Abstract
As educational leaders and teachers are increasingly expected to engage in school-based inquiry, it is important that they adopt an approach to research that leads to authentic grassroots forms of inquiry rather than top-down forms based on current business models such as data-driven decision-making. In this chapter, we will explore participatory action research (PAR) as a model for school-based inquiry that provides leaders and teachers with an approach that is more process oriented, more inclusive, and less hierarchical. PAR challenges the framework (or subverts the framework) of traditional research by moving away from a hierarchical researcher-participant model toward an engaged, cyclical relationship between communities and researcher to define, examine, and develop action steps to their own problems. The methodology is deeply rooted in the belief that communities can define and solve their challenges and a researcher, as a participant, can be an active part of that process. Unlike other forms of more standard, academic research, PAR continually loops through a set of questions, analysis, solutions, and back again, ensuring that the process is grounded, situated, and fulfills the goal to develop both solutions and empowerment. Our contention is that if educational leaders either collaborate with researchers trained in PAR or are trained themselves as PAR researchers, they are more likely to see themselves as facilitating a more democratic, inclusive, and authentic form of inquiry that is more likely to result in organizational learning, the building of greater instructional capacity, and greater awareness of the contextual factors that impact students’ lives.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anderson, G. L. (1998). Toward authentic participation: Deconstructing the discourse of participatory reforms. American Educational Research Journal, 35(4), 571–606.
Anderson, G. L., & Herr, K. (2005). The action research dissertation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Anderson, G. L., & Herr, K. (2011). Scaling up: “Evidence-based” practices for teachers is a profitable but discredited paradigm. Educational Researcher, 40, 287–289.
Arellano-Gault, D. (2010). Economic NPM and the need to bring justice and equity back to the debate on pubic organizations. Administration and Society, 42(5), 591–612.
Barros, M. (2010). Emancipatory management: The contradiction between practice and discourse. Journal of Management Inquiry, 19(1), 166–184.
Bates, R. (1980). Educational administration, the sociology of science, and the management of knowledge. Educational Administration Quarterly, 16(2), I–20.
Beare, H. (1993). Different ways of viewing school site councils: Whose paradigm is in use here? In H. Beare, & W. Boyd (Eds.), Restructuring schools: An international perspective on the movement to transform the control and performance of schools (pp. 200–217). London: Falmer Press.
Bell, E. E. (2001). Infusing race into the US discourse on action research. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), The handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 49–59). London: Sage.
Brecher, J., Costello, T., & Smith, B. (2000). Globalization from below: The power of solidarity. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.
Burch, P. (2009). Hidden markets: The new education privatization. New York: Routledge.
Cammarota, J., & Fine, M. (Eds.). (2008). Revolutionalizing education: Youth participatory action research in motion. New York: Routledge.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press.
de Schutter, A., & Yopo, B. (1981). Investigacion participativa: Una opcion metodologica para la education de adultos [Participatory research: A methodological option for adult education]. Patzcuaro, Mexico: CREFAL.
Edmonds, R. (1982, December). Programs of school improvement: An overview. Educational Leadership, 40, 4–11.
Everett, S. (1938). The Community School. New York: D. Appleton-Century.
Fals-Borda, O. (1991). Some basic ingredients. In O. Fals-Borda & M. A. Rahman (Eds.), Action and knowledge, breaking the monopoly with participatory action-research (pp. 3–12). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Fine, M., Torre, M. E., Boudin, K., Bowen, I., Clark, J., Hylton, D., et al. (2003). Participatory action research from within and beyond prison bars. In P. M. Camic, J. E. Rhodes, & L. Yardley (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp. 173–198). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Foster, W. (1986). Paradigms and promises: New approaches to educational administration. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Freire, P. (1970). The pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Freire, P. (1982). Creating alternative research methods: Learning to do it by doing it. In B. Hall, A. Gillette, & R. Tandon (Eds.), Creating knowledge: A monopoly. New Delhi, India: Society for Participatory Research in Asia.
Gitlin, A., & Margonis, F. (1995). The political aspect of reform: Teacher resistance as good sense. American Journal of Education, 103, 377–405.
Gold, E., Simon, E., & Brown, C. (2004). A new conception of parent engagement: Community organizing for school reform. In F. English (Ed.), Handbook of educational leadership: New dimensions and realities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Pub.
Gonzalez, N., Moll, L., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Goodman, J., Baron, D., & Myers, C. (2004). Constructing a democratic foundation for school-based reform: The local politics of school autonomy and internal governance. In F. English (Ed.), Handbook of educational leadership: New dimensions and realities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gronn, P. (2000). Distributed properties: A new architecture for leadership. Educational Management and Administration, 28(3), 317–338.
Halverson, R., Grigg, J., Prichett, R., & Thomas, C. (2005). The new instructional leadership: Creating data-driven instructional systems in schools (WCER Working Paper 2005–9). Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of  Wisconsin–Madison. Wisconsin: Madison.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers’ work and culture in the postmodern age. New York: Teachers College Press.
Hatcher, R. (2005). The distribution of leadership and power in schools. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 26(2), 253–267.
Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2005). The action research dissertation: A guide for students and faculty. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2008). Teacher research and learning communities: A failure to theorize power relations? Language Arts, 85(5), 382–391.
Johanek, M., & Puckett, J. (2007). Leonard Covello and the making of Benjamin Franklin High School. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Kretzmann, J., & McKnight, J. (1993). Building communities from the inside out. Chicago: ACTA Publications.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2006). Successful school leadership. What it is and how it influences pupil learning. National College for School Leadership (Research Report n° 800). University of Nottingham.
Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (2008). Teachers in professional communities: Improving teaching and learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
Lipman, P. (1997). Restructuring in context: A case study of teacher participation and the dynamics of ideology, race, and power. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 3–37.
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. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers’ professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91(4), 509–536.
Malen, B., & Ogawa, R. (1988). Professional-patron influence on site-based governance councils: A confounding case study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 10(4), 251–270.
Means, B., Chen, E., Debarger, A., & Padilla, C. (2011, February). Teachers’ ability to use data to inform instruction: Challenges and supports. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Minkler, M. (2005). Community-based research partnerships: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 82(2 Supp 2), ii3–ii12.
Minkler, M., & Wallerstein, N. (Eds.). (2003). Community-based participatory research for health. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ospina, S., & Foldy, E. (2005, September). Toward a framework for social change leadership. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Public Management Research Association, Los Angeles.
Reid, C., & Frisby, W. (2004). Advancing women’s social justice agendas: A feminist action research framework. International Journal of Qualitative Method, 3(3), 2.
Rogers, J., & Terriquez, V. (2009). “More Justice”: The role of organized labor in educational reform. Educational Policy, 23(1), 216–241.
Rothman, R. (Ed.). (2009). Leadership in smart systems. Voices in Urban Education. Providence, RI: Annenberg Institute for School Reform. http://www.annenberginstitute.org/VUE/archives/vue-25
Sahlberg, P. (2007). Education policies for raising student learning: The Finnish approach. The Journal of Education Policy, 22(2), 147–171.
Saltman, K. (2009). The rise of venture philanthropy and the ongoing neoliberal assault on public education: The case of the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation. Workplace, 16, 53–72.
Scherer, M. (2008, December/2009, January). Driven dumb by data? Educational Leadership, 66(4), 5.
Sergiovanni, T. (2000). The lifeworld of leadership: Creating culture, community, and personal meaning in our schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Shirley, D. (1997). Community organizing for urban school reform. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Shutz, A. (2006). Home is a prison in the global city. The tragic failure of school-based community engagement strategies. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 691–743.
Somekh, B. (2010). The Collaborative Action Research Network: 30 years of agency in developing educational action research. Educational Action Research, 18(1), 103–121.
Spillane, J., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. (2004). Towards a theory of school leadership practice: Implications of a distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3–34.
Theoharis, G. (2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social justice educational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 221–258.
Torre, M., & Fine, M. (2006). Researching and resisting: Democratic policy research by and for youth. In S. Ginwright, P. Noguera, & J. Cammarota (Eds.), Beyond resistance! Youth activism and community change: New democratic possibilities for practice and policy for America’s youth (pp. 269–285). New York: Routledge.
Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U.S. Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
van der Meulen, E. (2011). Participatory and action-oriented dissertations: The challenges and importance of community-engaged graduate research. The Qualitative Report, 16(5), 1291–1303.
Warren, M., & Mapp, K. (2011). A match on dry grass: Community organizing as a catalyst for school reform. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wayman, J., & Springfield, S. (2006). Technology-supported involvement of entire faculties in examination of student data for instructional improvement. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 549–571.
Whitman, D. (2008). Sweating the small stuff: Inner-city schools and the new paternalism. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
Whyte, W. F. (Ed.). (1991). Participatory action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wilson, W. J. (2009). More than just race: Being Black and poor in the inner city. New York: W.W. Norton.
Woods, P. (2004). Democratic leadership: Drawing distinctions with distributed leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 7(1), 3–26.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Anderson, G.L., Middleton, E.B. (2014). LeaderPAR: A Participatory Action Research Framework for School and Community Leadership. In: Bogotch, I., Shields, C. (eds) International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Social (In)Justice. Springer International Handbooks of Education, vol 29. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6555-9_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6555-9_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-6554-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6555-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)