Editorial

VALUE OF ACTION RESEARCH AT THE PRESERVICE LEVEL

Wendy Auger and Michael Wodlinger

The focus of this issue is an action research project that was carried out from September 1997 to March 1999 at Nipissing University. While considerable research on action research had already been done with practising teachers, there appeared to be very little research that focused specifically on teachers preparing for entering the profession. In each of the two academic years when our research was carried out, over forty B.Ed. candidates volunteered their time to research this important topic. Initially, the question that had been raised concerning this project was whether or not action research should be an integral part of the preservice program in the faculty of education. As the project proceeded, an additional question emerged which focused on the potential symbiosis between action research and reflective practice.

The three articles in this issue have all been written by people involved in the project at Nipissing University. They investigate the value of action research at the preservice level, by exploring the various dimensions of what it takes to become an effective/reflective teacher and the insights gained from conducting action research.

The Auger and Wideman article was written by the principal investigators who initiated the project. The other two articles were written by preservice teacher candidates involved in the research project, Marilyn Kroeker Motlong and Eva MacKenna. The article by the principal investigators was, of necessity, written in more formal research terms while the other two articles reflect a more narrative style. Such variation in styles alone provides an interesting juxtaposition between the personal context dealt with in narrative writing gleaned from a journaling perspective and the more specific details derived from a more formal research perspective.

The ability to identify a clear question about one’s own practice is central to action research. Identifying a question is often difficult for preservice teacher candidates because they lack perspective on teaching practice, because they are learning so much so quickly, and because successful teaching is complex and multifaceted. Both preservice teacher candidates write of the difficulties they had in identifying a clear research question and about how beneficial this struggle was in itself for developing their understandings of teaching and learning. In addition, these articles both describe transformational changes in thinking and the difficulties faced in making these changes.

In essence both authors were confronting the question of which was more important - teaching or learning. While these concepts are not meant to be mutually exclusive, how one answers the question can reflect how a teacher approaches, not only the development and implementation of appropriate classroom practice, but also one's own professional growth. A perspective that centres on learning opens teachers to active investigation of their own practice.

A crucial message in all of these papers is the initiation of a new tradition at the preservice level, which will be supportive of teachers' growth and development from the very beginning of their careers. A common theme in all three articles is the power of autonomy in the growth process. When one assumes responsibility for the direction of one’s own personal and professional growth, a stronger degree of commitment becomes evident. This provides powerful support, not only for the development of both moral and cognitive autonomy, but also for the continuation of this process throughout one’s professional life.

By combining the perspectives of the practitioner researcher with those of the academic researcher, a rich body of educational knowledge can be developed which will ultimately benefit the teaching and learning of children.