Inception Training for AfriCLP Fellows Prof. Timothy Mwololo Waema Ledger Bahari Beach Hotel, Dar es Salaam January/February 2018 Introduction to Action Research to Policy Fellows

Definitions of Action Research Action Research Methods Definitions of Action Research 14th July 2010 Any research into practice undertaken by those involved in that practice, with an aim to change and improve it Action research is about both ‘action’ and ‘research’ and the links between the two A participatory, democratic process concerned with developing practical knowledge in the pursuit of worthwhile human purposes, grounded in a participatory worldview It seeks to bring together action and reflection, theory and practice, in participation with others, in the pursuit of practical solutions to issues of pressing concern to people, and more generally the flourishing of individual persons and their communities Note: It is quite possible to take action without research or to do research without taking action, but the unique combination of the two is what distinguishes action research from other forms of enquiry Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Eds.). (2001). Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice. London: Sage Publications, p1 Qualitative Methods and Action Research

Action Research Overview Action Research Methods 14th July 2010 Aims: action to bring about change in some community or organisation or program research to increase understanding on the part of the researcher or the practitioner or both Purpose to gain a greater understanding and improvement (via recommendations) of practice over a period of time in our case, to influence an identified policy process using scientific evidence Collaborative in two senses: that many action research activities are best carried out with stakeholders that action research always involves the participants, at least in knowing what is being explored and why that the researcher owns the agenda, despite the collaboration More qualitative than quantitative Qualitative Methods and Action Research

Action Research Cycle Diagnosing Reflecting Planning Acting Observing

Action Research Cycle Cyclical with five inter-related stages: Diagnosing Analysis of the policy context e.g. where are we with CC policy, strategy or plan (e.g. Agri, Energy, NAP, …)? Analysis of the stakeholders – interests, passions, expectations, worldviews, knowledge, eg. Using Power- Interest Grid Planning Literature review and formulating theories concerning the nature of the research domain Plan the project with policy stakeholders Acting – Collaborating with policy stakeholders to take action in the policy process informed by scientific evidence Observing - Observing & recording the effects of the action Reflecting - critically reflecting on both the policy process and outcomes. You may find that your action and observations have raised further questions and you need to repeat the cycle e.g. go back to literature for further evidence

Checkland’s F, M & A Checkland suggests AR should be conceptualised in terms of: F: Framework of ideas that acts as a theory base for the research in a particular action research project, e.g. Actor Network Theory, Political Perspective, Level of use of Research Framework, etc. M: Problem solving methodology that researchers create or adopt, which embodies F, enabling the theory base to be put into use A: Area of application Real-world problem situation where researchers use M, aiming to help people in that situation bring about changes that they agree to be improvements While acting on A, action researchers reflect on declared F and M, modifying where necessary Others add R: the actual research process adopted in a particular study

AR research process Diagnosing Planning Acting Observing Reflecting Identify the nature of the problem situation and develop F (framework of ideas) about the situation and how it might be changed Planning Specify actions that should alleviate the situation M (Methodology) Plans should be flexible & adaptable Acting Taking action or intervening in the agreed area of A (application) in line with the plan Observing Establish whether the theoretical effects of the action were realized, and whether they relieved the problem(s) Reflecting Decide on achievements in terms of practical outcomes & new knowledge & whether new AR cycle is required

Expectations/roles of the researcher Plan with practitioners (what to do & why) and collaborate with them within a mutually acceptable ethical framework NOT expert who analyzes, diagnoses & recommends (NOT consultancy) Facilitator who enables practitioners do own research Participants in both the research and actual work Characteristics Concentrates on practical and real-world issues Iterative cycle of 5 inter-related stages Emphasizes on change and lessons learned Collaboration with practitioners - need agreed protocol Use of multiple data collection methods (e.g. KII, FGDs) Outcomes Action outcomes (practical achievements) + Research outcomes (learning about problem solving processes and acting in a situation)

Action research has been typified as a way to build Motivations To make academic research relevant, researchers should try out their theories with practitioners in real situations and real organizations The emphasis is more on what practitioners do than on what they say they do (researcher observes reality) Key Assumptions Social settings cannot be reduced for study, and Actions bring understanding Action research has been typified as a way to build theory, knowledge, and practical action by engagement with the world in the context of practice itself

Carrying out practical AR Action Research Methods 14th July 2010 Organize the actions into small units which can be completed in short time Take field notes on every action Actions includes: fieldwork entrance letters, fixing required facilities, meetings and workshops Anything that consumes time in the field is part of the action Use some known data analysis techniques Align our field notes empirical material in those techniques Think and make sense of the actions and results Some time is needed away from the field to reflect on the results Qualitative Methods and Action Research

Pros and cons of action research Focuses on research relevant to people in real-world -> practical benefits Not readily accepted by some researchers as a ‘serious’ form of enquiry Bridges the gap between academia and real-world Sometimes confused with consultancy Suited to creation & refinement of systems dev. & problem-solving methods Criticized by some positivists for lack of rigor, inability to establish cause-effect, etc. Can democratize the research process Can be difficult to meet the needs & expectations of all Can have higher goals than other research strategies, e.g. enabling improvements in ways people live Not suited to people unwilling to work democratically with others in complex, problematic & unpredictable real-world situations

Summary - Discussion questions Action Research Methods 14th July 2010 Policy window of opportunity Do you have a policy window of opportunity that you can influence? Are you part of the policy process? If not, how do you enter? Where will your input be required? Window in process, Area Framework What is your conceptual framework or theory? 1) Based on literature review 2) Informs Research Design Methodology How will you collect data on the implementation context & the problem you are solving (Area of Application)? How many Action points are involved and how will you collect data during action? Workshops, meetings, interviews, … How do you overcome biases from yourself, group think, ...? How will you handle the ethical issues (consent, whose viewpoints, confidentiality, etc.)? How will you analyze the data? e.g. Qualitative methods & tools Other issues How will you ensure participation of practitioners? What constitutes reflection? What constitutes action outcomes and research outcomes? How will you contribute to research & policy? Qualitative Methods and Action Research

Criteria for evaluating AR Did the work involve an iterative plan-act-reflect? How many cycles are involved? Do you think this is enough? Do the researchers make explicit F, M and A? What general methods were used? Do you think enough methods were used and adequate data collected? Do the researchers discuss the extent of participation and challenges encountered? Does researchers recognize biases, e.g. self-delusion and group-think and do they adequately address them? What practical & research outcomes and generalizations do the researchers claim from the AR? Is the research of high quality? What limitations are recognized? Any other flaws or omissions? Overall, how efficiently do you think the action research strategy has been reported and used?