The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 20:3 (2011), pp.

421-437

Teachers Professional Development:

Investigating Teachers Learning to Do Action
Research in a Professional Learning Community
Chiou-hui Chou
National Hsinchu University of Education, Taiwan
joyce@mail.nhcue.edu.tw

This paper investigates a group of in-service elementary English teachers learning to do action research when
they were involved in a professional learning community. It explores to what extent action research is an effective
approach in relation to teachers professional development, and how a teachers learning community can
contribute to teachers development. The research data includes interviews with each teacher, teachers reflective
journal, discussion data from this research group, and teachers action research papers. Data were collected
over two semesters. The study validates teachers action research as a way to assist teachers in understanding
their practice and improving student achievement, and finds that a professional learning community serves
as an effective platform for teachers to exchange knowledge, to interact, and to learn from one another based
on their practices. The results of this study fill the gap in research that discusses the outcomes of teachers
endeavors on teaching practice and student learning.
Keywords: action research, EFL elementary teacher, professional development, professional learning
community

Over the past few decades, action research has

been a trend for teachers professional development in
teacher education. Recent professional development
activities have emphasized involving teachers in
identifying problems and questions, thinking about and
discussing their work, gathering data, and using what
they have learned from their teaching to inform their
practice (Darling-Hammond, 2006; Mertler, 2006). In
teachers own research, it is the teachers themselves
who investigate their own practice, becoming both
subjects and objects of the research process (Garcia
& Roblin, 2008). Action research researchers and
educators have written a lot to encourage practitioners
to follow this line of inquiry for their professional
development (Burns, 1999; Cochran-Smith & Lytle,
1999; Darling-Hammond, 2006; Johnson, 2005; McNiff
& Whitehead, 2006; Mertler, 2006; Stringer, 2007).
However, there is a growing call for more
collaboration among teachers in order to stimulate

teacher learning (Hargreaves, 1997; King & Newmann,

2000; Marsick & Watkins, 1999). The reasoning
behind this call for collaboration is that feedback,
new information and ideas do not only spring from
individual learning, but to a large extent also from
dialogue and interaction with other people. Moreover,
collaboration is assumed to create a learning culture
and to help build a community in which further learning
is supported and stimulated. Thus, more recently,
researchers have stepped further to promote the notion
of collaborative learning communities as imperative
for the success of teacher inquiry (Crockett, 2002;
Dana & Yendol-Silva, 2003; Snow-Gerono, 2005;
Vescio, Ross, & Adams, 2008). Recommendations
for professional development have shifted to focus
attention on creating local communities that
promote the practice of shared inquiry grounded
in teachers work (Crockett, 2002, p. 609). These
contemporary beliefs are giving rise to forming site-

Copyright 2011 De La Salle University, Philippines

422

THE ASIA-PACIFIC EDUCATION RESEARCHER

based professional development communities. The

goal of this type of research is to utilize the expertise
of the collaborators and to foster sustained dialogue
among educational stakeholders in different settings
(Hendricks, 2006).
Despite the growing trend for teacher learning
communities, only recently has the focus of this
literature shifted to empirically examining the
changes in teachers practices and students learning
as a result of professional learning communities
(Vescio et al., 2008, p. 81). Moreover, as Vescio et al.
(2008) points out, though teachers perceptions about
the value of professional learning communities are
both valid and valuable, understanding the outcomes
of these endeavors on teaching practice and student
learning is crucial, particularly in todays era of scarce
resources and accountability (p. 81). With this in
mind, the researcher hopes the study will contribute to
filling the gap in the current literature and contribute
empirical data to the discussion about how participants
go through their inquiry processes in a professional
learning community, how they learn within this
community, and how their students learning outcomes
are achieved.
This paper describes and analyzes the professional
development of a group of in-service elementary
English teachers, involved in a professional learning
community initiated by the researcher. It was first
based on the methodological principles of action
research (McNiff & Whitehead, 2006; Stringer,
2007) and then it followed the educational trends of
professional learning communities in which teachers
collaboratively conducted research within their local
community (Burns, 2005; Dana & Yendol-Silva, 2003;
Snow-Gerono, 2005; Vescio et al., 2008). The aim
of this study is first to explore to what extent action
research is an effective approach in relation to teachers
professional development, and how a teachers learning
community can contribute to teachers development.
To date, perceptions of teachers learning communities
for development are often reported. It is likely there are
important supporting conditions for the communities
to be successful. Seldom has the literature discussed
the function of a teachers learning community. This
study is to extend the research on teachers action
research and professional learning communities by
providing perspectives on how to help novice action
researchers go through their research journey and how
a collaborative learning community can have great
potential for bringing about improvements in teaching
and learning. Indeed, there is a need for research

VOL. 20 NO. 3

that examines the supporting conditions that enable

learning communities to succeed; therefore, this issue
will also be examined in this paper.
Literature Review
Action Research
According to McNiff and Whitehead (2006), action
research is a form of enquiry that enables practitioners
everywhere to investigate and evaluate their work
(p. 7). It is referred to as research that teachers do to
investigate their own professional practice in an attempt
to understand and improve the nature and specifics of
their work. This type of research allows practitioners
to take the lead in improving and better understanding
their working with students. Since Stenhouse (1981),
extensive research in the US, UK, Australia, and other
parts of the world has made teacher action research
a valuable form of professional development (Burns,
1999; Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999; McNiff &
Whitehead, 2006; Mertler, 2006; Poon, 2008; Stringer,
2007; Wallace, 1998). Teacher educators who are
involved in doing action research with teachers find
that teachers become more reflective, critical, and
analytical about their own teaching behaviors in the
classroom (Darling-Hammond, 2006; Shank, 2006;
Snow-Gerono, 2005; Stark, 2006).
How do we inspire teachers to step into action
research? Kemmis and McTaggarts (1988) notable
action research framework is described as (1) Plan:
develop a plan for improvement, (2) Act: implement
the plan, (3) Observe: observe and document the
effects of the plan, and (4) Reflect: reflect on the
effects of the plan for further planning and informed
action. Their framework shows that the central goal
of action research is improvement of teaching practice
through systematic investigation. While talking about
action research for teachers professional development,
Gould (2008) indicates that the research topics must be
relevant and engaging to teachers. These are certainly
important topics and there is likelihood that such
research will have a direct and vast impact on teaching
and learning. For example, in the field of teaching
English, Wallace (1998) suggests the following possible
areas as a focus for action: classroom management,
appropriate materials, particular teaching areas such
as reading, oral skills, student behavior, achievement
and motivation, personal management issues such as
time management and relationships with colleagues/
higher management. To be more concrete, Preisman
(2007) also offers six steps and directions for teachers

Teachers Professional Development

to conduct action research. They are: (1) Determine

what you want to improve in your classroom or school,
(2) Research your idea, (3) Plan your study, (4) Put
your plan into action, (5) Examine the information you
collect, and (6) Decide what you will do with the new
knowledge of your educational practices.
The reviewed models serve as the framework for
the participants in this study to step into their own
action research. The main focus of action research is
the improvement of teachers classroom practice and
their empowerment. When teachers are enthusiastic in
their teaching, energized about their learning, and not
terrified of research, they can go on to find the answers
to the questions they have about their educational
practices. This study is intended to fulfill this goal.
Action Research and Professional Development
Why is action research important for in-service
teachers professional development? Effective
professional development should be understood as
a job-embedded commitment that teachers make in
order to further the purposes of the profession while
addressing their own particular needs (Diaz-Maggioli,
2004, p. 5). Johnson (2005) states that action research
can be the most efficient and effective way to address
the professional development of teachers (p. 44) as
it is a systematic observation of ones own teaching
practice and it allows teachers to connect education
theory and research to their classroom practice and
helps them to become more reflective and analytical
in their teaching practice. In this line of professional
development, teachers have the opportunity to select
a theory or strategy to explore, research their topic in
more depth, implement or practice new strategies, and
collect data on their performance and their students
performance to monitor the results of their efforts.
In addition, recent educational literature describes
effective teachers as being reflective and critical
practitioners. These qualities can be difficult to
develop by just attending a seminar or conference, thus
creating the need for a different approach to teachers
in-service training in which experiential, teacher
development is required. Growing evidence has
suggested that action research as a form of professional
development not only can make teachers feel better
about their practice, but also can generate learning
gains for students (Darling-Hammond, 1997). Mertler
and Charles (2005) thus provide some practical guides
for teachers who are still unclear about why they
should do action research: (1) Action research deals
with your problems, not someone elses. (2) Action

CHOU, C.

423

research is very timely; you can begin whenever you

are ready and obtain immediate results. (3) Action
research provides teachers with opportunities to better
understand, and therefore improve, their educational
practices. (4) As a process, action research can also
promote the building of stronger relationships among
colleagues. (5) Possibly most importantly, action
research provides teachers with alternative ways of
viewing and approaching educational questions and
problems and with new ways of examining their own
educational practices. Moreover, as Mertler (2006)
indicates, action research can be used successfully in
educational settings to effectively connect theory to
practice, to improve educational practice, to empower
teachers, and as a means for promoting professional
growths (p. 13). Recently, Preisman (2007), a teacher
educator teaching graduate research courses in the
US, wrote about her experience guiding and urging
her participants to conduct action research for their
professional development. She used a few concise
words to describe how action research is significant
in teachers lives, indicating that action research is
meaningful, friendly, and possible. She concludes that
conducting action research not only helps improve the
lives of the students, but also allows teachers to seize
control and effectuates change in personal and relevant
issues in schools and classrooms. Most importantly,
it offers teachers the opportunity to become a more
effective and influential educators. More recently, Poon
(2008), a teacher educator in Hong Kong, investigated
three EFL elementary English teachers professional
development through action research. She finds that
the teachers in her studies have benefited from the
action research in the aspects: enhancing knowledge
in English language teaching, boosting in confidence
and sense of satisfaction, improving teaching strategies
and techniques, and broadening their mind.
Although action research has been widely
discussed as an effective approach for professional
development around the world, there are still some
difficulties. Gould (2008) indicates, as teachers are
often overburdened with all kinds of professional
and personal obligations, thus time must be set aside
for teachers to talk, research, and write. Also, for
this type of professional development, principals and
administrators must carve out specific time for this
type of activity to occur. Thus, time and administrative
support are necessary for teachers professional
development to be effective (Darling-Hammond,
2005; Gould, 2008). In addition, as Gould (2008)
states, this type of professional development activity

424

THE ASIA-PACIFIC EDUCATION RESEARCHER

does not simply occur in a vacuum. Teachers must

be given the opportunity to put their perceptions of
theory of learning into practice. They must go through
the process to see the impacts on their teaching and
students learning; otherwise they will not believe
action research is genuinely useful for their profession
(Gould, 2008, p. 5).
In Taiwan, it was the educational reform, Grade
1-9 Curriculum mandated in 2001, that teachers
professional development has been a focus. In order
to keep up with the international trend for teachers
professional development, Grade 1-9 Curriculum
considers teachers action research as one important
criterion in their processional. It was also in this
new curriculum that English instruction (two hours
per week) was mandated for fifth and sixth graders;
later in 2003 for third graders above. Teachers have
to participate in lots of in-service teacher training
activities to meet the new demands over the years.
For many, implementing action research for their
professional development is still very new as teachers
usually chose to pursue successful goals in classrooms
first. Just as Ross-Fisher (2008) points out that research
is still regarded as not typically something that many
K-12 teachers think about as part of their regular
planning regimen (p. 160) and many teachers
are so focused on getting through each day that
the mere thought of trying to incorporate research
into their professional practice may seem daunting
and unrealistic (Ross-Fisher, 2008, p. 160). These
phenomena are very common in the educational
context in Taiwan. Therefore, how can researchers
and educators promote teachers action research for
teachers development in the context where action
research is still in its infancy remains a crucial issue.
There is still a need for educators and researches to
continue working in this line of research to explore
more and to make it a better research method for
teachers professional development. This study thus
hopes to provide its experience and offer suggestions
for more teachers to follow this line of research for
their professional development.
Teacher Learning Communities
According to Little (1993), a professional learning
community comprises of a group of people who
consider themselves to be engaged in the same
sort of work, who share with one another a set of
values, norms, and perspectives that apply to but
extend beyond work-related matters. Multiple
terms, including teacher study groups, teacher

VOL. 20 NO. 3

inquiry groups, teacher learning communities,

and teachers communities of practice are being
used to describe the concept of community as a
means toward teacher professional development and
education reform. Emerging evidence suggests that
these initiatives lead to effective and long-term teacher
development (Grossman, Wineburg, & Woolworth,
2001; Little, 2003). These structures encompass a
collaborative and inquiry-based approach that can
lead to pedagogy of investigation (Ball & Cohen,
1999). In addition, a collaborative inquiry community
can provide a decision-making and problem-solving
environment necessary to support long-term change
(Giles & Hargreaves, 2006). Thus, education reformers
have increasingly invested in developing small
collaborative communities with schools and districts
as a central strategy for improving teaching and student
learning. It is the expectation that small communities
will make it easier for teachers to share practices and
will encourage them to create a culture for sustained
instructional improvement, which will in turn enhance
student learning (Supovitz & Christman, 2005).
However, Supovitz and Christman (2005) in
their study of teacher communities in Cincinnati
and Philadelphia in the US find that simply creating
a community is not enough to change practice
significantly. As they state, districts and school leaders
must provide the communities with the necessary
structures, strategies, and support to help teachers
hone their instructional craft knowledge (p. 649).
In a supportive learning community, teachers can
collaborate and engage in dialogue with colleagues and
other professionals. This type of professional learning
community creates opportunities for dialogues which
also make it safe to ask questions and work in a
community where uncertainty is not only valued, but
supported (Little, 1993).
Little (1982) identified four kinds of teacher
interactions that are central to collegiality and
professional community. They are: (1) frequent
concrete and precise discussions about teaching and
learning, (2) frequent observation coupled with useful
feedback, (3) collaborative development and evaluation
of teaching materials, and (4) teachers teaching and
learning from one another (p. 331). Accordingly, in
order to better structure the communities, Supovitz
and Christman (2005) recommend the following steps
be taken by leaders who want to build communities of
instructional practice: focusing communities around
instruction, diversifying communities, supporting
communities, legitimizing communities, and creating

Teachers Professional Development

professional learning opportunities for communities.

As Wray (2007) reviews, in all versions of the
communities of practice model, teacher learning is
promoted because these communities offer the space
for discussions of the teaching contexts in which
teachers are working.
Based on the suggestions previously mentioned,
the researcher thus initiated a teachers professional
learning community to provide necessary structures,
strategies, and support to help teachers develop their
professional knowledge, improve their instruction, and
share their practice. It set out to investigate teachers
experiences of learning to do action research, the
effects of their participation in a professional learning
community, and their impacts on students learning.
Methodology
A qualitative approach is employed because
it offers the researcher an opportunity to explore
complex new areas of research in a way that brings
forth the perspectives of the research participants
themselves. Qualitative research has increasingly
been proving its worth in studying social phenomenon
(Patton, 1990). Furthermore, the qualitative paradigm
allows the researcher to find the meaning people have
constructed, that is, how they make sense of their
world, and the experiences they have in the world
(Merriam, 1998, p. 6).
Participants
The researcher started to recruit participants by
e-mailing and calling teachers who were participants in
in-service teacher training courses at the researchers
university and those teachers who were acquainted
with the researcher through her visits to schools for
English class observation and supervising or on other
occasions. In the phone conversations, the researcher
asked the participants if they would like to join a
research team to carry out their action research as a
venue for their professional development. In addition,
in the e-mail to the participants, the researcher attached
a research proposal to let them know about the
research process. Five elementary English teachers in
the researchers teaching community volunteered to
participate in the study. During the first few weeks of
research, one participant withdrew from the team as
it was difficult for him to coordinate with colleagues
and find class hours during which to conduct his
action research in the climate of his school. Another
participant withdrew in the period just before the
research group wrote up their individual action

CHOU, C.

425

research papers because her junior-high daughter

needed more parents care and attention, starting not
going to school. Therefore, data in this study came
from three participants, Janet, Paula, and Lilyall the
names used in this study are pseudonyms.
Janet graduated from the English department at a
normal university with an English teacher certificate
and she has 12 years of teaching experience. At the
time of the study, she was a third grade teacher in a
rural elementary school. The researcher came to know
her in a previous study while conducting focus group
interviews on professional development topics with
teachers in her teaching community. Paula graduated
from a teachers college with an English teacher
certificate. At the time of the study, she had been
teaching at her school for five years. She was teaching
sixth graders. The researcher came to know her while
visiting her school to observe English classes several
years prior to the current study. Also, she came to
the researchers in-service teacher-training course
during the summer of the current research project.
Lily graduated from a teachers college with an
English teacher certificate. She was teaching the first
graders while participating in this study. She had been
teaching for four years. The researcher came to know
her while she was taking in-service English teacher
training courses at the researchers university during
that the same summer that the researcher invited her
to participate in this study.
Study Context
After receiving responses from the teachers, the
researcher and the participants formed a research
community. The teachers were told they could choose
their own topic, and the researcher, as a university
educator, would guide them through the process. They
set up to meet twice a month, from 15:00 to 18:00 on
Wednesdays. Sometimes the meeting ended at 19:00
and once ended at 21:00 as they were discussing
presenting their research results at a conference.
While the agenda of these meetings varied to some
degree, they were more similar than dissimilar. The
agendas focused on topics that allowed teachers to
describe the research process they had undergone,
to share their video-taped clips of what had worked
successfully and what had not work successfully, to
tell their personal obstacles and triumphs during
their research processes, and to comment and offer
suggestions for one another.
Thus, during the meetings, the participants usually:
(a) talked about the things that they had done in their

426

THE ASIA-PACIFIC EDUCATION RESEARCHER

research process, (b) commented on their prepared

materials for sharing and discussion, (c) made
suggestions about the next step that teachers could
take, (d) stated the problems and challenges they
might encounter, and (e) reported what they planned
to do next week.
The guidelines are given because the researcher
envisions collaborative teacher inquiry as a cyclical
process that fosters an ongoing dialogue about
classroom practices and student achievement (Nelson
& Slavits, 2008). Following the guidelines, the
participants were told that in each inquiry cycle they
determined a focus for the inquiry, then proceeded
through stages of developing a plan for action, carried
out the plan while collecting and analyzing data, and
drew conclusion of their findings related to their
teaching situations.
Also, during the meeting, the research team
discussed about their research steps and processes,
what data to be collected, how to collect the data, and
how the data would be organized. The participants
research data include questionnaires containing Likertscale-type items for students to display their learning
attitudes towards their research strategies and openended questions, video-taped classroom observations,
and examination of student academic performance.
Each participant established a timeline for carrying
out their research. Setting these parameters helps them
to remain organized, focused, and on schedule. At the
end of the project, the participants then shared their
action research papers with the group.
Data Collection and Analysis
The data were collected over two semesters. They
were from interviews with each participant before,
during, and after the research, eight meeting sessions
of discussion, teachers reflective journals, teachers
video clips of teaching, and teachers action research
papers. Multiple sources of data were used. As
Patton (1990) points out, The use of a combination
of interviews, observations, and document analysis,
allows the fieldworker to use different data sources
to validate and cross-check findings (p. 244).
Marshall and Rossman (1989) also suggest that using
a combination of sources increases the credibility as
the strengths of one particular source may add to the
weakness of another source.
The interviews were audio recorded and then
transcribed. All the data were read and read again.
At that point, themes or categories began to emerge
from the data. Specific lines of text that supported or

VOL. 20 NO. 3

illuminated the categories were then identified. The

constant comparative method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985)
was employed to keep the themes tied closely to the
data. Finally, participants were given an opportunity
to review the results and provide feedback as to its
accuracy. The process of member checking is essential
in assuring that the researchers conclusion is an
accurate representation of the participants own reality
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
Findings
The findings illustrate how teachers have learned to
do action research and what teachers have gained from
participating in a professional learning community.
The following section portrayed some of the key
processes and benefits related to teachers participation
in this inquiry-based professional learning community,
which include teachers learning to do action research,
students learning results, and benefits of participating
in this learning community.
Stepping into Action Research: Framing the Right
Question
The first meeting was arranged for the participants
to get to know each other and to form a research group.
The researcher explained about the project and gave
a small talk about action research. Then, participants
were asked if they had any topic in mind to start.
Although they had been previously asked to think about
any ideas they had in mind, not all participants went in
the right direction of finding a research question at first.
Given the need of the teachers inquiry and support in
the study, the researcher and the teachers decided to
meet regularly to talk about their individual research
processes. Participants were told to formulate a plan for
carrying out their action research and then later they
could gain comments and revise their plans.
As a first step to action research, participants
reflected on their teaching from the prior few weeks
and from the previous semester. They then collected
their students work and their own teaching video clips
to find a research topic. The teachers typically selected
topics related to methods to improve students learning
in English. They then articulated their rationales
as to why they had selected their individual topics.
The following paragraphs describe the participants
topics.
Janet was the first person to find the right research
direction and she soon framed her research question.
She wanted to implement actions, following a Total
Physical Response (TPR) approach, while teaching

Teachers Professional Development

the alphabet and accompanying words to her first-year

English learning students. TPR is a language teaching
method built around the coordination of speech and
action; it attempts to teach language through physical
(motor) activity (Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p. 73).
She talked about how she collected data and framed
her research topic and questions during the previous
few weeks.
In my third week, I taught the two letters A and
B and their corresponding words, ant, ax, bag,
and bat. In week four, I taught C and D and the
corresponding words, cat, can, duck, and desk.
Later, when I showed the flashcard of ant and ask
students to say it, they forgot. I was surprised at
the response. In my teaching process, I have used
the flashcards to teach the words, called individual
students to practice, and done choral practice and
group practice. I started to think: Whats wrong
with my teaching? These students are new to
me. Did I need to ask their previous homeroom
teacher to know about their learning attitudes?
So I had a talk with last years homeroom teacher
and surveyed the students backgrounds. Later,
I found most of the students come from families
with different ethnic backgrounds of their parents,
families with aboriginal parents, and families with
low soci-economic. But I found they love PE class,
which inspired me to think incorporating TPR in
my teaching for first-time English learners. Thus, in
week five, I invented actions for each word and when
I taught a word, I did the action and asked students to
say the word and to do the action with me. Students
felt the learning process interesting and it did help
them to say the words when I cued the action. Then
I continued my strategy (meeting 1107).

Paula and Lily, however, had to clarify and narrow

down a topic for research over a couple of discussion
sessions. Paula was teaching sixth graders and their
English competence varied greatly. She wanted to
push the weak students to improve their English
speaking abilities and hoped they could concentrate on
learning during her teaching time in class. Thus, she
arranged students into six heterogeneous groups and
implemented strategies to motivate students to learn by
following the principles of cooperative learning. She
hoped that through group competition, students would
work together and strive to achieve their goals.
The following shows Paulas rationale for finding
her research direction. She wrote:
Before I came to meet the research team, I was
excited. In order to improve students English learning

CHOU, C.

427

interest and increase their achievements, I have read

a number of books on English instruction.As a
homeroom teacher of sixth graders, I plan to do a
lot of things to help the students to increase their
English competence before they leave my school
(Paulas first journal writing)

As the project went on, the researcher was afraid

that the participants were not proceeding towards the
right research direction and was eager to know their
topics and to see the process of their action research.
On the third meeting, Lily and Paula finally narrowed
down their topics. Lily was teaching first graders.
Some of her students came from families who could
not support the students learning at home. Thus, she
wanted to find strategies to help those few students to
keep up with learning at the pace of the majority of
the students. The method she chose was to implement
English songs and chants in her class so those students
who needed help could easily emerge into the English
learning environment. Lily said:
During the first meeting, I found my research topic
was too vague, but after listening to our group
members comments and discussing with the group
members, I finally found the focus and came out with
the right idea. I am happy that I quit some ideas and
narrow down to this topic (meeting 1107).

At the same meeting session, Paula talked about her
research topic, but she was still unable to find the right
research focus. After sharing and interacting with
peers and the research facilitator, she finally came
to a decision.It was through discussing, sharing, and
commenting that Paula finally chose to focus on one
area to conduct her research. Examining the above
data, the research facilitator first finds for these
novice action researchers, choosing an appropriate
topic and framing the right research question
was not an easy task. During the discussion,
the research facilitator did not want to interfere
too much in deciding the participants research
questions as she was hoping that the participants
would truly focus on their own teaching contexts
for their professional development. In addition,
the facilitator was observing if the participants
would pay attention to the necessary elements
when developing appropriate research questions:
the student population, the desired result, and
the specific strategy for achieving the end result
(Ross-Fisher, 2008). Moreover, the facilitator
was very aware that for teacher professional

428

THE ASIA-PACIFIC EDUCATION RESEARCHER

development truly to impact student learning, the

topic for teacher development should be relevant
and engaging to teachers and will have a direct and
vast impact on teaching and leaning (Gould, 2008,
p. 5). The facilitator was hoping Paula could think
deeper about her research. Later, it was Janet who
was the first participant to frame her research question
offered some help when Paula had difficulties in
determining her research focus. The facilitators
purpose of listening to peers discussion was for
them to think thoroughly about doing research for
themselves, not for the facilitator because no one
knows better than the teachers themselves about the
challenges they face (Gould, 2008). Although the
participants were wobbling in the research journey,
they had stepped into it to inquire into what would
work best for their students and to conduct inquiry
on the effects of their teaching and learning.
Learning Through Sharing and Discussing
It was a fruitful meeting when the participants
came with ample data for discussion and they reported
that they felt satisfied with their research process or
data collection. During the meeting sessions, each
teacher would present what they had accomplished
in the research process, show their own video clips
of teaching for the past two weeks, and then invite
suggestions and comments about their problems.
Through sharing teaching video clips and their ideas,
teachers existing knowledge was challenged, tacit
knowledge was exposed, and alternative ways of
knowing and understanding were revealed. This
then led to their new understanding of teaching and
learning. Janets writing in her journal summarizes
the above criteria:
I think the following are the benefits of doing
action research with a group: During meeting
sessions, our report on research processes and
teaching experiences helps our members clarify and
examine our work. Moreover, discussion, sharing,
questioning, commenting, and the professors advice
can inspire our group members more teaching ideas
and methods (Janets 21st journal writing).

The following section provides more examples

focusing on the above themes: challenging existing
knowledge, critically examining teaching practice,
and learning from others. Lily said:
After watching Janets teaching video, I was
impressed. Janet was very energetic and her teaching

VOL. 20 NO. 3
was very dynamic. Watching her teaching video, I
found I could learn from her. In my teaching, I have
to be very active in engaging students to learn and I
can also incorporate her strategy of using actions to
teach my first graders new words. This might help
them memorize the words better and every child
can be engaged in the learning process (meeting
1123).

During the video watching session, Lily showed

her teaching video to the group. She commented on
her teaching, saying she adopted Janets suggestion
from the previous meetingshe asked students to
design their own movements while signing the song
Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star and to perform an English
songand her students loved it. At the same time,
she also expressed her dilemmanot knowing how
to pay attention to all of the students learning. She
stated one student said the song was too easy for him
as he had learned it in kindergarten, one student was
playing with his pencil, and some students could not
keep up with the class as they were unfamiliar with
the song. Lily also pointed out that one student was
just playing alone and not following along with the
class. She said:
Lily: At first, I just knew this kid talked a lot in class.
Now, watching this teaching video now, I see he
was playing a lot.
Janet: You might walk around the class often and walk
to those students who need monitoring often. So,
they can concentrate....One more thing, you taught
the song directly without enough preparations. You
might prepare some teaching aids. For example, I
used to teach this song and I would prepare paper
stars; some are small and some are big. Also, you
can emphasize the meaning of twinkle. So they
know they were singing the words with their
meaning.
Facilitator: I agree.
Lily: Yeah, I thought about asking students to cut
out their starts and color them. Then ask them to
make a ring of stars and wear it on their wrists
(meeting 1205).

Later, Lily stated, during the past weeks, my teaching

experiences in learning to be a more reflective
practitioner had changed the way I now teach (Lilys
fifth journal writing). In her next research cycle, she
modified her teaching strategies and also implemented
the ideas suggested by peers: (a) she put up a poster
providing the lyrics for students to sing along and this
was from the theory of comprehensible input (Krashen,
1985), (b) she added actions while singing the song,

Teachers Professional Development

which was successful during the last cycle, and (c) she
implemented this part in this cycle: inviting students to
invent actions for their group performance. She found
during this cycle of teaching the song Teddy Bear,
students were more engaged and she also discussed
with students about her their learning results and her
teaching strategies as she wrote in her sixth journal.
Paula commented on the value of a collaborative
inquiry process in which the team members could all
share experiences, listen to one anothers ideas, and
contribute suggestions and ideas (Paulas sixth journal
writing). Similarly, Janet once wrote about her feelings
about group meeting, saying:
During each group meeting, I can always learn some
valuable aspects from group members, and apply
them to my own teaching practice. Besides, I can
learn from other peoples failure experiences and
examples and learned not to commit the same type
of mistake. Whats more, I can hear other peoples
comments on my teaching. There are a lot of rewards
(Janets 18th journal writing).

In addition, Janet wrote about the function of

a teacher educator as a research and community
facilitator. She wrote, the team members gather
together with a TESOL educator, the discussion
sessions helped us to hear other peoples views
from professionals who value our job (Janet, sixth
journal writing). In her 18th journal writing, she also
pointed out that the research facilitators function as
follows:
During the group meeting, Prof. C can always point
out directions for us to make modifications to be
better in teaching and research. From her analysis
on our lesson and inquiry into our teaching practice,
we could also learn how to analyze and evaluate
a teachers lesson, not just based on our common
sense Last summer, I went to join a workshop
on teacher professional development evaluation.
Regarding how to evaluate someones teaching,
I only gained general ideas. Now, I have learned
how to analyze and evaluate ones teaching or my
own teaching more specifically (Janets 18th journal
writing).

These comments and reflections from teachers

were valuable for collaborative learning. Just as
Kooy (2006) indicates, by providing social space,
interactions, and time, the research team can build
relationships and open the way for relational learning.
The presentation of the data coming from different
sources illustrates how teachers were actually

CHOU, C.

429

learning to do their research, how they were learning

in a teachers learning community, and what they have
benefited from participating in this community.
Enhancing Students Learning
As Gould (2008) points out, the underlying premise
of action research is to improve teaching and learning.
In order to accomplish that goal, the teacher must
determine whether and to what extent the intended
result is occurring within the context of the specific
strategies or techniques employed in the investigation
(p. 163). In this study, how have students benefited
from the teachers action research? Did the teachers
action research have a long-term effect on their
students learning? The following section presents
reports from Paula and Janet about their students
learning results. In Paulas reflective journal entries
and action research paper, she wrote about her students
learning results. She first divided the processes of the
first cycle of her action research into observation
stage, first trial stage, and second trial stage. In
each stage, students objective learning records came
from official monthly exams at her school, in which a
native English speaker would conduct a one-by-one
oral test with students. As she wrote, at first glance at
the results, I felt discouraged due to the fact that these
results did not show that my strategy worked to help
the weakest students to achieve better (Paulas 7th
journal writing). Throughout the three outlined stages,
there were about three to four students who achieved
below 60. For this group of students, they did not move
up to a better level. However, looking at the group of
students who scored above 80, she found the number
was 18, 21, and 20, which meant that gradually, two
to three students moved from the middle level, scoring
from 60 to 79, to the level of scoring above 80. After
the first semester of her research, she continued her
strategy in the next semester, which she called a new
stagea new cycle then began.
Thus, in Paulas next semester, she wanted to test
if her strategy in her action research helped students
retain the achievement in their English learning
process. She collected monthly exam scores to
compare with the results of the previous semester.
She found there were 21 students who scored above
80, and three who scored below 60, which was almost
the same as the results from the previous semester.
She was uncertain if her research helped students
achieve better results. Therefore, she went one step
further to compare the research group with two other
classes (6-A and 6-B) taught by her and the same
native English teachers. She focused on 6-A, which

430

THE ASIA-PACIFIC EDUCATION RESEARCHER

VOL. 20 NO. 3

had the same average score at the observation stage,

81. She found her research class (6-C) outperformed
the comparison class. The average of Class 6-A was
74 while the average of Class 6-C was 85. Students
in Class 6-A did not perform well as its scores went
down while Class 6-C achieved scores similar to that of
the previous semester (see Table 1). This finally made
her feel satisfied with the research result. In her action
research paper, she wrote, by comparing with a class
taught by the same teachers, I felt the results would
be objective. This gave me a big picture of students
learning, comparing the scores of my research class
with those of other students in the same grade level
(Paulas research paper, p. 41).
Janet wanted to see how the teaching strategies she
applied in her action research worked for students
learning result. Therefore, in the beginning of her
second semester of research, she conducted a test to
see whether her students still remembered the taught
words after a three-week winter vacation. Thus, in
the first week of the spring semester, she did a review
of the words students learned the last semester
presenting the words corresponding to each letter of
the alphabet and asking the students to do the actions
for the words while saying the words. After only one
time of this review, she conducted an oral test on the
52 taught words. In the test, she randomly presented
the flashcards of the words and asked the student to
say the word. She used the following rubric to grade
the students: Students saying the word immediately
and correctly will get two points. For these students,
they will get one point: hesitating for a while and then

saying the word correctly or saying the word after the

teacher reminds him or her to try doing the action to
recall the memory. For students who cannot say the
word or say the word wrong will get zero point.
In this oral test, the total points were 104, as there
were 52 wordseach letter had two corresponding
words. How did students perform on this test? The
results ranged from 93 to 100 points, which shows
the rate of correct answers ranged from 89% (93/104)
to 96% (100/104). Janets teaching strategies did help
students retain the words learned. She wrote in her
paper:
I was trying to see whether my teaching strategies
would help students memorize the words they
learned well. For students living in a rural area and
without much academic stimulus and competition,
I was satisfied and they were doing great. The result
showed that the memory loss of the words was low
after a long vacation. Students could memorize most
of the words and it seemed to me that my teaching
strategy should have helped students memorize
words well (Janets research paper, p. 50).

Inquiring into Students Learning Results and

Attitudes
In addition to assessing students learning results,
in order to know about students learning attitudes
towards their teaching strategies and the effects of
their research processes, the team members also
discussed whether to give students a questionnaire
to gain some data from students opinions (meeting
0116). They thus discussed with the facilitator to form

Table 1
Paulas Students Learning Results: Comparing with Two Classes
Observation
1st Semester
First result
Scores

1st trial:
1st semester
Second result

2nd trial:
1st semester
Third result

A new stage:
2nd semester
Fourth result

6A

6B

6C

6A

6B

6C

6A

6B

6C

6A

6B

6C

100

90-99

13

11

11

10

11

10

80-89

70-79

60-69

50-59

40-49

30-29

20-29

10-19

Average

81

74

81

85

75

88

80

71

84

74

69

85

Teachers Professional Development

some sample questions to gain insight into students

learning attitudes. Janet wrote in her journal, Yeah,
I should give students a questionnaire to ask about
their opinions about my teaching strategies use
this semester (Janets 21st journal writing). After
discussing the questions types with group members,
at the end of the semester, Janet asked her students
to write down their feelings about her strategies
and to indicate their learning attitudes towards
English. The results showed that students loved
her strategies of incorporating actions to memorize
words and they loved her English class. As she
wrote in her paper:
In this research, asking students to do actions to
learn English words makes them feel interesting.
In addition, students responded that they were glad
that they were invited to propose their ideas of an
action in learning a new wordwhich made them
feel proud and happy. Students love to learn English
in the atmosphere of doing actionlike performing
and playing (Janets paper, p. 52).

In Janets interview, she reported I think the

most successful part of my teaching strategy in the
research is, using actions to help students to memorize
new words. Students love the actions they designed
because these came from their creative ideas, they
could memorize them better (Janets third interview).
Janets data illustrates how her students have gained
deeper learning attitudes towards English learning in
her class.
In addition to colleting students academic data to
test the effect of the strategies implemented, Paula also
conducted a survey to inquire about students attitudes
towards her research strategy at the end of her first
semester. First, the results show that students expressed
positive comments on her teaching strategies. Students
agreed that a small group learning situation (a) gave
them more practice opportunities in class, (b) helped
them improve English learning, (c) made them feel
more confident during an oral test, (d) made them like
attending English classes, and (e) made the learning
atmosphere more active. Next, students expressed
they liked the atmosphere in which group members
helped one another. Third, the teacher also asked
students to indicate their English learning experiences:
Comparing the two monthly exams, how have you felt
about your English learning results? Students indicated
positive comments in the following five categories:
they improved their English vocabulary listening
abilities, they could comprehend the English teachers

CHOU, C.

431

oral test questions, they could read the content of each

lesson better, their oral test results were improved, their
written test results were improved, and they gained
more confident in learning English.
Discussion
Following the call for empirically examining the
changes in teachers practices and students learning
as a result of professional learning communities
(Vescio et al., 2008), and not just stating that teachers
perceptions about the value of professional learning
communities are both valid and valuable (Vescio et
al., 2008, p. 81), this study has provided data which
illustrate the following themes to fill the gap of
discussing the outcomes of teachers endeavors on
teaching practice and student learning, particularly in
todays scare resources and accountability.
Action Research Improves Students Learning
In action research, students are used as an
important source of information (Ponte, 2002), the
findings exemplify how teachers use action research
to investigate and evaluate their work (McNiff &
Whitehead, 2006). In this study, just as Janet expressed
in her journal by talking about giving a questionnaire
in order to know about students learning results and
feelings, she wrote, Since this is my action research,
how the researched objectives feel is sure to be
important and their opinions should be valued (Janets
21st journal writing).
While participating in a professional learning
community, many teachers indicate that unless
classroom practice and student learning improve,
participation is not worth the investment of teacher
time and energy (Tschannen-Moran, Uline, Woolfolk
Hoy, & Mackley, 2000). First of all, the results of this
study echo the above statement. Teachers in this study
have stepped into their action research with the aim
of improving their students learning. They started
their action research to focus on how they could help
students to achieve better performance in English.
They set out to implement strategies to improve their
teaching and to monitor their students learning. At the
end of their action research, they have found students
not only achieved better performance in general
English skills, but they also benefited from learning
with peers and experienced learning in a supportive
environment.
Next, as Noddings (1992) emphasizes, Caring
is the very bedrock of all successful education (p.
27). Teachers who believe in their students abilities

432

THE ASIA-PACIFIC EDUCATION RESEARCHER

demonstrate that they care by placing the learners

at the center of the educational process. It was
through this project, the researcher finds these novice
teacher researchers tend to start with caring for their
students. Linking inquiry and learning requires that
participants are responsible for helping students
learn better, delivering quality education, and making
improvements in their day-to-day practices. Third, this
study finds these teachers have continually reflected on
and refined their instructional approaches to ensure that
their students are learning and that they deeply cared
about the learning of each student. This result confirms
what Grossman et al. (2001) state, although teacher
learning is important in any professional development
program improvements in students learning are
necessary for the effort to be considered successful.
As action research typically involves sources
of data such as teacher observation, examination
of student work samples, interest inventories, and
performance on either teacher-created assessments
or commercially-produced instruments (Ross-Fisher,
2008), in this project, teachers were also advised to
collect both quantitative and qualitative data. As these
teachers are novice researchers, they were advised to
use descriptive statistics, such as population mean, for
analyzing their data (Ross-Fisher, 2008). Additionally,
presenting the data in charts, graphs, or tables is
appropriate and useful (Goud, 2008).
Through Action Research, Teachers Learn to
Critically Examine Their Practice and to Get to
Know About Their Teaching and Their Students
Better
In light of action research, reflection takes places
before, during, and after each cycle of action. Being
critical in teaching and action research follows
Deweys lead, viewing the problematic as a central
principle of inquiry (Schon, 1983, 1987; Tabachnick
& Zeichner, 1991). The underlying goal of this
project is for participants to view teacher research
as an opportunity to critically examine their own
teaching and as a tool for reaching understanding
about the things they encountered in their classrooms.
In this study the teachers were constantly required
to examine their own teaching through a number of
methods, such as writing teachers journals, watching
teaching video clips, participating in discussions at
meeting sessions, and writing their own research
papers. The results also showed a growth in teachers
understanding of their teaching and contributed to
improving their practice. Examining data from the

VOL. 20 NO. 3

participants reflection in their journals and discussion

sections and their research papers, the researcher finds
these teachers become more reflective, critical, and
analytical about their own teaching behaviors in the
classroom (Darling-Hammond, 2006; Shank, 2006;
Snow-Gerono, 2005; Stark, 2006). For example, Lilys
comments during the meetings (meeting 1123 and
meeting 1205) and journal writing #4, Janets journal
writing #18, and Paulas paper (on page 41) present
the fact that they gained better awareness of critical
reflection and teaching.
Moreover, as action research affords teachers
opportunities to connect theory with practice, to
become more effective in their practice, and to become
empowered practitioners, in this study, the teachers
have tried out teaching strategies to see what worked
best with their students in their own contexts. They
collected evidence of student learning and made their
instructional decisions based on that evidence in
accordance with the principles of action research
finding problems, implementing strategies, collecting
data, analyzing results, and sharing with peers (Burns,
1999; McNiff & Whitehead, 2006; Mertler, 2006;
Stringer, 2007; Wallace, 1998). Just as Sparks-Lager
and Colton (1991) indicate, professional knowledge is
seen as coming both from sources outside the teacher
and from the teachers own interpretations of their
everyday experiences. Teachers can select a theory or
strategy to explore, research the topic in more depth,
implement or practice new strategies, and collect data
on their performance and their students performance
to monitor the results of their efforts. In this study, the
teachers have investigated how theories can be put
into practice in their teaching contextsJanet applied
a modified TPR approach, Paula used cooperative
learning to encourage students to have more oral
practice in groups, and Lily implemented English
songs to give more meaningful chances for students to
speak English. The examples illustrate how teachers
action research can help teachers learn to teach for
understanding as teacher action research is a form
of enquiry that enables teachers to investigate and
evaluate their work (McNiff & Whitehead, 2006).
By carrying out their individual action research,
the teachers experienced what worked best for their
students to learn English and how they could solve
their own problems in their teaching. The results
of this study show that new teaching competencies
can be acquired in practice (Hargreaves, 1997) and
teachers working contexts are a suitable place for
their professional development.

Teachers Professional Development

Furthermore, action research affirms the

professionalism of teaching by giving teachers a
real voice in their own professional development. As
the teacher is the judge of what works, the essence
of action research lies in the fact that teachers have
unique insights into their classrooms and can explore
questions that are not accessible to outsiders like
university researchers. The results of this study show
that through action research, the participating teachers
have gotten to know their students and themselves
better via collecting, monitoring, and analyzing their
students learning records and surveying their learning
attitudes. They have played a key role in changing their
teaching to benefit their students learning. By carrying
out their individual action research, they have come to
know more about themselves and their students.
What Especially Contributes to Teachers Learning
in a Community?
In addition to outlining the framework of doing
action research, this study formed a small community,
arranged meetings sessions, and implemented video as
a means for teachers to share their teaching practice, to
reflect on their teaching, and to learn from one another
via watching real teaching in context. According to
Little (1982), four kinds of teacher interactions are
central to collegiality and professional community:
frequent concrete and precise discussions about
teaching and learning, frequent observation coupled
with useful feedback, collaborative development and
evaluation of teaching materials, and teachers teaching
and learning from one another. First, in this project, in
order to better stimulate participants interaction and
reflection, the research facilitator, following Little
(1982), employed the use of teachers own teaching
videos as the framework for reflection and discussion.
When the participants started to collect their research
data, the research facilitator suggested that during
the meeting, participants would present their own
teaching video clips to share with the peers. Thus,
during the meeting sessions, participants viewed
video clips of their instruction and sought different
ideas and strategies to deal with problems. The intent
of using video clips of teachers teaching was to
elicit descriptions of participants meaning making
in teaching and to allow reflection and critic. With
such viewing, teachers could approach the potential
effects of group discussions as well as the principles
of reflections. As literature indicates, video records
can highlight aspects of classroom life that a teacher
might not notice in the midst of carrying out a lesson,

CHOU, C.

433

and can capture the social fabric of a classroom

(Clark & Hollingtsworth, 2000). In this study, the
video activity proved to be a successful venue for
teachers to reflect and to develop. The data show that
the teachers verbal responses to the open-minded
questions in the discussion sessions actually helped
them examine their teaching practice. Dialogues
and interactions with others foster knowledge
construction and reconstruction (Kooy, 2006). Take
Lily as an example in this study: Examining the
data from meeting 1205 while Lily was showing
her teaching video as an example and her reflective
journal writing 4 and 5. She found her weakness
in scaffolding the first graders to learning and she
acknowledged that she did not pay enough attention
to monitor students leaning as she had taught higher
graders long. She took Janets advice to design
teaching aids and to engage students in learning
through meaningful actions. She also commented on
the energetic and engaging aspects she learned from
Janet while she viewed Janes teaching video. The
results of this study show that during the meeting
sessions, teachers not only could reflect and critic on
their own teaching video clips, but peers also could
offer different views and perspectives of teaching
activities and strategies.
However, it must also be noted that for teachers to
share their teaching videos in the meeting may not be
an easy task. In this study, Lily was not very comfortable
in showing her teaching videos at the early stage of the
study. She once wrote in her journal that she felt the peers
were very confident in their teaching performance while
she was a little nervous watching herself teach with the
peers on the big screen due to her novice experience
in English teaching and lack of confidence. The case
of Lilys learning process was found to be similar in
other contexts and studies. For example, in Mei Sius
(2008) study, she finds that teachers in her study also
experienced the same phenomenon. It was through the
research process that teachers reported that they felt
comfortable talking to each other professionally and
observing each other (p. 107). It is thus suggested that
the research facilitator must pay attention to this issue.
As the research group members get to know about each
other better and get familiar with the research process,
the atmosphere of a supportative and warm learning
community will be developed.
In addition, in Taiwan, after the educational reform
in 2001, elementary teachers have been required
to participate in lots of workshops and in-service
teacher training programs to acquire new subject

434

THE ASIA-PACIFIC EDUCATION RESEARCHER

matter knowledge in order to cope with the new

standards. It was this new curriculum that English
was mandated in elementary education. Elementary
English teachers have been under great pressure to
meet new demands for courses and policies over the
years. Thus, participants in this project were required
to pursue not only professional knowledge in English
but also professional knowledge in doing action
research. For novice teachers to survive, they usually
chose to focus more on the subject matter knowledge
in their profession. The role of the research facilitator
in this study thus needed to provide more support
for these participants during their action research
processes. The first type of support came from the
subject matter knowledge and teaching strategies.
As the research facilitator was also a TESOL teacher
educator, these participants would sometimes inquire
about instructional knowledge from the facilitator to
confirm their concepts and strategies. The exchange
and interaction of teaching strategies made them feel
comfortable and confident in their learning to teach.
Thus, in addition to providing the knowledge about
conducting action research, the research facilitator
also serve as a mentor, providing the participants
perspectives about teaching.
Furthermore, the three participants in this study
have shown their commitment to learning in their
profession. They did not withdraw from the project
when encountering obstacles. At last, they have
managed to fulfill their research. They were involved
in this project to learn from one another rather than to
compete with one another. As indicated, collaboration
is assumed to create a learning culture and helps
to build a community in which further learning is
supported and stimulated (Kwakman, 2003). The
researcher finds that participants in this project were
supportive of one another and they were able to provide
remarkable comments and solutions to problems. This
type of learning culture, as a result, helps contribute to
the fruitful results of their work and research.
Therefore, this study finds that in order for a
community of novice research teachers to work
successfully, the activity to facilitate teachers learning
and the supportive atmosphere for learning with peers
as well as the role of the community facilitator should
be emphasized.
Conclusion
This study has illustrated embedding teachers action
research in a professional learning community to assist
teachers learning to do research and gain knowledge.

VOL. 20 NO. 3

It draws the following conclusions. Firstly, findings

from this study validate teachers action research as
a way to assist teachers in understanding their practice
and improve student achievement. As Slavin (2006)
indicates, teachers conduct research for one main
purpose: to improve teaching and learning. When
teachers take actions based on their research findings,
it is logical that students learning should also benefit.
This study adds data to the growing body of knowledge
that action research as professional development not
only makes teachers feel better about their practice,
but it also reaps learning gains for students (DarlingHammond 1997).
Secondly, as Abell (2007) indicates, teaching
by its very nature is an inquiry-oriented process (p.
64). This study emphasizes that action research is
a professional development strategy that puts the
teacher at the center of the professional development
process (Gould, 2008, p. 5). The teachers in this
study have all set out upon their own inquiry journey.
They began their inquiries into their classrooms and
then they took actions to improve their instruction.
Although still some teachers might think of research
as something only university professors do, this study
suggests teachers can contribute to the research base
on effective instruction by conducting research in their
own classrooms.
Thirdly, just as Ross-Fisher (2008) states, Dont
forget to share (p. 164), action research promotes
teachers sharing their results. Thus, in order to share
with a wider audience, the research group presented
their results at an English teaching conference. The
conference presentation, discussion, and sharing was
a brand new experience for these participants. In their
profession, they have never had this professional
presentation opportunity. Darling-Hammond (2003)
states, teachers learn best by studying, doing, and
reflecting; by collaborating with other teachers; by
looking closely at students and their work; and by
sharing what they see (p. 278). For those teachers
who have not yet begun their own research, this study
shows that action research can indeed be meaningful,
friendly, and possible (Preisman, 2007). The peers felt
although the journey was rocky, the final destination
was a great triumph.
Fourthly, this study finds a professional learning
community can serve as an effective platform for
teachers to exchange knowledge, to interact, and
to learn from one another based on their practices.
As Wray (2007) reviews, in all versions of the
communities of practice model, teacher learning is

Teachers Professional Development

promoted because the communities offer the space

for discussions about the teaching contexts in which
teachers are working. This study thus adds empirical
data to educational literature which supports the
recent recommendations for professional development
through forming a site-based professional learning
community that promote the practice of shared inquiry
grounded in teachers work (Crockett, 2002; Vescio
et al., 2008).
Lastly, as the research facilitator proposed a videowatching section for sharing and discussion during the
meeting sessions, this activity proved to be effective
for maintaining the community discussion and
provided a space for critical reflection and comment.
It also gave teachers concrete events to comment,
evaluate, and reflect. For future collaborative action
research researchers, this study thus suggests research
facilitators offer a framework for maintaining the
discussion.
Moreover, it was also with the help of the research
facilitator that this teacher community went to the
end of the research journey. Although the research
facilitator and the participants all encountered
difficulties and frustrations, they did not set back.
The facilitator can indeed play a very important role
in maintaining a community and guiding novice
research practitioners in their research profession. The
facilitators professional knowledge made the novice
research teachers feel confident in their direction of
doing research.
Challenges and Implications
Although it has been long proposed that
teachers action research be part of the criterion of
teachers professional development nationally and
internationally, there are some challenges ahead.
First, the researcher finds teachers in this study still
need to gain more insights about action research.
Despite so much seemingly incontrovertible evidence
of the advantages of action research for professional
development, some current action research studies
demonstrate that teachers still hold back (Roth, 2007).
This study also encountered the same dilemma. Before
conducting the research, the researcher emailed and
phoned several additional teachers in her teaching
district to participate, they turned down the invitation.
After hearing about the bimonthly meeting sessions, the
writing of an action research paper, and the requirement
of collecting data and observations, they responded
that these tasks would take a lot of their time and they
did not feel confident about fulfilling the goals. Even if

CHOU, C.

435

the research initiator made it clear that she would act as

a facilitator to support teachers in learning to do action
research, a number of teachers hesitated. As previous
research has indicated, inquiry-related constraints
revolve around the issues of insufficient rewards, time,
and teacher support such as what Darling-Hammond
(2005) states, time and administrative support are
necessary for professional development to be effective.
This study also encountered constraints although the
support from the research initiator was provided and
the study followed suggestions from previous studies
(Ponte, Beijaard, & Wubbels, 2004; Poon, 2008), in
which facilitators support play an important role in
helping teachers do their action research. Still, not much
evidence shows schools offer awards to support the
participating teachers inquiry efforts. Thus, this study
suggests if action research and collaborative inquiry
are to continue as trends of teachers professional
development, teachers support for conducting research
should be valued. It is suggested that one-to-two hours
of research time per week be given for teachers due to
the fact that each research meeting session usually takes
more than three hours and analyzing data and writing
the paper take more time.
Next, action research in elementary English
education is very scant in EFL contexts due to the
new curriculum and mandates in Asian countries or
some other countries. It is suggested that researchers
and educators can implement teacher action research
or collaborative inquiry in a semester-long training
course to help teachers gain sufficient knowledge to
do action research for their professional development.
In this type of training course, a small community of
practitioners can then be formed and official in-service
training time would then be allowed. Moreover, during
the training course, when teachers carry out their
action research projects, facilitators and peers support
should be provided. Teachers with interests in action
research can collaborate to help one another. Without
stepping on the research journey, teachers wont realize
the meaning of conducting action research. In this way,
there will be more teachers and communities to follow
the move toward the current teachers professional
development trend.
In conclusion, even though this study has been
a small initiative, it has allowed the researcher and
practitioners to move towards the construction of new
ways to approach professional development activities
as well as to give voice and visibility to researchers
and teachers. In a few words, it has allowed us to learn
from our own practice.

436

THE ASIA-PACIFIC EDUCATION RESEARCHER

Acknowledgment

A research grant was awarded by the National Science

Council, Taiwan (Grant No. NSC 96-2411-H-134-007).
The author would like to thank all the teachers who
participated in this study and the reviewers for their
insightful comments.

References

Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge.

In S.K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook
of research on science education (pp. 1105-1140).
Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice,
developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based
theory of professional education. In L. DarlingHammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning
profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp.
1-32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative action research for English
language teachers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Burns, A. (2005). Action research an evolving paradigm?
Language Teaching, 38(2), 57-74.
Clarke, D., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a
model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 18(8), 947-967.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1999). Relationships
of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in
communities. In A. Iran-Njad & P.D. Pearson (Eds.),
Review of research in education (Vol. 24, pp. 249-305).
Washington, DC: American Educational Research
Association.
Crockett, M.D. (2002). Inquiry as professional development:
Creating dilemmas through teachers work. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 18(5), 609-624.
Dana, N.F., & Yendol-Silva, D. (2003). The reflective
educators guide to classroom research: Learning to
teach and teaching to learn through practitioner inquiry.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Teacher learning that supports
student learning. In A. Ornstein, L. S. Behar-Horenstein,
& E. Pajak (Eds.), Contemporary issues in curriculum
(pp. 277-282). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2005). Teaching as a profession:
Lessons in teacher preparation and professional
development. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(3), 237-240.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful teacher education:
Lessons from exemplary programs. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Diaz-Maggioli, G. (2004). Teacher-centered professional
development. Alexandria, VI: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development.
Garcia, L. M., & Robin, N. P. (2008). Innovation, research
and professional development in higher education:

VOL. 20 NO. 3
Learning from our own experience. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 24(1), 104-116.
Giles, C., & Hargreaves, A. (2006). The sustainability
of innovative schools as learning organizations and
professional learning communities during standardized
reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1),
124-156.
Gould, M. (2008). Teacher as researcher: A paradigm for
professional development. Kappa Delta Pi Record,
45(1), 5-7.
Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Woolworth, S. (2001).
Toward a theory of teacher community. Teachers
College Record, 103(6), 942-1011.
Hargreaves, A. (1997). From reform to renewal: A new
deal for a new age. In A. Hargreaves & R. Evans (Eds.),
Beyond educational reform. Bringing teachers back
in (pp. 105-125). Buckingham, UK: Open University
Press.
Hendricks, C. (2006). Improving schools through action
research: A comprehensive guide for educators. Boston:
Pearson.
Johnson, A. P. (2005). A short guide to action research (2nd
ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action
research planner (3rd ed.). Geelong, Australia: Deakin
University.
King, M. B., & Newmann, F. M. (2000). Will teacher
learning advance school goals? Phi Delta Kappan, 81,
576-580.
Kooy, M. (2006). The telling stories of novice teachers:
Constructing teacher knowledge in book clubs. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 22(6), 661-674.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and
implications. New York, NY: Longman.
Kwakman, K. (2003) Factors affecting teachers participation
in professional learning activities. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 19(2), 149-170.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Little, J. W. (1982). Norms of collegiality and
experimentation: Workplace conditions of school
success. American Educational Research Journal,
19(3), 325- 340.
Little, J. W. (1993). Professional community in
comprehensive high schools: The two worlds of
academic and vocational teachers. In J. W. Little &
M. W. McLaugh (Eds.), Teachers work: Individuals,
colleagues, and contexts (pp. 104-136). New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Little, J. W. (2003). Inside teacher community:
Representations of classroom practice. Teachers College
Record, 105(6), 913-945.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1989). Designing qualitative
research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (1999). Facilitating
learning organizations: Making learning count.
Aldershot, England: Gower.

Teachers Professional Development

McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2006). All you need to know
about action research. London: Sage Publication.
Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study
applications in education: Revised and expanded from
case study research in education. San Francisco: JosseyBass Publishers.
Mertler, C. A. (2006). Action research: Teachers as
researchers in the classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Mertler, C. A., & Charles, C. M. (2005). Introduction to
educational research (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
Nelson, T., & Slavit, D. (2008). Supported teacher
collaborative inquiry. Teacher Education Quarterly,
35(1), 99-116.
Noddings, N. (1992). The challenge to care in schools:
An alternative approach to education. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research
methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Ponte, P. (2002). How teachers become active researchers
and how teacher educators become the facilitators.
Journal for Educational Action Research, 10(3), 399423.
Ponte, P., Ax, J., Beijaard, D., & Wubbels, T. (2004).
Teachers development of professional knowledge
through action research and the facilitation of this by
teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education,
20(6), 571-588.
Poon, A.Y. K. (2008). How action research can complement
formal language teacher education. The Asia-Pacific
Education Researcher, 17(1), 43-62.
Preisman, K. (2007). Dont be afraid: Take action to improve
your educational practices. Kappa Delta Pi Record,
43(3), 102-103.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and
methods in language teaching. Boston, MA: Cambridge
University Press.
Roth, K. J. (2007). Science teachers as researchers. In S. K.
Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research
on science education (pp. 1203-1250). London, UK:
Routledge.

CHOU, C.

437

Ross-Fisher, R. (2008). Action research to improve teaching

and learning. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 44(4), 160-164.
Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How
professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic
Books.
Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Shank, M .J. (2006). Teacher storytelling: A means for
creating and learning within collaborative space.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(6), 711-721.
Slavin, R. E. (2006). Educational psychology: Theory and
practice (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Snow-Gerono, J. L. (2005). Professional development in
a culture of inquiry: PDS teachers identify the benefits
of professional learning communities. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 21(3), 241-256.
Stark, S. (2006). Using action learning for professional
development. Educational Action Research, 14(1),
23-43.
Stenhouse, L. (1981). What counts as research? British
Journal of Educational Studies, 29, 103-122.
Stringer, E. T. (2007). Action research (3rd ed.). San
Francisco, CA: Sage.
Supovitz, J. A., & Christman, J. B. (2005). Small learning
communities that actually learn: Lessons for school
leaders. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(9), 649-651.
Tabachnick, B. R., & Zeichner, K. (1991). Issues and
practices in inquiry-oriented teacher education.
London, UK: Falmer Press.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Uline, C., Woolfolk Hoy, A., &
Mackley, T. (2000). Creating smarter schools through
collaboration. Journal of Educational Administration,
38, 247-271.
Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review
of research on the impact of professional learning
communities on teaching practice and student learning.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 80-91.
Wallace, M. J. (1998). Action research for language
teachers. Boston, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Wray, S. (2007). Teaching portfolios, community, and preservice teachers professional development. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 23(7), 1139-1152.