A C T I O N R E S E A R C H I N H E A L T H C A R E
6
recommend that this is used as a rigid structure. They maintain that in
reality the process may not be as neat as the spiral of self-contained cycles
of planning, acting and observing, and reflecting suggests. These stages,
they maintain, will overlap, and initial plans will quickly become obsolete
in the light of learning from experience. In reality the process is likely to
be more fluid, open, and responsive.
We find the spiral model appealing because it gives an opportunity to
visit a phenomenon at a higher level each time and so to progress towards
a greater overall understanding. By carrying out action research using this
model, one can understand a particular issue within a healthcare context
and make informed decisions with an enhanced understanding. It is
therefore about empowerment. However, Winter and Munn-Giddings
(2001) point out that the spiral model may suggest that even the basic
process may take a long time to complete. A review of examples of stud-
ies included in this book and the systematic review of studies using the
action research approach by Waterman et al. (2001) show that the period
of a project has varied significantly, ranging from a few months to one or
two years.
Several other models have also been put forward by those who have
studied different aspects of action research and we shall present some of
these later in this section. Our purpose in doing so is to enable the reader
to analyse the principles involved in these models which should, in turn,
lead to a deeper understanding of the processes involved in action
research. No specific model is being recommended here and as the reader
may have already noticed they have many similarities. Action researchers
should always adopt the models which suit their purpose best or adapt
these for use.
The model employed by Elliot (1991: 71) shares many of the features
of that of Kemmis and McTaggart and is based on Lewin’s work of the
1940s. It includes identifying a general idea, reconnaissance or fact-
finding, planning, action, evaluation, amending plan and taking second
action step, and so on, as can be seen in Figure 1.2. Other models, such
as O’Leary’s (2004: 141) cycles of action research shown in Figure 1.3,
portray action research as a cyclic process which takes shape as knowl-
edge emerges.
In O’Leary’s model, for example, it is stressed that ‘cycles converge
towards better situation understanding and improved action implementa-
tion; and are based in evaluative practice that alters between action and
critical reflection’ (2004: 140). O’Leary sees action research as an expe-
riential learning approach, to change, where the goal is to continually
refine the methods, data, and interpretation in light of the understanding
developed in each earlier cycle.
01-Koshy et al.-4092-Ch-01.indd 6 03/09/2010 5:08:46 PM