Let's Talk

Critical Participatory Action Research and Improvement Science-Guided Research Comparing Our Approaches to Improve Education

Authors

  • Joy Howard Western Carolina University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1850-1455
  • Kimberly Derk University of Southern Indiana
  • Tori Colson University of Southern Indiana

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2023.285

Keywords:

Critical participatory action research, Improvement Science, Educational Research

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to identify key characteristics and forms that both research approaches use within the applied field of education. In this paper, we ask—how are CPAR and IS-GR similar and different? And, can tools or propositions from each be used in tandem within a research project? We invite readers to consider useful frameworks created to address problems of practice. Drawing strength from our diverse backgrounds (fields of study and professional roles), we aim to identify clear overlaps and divergent perspectives between the two approaches to aid scholarly practitioners in making informed decisions about the research frameworks they choose to take up to address pressing problems of practice in education.

Author Biographies

Joy Howard, Western Carolina University

Associate Professor
Human Services
Western Carolina University

Kimberly Derk, University of Southern Indiana

Adjunct Instructor
University of Southern Indiana
Teacher Education Department

Tori Colson , University of Southern Indiana

Associate Professor

Assistant Dean
Pott College of Science Engineering, and Education

University of Southern Indiana

References

Aken, J. E. (2004). Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: The quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules. Journal of Management Studies, 41(2), 219–246. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00430.x

Bartman, T., DeWalt, D. A., Johnson, D. P., Mehr, D. R., Payne, A. S., & Provost, L. P. (2018). Improvement science takes advantage of methods beyond the randomized controlled trial. Pediatric Quality & Safety, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000082

Baum, F. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 60(10), 854–857. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2004.028662

Best, M., & Neuhauser, D. (2006). Walter A Shewhart, 1924, and the Hawthorne factory. Quality & Safety in Health Care, 15(2), 142–143. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2006.018093

Breda, K. L. (2014). Participatory action research. In M. de Chesnay & de C. Mary (Eds.), Nursing research using participatory action research (pp. 1–12). Springer Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826126146.0001

Brethower, D. M., Dickinson, A. M., Johnson, D. A., & Johnson, C. M. (2021). A history of organizational behavior management. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 42(1), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/01608061.2021.1924340

Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2017). Learning to improve: How America's schools can get better at getting better. Harvard Education Press.

Burghardt Dubois, W. E. (1898). The study of the Negro problems. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 11(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271629801100101

Capodagli, B., & Jackson, L. (2016). The Disney way: Harnessing the management secrets of Disney in your company (3rd ed.). McGraw Hill.

Crow, R., Hinnant-Crawford, B. N., & Spaulding, D. T. (2019). The educational leader's guide to improvement science: Data, design and cases for reflection. Stylus Publishing.

Deming, W. E. (1967). Walter A. Shewhart, 1891-1967. Review of the International Statistical Institute, 36(3), 372–375.

Deming, W. E. (1984). Out of the crisis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Dresch, A., Pacheco Lacerda, D., & Cauchick Miguel, P. A. (2015). A distinctive analysis of case study, action research and design science research. Review of Business Management, 1116–1133. https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v17i56.2069

Ferman, B., Greenberg, M., Lee, T., & McKay, S. C. (2021). The right to the city and to the university: Forging solidarity beyond the town/gown divide. The Assembly, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.33011/assembly.v3i1.1003

Fine, M., & Torre, M. E. (2021). Essentials of critical participatory action research. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000241-000

Fine, M., Torre, M. E., Oswald, A. G., & Avory, S. (2021). Critical participatory action research: Methods and praxis for intersectional knowledge production. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 68(3), 344–356. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000445

Fischer, A. R. H., Tobi, H., & Ronteltap, A. (2011). When natural met social: A review of collaboration between the natural and social sciences. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 36(4), 341–358. https://doi.org/10.1179/030801811x13160755918688

Franklin, J. (1994). The formal sciences discover the philosophers’ stone. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 25(4), 513–533.

Gawande, A. (2009). The checklist manifesto: How to get things right. Metropolitan Books.

Gutierrez, R. R., & Lipman, P. (2016). Toward social movement activist research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29(10), 1241–1254. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2016.1192696

Hartman, D. (2022, January 14). Community-engaged research: What it is and why it matters. American Sociological Association. https://www.asanet.org/community-engaged-research-what-it-and-why-it-matters

Hartmann, D. (2016). Sociology and its publics: Reframing engagement and revitalizing the field. The Sociological Quarterly, 58(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00380253.2016.1248132

Hinnant-Crawford, B. (2020). Improvement science in education: A primer. Myers Education Press.

Holtzman, E. (1994). Science, philosophy, and society: Some recent books. International Journal of Health Services. 11(1), 123–149. https://doi.org/10.2190/L5EU-E7PC-HXG6-EUML

Hooks, B. (1990). Yearning. South End Press.

Imad, M. (2021). Trauma-informed teaching. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. https://tll.mit.edu/trauma-informed-teaching/

Improvement Science Research Network. (n.d). What is improvement science. http://www.improvementscienceresearch.net

Impruver (July, 2020). 10 Excellent enterprise continuous improvement examples. https://impruver.com/continuous-improvement-examples/

Jamaludin, A., Henik, A., & Hale, J. B. (2019). Educational neuroscience: Bridging theory and practice. Learning: Research and Practice, 5(2), 93–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2019.1685027

Jefferson, A., & Kirshner, B. (2021). Inquiry in place: Collaborative research as strategy for resistance to displacement. The Assembly, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.33011/assembly.v3i1.1001

Langley, G. J., Moen, R. D., Nolan, K. M., Nolan, T. W., Norman, C. L., & Provost, L. P. (2009). The improvement guide. Jossey-Bass.

LeMahieu, P. G., Bryk, A. S., Grunow, A., & Gomez, L. M. (2017). Working to improve: Seven approaches to improvement science in education. Quality Assurance in Education, 25(1), 2–4. https://doi.org/10.1108/qae-12-2016-0086

Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x

Magnuson, S., Kras, K. R., Aleandro, H., Rudes, D. S., & Taxman, F. S. (2019). Using plan-do-study-act and participatory action research to improve use of risk needs assessments. Corrections, 5(1), 44–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/23774657.2018.1555442

Martín-Baró, I. (1994). Writings for a liberation psychology. Harvard University Press.

Meyer, M. A., Hendricks, M., Newman, G. D., Masterson, J. H., Cooper, J. T., Sansom, G., Gharaibeh, N., Horney, J., Berke, P., van Zandt, S., & Cousins, T. (2018). Participatory action research: Tools for disaster resilience education. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 9(4/5), 402–419. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijdrbe-02-2017-0015

Mirra, N., & Rogers, J. (2016). Institutional participation and social transformation: Considering the goals and tensions of university-initiated YPAR projects with K-12 youth. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29(10), 1255–1268. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2016.1192697

Misra, S. (2012). Randomized double blind placebo control studies, the “gold standard” in intervention based studies. Indian Journal of Sexually Transmitted Diseases and AIDS, 33(2), 131–134. https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7184.102130

Moen, R. D., & Norman, C. L. (2010). Circling back. Quality Progress, 43(11), 22.

Nilsen, P., Thor, J., Bender, M., Leeman, J., Andersson-Gäre, B., & Sevdalis, N. (2022). Bridging the silos: A comparative analysis of implementation science and improvement science. Frontiers in Health Services, 1. https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2021.817750

Pain, R., Whitman, G., Milledge, D., & Trust, L. R. (2011). Participatory action research toolkit: An introduction to using PAR as an approach to learning, research and action. Building Adaptive Strategies for Environmental Change with Land Use Managers, 1–8.

Peden, C. J., & Rooney, K. D. (2009). The science of improvement as it relates to quality and safety in the ICU. Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 10(4), 260–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/175114370901000409

Perla, R. J., Provost, L. P., & Parry, G. J. (2013). Seven propositions of the science of improvement. Quality Management in Health Care, 22(3), 170–186. https://doi.org/10.1097/qmh.0b013e31829a6a15

Perry, J. A., Zambo, D., & Crow, R. (2020). The improvement science dissertation in practice: A guide for faculty, committee members, and their students. Myers Education Press.

Peterson, D. S., & Carlile, S. P. (2021). Improvement science: Promoting equity in schools. Myers Education Press.

Romme, A. G. (2003). Making a difference: Organization as design. Organization Science, 14(5), 558–573. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.5.558.16769

The Health Foundation (2011). Event report: Evaluating healthcare quality improvement a summary of learning from a health foundation roundtable. https://www.health.org.uk/publications/evaluating-healthcare-quality-improvement

Torre, M. E. (2009). Participatory action research and critical race theory: Fueling spaces for nosotras to research. The Urban Review, 41(1), 106–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-008-0097-7

Torre, M. E., Fine, M., Stoudt, B. G., & Fox, M. (2012). Critical participatory action research as public science. APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology, Vol 2: Research Designs: Quantitative, Qualitative, Neuropsychological, and Biological., 171–184. https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-011

Tuck, E. (2009). Suspending damage: A letter to communities. Harvard Educational Review, 79(3), 409–428. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.79.3.n0016675661t3n15

Warren, M. (2021). Willful defiance: The movement to dismantle the school to prison pipeline. Oxford University Press.

Downloads

Additional Files

Published

2023-02-27 — Updated on 2023-04-26

How to Cite

Howard, J., Derk, K., & Colson , T. (2023). Let’s Talk: Critical Participatory Action Research and Improvement Science-Guided Research Comparing Our Approaches to Improve Education. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 8(1), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2023.285

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 1 (2023): Regular Issue

Section

Research Manuscripts

License

Copyright (c) 2023 Joy Howard, Kimberly Derk, Tori Colson

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.