Participatory Action Research: issues in theory and practice

Action research is now common in educational and social practices of various kinds. The renaissance of this valuable approach to social enquiry has many virtues, but success is somewhat soured by cooption of some of the techniques occasionally used by action researchers for the technical improvement of practices, the Implicit values of which are poorly understood and timidly questioned. Naive cooption is accompanied by both traditional and new critique. Like most approaches to educational and social research, action research (or some people's impressions of it) has been subjected to critique by theorists of the so‐called post‐modern turn. These critiques have become prematurely Judgemental, and though drawing on what some see as powerful theoretical resources, are somewhat oblivious to the breadth and dynamism of action research theory and practice and dismissive of the achievements of action researchers who often work in contexts decidedly more risky than the academies which nurture and reward critique. Action research remains a diverse and thoroughly Justified and preferred mode of educational and social enquiry, continuing to address the concerns of both its practitioners and its critics.

     

Public understanding of science: from contents to processes

Public understanding of science is commonly seen in terms of lay persons' understanding of the contents of science. This article argues that it may be more salient to consider public understanding of the internal processes of science ‐ of the nature of scientific knowledge and of the sorts of information that science can reasonably be expected to provide. Drawing on the reported statements of non‐scientists in the media following the Chernobyl nuclear reactor accident, the article argues that the view of scientific knowledge that many people appear to hold is not one that can help them interpret and cope successfully with sts issues. The role that formal science education plays in sustaining this unhelpful view of science is discussed and some implications for practice are considered.     

Leadership and inclusion: a special school perspective

In July 2002, the National College for School Leadership (NCSL) held a 'Leading Edge' seminar focused on the contribution that leaders in special schools can make to the development of Inclusive policies and practices. The day gave colleagues working in specialist contexts an opportunity to share examples and experiences of current initiatives and to speculate about future trends and developments in inclusive education. In this article, Robin Attfield and Chris Williams, Assistant Directors in Programmes and Research respectively at the NCSL, explore the context in which the seminar took place and some of the themes and issues that emerged from discussion on the day. At the end of their paper, they summarise the key messages that the special school leaders who attended the seminar wished to communicate to a wider audience and articulate a further role for leaders in special schools in the development of inclusion.     

English Language Learners and Learning Disabilities: Research Agenda and Implications for Practice

Although little is known about learning disabilities (LDs) in English language learners (ELLs), there is a substantial knowledge base about the identification, assessment, and intervention of and for LDs in monolingual native English‐speaking students. Building on this knowledge, participants at an October 2003 National Symposium on Learning Disabilities in English Language Learners were asked to suggest research questions, priorities, and suggestions on how to build the necessary infrastructure to address critical research needs. In the discussions that took place, important themes emerged: (1) identification and assessment of LD and/or reading disabilities (RD) in ELLs (ELL/Ds), (2) understanding of the language and literacy developmental trajectories of ELLs, (3) understanding of the individual and contextual factors affecting outcomes, (4) the intersection of all of these areas with neurobiology, and (5) developing and testing the effectiveness of interventions for learning disabilities in ELL/Ds. These themes, and the research agenda that was forged around them, are presented. In addition, the practice implications of this agenda are presented, along with some suggestions for current practice while we await future research findings.