Finally, however, the fourth area of criticism arising from Hillage Report was
that so much research fails to address the problems which teachers daily face. It is
as though the world of the educational researcher and the world of the teacher are
far apart, or, even worse, impose a model of cause and effect which does not do
justice to the complex world of the classroom, or to the different contexts in which
teachers work. They ignore the values, aims and deliberation which permeate the
thoughtful teacher’s judgment. A powerful tradition therefore has emerged of
teacher-initiated action research, pioneered in England by Laurence Stenhouse in
the Centre for Applied Research in Education at the University of East Anglia.
Research here refers to any‘systematic, critical and self-critical enquiry which aims
to contribute to the advancement of knowledge’(Stenhouse 1975 , p. 156). Such
knowledge, geared to understanding particular practices (for example, how to
promote discussion on controversial issues, or how to get across to young learners
central but difficult concepts in biology), would give rise to tentative hypotheses
which need to be tested out, and refined in the light of further experience. Moreover,
it would be discovered that such practices worked in certain circumstances, and not
in others—those differences being noted and entering into the more general
knowledge or theory. A significant variable would be the teacher—his or her talent,
temperament, and understanding. For that reason each teacher would need to
develop a research perspective in his or her practice. For it to be a research per-
spective there would need to be a critical reflection based on evidence. The nature
of such action research is fully described by Elliott ( 1991 ) in his influential book,
Action Research for Educational Change,in which there are many examples of
action research in practice, especially in relation to the formulation of hypotheses,
the gathering of evidence and the significance of supportive but critical commu-
nities of teacher researchers.
41.7 Impact of Research Measurement
At the same time universities were, as explained above, changing in so far as research
was becoming a much more important element in their responsibilities, and even-
tually in their funding. Quality of research submitted for consideration was, under
RAE, measured on a scale 5 to 1. Initially the judgment would be made by panels
chosen for each university subject on a range of evidence including publications,
research grants from external resources, number of research students successfully
completing research degrees, proven influence on educational policy and practice,
and the ethos of the respective departments. The transformation of RAE into REF put
greater stress on the four best publications (measured on the scale 4 to 1) from those
members of the respective departments chosen for submission. The overall research
quality of the department would be calculated (again on a scale 4 to 1) on the
measured quality of the publications of the academics submitted to the panel—who
would most likely be fewer than the total number of academics within the department.
Furthermore, under REF,‘impact measures’were introduced. League tables of
41 Research and the Undermining of Teacher Education 617