Researching strategies and interventions: Action research
and enquiry processes as vehicle for embedding literacy
and numeracy
Bettina Schwenger
Unitec Institute of Technology
bschwenger@unitec.ac.nz
Abstract:
The transformation of academic practices and supporting high quality learning and teaching
has been an ongoing concern for the Academic Literacies Team at Unitec Institute of
Technology. During 2009, members of the team investigated mechanisms and explored
actions to achieve sustainable change in tertiary education contexts in relation to embedding
literacy and numeracy. The research outcomes have been used to build a solid foundation for
embedding work alongside teaching staff in 2010 and 2011, with action research and enquiry
processes providing the methodological framework for the Literacy and Numeracy Action
Research Project at Unitec. Teaching staff in a number of disciplines and student services, for
example Animal Care, Electro Technology, Nursing, Languages, Te Puna Ako and the library
have been undertaking projects in the areas of vocabulary/terminology, numeracy, reading,
writing and information literacy to investigate the effectiveness of specific learning and
teaching interventions.
The refereed paper reports back from the 2010 projects, including a summary of findings
from a meta-evaluation that allows teachers to evaluate their experience of action research
and enquiry processes as a means of sustainable change whilst capturing the impact that
participating in action research projects has on vocational lecturers teaching at levels 2 and
3. The findings reflect the challenges and successes of the teacher-researchers involved in
2010.
As part of the presentation, participants will step through the action research and embedding
cycle as well as discuss their experiences of achieving sustainable change in the embedding
process.
Background
Literacy and numeracy competencies enable adults to participate and achieve their goals at
work or study, in their communities and day-to-day life (Tertiary Education Commission,
2008). New Zealand’s results from the International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS) in 1996
and the Adult Literacy and Life Skills (ALL) Survey 2006 indicate a significant part of the
population have literacy and numeracy skills below a level that allows participation and
success in everyday life (Ministry of Education, 2007; Walker et al.). In Auckland, 410,000
people reported literacy skills below level 3 whilst 478,000 showed equally low numeracy
levels (Sutton & Vester, 2010).
Since the release of the Adult Literacy Strategy More Than Words (Ministry of Education,
2001), systemic changes to adult literacy and numeracy provision have been backed by
government funding, for example the development of the Learning Progressions and the
Assessment Tool as well as capability building at tertiary education institutes. Additionally,
literacy and numeracy focused practitioner qualifications and related study grants have been
made available to tertiary teachers.
Increasing student achievement, success and retention are key areas of focus for New
Zealand’s tertiary education providers. At Unitec Institute of Technology, at least 50% of the
programmes surveyed internally identified that literacy and numeracy issues impact on
students’ ability to learn and succeed. As part of a wider institutional response to the issues
raised in the survey, Unitec established the Academic Literacies Team, as part of Te Puna
Ako (the Centre for Learning and Teaching) and the Academic Literacies Policy (Unitec New
Zealand, 2008).
Sustainable embedding at Unitec
The Academic Literacies Team has been responsible for embedding literacy and numeracy
across Unitec since 2008, with an original focus on twelve programmes at level 2 and 3. In an
educational context, sustainability is used to describe work that is conducted within a
framework of factors such as limited resources and the need to achieve and maintain a certain
state of development in educational practices. Given the project-based nature of the team’s
work, its members have always been aware of the need to achieve sustainable change of
educational practices through its work within a limited time.
The members of the team have worked alongside faculty members to support the process of
embedding and capability building. Monitoring the translation of teachers’ new understanding
and skills into successful learning outcomes for students is an important part of the team’s
work (Whatman, Potter, & Boyd, 2011). This includes work on identifying course demands,
diagnosing student needs and integrating deliberate acts of teaching as well as assistance with
redevelopment of course documentation to embed literacy and numeracy (Schwenger, 2009a).
Additionally, members of the team have delivered the National Certificate in Adult Literacy
and Numeracy Education (Vocational) to Unitec teaching staff. Participants work through the
literacy and numeracy development model with students in their classroom to understand the
steps involved (Schwenger, 2009b). Members of the Academic Literacies Team formed an
action research group in early 2009 to investigate sustainable change and educational reform
theories, with an emphasis on the capability development of teaching staff.
Central to effective embedding is the individual lecturer’s capability to work confidently in
their vocational context with embedded literacy and numeracy. A variety of skills and
knowledge is required, such as being able to diagnose students’ strengths and needs in
relation to their course demands and then use appropriate instructional strategies successfully
as a base for explicit acts of teaching literacy and numeracy as needed (McKenna &
Fitzpatrick, 2005; Tertiary Education Commission, 2008; Whatman et al., 2011). The move
from “informed prescription” to “informed professional judgement” (Fullan, 2003, p. 6)
means that teaching staff are able to judge independently which actions are required by their
students in terms of literacy and numeracy instead of being presented with already developed
interventions by a third party (Schwenger, 2010).
On an institutional level, an approach was needed that would encourage on-going academic
development, connecting the embedding process and teachers’ practice (Tertiary Education
Commission, 2009; Whatman et al., 2011). Action research and enquiry processes were
identified as being a beneficial way to enhance the connection. The benefits of participating in
an action research project for individuals were found to include enhanced and more effective
teaching. This is to become a part of the performance management system at Unitec, and is an
accessible entry into structured and supported research and the possibility to contribute
towards a qualification, such as the Master in Education (Schwenger, 2010).
The research findings have provided a strong foundation for embedding at Unitec. In 2010
and 2011, action research and enquiry processes have been utilised as a methodological
framework for a multi-project approach, the ultimate aim of which is increasing student
achievement through enhanced staff capability. Action research and enquiry processes have
the potential to transform educational practices through an academic development initiative
that goes beyond one-off workshops.
Providing effective academic development
Academic development initiatives have been described as “a systemic attempt to bring about
change” (Guskey, 1986, p. 5). For academic staff development to be effective, it is important
to work within a strategic, systematic framework. Rather than disjointed activities, a
connected approach with links between the individual activities is needed. Ideally, such an
approach will address specific, identified needs that are relevant to the potential participants.
Academic staff development should be integrated in a comprehensive institutional change
process to ensure that the organisational culture openly values and supports the change efforts
(Reeves, Forde, O'Brien, Smith, & Tomlinson, 2002; Tertiary Education Commission, 2009).
The structured process of action research allows for a strategic and interconnected approach
where the staff development needs of individuals set the agenda for the projects (PiggotIrvine, 2009).
How academic staff development is viewed and valued in an educational organisation is
critical to an initiative’s success or failure (Cochran-Smith, 2002). An enquiry stance as a
shared ‘attitude’ within a learning community can help to establish enquiry as an accepted and
strategic mode of action rather than as a short-term activity to work through a project. At the
same time developing such an ‘attitude’ is crucial for teachers to develop their educational
practices further (Brookfield, 1995; Rust, 2009) as “our stance towards our practice is one of
inquiry” (Brookfield, 1995, p. 42).
A review of the relevant literature shows that successful academic development can be
provided through different models. Social interactions, such as conversations with colleagues,
are important for learning to occur which is again supported by the action research process
(Wenger, 1998). Well-combined theory and practice (Yoon, Duncan, Lee, Scarloss, &
Shapley, 2007) and opportunities for knowledge building and sharing with on-going
discussions, as well as time for trialling and practising, have been recognised as vital
components of successful academic development work (McKenzie & Turbill, 1999).
Teaching staff’s strengths and needs in relation to specific academic staff development need
to be taken into account for planning and delivery. At Unitec, most teaching staff come from a
strong vocational background with expertise in their respective discipline.
Changing educational practices is recognised as a central objective of academic development
initiatives (Rust, 2009). Action research and enquiry processes can help teaching staff to
focus on learning processes as well as provide opportunities for action-based learning which
has an impact on behaviour. Such learning is likely to be effective and will support the
transformation of individuals, groups and organisations (Reeves et al., 2002). Central to
critical engagement with teaching practice is the act of reflection. This means going a step
beyond acquiring new understanding and knowledge, to an internal and personal place where
people question their own existing assumptions, values and perspectives (Cranton, 1996).
Transforming teaching practices through reflection and enquiry
Effective academic development needs to support educators to identify and examine their
current understanding and approaches in order to enhance their professional knowledge and
theory (Tertiary Education Commission, 2009). Teachers’ beliefs, perceptions and
assumptions also influence their pedagogical theories. Enhancing teachers’ understanding of
theory leads to changes in classroom behaviour that then results in improved student learning
(Argyris & Schon, 1974) . Reflection enables teachers to systematically inquire into their own
practices and processes and is central for transformative learning (Brookfield, 1995). As
opportunities for reflection can be built into each action research cycle, the action research
process offers many possibilities for reflecting and for improving one’s reflective skills.
Guidance and modelling may be needed on how to reflect effectively and how to integrate
reflection into everyday work efficiently because being reflective is a developmental process.
Not all teachers might be sure of the value of reflection for their daily work in the classroom,
for example to be able to develop and to communicate the rationale underpinning their
teaching practices (Brookfield, 1995).
Transformative learning always involves some kind of reflection. Discussions concerning
reflection include issues such as different levels and types of reflection, for example, critical
reflection and self-reflection (Cranton, 1996; Mezirow, 2000). Reflection can only be
transformative if perspectives are changed as part of the process (Cranton, 1996). For
transformative learning to occur, the learner needs to “make an informed and reflective
decision to act on his or her reflective insight” (Mezirow & Taylor, 2009, p. 22-23).
Transformative learning can be defined as learning that transforms assumptions and
expectations, which in turn affects the thoughts, feelings and habits of an individual (Mezirow
& Taylor, 2009).
Going through a personalised and contextual action research and enquiry process, gives
teachers as researchers the opportunity to work on, reflect and transform their personal
theories, assumptions and expectations, develop their reflective processes and develop a
stance of inquiry (Broadbent, 1996).
The Literacy and Numeracy Action Research Project
Design
The approach of the Action Research Project includes individual projects and a metaevaluation. It captures the impact that participating in action research projects has on teaching
staff and also allows lecturers to evaluate their experiences of action research and enquiry
processes as academic development for sustainable change.
The members of the Academic Literacies Team support lecturers in setting up the individual
action research projects and offer support as required. In 2011 additional mentors have been
recruited from participants of the 2010 project. Five sessions are held throughout year,
facilitated by the senior academic action researcher and the Academic Literacies Team. The
meetings are scheduled to accompany the different stages of the action research and
embedding cycle and to guide participants through the action research cycles of the Problem
Resolving Action Research (PRAR) model (Piggot-Irvine, 2009). The first meeting in
February concerns finding a topic and starting to formulate a research question. The next
session covers the reconnaissance phase, which is followed by a session about the
implementation phase. One meeting is used for staff to prepare for their public sharing at the
Unitec Teaching and Learning Symposium in October. The final session focuses on how to
publish the results, for example in a journal article.
Process of individual projects
Each action research project follows the literacy and numeracy embedding intervention
process, combined with the action research cycles of the PRAR model (Piggot-Irvine, 2009)
as the research methodology. Lecturers identify a course related issue that their students have
found difficult. A literature review concerning the specific issue is conducted to make a
research-informed decision and to explore potential research angles before articulating a final
research question. Teachers then identify and design their individual intervention, their
evaluation approach and method, and work through their ethics applications.
Methods of the meta-evaluation
In 2010, semi-structured individual interviews were held at the beginning and at the end of the
project. An initial email contact with preliminary questions set the scene for the interviews. The
interview questions were designed to capture the feedback and opinions of the participants and
were emailed prior to the interview date.
This year, semi-open questionnaires and focus groups are being used at the beginning and at the
end of the project. Monthly email prompts are used to support the reflective process of
participants. Additionally, at the end of the project, participants can nominate a colleague to fill
out a short questionnaire about how they have experienced the changes.
Summarised findings of the 2010 meta-evaluation
In 2010, six projects with seven teachers were involved in the study. The purpose of the initial
interview was to capture participants’ teaching and learning approaches, their development in
the past that had changed their teaching, their previous experiences with action research and
enquiry processes, and the issues and interventions identified in their own action research
projects. The final interview was focused on recording the action research experiences of
individual researchers, their findings on the success of the interventions, as well as how the
action research project had affected their teaching, their thinking about teaching or about
themselves as teachers. Additionally, participants were asked about the potential long-term
changes on their teaching approaches.
Some of the following themes emerged from the interviews. All participants responded that
either a tertiary teaching qualification or a literacy/numeracy/language teaching qualification
had changed their approach to teaching prior to the action research project. The comments
showed that everybody involved has been experienced in providing learning on a tertiary
level and that they are interested in changing their practice. All participants valued the
personal and contextualised action research and enquiry experience. Six of the seven
participants mentioned that the action research project has helped them to reflect and that it
has given them focus. Downsides reported included time and logistical issues, plans that
required changing as well as missing institutional support for the research and its
requirements. One participant mentioned that, whilst the ethics process was perceived as
difficult and time consuming at first, it helped to fine tune the research setup and to think
more carefully about the process. The support given was valued and suggestions for
improvements were made.
All participants commented that their projects have been successful and helpful or useful for
students, based on the student feedback mechanisms used in each project. All individual
projects have had a student evaluation aspect incorporated, in some cases students were
surveyed, in others they were questioned to capture their opinions on the helpfulness of the
intervention. Changes in student skill levels were captured in the individual projects by the
Assessment Tool or by assignments and tests.
The question if and how the action research and enquiry processes had affected their teaching
and their thinking about teaching or about themselves as teachers was answered by all
participants positively. Aspects such as a strengthened awareness of their own teaching, a
focus on evidence to support reflections, and feelings of the strong interconnectedness
between action research as professional development and the teaching were mentioned. All
participants were positive about long-term changes to their teaching approaches.
Discussion of key outcomes
The interventions were based on explicit activities that were discipline-specific and were
developed after considering learner needs (McKenna & Fitzpatrick, 2005). All projects
investigated and diagnosed the students’ skills before intervening and used further
assessments to capture students’ progress (Casey et al., 2006). The teachers involved already
had an awareness and interest in embedding literacy and numeracy as well as a feeling that
literacy and numeracy support their students overall study success (Casey et al., 2006).
However, the final interviews show that they have enhanced their thinking about their
students’ learning and their own teaching by planning, implementing an intervention,
observing its results and evaluating its effects as well as by observing students’ learning in
more detail (Gusky, 1986). Making decisions based on relevant research and conducting a
literature review before designing and implementing the intervention has been important for
the participants (Argyris & Schon, 1974). Capturing students’ feedback and learning gains has
been a vital component in the individual projects and it has helped to enhance the evidence
base and triangulate the data (Zuber-Skerritt, 2002).
The action research and enquiry processes have helped the teachers involved to reflect,
improve their knowledge and intervene with appropriate actions (Mezirow & Taylor, 2009).
The teacher have systematically investigated and inspected their own practices and processes
by reflecting and focusing on one particular issue (Brookfield, 1995). The community of
literacy and numeracy action researchers at Unitec has developed a shared inquiry stance
where the investigation has become a mode of action (Brookfield, 1995; Rust, 2009). The
research has confirmed the importance of an appropriate support structure for teachers
undertaking research (Broadbent, 1996).
It can be seen as a limitation of this study that direct student feedback has been only collected
in the individual projects. However, teachers have been presenting their own findings at
conferences, which helps to validate the results of the study. The action research projects have
informed other participants as well as people across Unitec and the results have been shared
with the wider literacy and numeracy community in New Zealand through a variety of
channels (Cranton, 1996).
Conclusions
The paper has described the multi-project approach of the Unitec Literacy and Numeracy
Action Research Project. Findings of the meta-evaluation have been summarised and key
outcomes have been discussed. The 2010 findings have been used by the Academic Literacies
Team to improve the support structure and the design of the projects as well as the methods
used in the 2011 meta-evaluation.
The participants in 2010 have valued action research and enquiry processes as useful and
effective academic development for embedding literacy and numeracy. The meta-evaluation
indicates that these processes have helped the teachers involved to investigate and reflect on
their teaching practice as well as enhance their research capability. It has been a successful
initiative for embedding literacy and numeracy, with the design, implementation and
evaluation of course-specific interventions. It is planned to find out how teaching approaches
have been affected by contacting staff again one year after completing their projects. This is
to ascertain if it has helped them to transform their practices but also to find out about
potential barriers that might have impacted on staff. The Literacy and Numeracy Action
Research Project have been an important part of the Academic Literacies Team work and the
team is planning to continue the project with teaching staff in 2012.
References
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1974). Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Broadbent, F. (1996). The Impact of the Action Learning Program on The University of Queensland
Long-term outcomes 1991-1995 University of Queensland. Retrieved from
http://www.tedi.uq.edu.au/actionlearning/evaluations/qualitativereport1996/
Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Brass.
Casey, H., Cara, O., Eldred, J., Grief, S., Hodge, R., & Ivani, R. (2006). You wouldn't expect a maths teacher to
teach plastering…Embedding literacy, language and numeracy in post-16 vocational programmes – the
impact on learning and achievement. London: National Research and Development Centre for Adult
Literacy and Numeracy, University of London.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2002). Learning and unlearning: the education of teacher educators. Teachers and Teacher
Education(19), 5-28.
Cranton, P. (1996). Professional development as transformative learning: new perspectives for teachers of
adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fullan, M. (2003). Change forces with a vengeance. New York: Routledge Falmer.
Guskey, T. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15(5), 5-12.
McKenna, R., & Fitzpatrick, L. (2005). Integrated approaches to teaching adult literacy in Australia: A
snapshot of practice in community services Adelaide: National Centre for Vocational Education
Research (NCVER).
McKenzie, B., & Turbill, J. (1999). Professional development, classroom practice and student outcomes:
exploring the connections in early literacy development. Paper presented at the AARE-NZARE
Conference. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/99/pap/mck99328.htm
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult: core concepts of transformation theory. In Learning as
transformation: critcial perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J., & Taylor, E. (Eds.). (2009). Transformative learning in practice: insights from community, work
and higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ministry of Education. (2001). More than words. The New Zealand adult literacy strategy. Wellington: Ministry
of Education.
Ministry of Education. (2007). The adult literacy and life skills (ALL) survey: headline results and background:
Ministry of Education. Retrieved from
http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/16736/Factsheet_1-Final.pdf
Piggot-Irvine, E. (2009). Action research as an approach to development. In E. Piggot-Irvine (Ed.), Action
research in practice (pp. 11-34). Wellington NZCER Press.
Reeves, J., Forde, C., O'Brien, J., Smith, P., & Tomlinson, H. (2002). Performance management in education:
improving practice. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
Rust, F. (2009). Teacher research and the problem of practice. Teachers College Record, 111(8), 1882-1893.
Schwenger, B. (2009a). Guide for embedding LLN into courses and programmes. Auckland: Unitec New
Zealand.
Schwenger, B. (2009b). Enhancing educational practices through embedding literacy, language and numeracy.
Palmerston North: UCOL. Retrieved from http://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/download/ng/file/group3740/n3748-enhancing-educational-practices-through-embedding-literacy-language-and-numeracy--schwenger.pdf
Schwenger, B. (2010). Utilising action research and enquiry processes to achieve sustainable academic
development. Melbourne: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia, Inc.
Sutton, A., & Vester, B. (2010). Unlocking Auckland's potentional: adult literacy and numeracy skills in the new
Auckland. Auckland: COMET. Retrieved from www.comet.org.nz
Tertiary Education Commission. (2008). Learning progressions for adult literacy and numeracy: background
information. Wellington: Tertiary Education Commission.
Tertiary Education Commission. (2009). Strengthening literacy and numeracy: theoretical framework.
Wellington: Tertiary Education Commission.
Unitec New Zealand. (2008). Academic Literacies Policy. Auckland
Walker, M., Udy, K., Pole, N., May, S., Chamberlain, G., & Sturrock, F. Adult Literacy in New Zealand:
Ministry of Education. Retrieved from
http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/9474/IALS-brochure.pdf
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Whatman, J., Potter, H., & Boyd, S. (2011). Literacy, language and numeracy: connecting research to practice
in the tertiary sector. Wellington: Ako Aotearoa.
Yoon, K., Duncan, T., Lee, S., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher
professional development affects student achievement (Issues and answers report, REL 2007 - No. 033).
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for
Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
Zuber-Skerritt, O. (2002). A model for designing action learning and action research programs. The Learning
Organisation, 9(4), 143-149.