Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help

Introduction to Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills

"The more one listens to ordinary conversations, the more
apparent it becomes that the reasoning faculties of the brain take
little part in the direction of the vocal organs."
Edgar Rice Burroughs, American author and creator of the
Tarzan series (18751950)
Lesson Summary
You've probably heard the terms "critical thinking" and "reasoning
skills" many times, in many different contexts. But what exactly
does it mean to "think critically"? And just what are "reasoning
skills"? This lesson will answer these questions and show you why
critical thinking and reasoning skills are so important.
No matter who you are or what you do, you have to make
decisions on a regular basis. You may not realize it, but even those
decisions that seem like second naturelike deciding what to
wear when you're getting dressed in the morningrequire some
critical thinking and reasoning skills. When you decide what to
wear, you take many factors into considerationthe weather
forecast; the current temperature; your plans for the day (where
are you going? who will you see?); your comfort level (will you be
walking a lot? sitting all day?); and so on. Thus, you are already a
critical thinker on some level. But your life is complicated, and you
face decisions that are much more difficult than choosing what to
wear. How do you handle a conflict? Solve a problem? Resolve a
crisis? Make a moral or ethical decision?
"The person who thinks before he acts seldom has to apologize
for his acts."
Napoleon Hill
(Think and Grow Rich)
While there's no guarantee you'll always make the right decision
or find the most effective solution to a problem, there is a way to
significantly improve your oddsand that is by improving your
critical thinking and reasoning skills.
What Are Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills?
To improve your critical thinking and reasoning skills, you need to
know exactly what they are.
Critical Thinking
Think for a minute about the words critical thinking. What does
this phrase mean? Essentially, critical thinking is a decisionmaking process. Specifically, critical thinking means carefully
considering a problem, claim, question, or situation in order to
determine the best solution. That is, when you think critically, you
take the time to consider all sides of an issue, evaluate evidence,
and imagine different scenarios and possible outcomes. It sounds
like a lot of work, but the same basic critical thinking skills can be
applied to all types of situations.
Tip
It is important to keep in mind that all problems have more than
one solution. Like potato chips, you can't stop at just one. Keep
thinking (and munching!) and see how many possible answers you
can find. You might be surprised.
Critical thinking is so important because it helps you determine:
How to best solve a problem
Whether to accept or reject a claim
How to best answer a question
How to best handle a situation
Reasoning Skills
Reasoning skills, on the other hand, deal more with the process of
getting from point A, the problem, to point B, the solution. You
can get there haphazardly, or you can get there by reason.
A reason is a motive or cause for somethinga justification for
thoughts, actions, or opinions. In other words, it's why you do,

say, or think what you do. But your reasons for doing things aren't
always reasonableas you know if you've ever done or said
something in the heat of the moment. Reasoning skills ask you to
use good sense and base your reasons on facts, evidence, or
logical conclusions rather than just on your emotions. In short,
when you decide on the best way to handle a situation or
determine the best solution to a problem, you should have logical
(rather than purely emotional) reasons for coming to that
conclusion.
Logical: according to reason; according to conclusions drawn from
evidence or common sense
Emotional: drawn from emotions, from intense mental feelings
The Difference between Reason and Emotion
It would be false to say that anything emotional is not reasonable.
In fact, it's perfectly valid to take your emotions into
consideration when you make decisions. After all, how you feel is
very important. But if there's no logic or reason behind your
decisions, you're usually in for trouble.
Let's say, for example, that you need to buy a computer. This is a
rather big decision, so it's important that you make it wisely.
You'll want to be sure that you:
Carefully consider your options
Consider different possibilities and outcomes
Have logical reasons to support your final decision
It may seem obvious that you need to choose a computer that
best suits your needs and budget. For example, as much as you
might like the top-of-theline gaming computer with the best video
card, almost unlimited memory, and built in surround sound, you
shouldn't get it if you only need this computer for simple
functions. But for a variety of emotional reasons, many people do
make these kinds of unwise, unreasonable decisions. They may
have thought critically and still made the wrong choice because
they let their emotions override their sense of logic and reason.
Justifying Your Decision
One way to help ensure that you're using your critical thinking
and reasoning skills is to always justify your decisions and actions.
Why did you do what you did? Why did you make that decision?
Why did that seem like the best solution? Try this with even your
everyday decisions and actions. You'll get to know your current
decision-making process, and you'll be able to determine where in
that process you can become more effective.
Why Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Are Important
You will face (if you don't already) situations on the job, at home,
and at school that require critical thinking and reasoning skills. By
improving these skills, you can improve your success in everything
you do. Specifically, strong critical thinking and reasoning skills
will help you:
Compose and support strong, logical arguments
Assess the validity of other people's arguments
Make more effective and logical decisions
Solve problems more efficiently
Essentially, these four skills make up problem-solving skills. For
example, if someone wants to change your mind and convince
you of something, you have a "problem"you have to decide
whether or not to change your beliefs, whether to accept that
person's argument. Similarly, when you have a choice to make, or
a position you'd like to support, you have a different type of
"problem" to solvewhat choice to make, how to support your
position. Thus, the term problem solving can refer to any one of
these situations.
Tip
Don't be fooled by the use of the term argument. In this lessonn,
the word doesn't mean raised voices, harsh tones, and veiled
insults. Instead, in this arena, according to Princeton, the word
argument means "a course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating a
truth or falsehood; the methodical process of logical reasoning."
In Short
Critical thinking is the act of carefully considering a problem,
claim, question, or situation in order to determine the best
solution. Reasoning skills, which go hand-in-hand with critical

thinking, ask you to base your decisions on facts, evidence, and/or

logical conclusions. Critical thinking and reasoning skills are
implemented simultaneously to help you make smart decisions
and solve problems effectively. They also help you make stronger
arguments and better evaluate the arguments of others.
Skill Building until Next Time
Notice how many decisions you make throughout the day and
how many different problems you face. What kind of decisions
and problems do you encounter most often at home? At work? At
school?
Write down the process you went through to make a decision or
solve a problem today. What did you do to get from point A, the
problem, to point B, the solution?
Evaluate a decision or problem you solved recently. Do you think
it was a wise decision or effective solution? Why or why not? Did
you consider the range of issues, or did you neglect to take certain
issues into consideration? Did you make your decision based
mostly on reason or mostly on your emotions?
Exercises for this concept can be found at Critical Thinking and
Reasoning Skills Practice.

Macro & Micro Economics

By arpitaimt2012 | July 2013
Zoom InZoom Out Page 1 of 10
Economics has never been a science - and it is even less now
than a few years ago.Paul Samuelson
INTRODUCTION
Economics is the social science that analyzes the production,
distribution, and consumption of goods and services. A focus of
the subject is how economic agents behave or interact and how
economies work. A given economy is the result of a process that
involves its technological evolution, history and social
organization, as well as its geography, natural resource
endowment, and ecology, as main factors. These factors give
context, content, and set the conditions and parameters in which
an economy functions. The world economic events and how they
affect the domestic economy .The economic activity, and of the
interactions of consumers and businesses. Government policy and
its effects.
SCARCITY AND EFFICIENCY: THE TWIN THEMES OF ECONOMICS:
Robbinss definition of economics (economics is the science of
scarcity)
Scarcity of an economic goods or services (means not that it is
rare but only that it is not freely available) occurs where it's
impossible to meet all unlimited desires and needs of the peoples
with limited resources. Society must find a balance between
sacrificing one resource and that will result in getting other.
Efficiency denotes the most effective use of a society's resources
in satisfying peoples wants and needs. It means that the
economy's resources are being used as effectively as possible to
satisfy people's needs and desires. Thus, the essence of
economics is to acknowledge the reality of scarcity and then
figure out how to use these resources to produce the maximum
level of satisfaction possible with the given inputs & technology.
Any problem marked by scarcity of means and multiplicity of
ends, becomes ipso facto an economic problem, and as such, a
legitimate part of the science of economics.
sOCIOCULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY

In the United States, anthropology usually is considered to consist

of four subdisciplines, or sub-fields: archaeology (describing and
understanding past human behavior by examining material
remains), physical or biological anthropology (describing the
evolution and modern physical variation of the human species),
anthropological linguistics, and sociocultural anthropology. Most
university departments of anthropology have faculty in three or
four of these subdisciplines. Socio-cultural anthropology often is
called simply cultural anthropology in the United States, although
a few academic programs use the term social anthropology, the

common designation in Europe. Some anthropologists identify

applied anthropology as a fifth subfield, while others consider it
part of sociocultural anthropology.
Anthropology is defined as the study of human commonalities and
differences and expressly includes the entire temporal and
geographic range of humankind in its scope. The database of the
discipline is large, including prehistoric populations as well as
every variety of contemporary society. In distinguishing itself from
other social sciences, anthropology emphasizes the holistic,
comparative, culture-centered, and fieldwork-de-pendent nature
of the discipline.
In Europe, social anthropology is more closely allied with
economics, history, and political philosophy than it is with physical
anthropology and archaeology, which often are taught in separate
programs. As social anthropology evolved in Europe, it came to be
associated with studies of the economy, ecology, polity, kinship
patterns, and social organization of non-Western peoples,
particularly in colonial Africa and Asia. The European approach to
theory was associated with sociological (especially functionalist)
and, more recently, historical approaches. In the United States,
where research focused initially on Native Americans and was
strongly influenced by the particularistic descriptive approach of
Franz Boass ethnography, anthropology came to be associated
with culture, that complex whole (in Edward Tylors words)
encompassing customs, language, material culture, social order,
philosophy, arts, and so on. European social anthropologists have
not failed to address culture and Americans have not neglected
social structure, yet the difference in terminology distinguishes an
emphasis on social relations from an emphasis on shared meaning
and behavior.
The heart of sociocultural anthropology is ethnography, the
written description of a culture group. Ethnography has
undergone many changes since it began with field reports by
missionaries and colonial officials. The pace of change has
increased since the 1960s, as recognition of global links has
become standard, other social scientists have adopted
ethnographic methods, and postmodernism has imposed stricter
self-reflective criteria on writers. The methodological partner of
ethnography is ethnology, the comparative study of societies. In
its first decades, anthropology established the ideal that a
complete ethnographic record of the worlds cultures would allow
comparative studies that would lead to generalizations about the
evolution and functioning of all societies. Cross-cultural studies
continue to be one of the distinctive contributions of
anthropology to the social sciences.
HISTORY
Anthropology and sociology share common origins in the
nineteenth-century European search for a science of society.
Sociocultural anthropology and sociology also share a theoretical
history in the ongoing struggle between the desire for a
generalizing, rule-seeking science and that for a humanistic
reflection of particular lives. Throughout the twentieth century,
academic specialization and differences in research topics,
geographic focus, and methodological emphasis separated the
two disciplines. In the last several decades, globalization has
fostered a partial reconvergence of methods and subjects, though
not of worldviews, ethos, or academic bureaucracies.
Sociocultural anthropology often is contrasted with sociology: It is
said that anthropologists study small-scale societies, assume that
those societies are self-sufficient, and are usually outsiders
(politically, ethnically, and economically) to the groups they study.
These generalizations are partly true.
The methods of sociocultural anthropology have emphasized the
usefulness of seeking the large in the small by becoming
intimately acquainted with a single band, village, tribe, island, or
neighborhood, and anthropologys early link to colonialism and its
base of support in Europe, Japan, China, and the United States has
privileged wealthy outsiders as observers of peasants, tribal
peoples, and marginalized groups. However, anthropology has
always kept the larger picture in mind, and for every study of an
isolated population, there are ethnographies that reveal links at
the regional, national, and global levels. The affiliation of sociocultural anthropology with archaeology and paleoanthropology
ensures that the long term and the large scale are never far from
sight. Ethnographies of industrialized societies, ranging from

ethnic minorities to corporate cultures, begin with the microcosm

but connect to larger questions. Sociology has been associated
from its beginnings with studies of modernization and
globalization in Western societies. In the postwar world,
anthropologists became of necessity students of these processes
in the same small communities that had been their prewar
subjects of study. Anthropologists have sought ways to
encompass urban life, regional processes, and global economic
and political transformations in their work, leading them to
develop skills in quantitative social research as well as their
traditional qualitative methods.
Developments in method and theory in the twentieth century
have led to a widely perceived split between sociocultural
anthropologists who seek a natural science of society and those
who emphasize anthropologys humanistic role as an interpreter
of cultural worlds. These differences are reflected in the
distinction between emic and etic strategies. Based on the
linguistic concept of the phoneme, emic work calls for the
researcher to understand the inside view, focus on meaning and
interpretation, and grasp the natives point of view to realize
his vision of his world, in Bronislaw Malinowskis words. A good
ethnography enables readers to understand the motives,
meanings, and emotions of a different cultural world. The etic
(from phonetic) approach seeks generalizations beyond the
internal cultural worlds of actors, applying social science concepts
to the particulars of a culture and often using cross-cultural
comparisons to test hypotheses. A good ethnography presents
data that can be compared with other cases. In recent years, the
writing of ethnography has self-consciously struggled to develop a
style that can evoke the sensibility of a culture while including
descriptive information in a format that allows cross-cultural
comparisons.
Sociocultural anthropology begins with description and usually
intends that description (ethnography) to be a prelude to crosscultural comparison that will lead to generalizations about types
of societies or even about human universals. At the same time,
anthropologists are as likely as other social scientists to be
influenced by fashions in theory.
THEORY
The nineteenth-century origins of anthropology, like those of
sociology, are rooted in the expanding inquiry into the nature of
human society that characterizes the nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries, but anthropologys roots also involve the
questions of biological and social evolutionism characteristic of
the era, as epitomized in the work of Charles Darwin and Herbert
Spencer. Anthropology and sociology share origins in the
foundational work of Durkheim, Weber, and Marx. However,
cultural anthropology adds to its pantheon of ancestors Tylor,
Morgan, and Frazer; it is in the work of these three men that one
can see how anthropology was set on a different trajectory. The
American Lewis Henry Morgan (Ancient Society, 1877) and the
British Edward Burnett Tylor (Primitive Culture, 1871) and James
Frazer (The Golden Bough, 1890) are counted among the founders
of anthropology because they sought to establish general laws of
human society through the comparative study of historical and
contemporary peoples. Tylor, Morgan, and Frazer were unilineal
evolutionists who believed that universal stages of evolution
could be identified in the transition from simple to complex
societies and that modern peoples could be ranked in this
evolutionary scale. These two strandsthe belief that comparison
can produce scientific generalizations and the search for
evolutionary processescontinue to characterize anthropology,
though the racist evolutionism of these early approaches was
discarded as anthropology was established as a discipline in the
1920s and 1930s.
While the work of the nineteenth-century social theorists
presaged both anthropology and sociology, by the turn of the
century, each field was established in separate academic
departments and increasingly distinct research programs. In the
United States, anthropology as a scholarly project emerged
through the work of scholars drawn to the task of reconstructing
Native American cultures and languages, especially under the
auspices of the Bureau of American Ethnology and the formative
political, administrative, and scientific work of Franz Boas. Boas
responded to the prevailing ideas of unilineal evolutionism with a
theory that came to be called historical particularism, rejecting
broad generalizations about stages of evolution in favor of

detailed studies of the environmental context and historical

development of particular societies. Boas also trained the first
generation of professional anthropologists in the United States,
and his students, such as Alfred L. Kroeber, Robert Lowie, and
Edward Sapir, pioneered new theories that could replace unilineal
evolutionism. Sapirs and Benjamin Whorf s work on links
between language and culture, Margaret Meads on enculturation
and psychological anthropology, Ruth Benedicts on ethos, Zora
Neale Hurstons on folklore, and Kroebers on the superorganic all
fostered decades of theoretical development that pushed
American anthropology in distinctive directions. Field studies with
Native Americans and other North American minorities honed the
skills of the first generations of American anthropologists in
linguistic work, informant interviews, life histories, and historical
reconstruction and established the holistic style of American
anthropology, integrating archaeology, linguistics, and physical
anthropology with the study of society and culture.
While Boass students filled library shelves with detailed and
impressive ethnographies, a new theoretical orientation
developed in Great Britain that would have a great impact on the
culture-centered world of American anthropology. This was
functionalism, and its key proponents in anthropology were
Bronislaw Malinowski (psychological functionalism) and A. R.
Radcliffe-Brown (structural functionalism). The period of interest
in the ways in which cultural institutions maintain social order
which affected the United States when Radcliffe-Brown and
Malinowski spent time at American departments of anthropology
in the 1930smarks the point at which most texts officially
distinguish British social anthropology from American cultural
anthropology. Radcliffe-Brown countered Boasian particularism
with an emphasis on the search for general laws of society and
stimulated a generation of European and American students to do
the same. British social anthropologists turned their analytic focus
on the study of persons and relations in persisting social
structures and pushed themselves and their students to develop
the close observation, incisive analysis, and careful record keeping
that marked the coming of age of long-term participant
observation as a research method. Functionalist studies took
place in the context of colonialism, with the limitations and power
imbalance that that implies, yet remain impressive for the quality
of detail and their capacity to integrate descriptions of political,
economic, and kinship relations. Many ethnographic classics were
produced by British social anthropologists of that era (e.g.,
Malinowskis Argonauts of the Western Pacific in 1922 and EvansPritchards Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande in
1937 and The Nuer, 1940) and their students, including Raymond
Firth, Meyer Fortes, Audrey Richards, Lucy Mair, Edmund Leach,
Max Gluckman, and Fred Eggan.
While American anthropologists added the study of social
structure and function to their repertoire, they did not abandon
their interest in historical developments, language, personality,
and ethos and retained a four-fields orientation in the training
of graduate students. While some social anthropologists found
the idea of culture impossibly vague, American anthropologists
reveled in the complexity of the concept, with Kroeber and
Kluckhohn assembling a compendium of more than 150
definitions of culture. Stimulated by the challenge of British
social anthropology, the work of Kroeber, Mead, Benedict, and
Sapir from the 1920s through the 1950s explored culture as a
distinct level of analysis and a way to grasp the distinctive ethos
and worldview of each culture, along with the active role of the
individuals acts and words in shaping a culture.
In the 1940s and 1950s, the influence of materialist approaches in
the social sciences, while limited by the anticommunism in
American public life (explicitly Marxist approaches did not appear
until the 1970s), was manifested in a new set of evolutionary and
generalizing approaches in Ameri can anthropology. The work of
Julian Steward and Leslie White laid the groundwork for a new
approach to studies of adaptation and cultural change. White
argued for an evolutionary scheme in which culture (the uniquely
human capacity to manipulate symbols), as the superorganic
human adaptive mechanism, develops through evolutionary
stages marked by the increasing ability of human groups to
capture energy through technological systems. Steward worked
on a smaller scale, arguing for the analysis of structural similarities
among cultures at a regional level, which can be understood by
recognizing the hierarchical relations among three levels of
sociocultural integration: technoeco-nomics (infrastructure),

sociopolitical organization, and ideology (superstructure).

Stewards scheme allowed anthropologists to catalogue cultures
as structural types and encouraged the study of change over time
in a multilineal evolutionary process that he contrasted with
Whites more abstract global stages.
Materialist studies continued to develop and to shape
archaeology as well as cultural anthropology. Marshall Sahlins and
Elman R. Service merged Whites and Stewards approaches in a
neoevolutionist theory that encouraged both archaeologists and
materialist-oriented sociocultural anthropologists to consider the
regional and large-scale classification and development of
societies. Marvin Harris, Eleanor Burke Leacock, and Morton Fried
attempted to explain cultural diversity and change in the context
of the causal primacy of production and reproduction. In the
1960s and 1970s, the new field of cultural ecology developed a
neofunctionalist approach that allowed scientists to include
cultural and social aspects of human behavior in natural science
research. Roy Rappaports 1967 Pigs for the Ancestors began with
an effort to measure the energy intake and outflow of a highland
new Guinea population; the 1984 edition included a lengthy
discussion of criticisms of neofunctionalist theory and the
applicability of adaptive and evolutionary concepts to human
groups.
In France, Claude Levi-Strauss was developing ideas that would
transform the world of social science through structuralism, which
emerged in the 1960s and 1970s as a totalizing theory aiming at
uncovering the common structures of the human mind.
Structuralism, which was influenced by the linguistics theories of
Saussure and Jakobson, treated the products of culture as
symbolic systems and examined the formal patterns of those
systems in order to envision discern universal structures and
cognitive patterns of the human mind. Structuralism was applied
to myths, kinship, relations to art, and every other aspect of
culture. The work of Levi-Strauss, Edmund Leach, and other
structuralists drew sharp rebuttals from theorists who sought
explanations of human diversity in material and social conditions
rather than in mental templates. Although the abstractness of
structuralism eventually limited its interest to students of culture,
it continues to be a useful technique, particularly in the analysis of
the symbolic products of culture.
Ethnoscience, which emerged in the 1950s, also examined the
mental categories underlying cultural products. Drawing heavily
on linguistic theory and methodology, ethnoscience tried to
develop fieldwork methods sufficiently rigorous to delineate the
mental models that generate words and behavior and, in its
emphasis on the emic approach, insisted on the necessity of fully
accessing the native understanding of cultural domains. As
ethnoscience faded in importance in the 1970s, it was succeeded
by cognitive anthropology, the cross-cultural study of cognition.
Structuralism, ethnoscience, and responses to materialist
neoevolutionist theory stimulated the emergence of symbolic
anthropology and cultural analysis in the 1960s and 1970s, and
this in turn led to the interpretive turn that has continued in
cultural anthropology through the rest of the century. Again,
linguistics proved influential, as David Schneider, Clifford Geertz,
and Victor Turner explored new ways to study the cultural
construction of meaning and the public representation of
meaning in cultural elements. Most symbolic anthropologists
focus on the description and interpretation of particular cultural
cases, emphasizing the ethnographers role in explicating cultural
events or products, though a few symbolic anthropologists, such
as Mary Douglas, have sought general models of symbol systems.
Symbolic anthropology shifted in the 1980s toward interpretive
anthropology, which in turn generated a decade of reflection on
the writing of ethnography, seeking modes of representation that
would represent the worldview, internal logic, and emotional
sensibility of a culture. Emerging from interpretive approaches
have been experiments in ethnography, renewed interest in life
histories, and extensive critiques of an etic-oriented ethnography
that relies on the authoritative voice of an outside observer and
author. The 1980s also saw a new interest in history, spurred in
part by the work of French scholars such as Braudel, Bourdieu,
and Foucault and also playing a part in drawing some sociocultural
anthropologists toward humanistic approaches.
American cultural anthropology has always taken an interest in
evolutionary questions, and in the 1970s, the biologist E. O.

Wilson used sociobiology to challenge social scientists to study

the role of natural selection in human behavior. Anthropologists
immediate response was to criticize sociobiology as sociologically
naive, culture-bound, and potentially racist and sexist. In the
longer term, however, this challenge renewed anthropologists
interest in the holistic approach to culture, stimulating new
approaches to the flexible and complex linkage of genetic
inheritance and cultural malleability. Archaeologists, physical
anthropologists, and cultural anthropologists share an interest in
these long-term questions, which now are studied as human
behavioral ecology.
ORGANIZATION
While anthropological theory has participated in many of the
trends in the social sciences in this century, anthropologists most
often speak of themselves in terms of the topics they study and
the geographic areas in which they are expert. A cultural
anthropologist might say that she studies gender issues in the
Middle East, political hierarchy in Polynesia, or huntergatherer ecology in the Arctic, with the implication that her
theoretical school is a less useful category or that one might
include several different theoretical or methodological
approaches to ones topic.
A review of textbooks in anthropology and courses offered in
larger departments provides an indication of the overlap and the
difference in range between sociological and anthropological
topics. Traditional topics in anthropology include the categories of
sociopolitical life (political anthropology, the anthropology of
religion, social organization, patterns of subsistence, economic
anthropology), cross-cultural approaches to all social science
topics (ethnicity and identity, psychological anthropology, urban
anthropology, ethnohistory, gender), theoretical approaches
(symbolic anthropology, cultural ecology), applied topics (legal
anthropology, developmental anthropology, culture change,
medical anthropology, education and culture), and topics
reflecting the persistent holism of the anthropological enterprise
(language and culture, genetics and behavior).
Anthropologists regional focus traditionally has been small-scale
non-Western societies, but this has changed dramatically in the
last fifty years. While sociologists and other social scientists have
become more active in non-Western contexts (particularly
economic development and modernization), anthropologists have
become more active in studying Western societies, using their
traditional skills of small-community ethnography, cultural
models, and comparison in these situations. However, as part of
their postgraduate training, most American and European
anthropologists do a lengthy period of participant observation
research in a small-scale society, usually a foraging band or a
tribal or peasant society.
One stimulus to anthropologists willingness to become
wholeheartedly involved in the study of Western, industrialized,
and mass societies has been the growth in applied work. While
sociology was committed to researching public policy issues from
its beginning, anthropology has only intermittently taken on
research directed at social problems and policy issues. Beginning
with government work during World War II and the postwar Fox
and Vicos projects in applied anthropology and as a result of
globalization and limited aca-demicjob opportunities for
anthropologists, there has been an increase in putting
anthropological concepts and methods to the service of
immediate outcomes rather than academic research. The greatest
demand for applied anthropology is in economic and social
development, medical anthropology, the anthropology of
education, and international business.
METHODS
Anthropology was born in the theories of armchair
anthropologists who based their theories about the evolution of
human beliefs and societies on the reports of colonial officials,
missionaries, and merchants. Since that time, the commitment of
researchers such as Boas, Mead, and Malinowski to detailed, longterm field studies has generated the impulse that has sustained
generations of anthropologists in an effort to produce detailed,
fine-grained, firsthand descriptions of the worlds cultures.
Cultural anthropology has long held that long-term participant
observation, including mastery of local languages, is the best way
to produce valid ethnographic description. Participant observation

is the source of anthropologys ethnographic database and the

foundation on which controlled cross-cultural comparison is built.
The work of field research and the writing of ethnography have
received much attention in recent decades. Participant
observation is now an umbrella term for a research project that,
while it extends over the long term (usually at least a year) and
relies on the use of the local language, key informants, and living
close to the ground with the people being studied, is likely to
include a range of additional research techniques. Sociocultural
anthropologists also are trained in kinship analysis, unstructured
and structured interviews, questionnaires, scales, taxonomies,
and direct and unobtrusive observation. In the past decade, there
has been a growing expectation that researchers will combine
qualitative and quantitative research methods, increasing both
the validity and the reliability of ethnographic work. Applied
anthropology has generated its own methods, some of them
shaped by the time and cash restraints of nonacademic research,
such as rapid rural assessment, participatory appraisal, and
decision-tree modeling.
Cross-cultural comparison has been a goal of anthropology from
the start. The first armchair anthropologists used sometimes
unreliable secondhand information to generate categories and
stages of social evolution, but researchers soon employed more
scientific methods. Archaeologists work on regional and
chronological linkages encouraged ethnologists to trace the
development, distribution, and diffusion of culture traits
(especially in the United States, with Boass encouragement).
British social anthropologists and the neoevolutionists urged the
use of regional and global comparisons to generate models of
structural stability and change. George P. Murdock greatly
facilitated large-scale comparison when he created the Human
Relations Area Files, the physical form of the great database of
human cultures anthropology had long sought. Cross-cultural
studies in anthropology have allowed anthropologists to generate
and test midlevel hypotheses about cultural patterns and allowed
social scientists to test the broader validity of hypotheses
generated in Western contexts.
CURRENT ISSUES
In surveying the history of anthropological theory, one often
notices the persistent tension between materialist and idealist
ways of studying culture. In the current environment, after a
decade of postmodern critiques, this tension has actually split a
few academic departments, severing archaeology and biological
anthropology from cultural anthropology, or scientific from
humanistic approaches. Research specialization and job-market
pressures also interfere with the holistic four-fields approach that
American anthropologists have long considered their hallmark. In
addition, socio-cultural anthropology has been pressed by the
inroads of literary criticism, cultural studies, ethnic studies, and
other related fields into its traditional preserve. Like other social
sciences, anthropology feels that it is living through a crisis that
represents both a point in a repeated cycle of theoretical change
and a response to national and global contexts.
However, the end of the twentieth century has seen a wider
range of research and applied work than had ever been done
previously (see recent issues of American Anthropologist,
American Ethnologist, Current Anthropology, and Human
Organization). Current work in anthropology includes traditional
detailed ethnographies that aim to increase the descriptive
database of the worlds cultures, problem-focused fieldwork
aimed at elucidating theoretical puzzles, reflexive ethnography
that attempts to find a moral and artistic center from which to
write, analyses of organizations and evaluations of programs
intended to guide policy decisions, and hypothesis-testing data
crunching. The long-standing distinction between materialist and
idealist approaches continues as interpretive, postmodern
anthropology seeks new ways to do the job it has been critiquing
for a decade and as ecological, evolutionist, and materialist
approaches argue with renewed vigor for a scientific discipline.
Sociocultural anthropology and sociology share modern interests
in agency; power; the relative role of social structures and
individual action in culture change; the intersections of ethnicity,
class, and gender; and the historical shaping of modern
institutions and cultural representations. In all its interests,
ongoing input from archaeology, biological anthropology, and
linguistics has given so-ciocultural anthropology a uniquely broad

and deep perspective on the human condition, and its stream of

theory is fed from these other sources of knowledge about the
human condition. In describing the commonalities that unite
cultural anthropology, Rob Borofsky speaks of anthropologists
shared ethics: a desire to publicize human commonalities
(especially in countering racism), the valuing of cultural diversity,
and the use of cultural differences as a form of cultural critique
of the anthropologists home culture and in general of industrial
mass society. Despite an explosion of variation in what
sociocultural anthropologists do, anthropologists holistic and
comparative worldview remains distinctive.
Share This
Micro and Macro: The Economic Divide
FINANCE & DEVELOPMENT
G. Chris Rodrigo
Economics is split between analysis of how the overall economy
works and how single markets function
Micro and Macro: The Economic Divide
A question of scale (photo: Zack Seckler/Corbis)
Physicists look at the big world of planets, stars, galaxies, and
gravity. But they also study the minute world of atoms and the
tiny particles that comprise those atoms.
Economists also look at two realms. There is big-picture
macroeconomics, which is concerned with how the overall
economy works. It studies such things as employment, gross
domestic product, and inflationthe stuff of news stories and
government policy debates. Little-picture microeconomics is
concerned with how supply and demand interact in individual
markets for goods and services.
In macroeconomics, the subject is typically a nationhow all
markets interact to generate big phenomena that economists call
aggregate variables. In the realm of microeconomics, the object of
analysis is a single marketfor example, whether price rises in
the automobile or oil industries are driven by supply or demand
changes. The government is a major object of analysis in
macroeconomicsfor example, studying the role it plays in
contributing to overall economic growth or fighting inflation.
Macroeconomics often extends to the international sphere
because domestic markets are linked to foreign markets through
trade, investment, and capital flows. But microeconomics can
have an international component as well. Single markets often are
not confined to single countries; the global market for petroleum
is an obvious example.
The macro/micro split is institutionalized in economics, from
beginning courses in principles of economics through to
postgraduate studies. Economists commonly consider themselves
microeconomists or macroeconomists. The American Economic
Association recently introduced several new academic journals.
One is called Microeconomics. Another, appropriately, is titled
Macroeconomics.
Why the divide?
It was not always this way. In fact, from the late 18th century until
the Great Depression of the 1930s, economics was economics
the study of how human societies organize the production,
distribution, and consumption of goods and services. The field
began with the observations of the earliest economists, such as
Adam Smith, the Scottish philosopher popularly credited with
being the father of economicsalthough scholars were making
economic observations long before Smith authored The Wealth of
Nations in 1776. Smiths notion of an invisible hand that guides
someone seeking to maximize his or her own well-being to
provide the best overall result for society as a whole is one of the
most compelling notions in the social sciences. Smith and other
early economic thinkers such as David Hume gave birth to the
field at the onset of the Industrial Revolution.
Economic theory developed considerably between the
appearance of Smiths The Wealth of Nations and the Great
Depression, but there was no separation into microeconomics and
macroeconomics. Economists implicitly assumed that either
markets were in equilibriumsuch that prices would adjust to
equalize supply and demandor that in the event of a transient
shock, such as a financial crisis or a famine, markets would quickly
return to equilibrium. In other words, economists believed that
the study of individual markets would adequately explain the
behavior of what we now call aggregate variables, such as
unemployment and output.
The severe and prolonged global collapse in economic activity
that occurred during the Great Depression changed that. It was
not that economists were unaware that aggregate variables could
be unstable. They studied business cyclesas economies

regularly changed from a condition of rising output and

employment to reduced or falling growth and rising
unemployment, frequently punctuated by severe changes or
economic crises. Economists also studied money and its role in
the economy. But the economics of the time could not explain the
Great Depression. Economists operating within the classical
paradigm of markets always being in equilibrium had no plausible
explanation for the extreme market failure of the 1930s.
If Adam Smith is the father of economics, John Maynard Keynes is
the founding father of macroeconomics. Although some of the
notions of modern macroeconomics are rooted in the work of
scholars such as Irving Fisher and Knut Wicksell in the late 19th
and early 20th centuries, macroeconomics as a distinct discipline
began with Keyness masterpiece, The General Theory of
Employment, Interest and Money, in 1936. Its main concern is the
instability of aggregate variables. Whereas early economics
concentrated on equilibrium in individual markets, Keynes
introduced the simultaneous consideration of equilibrium in three
interrelated sets of marketsfor goods, labor, and finance. He
also introduced disequilibrium economics, which is the explicit
study of departures from general equilibrium. His approach was
taken up by other leading economists and developed rapidly into
what is now known as macroeconomics.
Coexistence and complementarity
Microeconomics is based on models of consumers or firms (which
economists call agents) that make decisions about what to buy,
sell, or producewith the assumption that those decisions result
in perfect market clearing (demand equals supply) and other ideal
conditions. Macroeconomics, on the other hand, began from
observed divergences from what would have been anticipated
results under the classical tradition.
Today the two fields coexist and complement each other.
Microeconomics, in its examination of the behavior of individual
consumers and firms, is divided into consumer demand theory,
production theory (also called the theory of the firm), and related
topics such as the nature of market competition, economic
welfare, the role of imperfect information in economic outcomes,
and at the most abstract, general equilibrium, which deals
simultaneously with many markets. Much economic analysis is
microeconomic in nature. It concerns such issues as the effects of
minimum wages, taxes, price supports, or monopoly on individual
markets and is filled with concepts that are recognizable in the
real world. It has applications in trade, industrial organization and
market structure, labor economics, public finance, and welfare
economics. Microeconomic analysis offers insights into such
disparate efforts as making business decisions or formulating
public policies.
Macroeconomics is more abstruse. It describes relationships
among aggregates so big as to be hard to apprehendsuch as
national income, savings, and the overall price level. The field is
conventionally divided into the study of national economic growth
in the long run, the analysis of short-run departures from
equilibrium, and the formulation of policies to stabilize the
national economythat is, to minimize fluctuations in growth and
prices. Those policies can include spending and taxing actions by
the government or monetary policy actions by the central bank.
Bridging the micro/macro divide
Like physical scientists, economists develop theory to organize
and simplify knowledge about a field and to develop a conceptual
framework for adding new knowledge. Science begins with the
accretion of informal insights, particularly with observed regular
relationships between variables that are so stable they can be
codified into laws. Theory is developed by pinning down those
invariant relationships through both experimentation and formal
logical deductionscalled models.
Since the Keynesian revolution, the economics profession has had
essentially two theoretical systems, one to explain the small
picture, the other to explain the big picture (micro and macro are
the Greek words, respectively, for small and big). Following
the approach of physics, for the past quarter century or so, a
number of economists have made sustained efforts to merge
microeconomics and macroeconomics. They have tried to develop
microeconomic foundations for macroeconomic models on the
grounds that valid economic analysis must begin with the
behavior of the elements of microeconomic analysis: individual
households and firms that seek to optimize their conditions.
There have also been attempts to use very fast computers to
simulate the behavior of economic aggregates by summing the
behavior of large numbers of households and firms. It is too early
to say anything about the likely outcome of this effort. But within
the field of macroeconomics there is continuing progress in

improving models, whose deficiencies were exposed by the

instabilities that occurred in world markets during the global
financial crisis that began in 2008.
How they differ
Contemporary microeconomic theory evolved steadily without
fanfare from the earliest theories of how prices are determined.
Macroeconomics, on the other hand, is rooted in empirical
observations that existing theory could not explain. How to
interpret those anomalies has always been controversial. There
are no competing schools of thought in microeconomicswhich is
unified and has a common core among all economists. The same
cannot be said of macroeconomicswhere there are, and have
been, competing schools of thought about how to explain the
behavior of economic aggregates. Those schools go by such
names as New Keynesian or New Classical. But these divisions
have been narrowing over the past few decades (Blanchard,
DellAriccia, and Mauro, 2010).
Microeconomics and macroeconomics are not the only distinct
subfields in economics. Econometrics, which seeks to apply
statistical and mathematical methods to economic analysis, is
widely considered the third core area of economics. Without the
major advances in econometrics made over the past century or
so, much of the sophisticated analysis achieved in
microeconomics and macroeconomics would not have been
possible.

An Overview of the
Methodological Approach of
Action Research

Rory OBrien
Faculty of Information Studies, University of Toronto
obrienr@fis.utoronto.ca
1998

Citation:
O'Brien, R. (2001). Um exame da abordagem metodolgica da
pesquisa ao [An Overview of the Methodological Approach of
Action Research]. In Roberto Richardson (Ed.), Teoria e Prtica da
Pesquisa Ao [Theory and Practice of Action Research]. Joo
Pessoa, Brazil: Universidade Federal da Paraba. (English version)
Available: http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html
(Accessed 20/1/2002)

Table of Contents

Introduction
What is Action Research?
Definition
The Action Research Process
Principles of Action Research
When is Action Research used?
Situating Action Research in a Research Paradigm
Positivist Paradigm
Interpretive Paradigm
Paradigm of Praxis
Evolution of Action Research
Origins in late 1940s
Current Types of Action Research
Traditional Action Research
Contextural Action Research (Action Learning)
Radical Action Research
Educational Action Research
Action Research Tools
The Search Conference
Role of the Action Researcher
Ethical Considerations
Examples of Action Research Projects
Case Study 1 - Development of nature tourism in the Windward
Islands

Action Research and Information Technology

Case Study 2 - Internet-based collaborative work groups in
community health
Case Study 3 - Computer conferencing in a learning community
Commentary on the need for more research
Conclusion

Introduction
If you want it done right, you may as well do it yourself. This
aphorism may seem appropriate if you are a picky housekeeper,
but more and more people are beginning to realize it can also
apply to large corporations, community development projects,
and even national governments. Such entities exist increasingly in
an interdependent world, and are relying on Action Research as a
means of coming to grips with their constantly changing and
turbulent environments.
This paper will answer the question What is Action Research?,
giving an overview of its processes and principles, stating when it
is appropriate to use, and situating it within a praxis research
paradigm. The evolution of the approach will be described,
including the various kinds of action research being used today.
The role of the action researcher will be briefly mentioned, and
some ethical considerations discussed. The tools of the action
researcher, particularly that of the use of search conferences, will
be explained. Finally three case studies will be briefly described,
two of which pertain to action research projects involving
information technology, a promising area needing further
research.

Stephen Kemmis has developed a simple model of the cyclical

nature of the typical action research process (Figure 1). Each
cycle has four steps: plan, act, observe, reflect.

Figure 1 Simple Action Research Model

(from MacIsaac, 1995)[ii]

Gerald Susman (1983) gives a somewhat more elaborate listing.

He distinguishes five phases to be conducted within each research
cycle (Figure 2). Initially, a problem is identified and data is
collected for a more detailed diagnosis. This is followed by a
collective postulation of several possible solutions, from which a
single plan of action emerges and is implemented. Data on the
results of the intervention are collected and analyzed, and the
findings are interpreted in light of how successful the action has
been. At this point, the problem is re-assessed and the process
begins another cycle. This process continues until the problem is
resolved.

Figure 2 Detailed Action Research Model

(adapted from Susman 1983)[iii]

Principles of Action Research

What gives action research its unique flavour is the set of
principles that guide the research. Winter (1989) provides a
comprehensive overview of six key principles.[iv]

What is Action Research?

1) Reflexive critique
Definition
Action research is known by many other names, including
participatory research, collaborative inquiry, emancipatory
research, action learning, and contextural action research, but all
are variations on a theme. Put simply, action research is learning
by doing - a group of people identify a problem, do something to
resolve it, see how successful their efforts were, and if not
satisfied, try again. While this is the essence of the approach,
there are other key attributes of action research that differentiate
it from common problem-solving activities that we all engage in
every day. A more succinct definition is,
"Action research...aims to contribute both to the practical
concerns of people in an immediate problematic situation and to
further the goals of social science simultaneously. Thus, there is a
dual commitment in action research to study a system and
concurrently to collaborate with members of the system in
changing it in what is together regarded as a desirable direction.
Accomplishing this twin goal requires the active collaboration of
researcher and client, and thus it stresses the importance of colearning as a primary aspect of the research process."[i]

An account of a situation, such as notes, transcripts or official

documents, will make implicit claims to be authoritative, i.e., it
implies that it is factual and true. Truth in a social setting,
however, is relative to the teller. The principle of reflective
critique ensures people reflect on issues and processes and make
explicit the interpretations, biases, assumptions and concerns
upon which judgments are made. In this way, practical accounts
can give rise to theoretical considerations.
2) Dialectical critique
Reality, particularly social reality, is consensually validated, which
is to say it is shared through language. Phenomena are
conceptualized in dialogue, therefore a dialectical critique is
required to understand the set of relationships both between the
phenomenon and its context, and between the elements
constituting the phenomenon. The key elements to focus
attention on are those constituent elements that are unstable, or
in opposition to one another. These are the ones that are most
likely to create changes.
3) Collaborative Resource

What separates this type of research from general professional

practices, consulting, or daily problem-solving is the emphasis on
scientific study, which is to say the researcher studies the problem
systematically and ensures the intervention is informed by
theoretical considerations. Much of the researchers time is spent
on refining the methodological tools to suit the exigencies of the
situation, and on collecting, analyzing, and presenting data on an
ongoing, cyclical basis.
Several attributes separate action research from other types of
research. Primary is its focus on turning the people involved into
researchers, too - people learn best, and more willingly apply
what they have learned, when they do it themselves. It also has a
social dimension - the research takes place in real-world
situations, and aims to solve real problems. Finally, the initiating
researcher, unlike in other disciplines, makes no attempt to
remain objective, but openly acknowledges their bias to the other
participants.
The Action Research Process

Participants in an action research project are co-researchers. The

principle of collaborative resource presupposes that each persons
ideas are equally significant as potential resources for creating
interpretive categories of analysis, negotiated among the
participants. It strives to avoid the skewing of credibility
stemming from the prior status of an idea-holder. It especially
makes possible the insights gleaned from noting the
contradictions both between many viewpoints and within a single
viewpoint

4) Risk
The change process potentially threatens all previously
established ways of doing things, thus creating psychic fears
among the practitioners. One of the more prominent fears comes
from the risk to ego stemming from open discussion of ones
interpretations, ideas, and judgments. Initiators of action
research will use this principle to allay others fears and invite
participation by pointing out that they, too, will be subject to the

same process, and that whatever the outcome, learning will take
place.
5) Plural Structure
The nature of the research embodies a multiplicity of views,
commentaries and critiques, leading to multiple possible actions
and interpretations. This plural structure of inquiry requires a
plural text for reporting. This means that there will be many
accounts made explicit, with commentaries on their
contradictions, and a range of options for action presented. A
report, therefore, acts as a support for ongoing discussion among
collaborators, rather than a final conclusion of fact.
6) Theory, Practice, Transformation
For action researchers, theory informs practice, practice refines
theory, in a continuous transformation. In any setting, peoples
actions are based on implicitly held assumptions, theories and
hypotheses, and with every observed result, theoretical
knowledge is enhanced. The two are intertwined aspects of a
single change process. It is up to the researchers to make explicit
the theoretical justifications for the actions, and to question the
bases of those justifications. The ensuing practical applications
that follow are subjected to further analysis, in a transformative
cycle that continuously alternates emphasis between theory and
practice.
When is Action Research used?
Action research is used in real situations, rather than in contrived,
experimental studies, since its primary focus is on solving real
problems. It can, however, be used by social scientists for
preliminary or pilot research, especially when the situation is too
ambiguous to frame a precise research question. Mostly, though,
in accordance with its principles, it is chosen when circumstances
require flexibility, the involvement of the people in the research,
or change must take place quickly or holistically.
It is often the case that those who apply this approach are
practitioners who wish to improve understanding of their
practice, social change activists trying to mount an action
campaign, or, more likely, academics who have been invited into
an organization (or other domain) by decision-makers aware of a
problem requiring action research, but lacking the requisite
methodological knowledge to deal with it.
Situating Action Research in a Research Paradigm
Positivist Paradigm
The main research paradigm for the past several centuries has
been that of Logical Positivism. This paradigm is based on a
number of principles, including: a belief in an objective reality,
knowledge of which is only gained from sense data that can be
directly experienced and verified between independent
observers. Phenomena are subject to natural laws that humans
discover in a logical manner through empirical testing, using
inductive and deductive hypotheses derived from a body of
scientific theory. Its methods rely heavily on quantitative
measures, with relationships among variables commonly shown
by mathematical means. Positivism, used in scientific and applied
research, has been considered by many to be the antithesis of the
principles of action research (Susman and Evered 1978, Winter
1989).
Interpretive Paradigm
Over the last half century, a new research paradigm has emerged
in the social sciences to break out of the constraints imposed by
positivism. With its emphasis on the relationship between
socially-engendered concept formation and language, it can be
referred to as the Interpretive paradigm. Containing such
qualitative methodological approaches as phenomenology,
ethnography, and hermeneutics, it is characterized by a belief in a
socially constructed, subjectively-based reality, one that is
influenced by culture and history. Nonetheless it still retains the
ideals of researcher objectivity, and researcher as passive
collector and expert interpreter of data.
Paradigm of Praxis

Though sharing a number of perspectives with the interpretive

paradigm, and making considerable use of its related qualitative
methodologies, there are some researchers who feel that neither
it nor the positivist paradigms are sufficient epistemological
structures under which to place action research (Lather 1986,
Morley 1991). Rather, a paradigm of Praxis is seen as where the
main affinities lie. Praxis, a term used by Aristotle, is the art of
acting upon the conditions one faces in order to change them. It
deals with the disciplines and activities predominant in the ethical
and political lives of people. Aristotle contrasted this with Theoria
- those sciences and activities that are concerned with knowing
for its own sake. Both are equally needed he thought. That
knowledge is derived from practice, and practice informed by
knowledge, in an ongoing process, is a cornerstone of action
research. Action researchers also reject the notion of researcher
neutrality, understanding that the most active researcher is often
one who has most at stake in resolving a problematic situation.
Evolution of Action Research
Origins in late 1940s
Kurt Lewin is generally considered the father of action research.
A German social and experimental psychologist, and one of the
founders of the Gestalt school, he was concerned with social
problems, and focused on participative group processes for
addressing conflict, crises, and change, generally within
organizations. Initially, he was associated with the Center for
Group Dynamics at MIT in Boston, but soon went on to establish
his own National Training Laboratories.
Lewin first coined the term action research in his 1946 paper
Action Research and Minority Problems,*v+ characterizing
Action Research as a comparative research on the conditions and
effects of various forms of social action and research leading to
social action, using a process of a spiral of steps, each of which
is composed of a circle of planning, action, and fact-finding about
the result of the action.
Eric Trist, another major contributor to the field from that
immediate post-war era, was a social psychiatrist whose group at
the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London engaged in
applied social research, initially for the civil repatriation of
German prisoners of war. He and his colleagues tended to focus
more on large-scale, multi-organizational problems.
Both Lewin and Trist applied their research to systemic change in
and between organizations. They emphasized direct professional
- client collaboration and affirmed the role of group relations as
basis for problem-solving. Both were avid proponents of the
principle that decisions are best implemented by those who help
make them.
Current Types of Action Research
By the mid-1970s, the field had evolved, revealing 4 main
streams that had emerged: traditional, contextural (action
learning), radical, and educational action research.
Traditional Action Research
Traditional Action Research stemmed from Lewins work within
organizations and encompasses the concepts and practices of
Field Theory, Group Dynamics, T-Groups, and the Clinical Model.
The growing importance of labour-management relations led to
the application of action research in the areas of Organization
Development, Quality of Working Life (QWL), Socio-technical
systems (e.g., Information Systems), and Organizational
Democracy. This traditional approach tends toward the
conservative, generally maintaining the status quo with regards to
organizational power structures.
Contextural Action Research (Action Learning)
Contextural Action Research, also sometimes referred to as Action
Learning, is an approach derived from Trists work on relations
between organizations. It is contextural, insofar as it entails
reconstituting the structural relations among actors in a social
environment; domain-based, in that it tries to involve all affected
parties and stakeholders; holographic, as each participant
understands the working of the whole; and it stresses that

participants act as project designers and co-researchers. The

concept of organizational ecology, and the use of search
conferences come out of contextural action research, which is
more of a liberal philosophy, with social transformation occurring
by consensus and normative incrementalism.

this wider background and then proceeds to construct a picture of

a desirable future. It is surprising how much agreement there
often is. Only when all this has been done is consideration given
to action steps..."[ix]
Figure 3 provides a schematic of a typical search conference.

Radical Action Research

The Radical stream, which has its roots in Marxian dialectical
materialism and the praxis orientations of Antonio Gramsci, has a
strong focus on emancipation and the overcoming of power
imbalances. Participatory Action Research, often found in
liberationist movements and international development circles,
and Feminist Action Research both strive for social transformation
via an advocacy process to strengthen peripheral groups in
society.
Educational Action Research
A fourth stream, that of Educational Action Research, has its
foundations in the writings of John Dewey, the great American
educational philosopher of the 1920s and 30s, who believed that
professional educators should become involved in community
problem-solving. Its practitioners, not surprisingly, operate
mainly out of educational institutions, and focus on development
of curriculum, professional development, and applying learning in
a social context. It is often the case that university-based action
researchers work with primary and secondary school teachers and
students on community projects.

Pre-conference process
set up Advisory Group of local representatives
agree on process design and participants
use focus groups for preparation
invitations, distribution of introductory materials

Introductory plenary
introductions, review objectives, outline process, introduce first
stage

Small group session 1

SCANNING THE ISSUE
past and present context
assess current situation
outline probable futures

Action Research Tools

Action Research is more of a holistic approach to problem-solving,
rather than a single method for collecting and analyzing data.
Thus, it allows for several different research tools to be used as
the project is conducted. These various methods, which are
generally common to the qualitative research paradigm, include:
keeping a research journal, document collection and analysis,
participant observation recordings, questionnaire surveys,
structured and unstructured interviews, and case studies.

Presentation plenary
reports from small groups, discuss directions, introduce second
stage

Small group session 2

DESIRED FUTURES
long-range visions
alternative / preferred futures

The Search Conference

Of all of the tools utilized by action researchers, the one that has
been developed exclusively to suit the needs of the action
research approach is that of the search conference, initially
developed by Eric Trist and Fred Emery at the Tavistock Institute
in 1959, and first implemented for the merger of Bristol-Siddley
Aircraft Engines in 1960.
The search conference format has seen widespread development
since that time, with variations on Trist and Emerys theme
becoming known under other names due to their promotion by
individual academics and consultants. These include DannemillerTysons Interactive Strategic Planning, Marvin Weisbord's Future
Search Conference, Dick Axelrod's Conference Model Redesign,
Harrison Owens Open Space, and ICAs Strategic Planning (Rouda
1995).
Search conferences also have been conducted for many different
circumstances and participants, including: decision-makers from
several countries visioning the Future of Participative Democracy
in the Americas;*vi+ practitioners and policymakers in the field of
health promotion in Ontario taking charge in an era of
cutbacks;[vii] and Xerox employees sorting out enterprise reorganization.[viii]

Presentation plenary
reports, review progress, introduction to third stage

Small group session 3

OPTIONS FOR CHANGE
constraints and opportunities
possible futures

Presentation plenary
reports, define strategic tasks / actions, select key tasks, form task
groups

Task Group sessions

TASK GROUP MEETINGS

Final plenary
Task Group reports, discuss future contacts, create new Advisory
Group

Eric Trist sums up the process quite nicely "Searching...is carried out in groups which are composed of the
relevant stakeholders. The group meets under social island
conditions for 2-3 days, sometimes as long as five. The opening
sessions are concerned with elucidating the factors operating in
the wider contextual environment - those producing the metaproblems and likely to affect the future. The content is
contributed entirely by the members. The staff are facilitators
only. Items are listed in the first instance without criticism in the
plenary session and displayed on flip charts which surround the
room. The material is discussed in greater depth in small groups
and the composite picture checked out in plenary. The group
next examines its own organizational setting or settings against

Post-conference process
report distributed
follow-up contacts
Advisory Group facilitates meetings of Task Groups
feedback on proposed actions
further search conferences
widen network
continuing evaluation of outcomes

Figure 3 - Search Conference

(adapted from The ABL Group, 1997)[x]

presented following a brief overview of this potentially promising

technical innovation.

Role of the Action Researcher

Case Study 1 - Development of nature tourism in the Windward

Islands

Upon invitation into a domain, the outside researchers role is to

implement the Action Research method in such a manner as to
produce a mutually agreeable outcome for all participants, with
the process being maintained by them afterwards. To accomplish
this, it may necessitate the adoption of many different roles at
various stages of the process, including those of
planner leader
catalyzer
facilitator
teacher
designer
listener
observer
synthesizer
reporter
The main role, however, is to nurture local leaders to the point
where they can take responsibility for the process. This point is
reached they understand the methods and are able to carry on
when the initiating researcher leaves.
In many Action Research situations, the hired researchers role is
primarily to take the time to facilitate dialogue and foster
reflective analysis among the participants, provide them with
periodic reports, and write a final report when the researchers
involvement has ended.
Ethical Considerations
Because action research is carried out in real-world
circumstances, and involves close and open communication
among the people involved, the researchers must pay close
attention to ethical considerations in the conduct of their work.
Richard Winter (1996) lists a number of principles:
Make sure that the relevant persons, committees and
authorities have been consulted, and that the principles guiding
the work are accepted in advance by all.
All participants must be allowed to influence the work, and
the wishes of those who do not wish to participate must be
respected.
The development of the work must remain visible and open to
suggestions from others.
Permission must be obtained before making observations or
examining documents produced for other purposes.
Descriptions of others work and points of view must be
negotiated with those concerned before being published.
The researcher must accept responsibility for maintaining
confidentiality.*xi+
To this might be added several more points:

In 1991, an action research process was initiated to explore how

nature tourism could be instituted on each of the four Windward
Islands in the Caribbean - St. Lucia, Grenada, Dominica, and St.
Vincent. The government took the lead, for environmental
conservation, community-based development, and national
economic development purposes. Realizing that the consultation
process had to involve many stakeholders, including
representatives of several government ministries, environmental
and heritage groups, community organizations, womens and
youth groups, farmers cooperatives, and private business, an
action research approach was seen as appropriate.
Two action researchers from York University in Toronto, with prior
experience in the region, were hired to implement the project,
with a majority of the funding coming from the Canadian
International Development Agency. Multi-stakeholder national
advisory councils were formed, and national project coordinators
selected as local project liaisons. Their first main task was to
organize a search conference on each island.
The search conferences took place, the outcome of which was a
set of recommendations and/or action plans for the carrying out
of a number of nature tourism-oriented sub-projects at the local
community level. At this point, extended advisory groups were
formed on several of the islands, and national awareness activities
and community sub-projects were implemented in some cases.
To maintain the process, regional project meetings were held,
where project coordinators and key advisory members shared
experiences, conducted self-evaluations and developed plans for
maintaining the process (e.g., fundraising). One of the more
valuable tools for building a sense of community was the use of a
videocamera to create a documentary video of a local project.
The outcomes varied.[xii] In St. Vincent the research project was
highly successful, with several viable local developments
instituted. Grenada and St. Lucia showed mixed outcomes, and
Dominica was the least successful, the process curtailed by the
government soon after the search conference took place. The
main difference in the outcomes, it was felt, was in the willingness
of the key government personnel to let go and allow the
process to be jointly controlled by all participants. There is always
a risk that this kind of research will empower stakeholders, and
change existing power relations, the threat of which is too much
for some decision-makers, but if given the opportunity, there are
many things that a collaborative group of citizens can accomplish
that might not be possible otherwise.

Decisions made about the direction of the research and the

probable outcomes are collective
Researchers are explicit about the nature of the research
process from the beginning, including all personal biases and
interests
There is equal access to information generated by the process
for all participants
The outside researcher and the initial design team must
create a process that maximizes the opportunities for
involvement of all participants.

Action Research and Information Technology

Examples of Action Research Projects

Much of the action research carried out over the past 40 years has
been conducted in local settings with the participants meeting
face-to-face with real-time dialogue. The emergence of the
Internet has led to an explosion of asynchronous and aspatial
group communication in the form of e-mail and computer
conferences, and recently, v-mail and video conferencing. While
there have been numerous attempts to use this new technology
in assisting group learning, both within organizations and among
groups in the community [this author has been involved with a
dozen or more projects of this kind in the nonprofit sector in
Canada alone], there is a dearth of published studies on the use of
action research methods in such projects Lau and Hayward
(1997), in a recent review of the literature, found that most
research on group support systems to date has been in short-

To better illustrate how action research can proceed, three case

studies are presented. Action research projects are generally
situationally unique, but there are elements in the methods that
can be used by other researchers in different circumstances. The
first case study, an account taken from the writings of one of the
researchers involved (Franklin 1994), involves a research project
to stimulate the development of nature tourism services in the
Caribbean. It represents a fairly typical example of an action
research initiative. The second and third case studies centre
around the use of computer communications, and therefore
illustrate a departure from the norm in this regard. They are

In the past ten years or so, there has been a marked increase in
the number of organizations that are making use of information
technology and computer mediated communications. This has led
to a number of convergences between information systems and
action research. In some cases, it has been a matter of managers
of corporate networks employing action research techniques to
facilitate large-scale changes to their information systems. In
others, it has been a question of community-based action
research projects making use of computer communications to
broaden participation.

term, experimental situations using quantitative methods.. There

are a few examples, though, of longitudinal studies in naturalistic
settings using qualitative methods; of those that did use action
research, none studied the use and effects of communication
systems in groups and organizations.
We can now to turn to the case studies, both of which are
situated in an area in need of more research - that of the use of
information technology as a potentially powerful adjunct to action
research processes.
Case Study 2 - Internet-based collaborative work groups in
community health
Lau and Hayward (1997) used an action research approach in a
study of their own to explore the structuration of Internet-based
collaborative work groups. Over a two-year period, the
researchers participated as facilitators in three action research
cycles of problem-solving among approximately 15 instructors
and project staff, and 25 health professionals from various regions
striving to make a transition to a more community-based health
program. The aim was to explore how Internet-based
communications would influence their evolution into a virtual
collaborative workgroup.
The first phase was taken up with defining expectations, providing
the technology and developing the customized workgroup
system. Feedback from participants noted that shorter and more
spaced training sessions, with instructions more focused on
specific projects would have been more helpful. The next phase
saw the full deployment of the system, and the main lesson
learned was that the steepness of the learning curve was severely
underestimated, with frustrations only minimally satisfied by a
great deal of technical support provided by telephone. The final
cycle saw the stabilization of the system and the emergence of
the virtual groups
The researchers found that those who used the system
interactively were more likely to establish projects that were
collaborative in nature, and that the lack of high quality
information on community healthcare online was a drawback.
The participants reported learning a great deal from the initiative.

Students were expected to use the system for collaborative

learning using three forms of conversation - dialogue, discussion
and critical reflection. Dialogues were enjoined as a result of
attempts to relate classroom lessons to personal situations at
work, with a better understanding provided by multiple opinions.
Discussions, distinguished by the goal of making a group decision
or taking an action, required a fair degree of moderation, insofar
as participants found it difficult to reach closure. The process of
reflecting critically on ideas was also difficult - participants rarely
took the time to analyze postings, preferring a more immediate,
and more superficial, conversational style.
The authors conclude with four recommendations: 1) be clear
about the purpose of the computer conference and expectations
for use; 2) develop incentives for widespread and continuous
participation; 3) pay attention to affects of the software on the
way the system is used for learning; and 4) teach members of the
community how to translate face-to-face collaborative processes
to the on-line environment.

Commentary on the need for more research

The characteristics of the new information technologies,
especially that of computer conferencing, which allows group
communications to take place outside of the bounds of time and
space, have the potential to be well suited to action research.
Projects that traditionally have been limited to local, real-time
interactions, such as in the case of search conferences, now have
the possibility of being conducted online, with the promise of
larger-sized groups, more reflexivity, greater geographic reach,
and for a longer period of sustained interaction. The current state
of the software architecture, though, does not seem to be
sufficient to induce the focused collaboration required. Perhaps
this will remain the case until cyberspace becomes as elaborate in
contextual cues as our current socio-physical environment.
Whatever the eventual outcome of online developments, it is
certain that action research and information technologies will
continue to converge, and we must be prepared to use action
research techniques to better understand and utilize this
convergence.
Conclusion

The interpretations of the study suggest that role clarity,

relationship building, information sharing, resource support, and
experiential learning are important aspects in virtual group
development. There was also a sense that more research was
needed on how group support systems can help groups interact
with their external environment, as well as on how to enhance
the process of learning by group members.
Case Study 3 - Computer conferencing in a learning community
Comstock and Fox (1995) have written about their experiences in
integrating computer conferencing into a learning community for
mid-career working adults attending a Graduate Management
Program at Antioch University in Seattle. From 1992 to 1995, the
researchers and their students made use of a dial-up computer
conferencing system called Caucus to augment learning outside of
monthly classroom weekends. Their findings relate to
establishing boundaries to interaction, creating a caring
community, and building collaborative learning.
Boundary setting was a matter of both defined membership, i.e.,
access to particular conferences, and actual participation. The
architecture of the online environment was equated to that of a
house, in which locked rooms allowed for privacy, but hampered
interaction. They suggest some software design changes that
would provide more cues and flexibility to improve access and
usage.
Relationships in a caring community were fostered by caring talk,
personal conversations and story telling. Over time, expressions
of personal concern for other participants increased, exemplifying
a more tightly-knit group. Playful conversations of a personal
nature also improved group relations, as did stories of events in
individuals lives. These processes provided the support and
induced the trust needed to sustain the more in-depth
collaborative learning taking place.

This paper has presented an overview of action research as a

methodological approach to solving social problems. The
principles and procedures of this type of research, and
epistemological underpinnings, were described, along with the
evolution of the practice. Details of a search conference and
other tools were given, as was an indication of the roles and
ethics involved in the research. The case studies gave concrete
examples of projects, particularly in the relatively new area of
social deployment of information technologies. Further action
research is needed to explore the potential for developing
computer-mediated communications in a way that will enhance
human interactions.

Endnotes
[i] Thomas Gilmore, Jim Krantz and Rafael Ramirez, "Action Based
Modes of Inquiry and the Host-Researcher Relationship,"
Consultation 5.3 (Fall 1986): 161.
[ii] Dan MacIsaac, "An Introduction to Action Research," 1995,
http://www.phy.nau.edu/~danmac/actionrsch.html
(22/03/1998).
[iii] Gerald I. Susman, "Action Research: A Sociotechnical Systems
Perspective," ed. G. Morgan (London: Sage Publications, 1983)
102.
[iv] Richard Winter, Learning From Experience: Principles and
Practice in Action-Research (Philadelphia: The Falmer Press, 1989)
43-67.
[v] Kurt Lewin, "Action Research and Minority Problems," Journal
of Social Issues 2 (1946): 34-46.
[vi] IIRM, "International Institute for Natural, Environmental &
Cultural Resources Management," 26/08 1997,
http://www.nmsu.edu/~iirm/ (24/03/1998).
[vii] Ontario Prevention Clearinghouse, "Our Communities in a
Global Economy: Under Siege and Taking Charge!" 03/06 1996,
http://www.opc.on.ca/events/congressvii/index.html
(22/3/1998).

[viii] Ronald E. Purser and Steven Cabana, "Mobilizing Large-Scale

Strategic Change: An Application of the Search Conference
Method at Xerox," 19/10 1996,
http://www2.wi.net/~rpurser/qualp.txt (12/04/1998).
[ix] Eric Trist, "Referent Organizations and the Development of
Inter-Organizational Domains," 39th Annual Convention of the
Academy of Management (Atlanta, 9/8, 1979) 23-24.
[x] ABL Group, Future Search Process Design (Toronto: York
University, 1997).
[xi] Richard Winter, "Some Principles and Procedures for the
Conduct of Action Research," in New Directions in Action
Research, ed. Ortrun Zuber-Skerritt (London: Falmer Press, 1996)
16-17.
[xii] Beth Franklin, personal communication - an account of the
outcomes has not yet been published (Toronto/York University,
10/2, 1998).
Bibliography

1.
ABL Group. Future Search Process Design. Toronto: York
University, 1997.
2.
Boog, Ben, et al. Theory and Practice of Action Research With Special Reference to the Netherlands. Tilburg, The
Netherlands: Tilbury University Press, 1996.
3.
Chisholm, Rupert, and Max Elden. "Features of Emerging
Action Research." Human Relations 46.2 (1993): 275-98.
4.
Comstock, Don, and Sally Fox. "Computer Conferencing in
a Learning Community: Opportunities and Obstacles." November
1995.
http://www.seattleantioch.edu/VirtualAntioch/DRAFT7HT.HTM
(14/04/1998).
5.
Elden, Max, and Rupert Chisholm. "Emerging Varieties of
Action Research: Introduction to the Special Issue." Human
Relations 46.2 (1993): 121-42.
6.
Emery, Fred E., and Eric L. Trist. "The Causal Texture of
Organizational Environments." Human Relations 18 (1965): 2132.
7.
Fals-Borda, Orlando. "Evolution and Convergence in
Participatory Action-Research." A World of Communities:
Participatory Research Perspectives. Ed. James Frideres. Toronto:
Captus University Publications, 1992. 14-19.
8.
Franklin, Beth. . An accounting of the outcomes has not
yet been published. Toronto/York University, 10/2. 1998.
9.
---. "Grassroots Initiatives in Sustainability: A Caribbean
Example." Human Society & The Natural World: Perspectives on
Sustainable Futures. Ed. D Bell and R. Keil. Toronto: York
University, 1994. 1-10.
10.
---, and David Morley. "Contextural Searching: An
Application of Action Learning Principles." Discovering Common
Ground. Ed. M. Weisbord. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 1992.
229-46.
11.
Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York:
Continuum, 1970.
12.
Gilmore, Thomas, Jim Krantz, and Rafael Ramirez. "Action
Based Modes of Inquiry and the Host-Researcher Relationship."
Consultation 5.3: 160-76.
13.
Greenwood, Davydd, William Foote Whyte, and Ira
Harkavy. "Participatory Action Research as a Process and as a
Goal." Human Relations 46.2 (1993): 175-92.
14.
Hall, Budd L. "From Margins to Centre? The Development
and Purpose of Participatory Research." American Sociologist
Winter 1992: 15-28.
15.
Hollingsworth, Sandra (ed.). International Action Research:
A Casebook for Educational Reform. London: The Falmer Press,
1997.

16.
IIRM. "International Institute for Natural, Environmental &
Cultural Resources Management." 26/08 1997.
http://www.nmsu.edu/~iirm/ (24/03/1998).
17.
Jones, Sue. "Choosing Action Research." Organizational
Analysis and Development: A Social Construction of
Organizational Behaviour. Ed. Ian Mangham. John Wiley & Sons
Ltd., 1986. 23-45.
18.
Kock Jr., Nereu F. "Myths in Organisational Action
Research: Reflections on a Study of Computer-Supported Process
Redesign Groups." Organizations & Society 4.9 (1997): 65-91.
19.
Lather, Patti. "Research as Praxis." Harvard Educational
Review 56.3 (1986): 257-77.
20.
Lau, Francis, and Robert Hayward. "Structuration of
Internet-Based Collaborative Work Groups Through Action
Research." 2/5 1997.
http://search.ahfmr.ab.ca/tech_eval/gss.htm (11/4/1998).
21.
Lewin, Kurt. "Action Research and Minority Problems."
Journal of Social Issues 2 (1946): 34-46.
22.
MacIsaac, Dan. "An Introduction to Action Research."
1995. http://www.phy.nau.edu/~danmac/actionrsch.html
(22/03/1998).
23.
Morgan, Gareth, and Raphael Ramirez. "Action Learning: A
Holographic Metaphor for Guiding Social Change." Toronto, April.
1983. York University Action Learning Group.
24.
Morley, David. "Resource Analysis as Action Research."
Resource Analysis Research in Developing Countries. Ed. Paul F.
Wilkinson and William C. Found. Toronto: York University, 1991.
1-16.
25.
Ontario Prevention Clearinghouse. "Our Communities in a
Global Economy: Under Siege and Taking Charge!" 03/06 1996.
http://www.opc.on.ca/events/congressvii/index.html
(22/3/1998).
26.
Purser, Ronald E., and Steven Cabana. "Mobilizing LargeScale Strategic Change: An Application of the Search Conference
Method at Xerox." 19/10 1996.
http://www2.wi.net/~rpurser/qualp.txt (12/04/1998).
27.
Revans, Reginald. The Origins and Growth of Action
Learning. Bromly, England: Chartwell Bratt, 1982.
28.
Rouda, Robert H. "Background and Theory for Large Scale
Organizational Change Methods." 1995.
http://alumni.caltech.edu/~rouda/background.html
(14/04/1998).
29.
---, and Mitchell E. Kusy Jr. "MANAGING CHANGE WITH
LARGE-SCALE, REAL-TIME INTERVENTIONS." 1995.
http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~rouda/T5_LSRTOD.html
(14/04/1998).
30.
Susman, Gerald I. "Action Research: A Sociotechnical
Systems Perspective." Ed. G. Morgan. London: Sage Publications,
1983. 95-113.
31.
---, and Roger D. Evered. "An Assessment of the Scientific
Merits of Action Research." Administrative Science Quarterly 23
(December 1978): 582-603.
32.
Tesch, Renata. Qualitative Research: Analysis Types and
Software Tools. New York: The Falmer Press, 1990.
33.
Trist, Eric. "A Concept of Organizational Ecology."
Australian Journal of Management 2.2: 161-75.
34.
---. "Intervention Strategies for Interorganizational
Domains." Human Systems Development: Perspectives on People
and Organizations. Ed. Robert Tannenbaum and et al. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985. 167-97.
35.
---. "New Directions of Hope." Regional Studies 13 (1979):
439-51.

36.
---. "Referent Organizations and the Development of InterOrganizational Domains." 39th Annual Convention of the
Academy of Management. Atlanta, 9/8. 1979.
37.
Weisbord, Marvin (ed.). Discovering Common Ground:
How Future Search Conferences Bring People Together To Achieve
Breakthrough Innovation, Empowerment, Shared Vision, and
Collaborative Action. San Francisco: Berret-Koehler Publishers,
Inc., 1992.

principals, school counselors, or other stake holders in the

teaching learning environment. It involve gathering information
about the ways in which their particular school operates, the
teacher teach, and student learn.
Definitions Carr and Kemmis say that: Action research is a form
of self-reflective inquiry that can be utilized by teachers in order
to improve the rationality and justice of Their own practices,
Their understanding of these practices and The situations in
which these practices are carried out.

38.
Winter, Richard. Action-Research and the Nature of Social
Inquiry: Professional Innovation and Educational Work.
Aldershot, England: Gower Publishing Company, 1987.
39.
---. Learning From Experience: Principles and Practice in
Action-Research. Philadelphia: The Falmer Press, 1989.
40.
---. "Some Principles and Procedures for the Conduct of
Action Research." New Directions in Action Research. Ed. Ortrun
Zuber-Skerritt. London: Falmer Press, 1996. 13-27.
41.
Zuber-Skerritt, Ortrun. New Directions in Action Research.
London: The Falmer Press, 1996.
What Is The Importance Of Research Study?

7 Answers
Joe Gilbert Profile
Joe Gilbert answered
Research is important when conducted correctly because it helps
us to understand and possibly even solve existing or possible
problems in the world. This could be anything from social issues
to medical breakthroughs. Governments carry out research all of
the time in order to come to conclusions about policies and
strategies. They will often choose experts in the particular field to
go out and carry out in-depth research to help them out. Without
this research and knowledge, it would be difficult to make a
change in the world. It would also mean that changes wouldn't be
fully considered which could result in bigger problems in the long
run. If a problem is evident, for example gun crime, it is essential
to understand what has caused the problem and why people
continue to take part in such illegal activity even though they
know it is fundamentally wrong. Research will aim to answer
these questions so that informed decisions can be made about
what strategies will help.
In order for research to be valid a lot of time, effort and money
have to be injected into the project. The problem is that most
people aren't patient or willing enough to put in the effort.
Without taking research seriously, results can be hugely flawed
resulting in a worse scenario than the original problem. Even huge
global companies with massive budgets do not put enough effort
into their research. One example of this is a company specializing
in beauty products who use a sample of less than 100 (which isn't
enough to be globally representative) and advertise for people to
test their product in places like fashion magazines (resulting in a
sample of a very similar demographic). These results are flawed
due to them not taking the research seriously enough.
Action research
Presentation Transcript
Presentation By (806) Sadia Hassan Roll no (804)
Topic Action Research
Introduction Introduced by Kurt Lewin in social science.
Stephen Corey introduced it in the field of education in 1953.
Action Research Teachers often leave a mark on their students,
but they seldom leave a mark on their profession" -(Wolfe, 1989).
Introduction Now in the field of education Action research is a
systematic investigation conducted by practitioners to provide
information to immediately improve teaching and learning.
James H. McMillan p.329
Definitions Stephen Corey (1953) define it as: The process
through which practitioners study their problems scientifically in
order to guide, correct and evaluate their decisions and actions. In
the educational setting i.e. school, the practitioners are the
teachers and his other colleagues who work to improve
instruction.
Definitions Geoffery E. Mills describe Action research in
education is any systematic inquiry conducted by teachers,

ce

Theories of Action Research Two main theories of action research:

Critical action research Practical action research Philosophical
Perspective
Type of Research It can be quantitative and also be qualitative
Depends upon the:Nature of study Sample size Instrumentation
Data Analysis
Types of Action Research In educational context Four basic types
depend upon the Nature of study Type of problem
Types of Action Re
Collaborative Action Research School-wide Action Research
District-wide Action Research
Individual Action Research Individual action research based on the
individual teacher research on a single issue in the classroom. It
may be any classroom problem related to student learning,
classroom management, related to administration or any
instructional strategy.
Collaborative Action Research When a group of teachers work
together to resolve a common issue related to a group of students
or department, it comes under collaborative action research.
School-Wide Action Research All issues which are common to all
within the school boundary come under this type. These common
problems can be investigated by the staff members while working
together
District-Wide Action Research The focus of action research is on
those problems that are wider in nature. District level educational
issues are addressed. It is more complex in nature and also utilizes
more resources.
Advantages It is applied in nature. Care full data
collection. Recommendations are meaningful. Allow the
professional development of teachers. It creates system wide
mind-set for the school improvement. It changes the climate of
school.
Advantages It enhance the decision making power
of teachers. It empower the educational leaders. Action
researchers evaluate themselves. It improves the communication
network. Researchers are more committed towards their work. It
promotes self-reflection and self-assessment. The results are
relevant and directly applicable.
Limitations Action Research also have following limitation Did
not follow scientific method accurately. less emphasize on the
previous findings or literature review. Teachers may not able to
do research as the professional researchers less about
generalizability. Special training is required.
Concluding remarks In summary, although some people may
critique that action research is an informal research since teachers
are not academic researchers, it is widely believed that action
research is extremely suitable for education as its main purpose is
to help teachers as researchers solve their teaching problems in
action.
THANKS

Chapter 4: ACTION RESEARCH

Rob McBride and John Schostak
This chapter seeks to tell you something more about action
research and then how to do it.
A. WHAT IS ACTION RESEARCH?
It is not tempting at all to try and blind the reader with science. As
you might guess a great deal of high falluting stuff has been
written about Action Research [AR] yet when it comes to getting
started much of this is not required. You should already have read
chapters 1 and 3. The first gives you examples of the work of

previous students. Chapter 3 gives you some idea about how to

do qualitative research. As AR is considered in this publication to
be a form of qualitative research, you should already have some
notions of what needs to be done. Teachers are already doing a
form of AR when they teach a lesson and feel it could be
improved or changed. AR is simply about reflecting about your
teaching and going through a cycle of change. Sometimes a group
of colleagues do AR together.
In general, action researchers are expected to carry out their AR
with greater rigour than indicated in the paragraph above. This
book has already alerted the reader to the issues such as the
ethical considerations which arise when data is collected, how
theory is built and so on. This chapter should firm up your initial
ideas. Ultimately, however, you will need to do it yourself while
glancing through these papers and possibly other publications on
AR. In a section below we will go through the steps you will need
to take and explain, hopefully, in simple terms what needs to be
done.
Rob McBride was with a group of teachers who were discussing
steps they might take to improve the experience of 16-19 year
olds. One commented that from his office he could, on most days,
see a group of lads on an adjoining recreation ground who had
left his school. They were unemployed, some were using drugs,
some had already committed serious criminal offences. He felt he
had failed them. Another teacher cited the economic situation
and suggested that the teacher should not blame herself. A third
believed that the rise of consumerism and the increasing gap
between rich and poor was the cause. Already in this anecdote
there is a rudamentary search for analysis and explanation. It
follows the pattern outlined in the generalisation from cases in
chapter 2 section I.
At this point there is no need to comment further on any of the
arguments put forward and it could be accepted that an
opportunity to let off steam and have a 'good moan' maybe
something we should all do once in a while. Research that was
solely about understanding situations might be content to pursue
the contextual analyses indicated in the anecdote. Action
researchers will also go through such a phase but ultimately they
would have to ask themselves
What can I do, given that the situation does not look very
promising?
AR begins when professionals begin to ask themselves this and
similar questions. As you might imagine this has caused
something of a split in those who claim to promote AR.
Carr and Kemmis [1986] define AR as follows:

"The study of a social situation, involving the participants

themselves as researchers, with a view to improving the quality of
action within it."
This last definition will inform this volume rather than any other.
Definitions and uses of AR have been commented upon by a large
number of academics in many fields. While it may appear to be a
form of navel gazing, on this course we have to scratch surfaces
more than we might normally, just as some academics have done
with these definitions. We have to attempt to gain a deeper and
more profound understanding of the uses of terms and ideas. It
means that to some extent we have to make some terms, that are
used in an everyday way, problematical - meanings have to be
questioned. The same is true of some forms of authority, which
are often exercised unreflectively. It is no coincidence that John
Elliott has written widely about the problems of centralised
control of education. Indeed, he has maintained that by engaging
in AR teachers are taking an anti-bureaucratic position through
which they become aware of the greater contextual framework.
This is certainly a credible view though it would be surprising if
some practitioners had not come to AR after being critical of
national policy, i.e. concerned with 'big' questions first.
Action researchers are usually anxious to assert that their work
seeks to narrow the gap between theory and practice. That is to
say they have no interest in theory which is not grounded in
practice nor practice which is not reflected upon and theorised
about. In this way theory and practice interact. We can also
conclude from Somekh's definition that AR is not carried out by
the archetypal scientist in a white coat who is detached from the
'objects' he [as it usually is] is studying. To some extent the
researcher is an 'insider' who changes the social situation by
virtue of studying it. When conducting an interview, for example,
it is more than likely that practitioners will have had thoughts and
ideas which otherwise would not have emerged had an interview
not taken place. Yet it sometimes becomes clear that an action
researcher can become something of an 'outsider' simply by
collecting data. In this sense knowledge is power and the
knowledge is held by the researcher. It is likely that the action
researcher will balance uncomfortably between the insider and
outsider positions during the course of her project.
While the research is taking place it is not unusual for an action
researcher to have a 'critical friend', i.e. someone who is often an
academic and who acts as a sounding board for discussion,
comments upon conclusions that might be drawn and/or action
about to be taken. Those engaging in AR are expected to collect
data more formally than classroom teachers would normally . This
implies an understanding of the methodologies of data gathering another role the critical friend might play. In general, the task of
the critical friend is to support the work of the action researcher
without taking over.

"Action Research is a form of self-reflective enquiry undertaken

by the participants [teachers, students or principals, for example]
in social [including educational] situations in order to improve the
rationality and justice of [a] their own social or educational
practices, [b] their understanding of these practices, and [c] the
situations [and institutions] in which these practices are carried
out."
Not all action researchers agree with this definition. There is
widespread agreement that the participants undertake the
research themselves. There is less agreement about the use of the
terms 'rationality and justice' and about [c]. It is [c] which opens
up the 'big' questions which have a tendency to divert research
away from the work place and from the developmental
possibilities as it did with the teachers I described above. One
solution might be that action researchers should look at the 'big'
questions and at their workplace. It has to be said that the central
focus in AR is on improving practice.

Figure 1, below, illustrates that AR is not only about research but

about action too. For recruits to AR, the very thought of carrying
out a formal interview can seem daunting. Taking action can be
more frightening still and even act as a bar to trying AR at all. We
might call the teacher starting out on AR as an enquiring teacher
who does the research part of AR but puts the action part on hold.
It has been argued that attempts to 'educate' without paying
attention to action is not education at all. Readers will find that it
maybe easier to begin acting in a small way in, say, your own
classroom. More ambitious action may affect others or call upon
others to make decisions about their own action. In this case it is
important that these people have some stake and/or say in both
the research and the action that follows. More will be said about
this below.

Professor John Elliott, (at the time of writing) Dean of the School
of Education at UEA, and a very influential figure, has defined AR
as:

Figure 1 adapted from Somekh in McBride [1989].

We can now consider each of these steps to see what each
entails.

"the study of a social situation with a view to improving the

quality of action within it." [Elliott, 1982]
Bridget Somekh [in McBride, 1989] has built upon this definition
to derive a more inclusive one. She sees AR as:

C. IDENTIFYING A FOCUS OF INTEREST OR A PROBLEM [step 1]

B. DOING ACTION RESEARCH - THE PROCESS

For those new to AR this step can be the most difficult. It is likely
that you will have to go through a period of reflection about your
own practice or maybe even observe a colleague at work.

Some teachers may have a child that they feel they would like to
understand better; there maybe an area where you think you are
failing; or a part of the curriculum which feels inadequate; a topic
about which you would like to know more; a topic which could
add something to your teaching and so on.
Other professionals say in business, or the caring professions
generally, may be concerned about the quality of decision maing
in a particular department or team. There may be concerns about
communication structures, particularly in multi-professional
agencies, between agencies and between geographically
dispersed sites. Doubts may be expressed concerning
management structures, the distributions of responsibilities and
duties leading to the possibility of role conflict and role strain.
There may be suspicions that quality assurance procedures are
inadequate or consultative procedures too narrow in focus. And
so on.

something, one has to observe more closely, and collect more

data. So,
follow your own natural curiosities and interests, making a note of
them as they arise. Eventually, you will be able to refine your
research question(s), or choose which course of research will be
the most rewarding for you.
share your interests and curiosities with others. This is a good way
of refining ideas. It also encourages a community approach to
action research.
We might advise you, then, to 'immerse' yourself in the situation,
if you are not already. Once the guiding curiosities and interests
are made sufficiently explicit. It becomes easier to know what
data to collect and how. You may decide, for example:
to create a portrait of 'everyday life in ....'

We all, to some extent, relish the comfort of what we are used to

and concluding that part of our work is not as good as it might be
can create discomfort. One ploy for getting into posing some
problems is to discuss your work with your colleagues and clients.
A colleague may be prepared to run a critical eye over activities.
Whether you try these steps or some others, you will have to
think imaginatively. The first steps towards making changes are
the worst and if you concentrate too much on the finer details
you will rarely find any incentive to do anything at all. Talk
yourself up and be perepared to fly by the seat of your pants a
little. This is not to suggest that should be reckless rather that you
should override the fears you might have and be prepared to sort
out difficulties only if they arise. Many problems do not actually
arise and when they do you can soon solve many of them. More
often than not, you will find your colleagues remarkably resilient.
Another alternative is to do nothing.

to answer a specific question such as,

'What kinds of things do children talk about when they work
together?'
'What kinds of things do project teams talk about when they work
together?'
'What kinds of things do nurses talk about when they work
together?'
and so on

Of course to write all of this is a little risky. But in our experience

change and improvement only comes about when people take
risks. It is also our experience that as the AR process is worked
through action researchers do not look back. Rather they develop
a confidence about their study and, more generally, adopt a
resourceful and flexible approach to their practice. In short they
are empowered and independent.

to make a case study of a particular individual or group in order

say, to gain insights into their personal agendas for life/work/play

D. COLLECTING DATA AND MAKING REPRESENTATIONS [step 2]

In a sense problem [or interest] posing is, or can be, a first step in
collecting dat a but the reader might feel that this step is more of
a starting point. It may be added that a supportive colleague or
'buddy' in your place of work can be a great help in data
collecting, as in other steps in process.
Let us first clarify what data is. Data can take any form. It can be:
documents produced in the ordinary course of affairs:
in running a school or classroom, e.g., pupil work, registers, wall
charts, pupil files/records, notes from parents, lesson plans/notes,
school brochures, policy statements etc.
in running a business, e.g., memos, minutes of meetings, project
plans, budgets, documentation relating to product campaigns,
specifications of roles and relationships, mission statements
in running a hospital, ward, general practice, e.g., care plans,
client files, memos, registers, rostas, noticeboard leaflets etc
photographs, of say, graffiti, wall pictures, professional/client
interaction, blackboard etc.
self-report diaries (this provides evidence of how the professional
or client reported some event, rather than of the event itself.
Such a report has to be set alongside other sources of data)
video and audio
memories
Each of these have their associated strengths and weaknesses.
Consequently, researchers do not simply depend upon one kind of
data but try to obtain as great a variety as the situation will allow.
There are no hard and fast rules about how to collect data, but
there are some guidelines which can be borne in mind. Although
'having an open mind' in the collection of data may seem to be
some sort of 'objective' ideal, it is hardly possible. Every
researcher is interested, or curious about something - otherwise
why research? It is this curiosity through which questions are
formed, and patterns are identified. In order to know more about

to improve practice,
does work scheme 'x' improve reading better than work scheme
'y'; or, does teaching style 'x' help pupils' to do 'y'?
does management style 'x' improve employee/employer
relationships better than management style 'y'?
does interview strategy 'x' improve professional/client
relationships better than strategy 'y'?

to increase critical insights into the social, personal and

educational significance of schooling, business, or health and
welfare organisations
The questions that have led you to carry out the research will
guide you in becoming selective about what to record. For
example, if you want to answer question two, you will exclude
from your attention much of the 'irrelevant' descriptive material
that would be necessary if you were answering question one. You
would exclude anything that did not relate to 'children talking
when at work'; that is, you would exclude things like teachers
talking to each other, pupils talking when not in work situations,
and so on.
What ever data you collect in the pursuit of your research focus
will become part of your data base.
However, there is a danger in the collection of data that a
researcher needs to recognise. It is simply that the very interests
that led you to do the research may mislead you, may bias your
findings in ways that are very subtle and hard to recognise.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO SUBJECT YOUR OWN INTERESTS AND VALUES
TO CONTINUAL CRITIQUE.
Qualitative researchers, particularly those influenced by
phenomenology, are aware of the need to suspend their own
taken for granted values, interests and beliefs. No one can do
research with an 'open mind', or clear of prejudice. That is not
what is being asked for here. What is being asked for is the
recognition that we all operate in everyday life with taken for
granted beliefs about the world. What is taken for granted as real,
true, holy and common sense in one culture and sub-culture will
not be considered to be so in others. Research is largely about
uncovering our own prejudices. As such it can be very
threatening.
It is important that we be on guard to discriminate between
judgements about 'data', interpretations of 'data', summaries of
'data' and 'data'. At a philosophical level it can be argued that all
data is a form of judgement. Qualitative sociologists continually
investigate the 'social construction' of 'data'. It is difficult to
maintain the argument that some things are'facts' and are not
socially constructed. For example, it can be said that a 'tree' is a
'fact' of nature. However, the concepts of 'tree' and 'nature' are

not quite the same in mythological systems of thought as distinct

from the systems of thought constructed by current scientific
practices. Each concept takes its meaning within a given context
of thought and practice; and these contexts can differ over time
and between speakers. In this way the concepts are socially
constructed by the speakers and practitioners within the context
of their use.
A scientists may give priority to the scientif definitions of tree and
nature. However, does this mean to say that the mythological
definitions are 'wrong', 'inferior'? Our answers to this question
can reveal our prejudices. The qualitative researcher will suspend
judgement at this point and will inquire into the different kinds of
meanings and practices associated with each context. If a
judgement is to be made it will be made at the end of the
research not at the point of data collection. This judgement, if it is
made, will be accompanied by a rationale in defence of the
judgement, based upon the data as an evidence base. For this
reason it is very important that prejudices are not built into the
data base itself otherwise the data-base will be biased and the
findings falisified. The data base must be a fair or unbiased
representation of the case itself. Thus the principles and
procedures adopted by the researcher to do this must be made
clear.
In developing the data base from which to make a representation
you will be involved primarily in: observation, interviewing and
the collection of documents and artifacts. These three will be
briefly outlined in turn.
1. Observation
Observation is more than just looking and seeing. The task of
observation is to be able to represent a social scene in a way
which is recognisable to the actors involved, is considered valid
and a true representation of their action. The problem here is the
issue of what is meant by valid and true. It is a truism that
different people make different judgements upon what they see.
Observation cannot be separated from the different meanings
that actors place upon their action, the actions of others, the
'stage' upon which they act and the 'props' they use. Thus, in
making a representative description of observable characters,
events, 'stages' and 'props', it is important to subject that
description in some way to the interpretations of the actors
involved. This can be done, for example, by:
allowing the actors to read the representation,
seeking occasions when one's understanding of the meaning of a
situation can be tested say by asking actors if the interpretation or
understanding is 'correct'.
engaging actors in reflection upon a recording and asking for their
interpretations of it, e.g., re-playing a video recording to pupils
By carrying out such 'tests' on a frequent basis, the researcher can
ensure that his or her understandings of what is being observed
do not differ significantly from those of the actors. However,
rather than one interpretation, the researcher will collect many
interpretations of a given observation, particularly when what is
being observed involves an 'us' and 'them' situation. Thus,
observation goes hand in hand with interviewing.
2. Interviewing
Much of your data will probably be collected by interview. The
interview is a record of the other's voice. The voice is something
very personal. When I speak, it is my voice and not someone
else's, my words, expressing my feelings, my point of view.
However, to what extent is this actually true?
How much of what I believe or know to be true is actually
something that is second or third hand, bequeathed to me by
television, parents or a school teacher? How much of what I speak
is actually derived from the voices of others, powerful others,
those who were significant in my life? Anyway, does my poor little
voice actually count in this world? Many people feel they do not
have a voice in their own organisation, family or life in general.
Interviewing involves wrestling with questions and issues like
these. In representing the voices of others am I not also
committing the same kind of theft of their voice by replacing it
with my own. What am I doing when I speak on behalf of
another? when I represent their voices? Am I not really
contributing to the social construction of their silence, their
voicelessness in society? How can I create a data record that truly

represents the voices of others without censorship, without

reinforcing the structures of power which continually deny a
means of expression to their voices?
For this reason, questionnaires are not a good strategy to uncover
the voices of participants. Questionnaires, in their search for
'objectivity' are pre-structured according to an agenda of interests
closer to that of the researcher than the researched. Thus, if you
are working in your own place of work it is probably not a good
idea to be tempted to pass around questionnaires. Some people,
doing AR for the first time, have been known to use
questionnaires on their colleagues because they do not have the
courage to carry out interviews. Resist the temptation. There is
barely a better starting point than conducting an interview in
order to identify the agenda of others. You might decide to use a
questionnaire if you want to talk to a large number of people at a
later stage to get a broad picture or to find out how widespread
your conclusions apply. Bear in mind the issues associated with
quantification [covered in chapter 2], and be careful about
generalising.
Remembering the need for 'immersion' and the value of an early
interview, start collecting data early on. Steps 1 and 2 as outlined
here, should not be considered as necessarily distinct. When you
begin you may feel that you have a poor grasp of the area you are
studying but this should not prevent you conducting an open
ended interview in which you may say little a learn a great deal.
Often we are asked how many interviews a researcher should
carry out. There is no simple answer to this question. We could
say that you need to carry out as many interviews as you need to
in order to clarify or establish one case or another. You will
probably find that in a remarkably short period you will have a
substantial volume of data and this may begin to frighten you.
Indeed, too much data can become very difficult to make sense
of. Try and collect data from the various viewpoints that there
appears to be and then have a pause and try and make sense of
what you have. You can then decide in which direction your study
might go. You might wish to reinterview some people or change
the focus completely. As you acquire a sense of what is happening
you may well be able to categorise data as you collect it, into
'important', 'peripheral', 'not sure' or whatever. In this way you
can keep a finger on the pulse of your study.
One classification of interviewing style regards it as resting on a
continuum between formal to informal. The most formal kind of
interviewing would be similar to the researcher reading a
questionnaire to the interviewee. The interviewer's task would be
to ensure a correct interpretation by the interviewee of the
interview schedule.
In a less formal interview the interviewer would have a list of
broad questions but would follow up 'interesting' issues raised by
the interviewee in reponse to the questions. Informal interviews
try to engage the interviewee in 'conversations'. The intention is
to allow the interviewees to address their own agenda of
concerns and interests without imposition by the interviewer. The
interviewer may begin with a simple "Can you tell me something
about 'x'? Typically, the interviewee then makes the points
perceived as significant, tying them together in a way he or she
sees as 'rational'. Informal interviewing may take place under
formally agreed conditions; or, it may be simply a passing
conversation. In the latter case the researcher has to consider the
ethical questions associated with using this information.
[a] The 'rules' of informal interviewing
Informal interviewing is more an art form than a 'science'. There
are no hard and fast rules. However, there are possible problems
that the interviewer needs to be aware of:
imposing one's own agenda on the interviewee
closing down the interviewees options
giving opinions rather than asking questions
begging the question
failing to ask for concrete examples: the 'stories', anecdotes,
descriptive accounts
being threatening [e.g., adult v. child; teacher v. pupil]; thus the
necessity of engaging in threat reducing strategies, and trust
enhancing
talking too much

revealing one's interests in a way that the interviewee 'gives you

what you want to hear'.
using an audio recorder without consulting the interviewee
[b] Strategies for informal interviewing
Again there are no recipes. Everyone develops their own style
according to their personality. Acting out of character is easily
detected. Thus, it is best to learn by trial, error, discussion and
reflection what works and what does not. The following describe
a number of interviewing styles that we have seen colleagues
adopt.
[i] The provocative style. Some people have what may be called a
provocative style. It is almost an 'attack'. Its advantage is that it
gets to the central issues very quickly by provokes responses. It
can, however, also set up a distrust, a nervousness which closes
down the interviewees responses.
[ii] The 'I'm on your side' style. Here the interviewer dresses and
speaks to copy the image of the interviewee. This has the
advantage of establishing an initial favourable response. However,
an unconvincing interviewer may get 'found out'.
[iii] The 'laid back' style. The style is casual, 'cool', almost clumsy,
clearly no threat to anyone. It requires a certain attitude of mind
which is non-judgemental, does not indicate anger, or frustration
but always indicates an interest in whatever is being said, no
matter how boring or trivial or shocking. The danger is that the
interviewee does not treat the interviewer seriously. But that too
is its strength. It can lull the interviewee into making known what
otherwise would have remained hidden.
[iv] The social worker/encounter therapy style. In this style the
interviewer indicates 'that's interesting, tell me more'. This, can
lead the interviewee into simply giving the interviewer what he or
she wants [i.e., what is interesting]. It can also be unnerving - it
may prompt a feeling of being secretly psycho-analysed.
Nevertheless, it can build a trust. It provides an 'ever listening ear'
which is useful in that people like to talk, especially about
themselves.

other background objects which can either be functional or have

aesthetic or symbolic value] and tools of the day-to-day work of
the organisation. Each of these hold a meaning for the actors
which need to be discovered. In order to uncover the social
meaning of documents and artifacts questions such as the
following can be asked of oneself or of others to direct
observation and analysis:
how are the documents used?
on what occasions are they used?
in which places are they used?
who uses them?
are they used with others?
what typical patterns of behaviour, and/or rituals accompany
their use?
What kinds of things are said about them?
How do individuals and groups feel about them? How do they
judge them?
The researcher may also establish who wrote a document and
what they intended to achieve by writing it. By exploring wording,
illustration, examples used, general format and presentation,
anticipated audience from the writer's point of view, important
issues maybe established.
Remember to hoard and collect any paperwork which might be
relevant and a small note which can serve as a diary can produce
valuable data. Diaries have the added advantage of soon
becoming reflective, that is you will find yourself writing down
private thoughts which can be enormously illuminative about
your own understandings and biases. It is not unusual to find that
a diary will at least provide a useful record of your activities. At
best it will become a reflective account of your activities and a
major source of data.
As a diverse range of material begins to be collected - in the form
of audio or video tape recordings, diaries, documents etc - the
next major question is how to put it into an order which can be
easily accessed and to make sense of it all.
E. ANALYZING DATA AND GENERATING HYPOTHESES [step 3]

These styles are not so much agreed techniques of interviewing,

but rather caricatures of styles that can be seen in practice.
During interviews, it is sometimes helpful to test out
understandings, or developing ideas or analyses. Thus, an
interviewing may say, 'As I understand it at the moment I hear
you saying ........ ' and then summarises the understanding he or
she has of what the interviewee has been saying. Or, the
interviewer may say, 'One argument/view/issue I've heard from
other people is ....., What are your views?' In this way, ideas can
be tested out or 'triangulated'[see F, below], to see to what
extent they apply to other people.
It should also be borne in mind that an interview is not merely a
question of words but of discourse, that is, communication of a
broader kind than just words. Your dress does not have to be
formal but appropriate. In general I find myself trying to fit in in
some way. Often I find it useful to dress a little less formally than
the person I hope to interview though this is not always true. It is
sometimes useful to be 'less important' then the person you are
interviewing. If you come across as 'more important' you may find
the interviewee being a little overawed, restrained and not as
forthcoming as you might hope.
Immerse yourself into your study as soon as you can. You may
have to do some reading and some interviewing. But do whatever
needs to be done, especially the interviewing, sooner rather than
later. Interviewing requires some commitment from you. Get over
any embarrassment or fear you might have at an early point and
this usually means jumping in [but with sensitivity].
3. Documents and Artifacts
During the course of everyday action, documents and artifacts are
often made or used. Documents include not only the official
organisational papers/reports/brochures but also the more worka-day memos, workplans, and materials. Even more transitory are
the notes and instructions chalked onto the
blackboard/whiteboard/flipchart which can be recorded as
'documentary' evidence of the work of a committee, or
classroom. Then there are the artifacts [models, artwork,
craftwork etc] and other 'props' [e.g., furniture, pictures and

Just as C and D above need not be separate, you may feel that
step E is taking place while you are doing C and D. Note first of all
that generating hypotheses takes place some time after you have
begun to immerse yourself in your study. Central to your research
will be trying to discern new understandings about your practice
and other people are vital for this. Early hypotheses tend to lack
understanding and familiarity. What might be called 'mature
hypotheses' have a firmer basis. An example may help here.
One student set out to experiment with more participative
classroom techniques. She had just returned to work after
bringing up two children and, having had the opportunity to
contemplate, she thought she would try what she had lacked the
confidence to do before. Before long she found that while her
classes were beginning to appreciate the new approach her major
difficulty was the teacher in the class next door who was unhappy
about children walking down the corridor during lessons on their
way to the library and other places. Comments were being passed
in the staffroom. Gradually the teacher's study became concerned
not only with changing her own classroom but making these
changes with the opposition of her colleague. Change in the
school became as important as change in her class. The original
hypothesis grew into a more relevant mature hypothesis.
Making sense of data is partly a matter of intuition and partly a
matter of being systematic. The intuitive part is about seeing
themes, patterns, make guesses, make arguments, ask further
questions about the data. In this respect you may find that being
familiar with the literature may help you decide what are the
important themes, though you will need to test out your own
ideas too. As patterns, arguments and questions arise the data
begins to be transformed from a pile of notes, transcripts,
documents and other recordings into 'evidence'
However, you do not have to wait for the inspired hunch or flash
of genius. Much of the work of making sense of data requires a
systematic ordering of data. This is largely a process of analysis
which can be broken down into a remarkably simple set of
routines:

label the individual documents, transcripts, etc. Commonsensical

labels work best: name of person interviewed or observed, date,
title(s) of event(s) watched.
number pages, paragraphs and any other obvious sub-unit of the
transcript or document.
index the various documents, transcripts etc. So for example, if
you wanted to know where the themes of 'control', or
'democratic values' or 'gender issues' or 'attitudes to work' and so
on had been expressed in the data files you would be referred to
all the places in the records where any particular theme had
cropped up: e.g., 'control' is mentioned in interviews file A, page 3
section 2, page 15 section 7, and so on.
continually ask the question, what is this data of? So, for example,
the note found in an obnservational record 'the client entered the
room with a sad expression on his face ....' is not data about the
state of mind of the client but is data concerning a judgement
made by the observer i.e., that the expression was one of
sadness. Similarly, in an interview if the interviewee says 'Jo is a
schizophrenic', this is not data bout Jo, but data about the
categorisation system used by the interviewee.
If you store data upon a computer, there is an added bonus. Most
wordprocessors will have a 'search' and 'find' facility. This can be
used as a simple way of organizing data. By placing key words at
the head of sections, the computer can be made to find these one
after another, thus helping to quickly trace important passages.
For example:
Interview with a Houseteacher
*discipline*
*building relationships*
*trust*
*being an individual*
*institutional roles*
as a house master I'm expected to discipline kids who have
misbehaved for other people ... and whom I might be getting on
very well with ... apart from that. Now I have got to try and build a
relationship which allows that situation to exist. I've got to try and
... kinds have got to understand - I try and teach kids that it's my,
part of my job sometimes to be nasty to them even though
they've not done anything personally to me. Um, and in that
sense they've got to identify me with the institution. And when
they hurt the institution they hurt me kind of situation. Having
said that, I also personally want them to see me ... as somebody
that they can trust and somebody that they can uh have
relationship with as a person, as an individual. I don't want to be
just part of the institution.
By instructing the computer to find the key word *trust* it will go
to all sections, one after another, which have been labeled with
the stars in this way. Thus it will not go to every single instance of
the non-asterisked 'trust'. With more sophisticated data handling
programmes such as hypertext, or hypercard, this process can be
made very much more sophisticated.
While you are organising your data it is likely that you will find
yourself deep in thought during odd moments, thinking about
interviews or something said in your class. In short, you will have
begun to analyse your data. If you have audio or video tapes, go
through them without necessarily transcribing at first. Get a feel
for them. If you have notes read them.Begin to tidy up your notes
and use a highlighter pen to pick out the parts you believe are
important. Do the same with documents and papers.
Gradually you will become aware of themes which begin to be
emerging. By this is meant several teachers may allude to, say, the
behaviour of a certain class or the learning of a group of children
or the actions of the headteacher. These then become themes
that you will pay special attention to. You may find yourself
progressively focussing upon them while, of course, not ignoring
other matters. As you go further you might see relationships
between the themes. You will have to be careful that the
relationships you see are not merely through your own eyes and
biases. A second round of interviews maybe needed to ascertain
that you are not misrepresenting those you have interviewed.
During the course of your study, the relationships which cement
your themes together will become your theories.

Take great care. It is neither essential nor good practice to create

theories which are not accurate. Data used to support a theory
should come from a range of sources, that is, it should be
triangulated. Data used in this way is called evidence. Remember
too, that it is not unusual for some data to be 'left over' as it were.
In other words it may not fit neatly into a theory. This data should
not automatically be discarded. It could be the most important
data of all. You will have to judge, in association with your
respondents. You will probably find out that people make their
decisions according to slightly different logics and what is rational
to you may not be to them and vice-versa.
F. PLANNING ACTION STEPS [step 4]
A common notion in all of qualitative research is that if the
planning of action is rooted in the data collected from those who
have to take action, there will be a good chance that the action
will actually take place. If you are doing AR in your own classroom
there are a number of temptations. One is to do nothing and
nobody else will know. This route, in my experience is rarely
taken. Action researchers are often, by this stage, heavily involved
in their work and cannot wait to try something. The questions
then are whether to try and make great or small changes or,
possibly, the action researcher will have a half hearted attempt.
Ultimately the sorts of changes that come about will depend upon
the people and the issues that are involved and the on-theground judgement of the researcher will be a major factor of
determining what happens.
When AR includes other people the decisions that have to be
made are quite different. The importance of the first line of this
section may well then be apparent. If you are trying to assess
children differently as a department, for example, you may need
to have several meetings. You may find it helpful to have
representatives from other departments at your meetings so they
can see what you are doing. Members of the Senior Management
Team may have a role to play. I have known a small minority in a
group who do not want to alter their practice. It is usually better
to leave them alone than antagonise them. If the changes you
plan work well, they may fall in at a later stage.
While we are formulating and planning the process of building
theory is also going on. It is a many layered process. The issue of
theory was alluded to in the previous section [D] and part 1,
'Building Theory', which follows, could just as easily have been
included in D. But to demonstrate that it is ongoing, it is included
here.
1. Building Theory
A theory is an explanation which links together elements of the
data that you have collected. We all have and also make theories
about the world all the time. Research allows us the chance to
develop and then to test some of these theories in practice. If a
teacher says "little Billy is just plain naughty' as a reason for bad
behaviour, this can be tested out by examining the contexts in
which Billy acts. We may find that he is always labeled naughty in
some, sometimes naughty in others and never naughty
elsewhere. This would be enough to suggest that the 'plain
naughty' theory is at least insufficient and perhaps is wrong.
Perhaps, the new theory, depending upon evidence would be
'Little Billy tends to be labeled naughty in excessively
authoritarian situations', or alternatively, 'in insecure situations'.
Such a reformulation no longer postulates the problem as residing
in 'little Billy' but in an interaction between 'little Billy and certain
social structures'. Furthermore, as repeatedly pointed out, to
label someone as naughty is data not about the person so labeled
but about the person who is doing the labelling. It is data bout the
system of labels employed by a professional in given contexts of
use.
Thus, one may go even further and begin to inquire into the
meaning of 'naughtiness'. We may find that teachers A, B, C and D
all have quite different definitions of 'naughtiness'. Or, we may
find that all teachers in the school have broadly similar
definitions, but the parents, social workers, and other social
groups do not. We would then be led again to the view that
whatever 'naughtiness' is, it is not an innate characteristic but is
rather something that is defined by particular people. That is, it is
socially constructed. It only exists when groups of people make it

exist by continually referring to certain behaviours or to certain

people as being 'naughty'.
Slowly, we are beginning to build a theory about naughtiness by
constantly referring to our evidence of what people say it is, and
what people do in different situations.
In building theories therefore we can ask ourselves such questions
as:
Do people who are in a similar social position (e.g. all teachers)
give the same kinds of explanations e.g., 'boys will be boys'?

[b] the second seeks to replace the existing way of doing things
with a different way of doing things.
The first occurs when through discussion members of a group are
convinced that their current practices are basically desirable but
that certain problems still need to be ironed out.
The second occurs when through discussion members of a group
become convinced that the current practices are less useful - or
even no longer defensible - in comparison with another way of
doing things identified through the research and observation
carried out.
In either case the proposal for action should include the following:

Do people who are in contrasting social positions give the same or

different kinds of explanation? E.g., do the working class and the
upper class explain wealth differences similarly or differently?
Do events observed in one context persist in order contexts? E.g.,
Sarah may be observed to be inarticulate when told to explain
things to a teacher. Is she also similarly inarticulate when she is
explaining equally difficult things to a friend in the playground? If
she is not then conjectures may be made about the different
social settings having an influence upon Sarah's competence to
explain things to others. If similar phenomena are found with
other girls then it is important to compare with groups of boys. It
is also important to take into consideration other factors such as
age, social class and so on. In this way a theory might be built
about behaviour in groups in relation to social context.
These comparisons and contrasts between individuals, groups,
and social contexts will begin to show what persists and what
changes over time and in different situations and with different
group composition. This process of constant contrast and
comparison is often referred to by the term theoretical sampling.
In this process we have begun to examine not only the beliefs of
others but also of ourselves. These beliefs and practices have
been challenged and perhaps changed by listening to and
observing a very much wider group of people than we would be
able to do in ordinary conversation and observation. The
principles outlined in the ethics section of this document have
ensured that we accord each person equal status and rights to
have a voice in the research. Typically, children have low status in
a group which contains adults. Research, by listening to children
seriously, can add a new and important dimension to the
classroom and to our understanding of the world of children, the
way they interpret and act upon their experiences of the
classroom.
Theory and action are inter-related in that we act, develop theory,
act and so on. When we build poor theory our actions often
produce outcomes that are different or even contrary to what we
expect. It is often said by scientists that there is nothing more
practical than a good theory. Insofar as theory is a basis for action
we have to develop it carefully and keep it constant review.
Social theory is often thought of as vague. However, the
behaviours of millions of people are routinely co-ordinated by
theoretical constructs everyday. Transport timetables, school
timetables, calenders, dances, polite exchanges between
strangers - all these in their different ways systematically coordinate the behaviour of people. We are very good and often
very precise in our techniques of behaviour co-ordination.
However, none of this is done in a mindless way. Unlike the
materials manipulated by chemists or engineers, people can
object to being manipulated, or can choose alternative actions.
The timetables that organize our lives in schools, businesses and
social life only work if we choose to make them work. Choice is
the key.
By identifying and generating alternatives, choices can be made
and action taken. The final major step in the process of action
research is to formulate action plans.
2. Action Plans
We can distinguish two broadly different kinds of action plan:
[a] the first seeks only to change the details of existing ways of
doing things; or, to solve certain problems in the execution of a
plan without changing the overall plan.

a statement of the aims of the proposed action,

a statement of the reasons for this action,
a statement of:
the new routines,
the new activities,
the new materials,
the new forms of group organisation,
the new concepts and philosophies which provide the rationale
for the changes
a statement of the means of monitoring changes,
a statement of the formative and evaluative changes. Formative
evaluation occurs throughout the period of the implementation
and can be used to provide feedback and so guide and shape the
action. Summative evaluation occurs at the end of the period of
implementation and provides a picture of the action project as a
whole so that people have a basis upon which to make decisions
about what has happened and what to do next.
a statement of the necessary resources, equipment, time .... etc.
By following guidelines such as these and adapting them to
specific purposes, action research can be a continuous process of
professional self and staff development.
As qualitative and indeed other forms of research have come to
stress action there has been a developing and increasingly
influential literature about change. Fullan [1982], Holt [1987],
Fullan and Stiegebauer [1991] and Fullan and Hargreaves [1992]
are some examples though the reader may be best advised to
read Changing the Curriculum by MacDonald and Walker [1974]
for a good theoretical basis. Even a cursory read of these pages
will suggest to the reader that our values suggest that change is
more likely to be a process than an event. More importantly it is
unlikely to be successful if teachers are told to implement
somebody else's design.
For us, change occurs following consultation and debate and
endeavours to incorporate the wishes of those involved. Of
course this is not always possible and can be arduous but not
always so. It is not necessary for managers, for example, to have
long drawn out, formal debates with their colleagues. Sometimes
a brief corridor word will suffice. People who work closely
together find ways of discussing their work without too many
formal meetings and develop an understanding for each others
preferences and views. In collegial institutions teachers and
others develop a culture which incorporates ways of
understanding and working with each other. In such institutions
chnage is decided by the body politic and while not everybody
accepts all changes most professionals can find a way through.
Dictatorial managers rarely have their fiats accepted in practice
though people may give them the impression that all is well by
being 'creatively compliant'. In qualitative research our focus is on
what actually happens rather than what appears to be the case.
G. IMPLEMENTING ACTION STEPS [step 5]
If you are working largely alone you are faced with the same sorts
of choices outlined in 4, above. When all is said and done
everything rests on a simple decision. "To do or not to do?" As I
have suggested above, there has to come a time when you have
to just go for it. This is the flying by the seat of your pants bit.
If you have colleagues involved, you will need to talk to each
other but ultimately, as above, change rests upon somebody
actually deciding to do something. There are often more reasons
for not doing than doing. And it is in the nature of things that all
change involves a risk. If you wait for no risk you will have a long
wait. If you have collected and analysed your data carefully and

attempted to ensure yourself that you have some people willing

to participate, you at least have a chance.
The leading action researcher , enabler or critical friend will need
to get colleagues to give accounts of what each is doing. We all
learn a great deal from simple stories. And these have to be
honest, warts and all. Those with doubts are often strengthened
by hearing about the failures of others. This is not necessarily a
question of being unkind but rather allowing others to realise that
they are not the only one who is finding the path a rocky one.
They can find fresh heart from commiserating with others, and
having the confidence to share their own failures. Of course it
does not have to be, and indeed, usually is not, a negative
business. It is wonderfully exciting when colleagues express what
they see to be success and show they have, then, the enthusiasm
to see a new round of possibilities before the current ones are
finished.
H. COLLECTING DATA TO MONITOR CHANGE, ANALYSING AND
EVALUATING [steps 6 & 7]
The first stage is to carry out what Elliott has called
'reconnaisance'. This involves the action researcher in first
describing the situation following the first action steps and then
beginning to explain the situation. Taking these actions implies
that the action researcher is now setting out on another stage of
the action research 'spiral'. Indeed the process is seen as a never
ending spiral which looks like a coil.
Yet there is a variation in this rather neat picture. Sometimes
during the course of carrying out action research the researcher
comes across a piece of data, or has a new thought or for some
other reason realises that there is a new and different perspective
upon all that has been done. In this case the entire new coil is
separate from the original. So, for example, an art teacher who
was exploring whether children draw better from pictures or
objects concluded that what was more important was the way she
taught and the children learned drawing. She also found that a
small group in her class could not and were not interested in
drawing at all and she was better off finding different art activities
for them to do. Having reconnoitred, the researcher may then be
in a position to form a more mature hypothesis or at least to
collect some data so that the study can proceed.

TYPES OF DIFFERENCES ON THE EARTHS

CES
HAVE DIFFERENT TYPES OF INTERACTION. FALLUJAH, IRAQ
GHANA MARKET

HEIGHT OF A PLACE. TORNADO MT. KILIMANJARO

TEGRATED
[BROKEN DOWN] ROCK AND HUMUS [ORGANIC MATERIAL- DEAD
POPULATION: NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN A PLACE.
ORGANIZATIONS: PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF MEMBER NATIONS.
EXAMPLES: UNITED NATIONS [UN]; AFRICAN UNION [AU];
ORGANIZATION OF PETROLEUM EXPORTING COUNTRIES [OPEC].
NATIONS OF THE WORLD. EXAMPLE: UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA; THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA; FEDERAL REPUBLIC
OF NIGERIA; GREAT SOCIALIST PEOPLES LIBYAN ARAB
JAMAHIRIYA.
IIWHY STUDY WORLD GEOGRAPHY?
you to
obtain a range of learning experiences and skills which make you
highly attractive to a wide range of future employers. The skills
practiced in geography are used by many professionals: urban and
regional planners, resource managers, attorneys, legislators,
business and political leaders, architects, marketing consultants
and engineers. It is an ideal stepping stone to a wide range of
careers.
IT IS A BROAD DIVERSE SUBJECT THAT ENCOMPASSES A WIDE
bject,
which may be classified as an art, science or social science.
Geography, as a discipline, is as diverse as the problems facing our
planet. From saving a forest to planning a downtown
development project, geographers are there.
STUDYING GEOGRAPHY PRO
Education is the most effective means that society possesses for
confronting the challenges of the future. In order to address the
environmental challenges society is currently faced with, people
are needed who can think broadly and understand the systems,
connections, and patterns of the physical and cultural world. We
desperately need people equipped with the analytical skills
necessary to rebuild neighborhoods, towns, and communities.
STUDYING GEOGRAPHY EXPANDSOUR KNOWLEDGE OF OUR

I. TO CONCLUDE
If you are feeling apprehensive, as many do, it is a good idea to
jump in early to feel the water. There are usually difficulties in
collecting data, and sometimes more substantial problems as you
analyse, collect more data, put forward your findings and so on.
Many practitioners return to study having not been on a long
course for a number of years. The greatest difficulties are, in our
experience, encountered by those who leave too much to the
later stages. You cannot progress very far without data, so go and
collect some.
ncient Origins & Basic Concepts of World Geography
Presentation Transcript
THE ANCIENT ORIGINS & BASIC CONCEPTS OF WORLD
GEOGRAPHY DR. DUKUZUMURENYI
IWHAT DOES GEOGRAPHY MEAN?WHY STUDY WORLD
GEOGRAPHY?
- THE
GREEK WORD FOR EARTH. 2. GRAPHIA- THE GREEK WORD FOR
- A NETWORK OF LINES CONNECTING POINTS. A
GRID SYSTEM.
THELOCATION OF A POINT ON AMAP OR ON THE
EARTHSSURFACE TO BE DESCRIBED INA WAY THAT IS
MEANINGFULAND UNIVERSALYUNDERSTOOD.
GRID SYSTEM
HE SCIENCE THAT STUDIES- THE
AREAL DIFFERENTIATION OF THE EARTHS SURFACE. *AREAL
DIFFERENTIATION- DIFFERENCES ON THE EARTHS SURFACE.+
VARIOUS APPEARANCES. DIFFERENT PLACES LOOK DIFFERENT.
SAHARA DESERT AMAZON RAIN FOREST
TYPES OF DIFFERENCES ON THE EARTHS
ORGANIZED DIFFERENTLY. NICARAGUAN VILLAGE MALI VILLAGE

cultures. You can develop the skills that will help you recognize
and make sense of the patterns, distributions, and interactions
between living things and their environment. Geographers often
study places by experiencing them first-hand. They use cutting
edge technology to study the landscapes and patterns that define
who we are and what we do.
IIITHE ANCIENT ORIGINS OF WORLD GEOGRAPHY
OLDEST RACE OF MEN DEVELOPED ALL OF THE SCIENCES,
INCLUDING GEOGRAPHY. HERODOTUS 484 B.C. - 432 B.C.
BLACK MEN AND WOMEN OF CLASSICAL KEMET [EGYPT] & TASETI [NUBIA: THE SUDAN]
OF CLASSICAL KEMET USED
GEOGRAPHY TO ALIGN THE GREAT PYRAMIDS WITH TRUE NORTH.
HOW TO MEASURE THE CIRCUMFERENCE OF THE EARTH, USING
LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE.
ENES [275
BC - 193 BC] WAS THE FIRST GREEK TO LEARN OF THE AFRICAN
METHOD FOR MEASURING THE EARTHS CIRCUMFERENCE.
ANCIENT ORIGINS
SHADOW ANGLE 360 = DEGREES IN CIRCLE D = DISTANCE FROM
EQUATOR. C = CIRCUMFERENCE
- MADE IN CONSTANTINOPLE IN
FREE OF ICE. EUROPEANS DID KNOW ABOUT ANTARTICA UNTIL
1818 AND THE INTERIOR OF ANTARTICA UNTIL 1958.
ES EXACT INFORMATION
ABOUT THE WESTERN COAST OF AFRICA, EASTERN COAST OF
BASED ON MUCH OLDER MAPS.
ADMIRAL PIRI REIS MAP
IVBASIC CONCEPTS OFWORLD GEOGRAPHY
1.FIVE THEMES OF WORLD GEOGRAPHY

DIFFICULT OR EASY IS IT TO OVERCOME TIME OR SPACE

SEPARATION.
TANGIBLE AND INTANGIBLE WAYS PLACES ARE CONNECTED.
REGION: ONEESSENTIAL UNIFORMITY INONE
OR A LIMITED NUMBEROF RELATED PHYSICAL ORCULTURAL
FEATURES.
SYSTEM, WHOSE PARTS ARE INTERCONNECTED. HAS A CORE
AREA SURROUNDED BY TOTAL SUBORDINATE
PERCEPTUAL]
INTO WHICH GEOGRPAHERS DIVIDE THE WORLD. DEFINED IN
TERMS OF A COMPOSITE OF ITS LEADING CULTURAL, ECONOMIC,
HISTORICAL, POLITICAL AND APPROPRIATE ENVIRONMENTAL
FEATURES.
AMERICA

2.GEOGRAPHIC PERSPECTIVES
CREATE SPATIAL PATTERNS, WHICH ARE PATTERNS IN THE SPACES
INHABITED BY HUMANS, OR A SPATIAL SYSTEM.
ELEMENTS.
PARTICULAR TIME.
SOCIETIESPRODUCE ANDEXCHANGE
RESOURCESTO MEET THE NEEDS OFITS PEOPLE.
REALITY.
3.BRANCHES OF WORLD GEOGRAPHY
EARTHSENVIRONMENT: PROPERTIESOF LAND, WATER,
AIR,PLANTS AND ANIMALS, THEIRDISTRIBUTION
ANDINTERRELATIONS.
ANDTHEIR ENVIRONMENT.ANALYZES THE SPATIALVARIATIONS OF
MATERIALTRAITS, SUCH AS HOUSETYPES AND SPIRITUALSYSTEMS.
[NATIONS OR STATES], THEIR RESOURCES AN EXTENT, AND THE
REASONS FOR THE GEOGRAPHICAL FORMS WHICH THEY ASSUME.
MAN [ANTHROPOLOGY: THE STUDY OF MAN] DEALS WITH MAN
IN HIS GEOGRAPHIC ASPECTS, SUCH AS HIS LOCATION, REGION,
ENVIRONMENTAL INTERACTION, MOVEMENT, SOCIETY.
THEGEOGRAPHY OF THEPAST.
WITH CITIES, AND TOWNS AND THE GROWTH ASSOCIATED WITH
URBANIZATION, WHICH IS THE GROWTH OF CITIES AS A RESULT
OF RURAL MIGRATIONS TO CITIES.
OFMAPS USING MATHEMATICS,STATISTICS ANDCOMPUTERS.
4.RELATED FIELDS OF STUDY
DEDUCTION OF THE PROPERTIES, MEASURMENT AND
RELATIONSHIP OF POINTS, LINES, ANGLES AND FIGURES IN SPACE
FROM THEIR DEFINING CONDITIONALS BY MEANS OF CERTAIN
ASSUMED PROPERTIES OF SPACE.
MEASUREMENT OF THE SHAPE OF AN AREA AND DISTANCES
BETWEEN LARGE TRACTS OF LAND, THE EXACT POSITION OF
GEOGRAPHICAL POINTS, AND THE CURVATURE, SHAPE AND
DIMENSION OF THE EARTH.
5.CONCEPTS
ON A MAP AND THE ACTUAL SIZE OF THE MAPPED AREA ON THE
EARTHS SURFACE.
OCCURING INSTRUCTURED ANDCOMPREHENSIBLE WAYS.
LINEAR DISTANCE PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE TIME DISTANCE.
NCEDECAY:DECREASE
IN INTERACTIONAS DISTANCE INCREASES.

IDEA.
TERRITORIAL OCCURRENCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL, HUMAN, OR
ORGANIZATIONAL FEATURES SELECTED FOR STUDY.