Preservice Teacher Action Research
Making Meaning and Generating Knowledge Through Inquiry
Keywords:action research, critical inquiry stance, generating knowledge, inquiry, meaning making, preservice teachers
This article analyzes the ways in which action research during preservice teacher education influences the development of a critical inquiry stance. By following eight preservice teachers as they conducted action research in their final semester of student teaching, this article demonstrates how action research created the space for preservice teachers to engage in practical and critical inquiry, which allowed participants the opportunity to develop a critical inquiry stance, to varying degrees. Discussed are the disparate ways participants thought about the meaning they made and the knowledge they generated during their action research assignment. The freedom action research granted preservice teacher to make meaning of their classroom instruction, generate knowledge, and bridge the gap between theory and practice, instruction and learning, and their students and themselves, allowed for the development of a critical inquiry stance. Findings suggest that through inquiry, preservice teachers disrupted the hierarchy of knowledge generation in teaching, as they theorized instruction, problematized pedagogy, and improved their teaching practices.
Alim, H. S. and Paris, D. (2017) ‘What is culturally sustaining pedagogy and why does it matter?’, in Alim H. S. and Paris D. (eds.) Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world, New York: Teachers College Press.
Ball, S. J. (2010) ‘The teacher's soul and the terrors of performativity’, Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 215–228. https://doi.org/doi:10.1080/0268093022000043065
Britzman, D. P. (1991) ‘The structure of experience and the experience of structure in teacher education’, in Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach, New York: State University of New York Press.
Cochran-Smith, M. and Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation, New York: Teachers College.
Dewey, J. (1904) ‘The relation of theory to practice in education’, in Borrowman, M. (ed.) Teacher education in America: A documentary history, New York: Teachers College Press.
Dodman, S., Growth, L., Ra, S., Baker, A. and Ramezan, S. (2017) ‘Developing an inquiry stance through PDS action research: Does it maintain after graduation?’, School-University Partnerships, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 30–46.
Faikhamta, C. and Clarke, A. (2015) ‘Thai pre-service science teachers engaging action research during their fifth year internship’, Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 259–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2013.860011
Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the oppressed, London: Continuum.
Freire, P. (1998) Pedagogy of freedom, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield.
Gay, G. (2002) ‘Preparing for culturally responsive teaching’, Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 53, No. 2, pp. 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102053002003
Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research, London: Aldine.
Hansen, J. M. and Nalder-Godfrey, N. (2004) ‘The Power of action research, technology and teacher education’, Computers in the School, Vol. 21, No. 1-2, pp. 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1300/J025v21n01_04
Harry, B., Sturges, K.M. and Klingner, J. K. (2005) ‘Mapping the process: An exemplar of process and challenge in grounded theory analysis’, Educational Researcher, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 3–13. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x034002003
Hulse, B. and Hulme, R. (2012) ‘Engaging with research through practitioner enquiry: The perceptions of beginning teachers on a postgraduate initial teacher education programme’, Educational Action Research, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 313–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2012.676310
Kennedy-Clark, S., Eddles-Hirsch, K., Francis, T., Cummins, G., Feratino, L., Tichelaar, M. and Ruz, L. (2018) ‘Developing pre-service teacher professional capabilities through action research’, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 43, No. 9, pp. 39–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n9.3
Kizilaslan, I. and Leutwyler, B. (2012) ‘Pre-service teacher action research: Concept, international trends, and implications for teacher education in Turkey’, Bulgarian Comparative Education Society, Vol. 10. Kyustendil, pp. 155–162.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995) ‘But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy’, Theory into Practice, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 159–165. http://doi.org/10.1080/00405849509543675
Ladson-Billings, G. (2017) ‘The r(e)volution will not be standard: Teacher education, hip hop pedagogy, and culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0’, in Alim, H. S. and Paris, D. (eds.) Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world, New York: Teachers College Press.
Lattimer, H. (2012) ‘Action research in pre-service teacher education: Is there value added?’, Inquiry in Education, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 1–25.
Levin, B. B. and Rock, T. C. (2003) ‘The effects of collaborative action research on preservice and experienced teacher partners in professional development schools’, Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102250287
López-Gopar, M. E. (2014) ‘Teaching English Critically to Mexican Children’, ELT Journal, Vol. 68, No. 3, pp. 310–320. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccu017
López-Gopar, M. E., Cordova, V. H., Sughrua, W. M. and Jiménez, E. N. L. (2021) ‘Developing Decolonizing Pedagogies with Mexican Pre-Service “English” Teachers’, in Hawkins, M. R. (ed.) Transmodal Communications: Transpositioning Semiotics and Relations, Bristol: Multilingual Matters (Translanguaging in Theory and Practice, Vol. 1), pp. 152–175. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788926379-010
Lytle, S. L. and Cochran-Smith, M. (1992) ‘Teacher research as a way of knowing’, Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 62, No. 4, pp. 447–475. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.62.4.4lm3811r1033431n
Manfra, M. M. (2019) ‘Action research and systematic, intentional change in teaching practice’, Review of Research in Education, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 163–196. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x18821132
Maxwell, J. A. (2010) ‘Validity: How might you be wrong?’, in Luttrell, W. (ed.) Qualitative educational research: Reading in reflexive methodology and transformative practice, London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.553
Merriam, S. and Tisdell, E. J. (2016) Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation, 4th edition, San Francisco: The Jossey-Bass.
Mok, A. O. (2016) ‘A reflective journey in teaching: Pre-service music teachers’ action research’, Australian Journal of Music Education, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 58–70.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 101, Stat. 1425 (2002) [online], Available: https://www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml [17 Jul 2022].
Ortlipp, M. (2008) ‘Keeping and using reflective journals in the qualitative research process’, The Qualitative Report, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 695–705.
Paris, D. (2012) ‘Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice’, Educational Researcher, Vol. 41, No. 3, pp. 93–97. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12441244
Parker, A., Bush, A. and Yendol-Hoppey, D. (2016) ‘Understanding teacher candidates’ engagement with inquiry-based professional development: A continuum of responses and needs’, The New Educator, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/1547688X.2015.1027978
Pennycook, A. (2004) ‘Critical Moments in TESOL Praxicum’, in Norton, B. and Toohey, K. (eds.) Critical Pedagogies and Language Learning. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139524834.017
Price, J. N. (2001) ‘Action research, pedagogy and change: The transformative potential of action research in pre-service teacher education’, Journal of Curriculum Studies, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 43–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270118039
Roulston, K., Legette, R., Deloach. M. and Pitman, C. B. (2005) ‘What is “Research” for teacher-researchers?’, Educational Action Research, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 169–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790500200283
Rudduck, J. (1988) ‘Changing the world of the classroom by understanding it: A review of some aspects of the work of Lawrence Stenhouse.’, Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 30–42.
Sleeter, C. (2019) ‘Introduction to “Emerging from standardization: Learning to teach for cultural, cognitive, and community relevance’, The Educational Forum, Vol. 83, No. 3, pp. 231–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2019.1599643
Villegas, A. M. and Lucas, T. (2002) ‘Preparing culturally responsive teachers: Rethinking the curriculum’, Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102053001003
Waff, D. (2009) ‘An insider voice: Leading as a teacher’, in Cochran-Smith M. and Lytle, S. L. (eds.) Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation, New York: Teachers College.
Zeichner, K. M. (1987) ‘Preparing reflective teachers: An overview of instructional strategies which have been employed in preservice teacher education’, International Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 565–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(87)90016-4
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2023 Rachel Ginsberg
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors declare with this manuscript intended for publication to ERIES Journal that:
- all co-authors agree with the publication of the manuscript even after amendments arising from peer review;
- all co-authors agree with the posting of the full text of this work on the web page of ERIES Journal and to the inclusion of references in databases accessible on the internet;
- no results of other researchers were used in the submitted manuscript without their consent, proper citation, or acknowledgement of their cooperation or material provided;
- the results (or any part of them) used in the manuscript have not been sent for publication to any other journal nor have they already been published (or if so, that the relevant works are cited in this manuscript);
- submission of the manuscript for publication was completed in accordance with the publishing regulations pertaining to place of work;
- experiments performed comply with current laws and written consent of the Scientific Ethics Committee / National Animal Care Authority (as is mentioned in the manuscript submitted);
- grant holders confirm that they have been informed of the submitted manuscript and they agree to its publication.
Authors retain copyright and grant ERIES Journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the published work with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. Moreover, authors are able to post the published work in an institutional repository with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. In addition, authors are permitted and encouraged to post the published work online (e.g. institutional repositories or on their website) as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.