Acceptable Methods in Action Researc.docx

Acceptable Methods in Action
Research
Schools of Public Service Leadership and Nursing and Health
Sciences
Version 1.1 Effective January 2015
Capella University
225 South Sixth Street, Ninth Floor
Minneapolis, MN 55402
PSL/NHS ACCEPTABLE METHODS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
...............................................................................................
..... 3
Action Research Acceptable Methods and Research Designs
................................... 4
Action Research is an Approach
................................................................................... 5
Qualitative Methods
...............................................................................................
..... 5
Quantitative Methods
...............................................................................................
... 7
Mixed Methods
...............................................................................................
............ 8
References
...............................................................................................
................. 9
3
ACTION RESEARCH ACCEPTABLE METHODS AND
RESEARCH
DESIGNS
The overarching goal of Action Research (AR) is to collaborate

with stakeholders and
participants in an effort to empower and effect social change.
AR can be considered a
continuum ranging from appreciative inquiry to pure
participatory research: appreciative
and cooperative inquiry (Heron, 1996; Reason & Rowan, 1981,
Stowell & West, 1991,
Torbert, 1976, 2004), action research or action science (Argyris,
1970, 1980, 1994; Argyris,
Putnam, & Smith, 1985), participatory action research (Freire,
1970), and participatory
research (Lewin,1958). The common factor is that the
participants or subjects are directly
involved in the research activities and the project solves a
practice or problem that impacts
the participants (Springer, 2007).
Appreciative Action Participatory Participatory
Inquiry Research Action Research Research
Research Mutually Question Question generated Community
generates and
Process generated
generated by the by the community. is in control of the process
question organization. Research process
Research controlled by
controlled and researcher
conducted by
researcher
Degree of Group Researcher asks High High
Participation process. for participation

Authentic
as needed
dialogue
Knowledge For practice Problem-solving Transform and
Transformational
Generation improvement advance scientific
knowledge
Knowledge Advance Improve system. Community action.
Social action.
Utilization practice. Self-
Advance
determination knowledge
Advance Development of critical
knowledge. consciousness.
Power Shared Held by Shared
Egalitarian
researcher
Outcomes Improvement
Solution
to Empowerment. Empowerment
of shared organizational Generation of community

of
practice problem. scientific
Scientific knowledg
knowle ge
e
d
Association Slight or none Possible Strong Strong
with Social
Change
4

Action Research is an Approach
Action Research is an approach or form of research as opposed
to a method. There are
different approaches or models of action research depending on
the action research
approach in the continuum, for example Lewin’s (1958) input,
transformation, output,
systems model of action research process; and Kemmis and
McTaggart’s (1999) plan, act,
observe, reflect action research interacting Spiral.
This document will review research methods and designs that
are acceptable for
dissertations using action research in the School of Public
Service Leadership(PSL) and the
School of Nursing and Health Sciences(NHS). The scholar-
practitioner model must guide all
decisions regarding what is and what is not an acceptable
research methodology. The
research methodologies and designs presented here offer a more
general rather than
specific discussion of those applicable approaches to
dissertation research.

In action research, the doctorate learner is considered a
principal investigator. The role of
the principle investigator is to facilitate or guide the study in
collaboration with an interested
organization or community. The term research methods is
identified in this document as the
broadest way in which the methodological concepts can be
categorized. The term research
design is identified as those overarching methodological
approaches that are most
commonly referred to as belonging to an umbrella of commonly
accepted quantitative,
qualitative, or mixed methodologies. As such, research designs
are more precise than
research methods, but still somewhat vague in the precise
manner in which data are
measured, collected, and analyzed.
Research questions should emerge from the identified research
problem or topic in a logical
way. Only after learners have clarified their research questions
do they begin to think about
methods, particularly data collection tools or instruments.
Research designs then evolve
from the research questions. In other words, there needs to be

clear alignment between the
research question and the means of gathering data and the data
has to answer the research
question.
Qualitative Methods
Qualitative research designs involve the principal investigator
in exploratory studies that
attempt to explain, define, or better understand phenomena. The
principal investigator
seeks to establish the meaning of phenomena from the
viewpoint of participants (Creswell,
2009, p. 16). These are the major categories:
• Case study – The researcher explores in-depth a program (such
as a program
evaluation), event, activity, or process of one or more
individuals (Creswell, 2009, p.
13). This is one of the most flexible designs to use with Action
Research.
• Phenomenological – The researcher identifies lived
experiences associated with the

phenomena (requires a strong background in psychology).
• Generic Qualitative Inquiry – The researcher is interested in a
thematic analysis of a
particular topic from the perspective of many participants.
• Grounded Theory – The researcher derives a general abstract
theory grounded in the
views of participants.
• Ethnographic – The researcher studies an intact cultural group
over a prolonged
period of time.
5
• Heuristics – The researcher and participants include their own
personal insights and
experiences during the research process.

No single research design dominates; however, the case study is
one of the most flexible
designs to use with action research (Stringer, 2007). Key to
providing a sound rationale and
justification for the chosen qualitative research design is to
clearly and explicitly connect
with authoritative sources on this design, by citing, discussing,
and referencing these
sources (e.g., Phenomenology - Moustakas; Grounded Theory –
Glaser and Strauss, Strauss
and Corbin; Case study - Yin, Stake). If the principal
investigator can demonstrate or justify
through scholarly support that their design meets the qualitative
criteria and that they are
sufficiently qualified to conduct the research, then the research
design will be accepted. In
action research these additional designs may include Delphi
method, trend analysis, force
field analysis, SWOT analysis, program evaluation, etc.
The criteria for acceptable PSL/NHS qualitative action research
designs are as follows:
• Creates an agenda for social change or reform.

• Empowers or collaborates with the participants or
stakeholders.
• Contributes in some way to the specialization’s existing body
of knowledge.
Qualitative research methods provide a wealth of information
concerning an observed
phenomenon. It is intended to better understand, explain, or
define aspects of the research
problem of interest. Each type of qualitative research design has
a unique and defined
process for collecting data based on that design’s accepted
methods and procedures.
• Gathering this type of data requires planning, researcher
experience, and a defined
strategy.
• The researcher must be aware of participant feelings,
emotions, knowledge,
experiences, and culture. In addition, many of these techniques
require that data be
obtained on facial expressions, intonation and overall
participant temperament.

The setting for conducting action research using qualitative
design must be conducive to the
research intent (e.g., a setting familiar to the participant).
• The researcher is an “active” part of the research when
interacting with participants.
It is critical to establish the role of the researcher, their overall
experience and
expertise on the proposed topic and methodology as they will
guide and provide
oversight for the research. The researcher is the key
measurement instrument.
Research bias is always a consideration.
• Additional consultants may be needed (e.g., counselors,
translators,
transcriptionists) to provide additional expertise. These
individuals must also adhere
to confidentiality protocols as dictated by the IRB.
• Multiple sources of data are common (e.g., interview
responses, observations,
document sources). See list below for other types of data

sources for qualitative
research. Triangulation of data for research questions is
encouraged.
• Participant feelings, emotions and experiences must be
captured and analyzed.
• Inductive analysis – The researcher must search for emergent
themes, explain and
interpret convergent and divergent information.
• Credibility and believability of the results are important.
• Ability to generalize – How the results can be used for an
expanded set of
participants, sometimes called transferability (Creswell, 2009)
is questionable given
small sample sizes which are typically purposive by design.
6

Data Sources for qualitative analysis include:
1. Fieldwork
2. Observation
• Participant
• Direct
• Naturalistic
3. Interviewing
• Open-ended questions
• Guided questions
• Focus groups
4. Open-ended questionnaire
5. Journaling
6. Literature, poetry, and lyrics,
7. Biography
8. Personal documents
9. Historical documents
10. Photographs, video, films, pictures, and drawings
Quantitative Methods
Using only quantitative methods in an action research study can

make it challenging to
engage stakeholders or produce results for actionable outcomes.
Quantitative or fixed
research designs are occasionally used for action research such
as found in SOPSL; thus,
they are discussed in this section. Non-experimental research
designs are the most
commonly used in action research. Correlational designs tend to
be more common than
experimental or quasi-experimental designs, as it is difficult to
manipulate the types of
variables under these types of study. Quasi and experimental
designs are more common in
scientific research studies where it is both desirable and
possible to manipulate variables
between participant groups.
Designs specific to a particular discipline or specialization are
acceptable as they meet the
specified criteria. If the learner can justify with scholarly
support that their design meets all
of the quantitative criteria, then the research design will be
accepted.
The criteria for acceptable PSL/NHS quantitative research

designs are as follows:
• Tests or verifies theories of explanations
• Identifies variables to study
• Relates variables in research questions
• Uses standards of validity and reliability
• Observes and measures information numerically
• Uses unbiased approaches
• Employs statistical techniques
Quantitative descriptive research such mean, range, standard
deviations, etc., may be used
with an action research project to add numerical information to
the other data that is
collected. Epidemiology data also falls into this category and
may include rates, ratios, odd
ratios, prevalence rates, and proportions. Such descriptive
designs are rarely used
exclusively for SOPSL dissertation action research.
7

Principal investigators who seek to better understand
phenomena (within PSL/NHS
specializations) may use the following data collection methods:
• Survey Research: The use of surveys or questionnaires
constitutes non-experimental
research if testing for linear relationships, statistical differences
or statistical
independence. This approach is very common in correlation
research designs used in
academic disciplines relevant to PSL/NHS specializations.
These data are subject to
internal and external validity considerations.
• Internal validity – The assessment of trustworthiness of the
data collected from
participants. This includes items such as participant experience,
knowledge, attitude
and emotional well being
• External validity – The assessment of trustworthiness of data

as it applies to other
groups, settings, and situations.
• Secondary Data Analysis: In action research the use of
secondary data can be used
to help justify the need for the study or as a comparison to data
that has been
collected. It cannot be used as the primary data for the results
of the study.
Mixed Methods
Mixed methods research tends to be a more complex, costly, and
lengthy process for
dissertations. Mixed methods designs involve the principal
investigator collecting diverse
types of data that best provide an understanding of a research
problem (Creswell & Plano
Clark, 2011). This is an acceptable approach in action research
pertinent to PSL/NHS
specializations. Principal investigators who seek to adopt a
mixed methods approach to their
action research dissertation must be familiar and up-to-date
with the current literature on
mixed methods research in order to satisfy current accepted

definitions and standards for
conducting this type of research. Similar to the requirement for
many types of qualitative
research, the principal investigator is expected to cite, discuss,
and reference authoritative
sources in support of numerous design elements (e.g., overall
design type, sampling
methods, data analysis methods, mixed methods validity and
applicability, etc.).
The principal investigator is obligated to demonstrate an
acceptable philosophical
understanding and appreciation for the merging of positivist and
social-constructivist
perspectives within a pragmatist paradigm. This merging of
philosophic traditions requires
the need to collect, organize, analyze, interpret, and merge both
quantitative and
qualitative data into one study.
The criteria for acceptable PSL/NHS mixed methods designs are
as follows:
• Justification for using a mixed methods approach needs to be
based on either the

current state of knowledge on the topic and the nature of the
phenomenon is
sufficiently complex such that examining it through a single
methodological approach
would fail to describe and explain the phenomenon.
• Understanding and appreciation for both the positivist and
social constructivist
traditions, either separately or as combined within the
pragmatist tradition.
• A visualization or methodological framework of the
integration of qualitative and
quantitative components.
• Design must align with the study’s stated purpose, goals, and
objectives, and be
capable of answering the study’s research questions.
• Research questions must meet current standards for acceptable
research questions.
• Data sources, data collection procedures, and sampling
methods must meet current
accepted standards supporting mixed methods research.

• Authoritative sources on mixed methods analysis must be
cited, discussed, and
referenced.
8
• Knowledge of how the quality and validity of mixed methods
research is established
and evaluated.
Mixed methods research represents an approach to examining
action research phenomenon
more holistically. It is quite possible, however, that the quality
of a mixed methods study is
based at least in part on the principal investigator’s systems-
thinking capabilities, which is
rooted in multiple philosophic perspectives, and who can work
with both all types of data to

uncover a deeper pattern of meaning through the merging of the
quantitative and
qualitative data.
• Interviews or extensive existing documents are generally
acceptable as qualitative
data. Open-ended questions included in a questionnaire, or as
part of a
predominantly quantitative survey are generally not acceptable.
• Surveys or questionnaires that collect quantitative information
including secondary
data, if appropriate.
• Sampling methods appropriate to each component, qualitative
(e.g., purposeful) and
quantitative (e.g., random).
• The use of a mixed methods design within a small number of
scholar-practitioner
approaches to disciplined inquiry—for instance, action research,
evaluation research,
survey or interview feedback, or appreciative inquiry are
acceptable, as long the
principal investigator demonstrates sufficient knowledge of this

approach based on a
thorough understanding of the literature and authoritative
sources.
Undertaking a mixed methods dissertation is no small
undertaking, and the decision to do
so should be based on the current state of knowledge or the
nature of the phenomenon,
and familiarity with the literature on mixed methods research.
In addition, the principal
investigator should consider,
• Personal or Professional Goals: If a principal investigator has
a desire to continue
conducting research, then the completion of a mixed-methods
study might constitute
experience in conducting both types.
• Time and Resources: A mixed methods study is going to
require additional time and
resources.
• Current Philosophical Orientation and Methodological
Competencies: The principal

investigator must be competent to conduct both quantitative and
qualitative
research.
To gain approval of any dissertation proposal, regardless of
methodological approach, the
principal investigator must demonstrate doctoral-level
knowledge and expertise in
presenting a scientifically meritorious study. There needs to be
consistency and alignment
among the research problem, purpose, and research questions,
based on a critical review of
the literature, and supported by a methodologically sound
research design. For mixed
methods research, this ultimately requires two methodological
approaches: quantitative and
qualitative. Finally, undertaking a mixed methods study requires
the support of a mentor or
perhaps a committee member who has some familiarity with
either mixed methods research
specifically, or has sufficient knowledge and skills in both
quantitative and qualitative
research.

References
Argyris, C. (1970). Intervention Theory and Method. Reading
MA: Addison-Wesley.
9
Argyris, C. (1980). Inner Contradictions of Rigorous Research.
San Diego CA: Academic Press.
Argyris, C. (1994). Knowledge for Action. San Francisco CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & Smith, D. M. (1985). Action science.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative,

quantitative, and mixed (3rd ed) Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and
conducting mixed methods research
(2nd eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York:
Herder & Herder.
Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded
theory. Chicago, Aldine.
Heron, J. 1996. Cooperative Inquiry: Research into the human
condition. London: Sage.
Lewin, K. (1958). Group Decision and Social Change. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Kemmis, S., and R. McTaggart. (1999). The action research
planner. Geelong, Australia: Deakin
University Press.
Moustakas, C. (1990). Heuristic research: Design, methodology,

and applications. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Reason, P. & Rowan, J. (1981). Human Inquiry: A Sourcebook
of New Paradigm Research.
London: Wiley.
Stake, R. (1994). Case studies. In N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln
(Eds.) Handbook of qualitative
research (pp.236-247). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stowell, F. A., & West, D. (1991). The appreciative inquiry
method: A systems based method of
knowledge elicitation. In M. C. Jackson, G. J. Mansell, R. L
Flood, R. B. Blackham, & S. V. E.
Probert (Eds.), Systems Thinking in Europe, (pp. 493-497). New
York, NY: Plenum.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research:
Grounded theory procedures
and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research:

Techniques and theory for
developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Stringer, E.T. (2007). Action research 3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
Calif., Sage Publications
10
Torbert, W. R. (1976). Creating a community of inquiry:
conflict, collaboration, transformation.
New York: John Wiley.
Torbert, W. & Associates (2004). Action Inquiry: The Secret of
Timely and Transforming
Leadership.
Yin, R.K. (2008). Case study research: Design and method.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

11
Table of ContentsAction Research Acceptable Methods and
Research DesignsAction Research is an ApproachQualitative
MethodsQuantitative MethodsMixed MethodsReferences
1. Statement of the Project: Write a clear statement of the
project and the basis for it being addressed.
1. Begin with a clear declarative statement, such as "It is not
known how and to what degree or extent. . . ."
2.Describe the general problem.
3.Identify the need for the study and explain why it is of
concern to the stakeholders r community members.
4.Tell the reader what needs to be discovered, or explain what is
wrong that needs to be fixed.
5.Answer these questions: What do we not know? What is the
need we are trying to address? Do we need more research? Do
we need to increase our understanding of the problem? Do we
need to find ways to solve it?

6.Clearly describe the magnitude and importance of the
problem.
2. Contribution to Society: Describe how your project will
contribute to society.
3. Need for Change: Present the empirical basis and related
evidence that there is a need for change (include the relevant
literature from your annotated bibliography).
4.Theoretical Foundation: Describe the theory or theories,
including assumptions, that serve as the backbone of your
project (include references for theories cited).
1.Establishes the foundation and structure of your study that can
hold or support a theory of a research work.
2.Explains why the problem under investigation exists.
3.Cites the major references in support of the theory that is
applied or developed in the study.
4.Describes how this study aligns or fits with other research in
the field using the same theory.
5.Describes the development of the research questions and/or
objectives.
5.Investigator Position (Action Researcher's Role): Provide an
explanation of your role as an action researcher (insider or
outsider).
6.Research Questions and/or Goals and Objectives of Your
Project: Provide a clear statement of the research questions to

be answered or the specific project objectives to be achieved.
7.Action Plan (Action Research Methods): Apply the Look,
Think, Act Model to explain how your project will be conducted
(what are the steps you will follow in implementing this
project?).
8.Dissemination Plan: Describe your plan for disseminating the
results of your project.
9.Action Research Data-Collection Methods: Describe the
methods you will use to collect the data. This includes
questionnaires, formal interview protocols, and measurement
tools established in the literature.
10.Assumptions: Identify the key assumptions of the proposed
project.
11.Limitations: Evaluate the weaknesses of your project at this
time.
12.Summary: Explain how your project meets the criteria
("hallmarks") of a good action research project.
13.Bibliography
Project Objectives
To successfully complete this project, you will be expected to:
1.Articulate the focus of an action research project and its
significance to the health care field.
2.Describe a current practice or intervention that an action

research project addresses.
3.Present the empirical basis and provide related evidence that
supports the need for change.
4.Describe the theory or theories, including assumptions, that
serve as the foundation of an action research project.
5.Analyze the health care organization's current environment
using tools included in the strategic management planning
process.
6.Assess both the internal and external environment of a health
care organization.
7.Evaluate the organization's directional strategy, including its
vision, mission, and values.
8.Apply traditional and new knowledge-economy methods to
obtain information for an action research project
To achieve a successful project experience and outcome, you
are expected to meet the following requirements. •Written
communication: Written communication is free of errors that
detract from the overall message.
•APA formatting: Resources and citations are formatted
according to APA (6th edition) style and formatting.
•Number of resources: Minimum of 30–40 resources.
•Length of paper: 15-20 typed, double-spaced pages.
•Font and font size: Arial, 10 point.

Due Date: End of Unit 10.
Percentage of Course Grade: 10%.
Submit Dissertation Proposal Final Project Scoring Guide
Grading Rubric
Criteria
Non-performance
Basic
Proficient
Distinguished
Describe a current practice or intervention that an action
16%
Does not describe a current practice or intervention that an
action research project addresses.
Identifies but does not describe a current practice or
intervention that an action research project addresses.
Describes a current practice or intervention that an action
Provides a thorough evaluation of a current practice or
intervention that an action research project addresses.

Articulate the focus of an action research project and its
16%
Does not articulate the focus of an action research project and
its significance to the health care field.
Describes an action research project and insufficiently links its
Articulates the focus of an action research project and its
Articulates and analyzes the focus of an action research project,
and delineates its significance to the health care field.
Evaluate the organization's directional strategy, including its
17%
Does not evaluate the organization's directional strategy,
including its vision, mission, and values.
Identifies the organization's directional strategy.
Evaluates the organization's directional strategy, including its
Provides a rigorous and scholarly evaluation of the
organization's directional strategy, including its vision, mission,
and values.
Present the empirical basis and provide related evidence that
supports the need for change in a health care organization.
17%

Does not present the empirical basis and related evidence that
Partially presents the empirical basis and provides some related
evidence that supports the need for change in a health care
organization.
Presents the empirical basis and provides related evidence that
Presents a comprehensive analysis of the empirical basis and
provides related evidence that supports the need for change in a
health care organization.
Apply appropriate methods to obtain information for an action
research project.
17%
Does not apply appropriate methods to obtain information for an
action research project.
Applies some but not all appropriate methods to obtain
information for an action research project.
Applies appropriate methods to obtain information for an action
research project.
Applies and analyzes use of appropriate methods to obtain
information for an action research project.
Describe the theory or theories, including assumptions, that
17%
Does not describe the theory or theories, including assumptions,

that serve as the foundation of an action research project.
Lists, but does not describe, the theory or theories that serve as
the foundation of an action research project.
Describes the theory or theories, including assumptions, that
Describes and analyzes the theory or theories, including
assumptions, that serve as the foundation of an action research
project.

Acceptable Methods in Action Researc.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Acceptable Methods in Action Researc.docx

Similar to Acceptable Methods in Action Researc.docx (20)

More from annetnash8266

More from annetnash8266 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Acceptable Methods in Action Researc.docx