music teachers. The use of these multiple methods and sources reflects an
attempt to secure an in-depth understanding and adds richness to the
inquiry.

In educational research, there is also justification for the use of at least

three different viewpoints in analysis. Each point of the triangle stands in a
unique position with respect to access to relevant data about a teaching
situation. (Burns, 1998, p. 323)

Through reflection, music teachers are able to access their own intentions
and the aims of their action. Students are able to explain how the actions
of the teachers and the curriculum presented influenced the way they
respond.

An Action Research Plan

The following plan is an example of an action research project that was
conducted by Hartwig (2009). This action research project was conducted
over one term (ten weeks) at the school. There were four cycles that were
planned collaboratively with content and activities as the driving force. At
the end of each cycle, students were expected to complete a task –
sometimes individually and sometimes within a group – prior to the plan
being implemented. Monitoring and evaluating the action then took place
during the cycle, after which a reflection on the results was carried out
where practical and theoretical conclusions were drawn, before planning
for the next cycle commenced. (Note: the content titles of the cycles were
predetermined, however the planning for implementation was only able to
be completed when the data from the previous cycle were analysed in line
with the action research design). The action research cycles are presented
in Figure 3.
88 Chapter Five

Figure 3 – Music project cycles

Cycle 4

Cycle 3

Cycle 2

Cycle 1

Cycle 1: Rhythm, raps, drum kit

Cycle 2: Staff notation, keyboards, singing
Cycle 3: Graphic scores, soundscapes, guitars
Cycle 4: Major compositions

The cycles involved different time frames depending on the thematic work
to be covered. Cycle one was two weeks; cycle two three weeks; cycle
three two weeks and cycle four became two weeks after a change in the
school timetable, but originally three weeks had been allocated for this
cycle. Various assessment tasks were set at the end of each cycle, with
both individual and group assessments conducted. The task for cycle one
was the composing and performing of a group composition in rap style.
 Action Research 89

Cycle two involved individual performance on the keyboard of pieces the

students had been practising. Individual performance of chords on the
guitar as well as group composition and performance of a soundscape was
required in cycle three. For this soundscape, a graphic score had to be
prepared and presented for the class to view. Cycle four was the
culmination of the term, and a group composition using voice, keyboard,
guitar and drum kit was required. Students once again had to prepare the
score and perform their composition for the rest of the class.

According to Oja and Smulyan (1989, p. 16), successful collaborative

action research depended on a project structure that allows the characteristics
of collaboration, focus on practice and professional development to
emerge. They believed that a project structure conducive to effective
action research consists of at least four elements:
x frequent and open communication among participants;
x democratic project leadership;
x spiralling cycles of planning, acting, observing and reflecting;
and
x positive relationships with the school context, within which the
project occurs.

The action research project was designed with importance placed on the
above elements.

The music teacher from the high school involved in the study is here given
the name Glenda. Glenda and the researcher met frequently and had an
effective line of communication. This involved a brief discussion after
each lesson, a planned meeting after each cycle and regular contact
through phone and email. The specific goals of the project were articulated
and mutually understood and accepted by all the stakeholders at the initial
meetings. The instigator of the action research project became the official
leader of the project however, as Glenda was the only other person directly
involved, the situation was effectively a two-person team with shared
responsibility.

The project proceeded through four spiralling cycles of planning, acting,

observing and reflecting. The spiralling cycles are fundamental to any
action research project “to provide participants with the opportunity to
work through several cycles in order to be effective … This allows
practitioners to use their own reflections, understandings and developing
90 Chapter Five

theories to inform both practice and research” (Oja & Smulyan, 1989, p.
20).

The administration at the project high school wholeheartedly supported the

project being implemented. The deputy principal was invited to become a
participant but she preferred a role of providing assistance and
consultation when needed or requested and became a critical friend for the
project. Whitehead and McNiff (2006) defined the role of a critical friend
to be both of friend and critic. As a friend they are supportive and listen to
the researcher’s account of the research. As a critic, their work is to offer
thoughtful responses to the account, raising points that perhaps have not
been raised by others. To get a reasonably unprejudiced view it is vital to
involve others who will act as critical friends to critique any
interpretations (McNiff, Lomax, & Whitehead, 1996).

Data Collection Tools for Action Research

Journals, observation and meeting notes.
Through the action research project the researcher and participants are
encouraged to keep a journal in which the plans made and the actions that
were taken are recorded. Impressions and personal opinions about the
actions taken and any reactions to them can also be recorded. The result is
a very personal record of what is done and what was thought that
encompasses critical reflections on the project. Notes from the cycle
meetings are also often included as well as observations notes from
lessons. These journals offer a way of collecting data that helps create
“thick description” (Guba & Lincoln, 1990) of the unique situational and
transactional aspects of the experience.

There are a number of complementary documents that support the journals

such as the plans for each week and cycle, syllabus and curriculum
documents, school plans, student handouts, and student test results in
literacy and numeracy.

Video.
Video recordings are often made of some of the lessons however, the
presence of the video recorder sometimes influences the students’
behaviour in a negative way. Instead of focussing on the task at hand the
students can react to the presence of the camera. Use of video recordings
needs to be carefully monitored, as they can be very useful in the
recording of student presentations. Such recordings provide an accurate
 Action Research 91

and detailed account of what transpired. In addition, the students are often
very keen to view themselves and others after their presentations.

Photographs.
Photographs can be taken of both the students engaging in the process and
the work produced, such as graphic scores, compositions and presentations.

Recorded interviews.
The recording and transcribing of all interviews is advisable. Open-ended
questions allow the interviewees an opportunity to raise points that are of
interest to them. Transcripts need to be analysed by searching for
responses and/or themes that commonly occur, as these can provide rich
accounts of other teachers’ reflections on the issues. Students can be
identified as key informants (Woods 1986) since they provide rich
description of their view of the classroom. Interviews can be conducted
individually or in small focus groups.

Student questionnaires.
Questionnaires and surveys may contain both closed and open questions.
These tools gather specific data from the targeted group and also give the
students the opportunity to express their points of view in a confidential
setting.

Analysis
“They [qualitative data] are a source of well-grounded, rich descriptions
and explanations of processes in identifiable local contexts” (Miles &
Huberman, 1994, p. 1). The data collected provides a rich description of
the project. An enormous amount of data can be collected throughout a
project and the analysis of this data should begin at the outset of the study
and be ongoing.

The analysis can, however, be described in five sections:

1. Analysis of the transcripts from interviews.
2. Analysis after each of the cycles of the project including the
reflective phase.
3. Analysis of questionnaires/surveys.
4. Analysis of supporting documents/policies relevant to the project.
5. Merging of the data from all of the above sources.
92 Chapter Five

Each step of the analysis will identify themes and issues that are both
complementary and contrasting. Through deliberation on the data
collected and by making authentic and professional interpretations themes
can be identified. These themes should then be shared and discussed with
all the stakeholders.

Conclusion
Action research is a qualitative study that has as its main aim, the
improvement of practice. This chapter has defined the Action Research
Methodology. It has presented examples of how this methodology has
been used in music education. This methodology is a most appropriate
method for use in music education in many settings including universities,
schools and the wider community.

Some writers (for example, Cresswell 2012; McNiff et al., 1996) have
identified the key characteristics of action research, of which this is a
summary:
x Uses a process of inquiry, regardless of design.
x Teacher or educator becomes the researcher (practitioner based).
x As the researcher, the practitioner becomes self-reflective.
x Others are engaged collaboratively in the process.
x Embodies good professional practice (cycling back and forth
between identifying a problem, trying a solution, reflection on
information learner, applying new solutions).
x Information is shared with others.

McNiff et al. (1996, p. 14) have also summarised the commonalities and
differences of action research and other research methods.

Action research shares the following characteristics with other research:

x it leads to knowledge;
x it provides evidence to support this knowledge;
x it makes explicit the process of inquiry through which
knowledge emerges;
x it links new knowledge with existing knowledge.

Action research is different to other research because:

x it requires action as an integral part of the research process
itself;
 Action Research 93

x it is focused by the researcher’s professional values rather

than methodological considerations;
x it is necessarily insider research, in the sense of practitioners
researching their own professional actions.

What makes participatory action research ‘research’ is not the machinery

of research techniques but an abiding concern with the relationships
between social and educational theory and practice (Kemmis &
McTaggart, 2000, p. 600).

References
Atkin, J. (1989). Can education research keep up with the education
reform? Phi Delta Kappan 71 (3), p. 200205.
Burns, R. (1998). Introduction to Research Methods. Third Edition.
Melbourne: Longman.
Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming Critical: Knowing Through
Action Research. Victoria: DeakingUniversity.
Cherry, N. (1999). Action Research – A Pathway to Action, Knowledge
and Learning. Melbourne: RMIT University Press.
Clandinin, D.J. & Connolly, F.M. (1991). Narrative and Story. In Schon,
D. The Reflective Turn. New York:Teachers College Press.
Colwell, R. & Richardson, C. (editors). (2002). 2nd Edition. The New
Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and Learning. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Costley, C. (1993). Music and Gender at Key Stage Three (11-14): An
Action Research Project. In British Journal of Music Education.
(1993), 10, p. 197-203.
Cresswell, J. (2012). Educational Research. Fourth Edition. New York:
Pearson Grundy, S. & Kemmis, S. (1992). Educational action research
in Australia: The state of the Art (an overview). In S.Kemmis (ed) The
Action Research Reader. Victoria: Deaking University Press, p. 83-97.
Dick, B. (1999). What is action research?
http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/whatisar/html
Gay, L. (1987). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and
Application. Merrill Publishing Company,, Melbourne.
Grundy, S. & Kemmis, S. (1982). Educational action research in Australia:
The state of the art (an overview). In S. Kemmis (ed) The Action
Research Reader. Victoria: Deakin University Press, p. 83-97.
94 Chapter Five

Guba, R. & Lincoln, Y. (1990). Judging the quality of case study reports.
In International Journal of qualitative studies in education. 3 (1) p. 53-
59.
Hartwig, K. (2009). Music in the year 8 classroom: An Action Research
Project. Koln, Germany: Lambert Academic Publishing.
Kember, D. & Kelly, M. (1994). Improving Teaching Through Action
Research. Campbelltown, NSW; Higher Education Research and
Development Society of Australasia Inc.
Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (1998). The Action Research Planner.
Victoria: Deakin University.
Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (2000). Participatory Action Research. In
Handbook of Qualitative Research, by Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S
(eds), p. 567-604.
Kuzmich, N. (1987). Research, problem-solving and music education in
British Journal of Music Education. 4(3), p. 211-222.
McNiff, J. Lomax, P, & Whitehead, J. (1996). You and Your Action
Research Project. London: Routledge.
McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2006). All You Need to Know About Action
Research. London: Sage Publications.
Mertler, C. (2006). Action Research – Teachers As Researchers in the
Classroom. London: Sage Publications.
Miller, B. (1996). Integrating Elementary General Music: A Collaborative
Action Research Study. In Bulletin Council for Research in Music
Education. Fall 1996, p. 100-115.
Miles, M. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. London:
Sage Publications.
Oja, S. & Smulyan, L. (1989). Collaborative Action Research – A
Developmental Approach. London: The Falmer Press.
Paton, M. (1987). How to use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation. London:
Sage Publications.
Regelski, T. (1994–1995). Action Research and Critical Theory:
Empowering Music Teachers to Professionalize Praxisin Bulletin –
Council for Research in Music Education. Winter 1994/95, p. 63-89.
Whitehead, J. & McNiff, J. (2006). Action Research Living Theory.
London: Sage Publications.
Woods, P. (1986). Inside Schools: Ethnography in Educational Research.
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Zuber Skerritt, O. (1992). Action Research in higher education: Examples
and reflections. London: KoganPress.
—. (1992). Professional Development in Higher Education. London:
Kogan Page.
 Action Research 95

—. (1995). Models for Action Research. In Pinchen, S. & Passfield, R.

(eds). Moving On–Creative Applications of Action Learning and
Action Research. Upper Mt Gravatt: ALARPM, p. 2-29.

Action Research Association:

ALARPM – http://www.alarpm.org.au
A wealth of Action Research Resources is also available:
http://www.uq.net.au/action_research/arhome.html