Appendix C: The reflective practitioner
Example #3: Focusing on collaboration
In 1996, an example of action research was published that was intended simultaneously for classroom
teachers and for university researchers, and which focused on the challenges of collaboration among
educators (Ulichny & Schoener, 1996). A teacher (Wendy Schoener) and a university researcher (Polly
Ulichny) explored how, or even whether, teachers and university researchers could participate as equals in
the study of teaching. Wendy (the two used first names throughout when they published their experiences)
was a teacher of adults learning English as a Second Language (ESL); Polly was a specialist in multicultural
education and wanted to observe a teacher who was successful at reaching the ethnically diverse students
who normally study ESL. Polly therefore asked Wendy for permission to study her teaching for an extended
period of time—to visit her class, videotape it, interview her about it, and the like.
What followed is best described as an extended negotiation between teacher and professor for access to Wendy's
class, on the one hand, and for mutual respect for each other's work, on the other. In the published article, the
negotiations are described separately by each participant, in order to honor the differences in their concerns and
perspectives. Before, during, and after the observations, it was necessary for Polly and Wendy each to adjust
expectations of what the other person could do and was willing to do. As the authors put it, some things were "easy
to hear" from the other and some things were "hard to hear". Wendy, as a teacher, found it easier to hear criticisms
of her teaching if they came from herself, rather than from the higher-status university professor, Polly. Polly, for
her part, found it easier to hear Wendy's comments if she matched Wendy's self-criticisms and evaluations with
some of her own experiences. Polly therefore made sure to tell Wendy about dilemmas and problems she
experienced in her own (university) teaching. Because they needed to adjust to hearing and talking with each other,
the two educators eventually focused less on Polly's original purpose—studying multicultural teaching—and more
on the problem of how teachers and university researchers might collaborate effectively.
Overall, this study qualifies as a piece of action research, though it is not fully focused on classroom teaching.
For example, the teachers did collaborate and reflect on their experiences, but not all of the reflection was about
teaching in classrooms. The rest was about the relationship between Wendy and Polly. While the problem selected
was originally about classroom teaching—Wendy’s—it did not originate with the classroom teacher (Wendy) or
concerns she had about her own classroom; instead it was chosen by the university researcher (Polly) and her
desire to study multicultural teaching. The researchers did share what they learned by publishing their observations
and ideas, but their published report speaks only partly to classroom teachers as such; in addition it speaks to
academic researchers and educators of future teachers.
By pointing out differences among these examples of action research, we do not mean to imply that one is
“better” than another. The point is simply to show how diverse studies by teachers can be and to appreciate their
differences. Whatever their specific features, classroom studies by teachers hold in common the commitment to
giving a voice to teachers as they reflect on problems and challenges intrinsic to classroom life. This goal can be
accomplished in more than one way: through journals and other record-keeping methods, through oral discussions
with colleagues, and through written reflections created either for themselves or for others concerned about
teaching and learning. Diversity among topics and methods in action research studies should not surprise us, in
fact, since classrooms are themselves so diverse.