1984
DOI: 10.1177/016146818408600101
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Cognitive-Developmental Approach to Collaborative Action Research with Teachers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1987
1987
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This study involves the development and implementation of an educational design project in an attempt to build graduate students' knowledge, skills and capabilities in deploying normcritical gender lenses in their design practice and questions how these perspectives are perceived, received and implemented in design processes by students, to explore the challenges and opportunities observed by the authors, external experts, and the students. The process involved working on the problems the authors identified, continuous self-evaluation, and bringing various stakeholders (e.g., instructors, researchers, and collaborators) together to improve pedagogical practice and contribute to educational theory with an action research approach (Oja and Smulyan, 1989;McKernan, 2007). Accordingly, the authors first developed the theory-informed project structure and syllabus 4 in collaboration with the Çankaya GE Unit (Stage 1 Planning), deployed this structure in the Graduate Design Studio course (Stage 2 Action), and analyzed the design processes and outcomes (Stage 3 Analysis).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This study involves the development and implementation of an educational design project in an attempt to build graduate students' knowledge, skills and capabilities in deploying normcritical gender lenses in their design practice and questions how these perspectives are perceived, received and implemented in design processes by students, to explore the challenges and opportunities observed by the authors, external experts, and the students. The process involved working on the problems the authors identified, continuous self-evaluation, and bringing various stakeholders (e.g., instructors, researchers, and collaborators) together to improve pedagogical practice and contribute to educational theory with an action research approach (Oja and Smulyan, 1989;McKernan, 2007). Accordingly, the authors first developed the theory-informed project structure and syllabus 4 in collaboration with the Çankaya GE Unit (Stage 1 Planning), deployed this structure in the Graduate Design Studio course (Stage 2 Action), and analyzed the design processes and outcomes (Stage 3 Analysis).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some scholars refer to research on one's own teaching as collaborative action research (Oja & Smulyan, 1989) or practical inquiry (Richardson, 1996). Here, I use the label self-study because ''self-study is about the learning from experience that is embedded within teachers creating new experiences for themselves and those whom they teach'' (Russell, 1998, pp.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…I have used the term collaborative action research and/or inquiry in my writings to depict the investigations that I and my partners conducted in a partnership setting (e.g., Catelli, 1995Catelli, , 2002. Characterized by a systematic and cyclical method of operation (e.g., identification of a problem, data collection and analysis, implementation of an action plan and evaluation), action research has been seen by numerous educators as a viable means to educational reform and improvement (e.g., Hollingsworth, 1997;Holly, 1991;Lieberman, 1986;Oja & Smulyan, 1989;Pine,1986Pine, , 2000Somekh & Zeichner, 2009). I turn now to Tunks's (2011) chapter, which examines the status of action research in PDS partnership settings.…”
Section: Self-assessment and Renewalmentioning
confidence: 99%