of 21
8/10/2019 Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
1/21
Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
Introduction to Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills
"The more one listens to ordinary conversations, the more
apparent it becomes that the reasoning faculties of the brain take
little part in the direction of the vocal organs."
Edgar Rice Burroughs, American author and creator of the
Tarzan series (18751950)
Lesson Summary
You've probably heard the terms "critical thinking" and "reasoning
skills" many times, in many different contexts. But what exactly
does it mean to "think critically"? And just what are "reasoning
skills"? This lesson will answer these questions and show you why
critical thinking and reasoning skills are so important.
No matter who you are or what you do, you have to make
decisions on a regular basis. You may not realize it, but even those
decisions that seem like second naturelike deciding what to
wear when you're getting dressed in the morningrequire some
critical thinking and reasoning skills. When you decide what to
wear, you take many factors into considerationthe weatherforecast; the current temperature; your plans for the day (where
are you going? who will you see?); your comfort level (will you be
walking a lot? sitting all day?); and so on. Thus, you are already a
critical thinker on some level. But your life is complicated, and you
face decisions that are much more difficult than choosing what to
wear. How do you handle a conflict? Solve a problem? Resolve a
crisis? Make a moral or ethical decision?
"The person who thinks before he acts seldom has to apologize
for his acts."
Napoleon Hill
(Think and Grow Rich)
While there's no guarantee you'll always make the right decision
or find the most effective solution to a problem, there is a way to
significantly improve your oddsand that is by improving your
critical thinking and reasoning skills.
What Are Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills?
To improve your critical thinking and reasoning skills, you need to
know exactly what they are.
Critical Thinking
Think for a minute about the words critical thinking. What does
this phrase mean? Essentially, critical thinking is a decision-
making process. Specifically, critical thinking means carefully
considering a problem, claim, question, or situation in order to
determine the best solution. That is, when you think critically, you
take the time to consider all sides of an issue, evaluate evidence,and imagine different scenarios and possible outcomes. It sounds
like a lot of work, but the same basic critical thinking skills can be
applied to all types of situations.
Tip
It is important to keep in mind that all problems have more than
one solution. Like potato chips, you can't stop at just one. Keep
thinking (and munching!) and see how many possible answers you
can find. You might be surprised.
Critical thinking is so important because it helps you determine:
How to best solve a problem
Whether to accept or reject a claim
How to best answer a question
How to best handle a situation
Reasoning Skills
Reasoning skills, on the other hand, deal more with the process of
getting from point A, the problem, to point B, the solution. You
can get there haphazardly, or you can get there by reason.
A reason is a motive or cause for somethinga justification for
thoughts, actions, or opinions. In other words, it's why you do,
say, or think what you do. But your reasons for doing things aren't
always reasonableas you know if you've ever done or said
something in the heat of the moment. Reasoning skills ask you to
use good sense and base your reasons on facts, evidence, or
logical conclusions rather than just on your emotions. In short,
when you decide on the best way to handle a situation or
determine the best solution to a problem, you should have logical
(rather than purely emotional) reasons for coming to that
conclusion.
Logical: according to reason; according to conclusions drawn from
evidence or common sense
Emotional: drawn from emotions, from intense mental feelings
The Difference between Reason and Emotion
It would be false to say that anything emotional is not reasonable.
In fact, it's perfectly valid to take your emotions into
consideration when you make decisions. After all, how you feel is
very important. But if there's no logic or reason behind your
decisions, you're usually in for trouble.
Let's say, for example, that you need to buy a computer. This is a
rather big decision, so it's important that you make it wisely.You'll want to be sure that you:
Carefully consider your options
Consider different possibilities and outcomes
Have logical reasons to support your final decision
It may seem obvious that you need to choose a computer that
best suits your needs and budget. For example, as much as you
might like the top-of-theline gaming computer with the best video
card, almost unlimited memory, and built in surround sound, you
shouldn't get it if you only need this computer for simple
functions. But for a variety of emotional reasons, many people do
make these kinds of unwise, unreasonable decisions. They may
have thought critically and still made the wrong choice because
they let their emotions override their sense of logic and reason.
Justifying Your DecisionOne way to help ensure that you're using your critical thinking
and reasoning skills is to always justify your decisions and actions.
Why did you do what you did? Why did you make that decision?
Why did that seem like the best solution? Try this with even your
everyday decisions and actions. You'll get to know your current
decision-making process, and you'll be able to determine where in
that process you can become more effective.
Why Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Are Important
You will face (if you don't already) situations on the job, at home,
and at school that require critical thinking and reasoning skills. By
improving these skills, you can improve your success in everything
you do. Specifically, strong critical thinking and reasoning skills
will help you:
Compose and support strong, logical arguments
Assess the validity of other people's arguments
Make more effective and logical decisions
Solve problems more efficiently
Essentially, these four skills make up problem-solving skills. For
example, if someone wants to change your mind and convince
you of something, you have a "problem"you have to decide
whether or not to change your beliefs, whether to accept that
person's argument. Similarly, when you have a choice to make, or
a position you'd like to support, you have a different type of
"problem" to solvewhat choice to make, how to support your
position. Thus, the term problem solving can refer to any one of
these situations.
Tip
Don't be fooled by the use of the term argument. In this lessonn,
the word doesn't mean raised voices, harsh tones, and veiled
insults. Instead, in this arena, according to Princeton, the word
argument means "a course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating a
truth or falsehood; the methodical process of logical reasoning."
In Short
Critical thinking is the act of carefully considering a problem,
claim, question, or situation in order to determine the best
solution. Reasoning skills, which go hand-in-hand with critical
8/10/2019 Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
2/21
thinking, ask you to base your decisions on facts, evidence, and/or
logical conclusions. Critical thinking and reasoning skills are
implemented simultaneously to help you make smart decisions
and solve problems effectively. They also help you make stronger
arguments and better evaluate the arguments of others.
Skill Building until Next Time
Notice how many decisions you make throughout the day andhow many different problems you face. What kind of decisions
and problems do you encounter most often at home? At work? At
school?
Write down the process you went through to make a decision or
solve a problem today. What did you do to get from point A, the
problem, to point B, the solution?
Evaluate a decision or problem you solved recently. Do you think
it was a wise decision or effective solution? Why or why not? Did
you consider the range of issues, or did you neglect to take certain
issues into consideration? Did you make your decision based
mostly on reason or mostly on your emotions?
Exercises for this concept can be found at Critical Thinking and
Reasoning Skills Practice.
Macro & Micro Economics
By arpitaimt2012 | July 2013
Zoom InZoom Out Page 1 of 10
Economics has never been a science - and it is even less now
than a few years ago.Paul Samuelson
INTRODUCTION
Economics is the social science that analyzes the production,
distribution, and consumption of goods and services. A focus of
the subject is how economic agents behave or interact and how
economies work. A given economy is the result of a process that
involves its technological evolution, history and social
organization, as well as its geography, natural resource
endowment, and ecology, as main factors. These factors givecontext, content, and set the conditions and parameters in which
an economy functions. The world economic events and how they
affect the domestic economy .The economic activity, and of the
interactions of consumers and businesses. Government policy and
its effects.
SCARCITY AND EFFICIENCY: THE TWIN THEMES OF ECONOMICS:
Robbinss definition of economics (economics is the science of
scarcity)
Scarcity of an economic goods or services (means not that it is
rare but only that it is not freely available) occurs where it's
impossible to meet all unlimited desires and needs of the peoples
with limited resources. Society must find a balance between
sacrificing one resource and that will result in getting other.
Efficiency denotes the most effective use of a society's resources
in satisfying peoples wants and needs. It means that the
economy's resources are being used as effectively as possible to
satisfy people's needs and desires. Thus, the essence of
economics is to acknowledge the reality of scarcity and then
figure out how to use these resources to produce the maximum
level of satisfaction possible with the given inputs & technology.
Any problem marked by scarcity of means and multiplicity of
ends, becomes ipso facto an economic problem, and as such, a
legitimate part of the science of economics.
sOCIOCULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY
In the United States, anthropology usually is considered to consist
of four subdisciplines, or sub-fields: archaeology (describing and
understanding past human behavior by examining material
remains), physical or biological anthropology (describing the
evolution and modern physical variation of the human species),
anthropological linguistics, and sociocultural anthropology. Most
university departments of anthropology have faculty in three or
four of these subdisciplines. Socio-cultural anthropology often is
called simply cultural anthropology in the United States, although
a few academic programs use the term social anthropology, the
common designation in Europe. Some anthropologists identify
applied anthropology as a fifth subfield, while others consider it
part of sociocultural anthropology.
Anthropology is defined as the study of human commonalities and
differences and expressly includes the entire temporal and
geographic range of humankind in its scope. The database of the
discipline is large, including prehistoric populations as well as
every variety of contemporary society. In distinguishing itself fromother social sciences, anthropology emphasizes the holistic,
comparative, culture-centered, and fieldwork-de-pendent nature
of the discipline.
In Europe, social anthropology is more closely allied with
economics, history, and political philosophy than it is with physical
anthropology and archaeology, which often are taught in separate
programs. As social anthropology evolved in Europe, it came to be
associated with studies of the economy, ecology, polity, kinship
patterns, and social organization of non-Western peoples,
particularly in colonial Africa and Asia. The European approach to
theory was associated with sociological (especially functionalist)
and, more recently, historical approaches. In the United States,
where research focused initially on Native Americans and was
strongly influenced by the particularistic descriptive approach ofFranz Boass ethnography, anthropology came to be associated
with culture, that complex whole (in Edward Tylors words)
encompassing customs, language, material culture, social order,
philosophy, arts, and so on. European social anthropologists have
not failed to address culture and Americans have not neglected
social structure, yet the difference in terminology distinguishes an
emphasis on social relations from an emphasis on shared meaning
and behavior.
The heart of sociocultural anthropology is ethnography, the
written description of a culture group. Ethnography has
undergone many changes since it began with field reports by
missionaries and colonial officials. The pace of change has
increased since the 1960s, as recognition of global links has
become standard, other social scientists have adopted
ethnographic methods, and postmodernism has imposed stricterself-reflective criteria on writers. The methodological partner of
ethnography is ethnology, the comparative study of societies. In
its first decades, anthropology established the ideal that a
complete ethnographic record of the worlds cultures would allow
comparative studies that would lead to generalizations about the
evolution and functioning of all societies. Cross-cultural studies
continue to be one of the distinctive contributions of
anthropology to the social sciences.
HISTORY
Anthropology and sociology share common origins in the
nineteenth-century European search for a science of society.
Sociocultural anthropology and sociology also share a theoretical
history in the ongoing struggle between the desire for a
generalizing, rule-seeking science and that for a humanistic
reflection of particular lives. Throughout the twentieth century,
academic specialization and differences in research topics,
geographic focus, and methodological emphasis separated the
two disciplines. In the last several decades, globalization has
fostered a partial reconvergence of methods and subjects, though
not of worldviews, ethos, or academic bureaucracies.
Sociocultural anthropology often is contrasted with sociology: It is
said that anthropologists study small-scale societies, assume that
those societies are self-sufficient, and are usually outsiders
(politically, ethnically, and economically) to the groups they study.
These generalizations are partly true.
The methods of sociocultural anthropology have emphasized the
usefulness of seeking the large in the small by becoming
intimately acquainted with a single band, village, tribe, island, orneighborhood, and anthropologys early link to colonialism and its
base of support in Europe, Japan, China, and the United States has
privileged wealthy outsiders as observers of peasants, tribal
peoples, and marginalized groups. However, anthropology has
always kept the larger picture in mind, and for every study of an
isolated population, there are ethnographiesthat reveal links at
the regional, national, and global levels. The affiliation of socio-
cultural anthropology with archaeology and paleoanthropology
ensures that the long term and the large scale are never far from
sight. Ethnographies of industrialized societies, ranging from
8/10/2019 Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
3/21
ethnic minorities to corporate cultures, begin with the microcosm
but connect to larger questions. Sociology has been associated
from its beginnings with studies of modernization and
globalization in Western societies. In the postwar world,
anthropologists became of necessity students of these processes
in the same small communities that had been their prewar
subjects of study. Anthropologists have sought ways to
encompass urban life, regional processes, and global economic
and political transformations in their work, leading them todevelop skills in quantitative social research as well as their
traditional qualitative methods.
Developments in method and theory in the twentieth century
have led to a widely perceived split between sociocultural
anthropologists who seek a natural science of society and those
who emphasize anthropologys humanistic role as an interpreter
of cultural worlds. These differences are reflected in the
distinction between emic and etic strategies. Based on the
linguistic concept of the phoneme, emic work calls for the
researcher to understand the inside view, focus on meaning and
interpretation, and grasp the natives point of view to realize
his vision of his world, in Bronislaw Malinowskis words.A good
ethnography enables readers to understand the motives,
meanings, and emotions of a different cultural world. The etic(from phonetic) approach seeks generalizations beyond the
internal cultural worlds of actors, applying social science concepts
to the particulars of a culture and often using cross-cultural
comparisons to test hypotheses. A good ethnography presents
data that can be compared with other cases. In recent years, the
writing of ethnography has self-consciously struggled to develop a
style that can evoke the sensibility of a culture while including
descriptive information in a format that allows cross-cultural
comparisons.
Sociocultural anthropology begins with description and usually
intends that description (ethnography) to be a prelude to cross-
cultural comparison that will lead to generalizations about types
of societies or even about human universals. At the same time,
anthropologists are as likely as other social scientists to be
influenced by fashions in theory.THEORY
The nineteenth-century origins of anthropology, like those of
sociology, are rooted in the expanding inquiry into the nature of
human society that characterizes the nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries, but anthropologys roots also involve the
questions of biological and social evolutionism characteristic of
the era, as epitomized in the work of Charles Darwin and Herbert
Spencer. Anthropology and sociology share origins in the
foundational work of Durkheim, Weber, and Marx. However,
cultural anthropology adds to its pantheon of ancestors Tylor,
Morgan, and Frazer; it is in the work of these three men that one
can see how anthropology was set on a different trajectory. The
American Lewis Henry Morgan (Ancient Society, 1877) and the
British Edward Burnett Tylor (Primitive Culture, 1871) and James
Frazer (The Golden Bough, 1890) are counted among the founders
of anthropology because they sought to establish general laws of
human society through the comparative study of historical and
contemporary peoples. Tylor, Morgan, and Frazer were unilineal
evolutionists who believed that universal stages of evolution
could be identified in the transition from simple to complex
societies and that modern peoples could be ranked in this
evolutionary scale. These two strandsthe belief that comparison
can produce scientific generalizations and the search for
evolutionary processescontinue to characterize anthropology,
though the racist evolutionism of these early approaches was
discarded as anthropology was established as a discipline in the
1920s and 1930s.
While the work of the nineteenth-century social theorists
presaged both anthropology and sociology, by the turn of thecentury, each field was established in separate academic
departments and increasingly distinct research programs. In the
United States, anthropology as a scholarly project emerged
through the work of scholars drawn to the task of reconstructing
Native American cultures and languages, especially under the
auspices of the Bureau of American Ethnology and the formative
political, administrative, and scientific work of Franz Boas. Boas
responded to the prevailing ideas of unilineal evolutionism with a
theory that came to be called historical particularism, rejecting
broad generalizations about stages of evolution in favor of
detailed studies of the environmental context and historical
development of particular societies. Boas also trained the first
generation of professional anthropologists in the United States,
and his students, such as Alfred L. Kroeber, Robert Lowie, and
Edward Sapir, pioneered new theories that could replace unilineal
evolutionism. Sapirs and Benjamin Whorf s work on links
between language and culture, Margaret Meads on enculturation
and psychological anthropology, Ruth Benedicts on ethos, Zora
Neale Hurstons on folklore, and Kroebers on the superorganic all
fostered decades of theoretical development that pushed
American anthropology in distinctive directions. Field studies with
Native Americans and other North American minorities honed the
skills of the first generations of American anthropologists in
linguistic work, informant interviews, life histories, and historical
reconstruction and established the holistic style of American
anthropology, integrating archaeology, linguistics, and physical
anthropology with the study of society and culture.
While Boass students filled library shelves with detailed and
impressive ethnographies, a new theoretical orientation
developed in Great Britain that would have a great impact on the
culture-centered world of American anthropology. This was
functionalism, and its key proponents in anthropology were
Bronislaw Malinowski (psychological functionalism) and A. R.Radcliffe-Brown (structural functionalism). The period of interest
in the ways in which cultural institutions maintain social order
which affected the United States when Radcliffe-Brown and
Malinowski spent time at American departments of anthropology
in the 1930smarks the point at which most texts officially
distinguish British social anthropology from American cultural
anthropology. Radcliffe-Brown countered Boasian particularism
with an emphasis on the search for general laws of society and
stimulated a generation of European and American students to do
the same. British social anthropologists turned their analytic focus
on the study of persons and relations in persisting social
structures and pushed themselves and their students to develop
the close observation, incisive analysis, and careful record keeping
that marked the coming of age of long-term participant
observation as a research method. Functionalist studies took
place in the context of colonialism, with the limitations and powerimbalance that that implies, yet remain impressive for the quality
of detail and their capacity to integrate descriptions of political,
economic, and kinship relations. Many ethnographic classics were
produced by British social anthropologists of that era (e.g.,
Malinowskis Argonauts of the Western Pacific in 1922 and Evans-
Pritchards Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande in
1937 and The Nuer, 1940) and their students, including Raymond
Firth, Meyer Fortes, Audrey Richards, Lucy Mair, Edmund Leach,
Max Gluckman, and Fred Eggan.
While American anthropologists added the study of social
structure and function to their repertoire, they did not abandon
their interest in historical developments, language, personality,
and ethos and retained a four-fields orientation in the training
of graduate students. While some social anthropologists found
the idea of culture impossibly vague, American anthropologists
reveled in the complexity of the concept, with Kroeber and
Kluckhohn assembling a compendium of more than 150
definitions of culture. Stimulated by the challenge of British
social anthropology, the work of Kroeber, Mead, Benedict, and
Sapir from the 1920s through the 1950s explored culture as a
distinct level of analysis and a way to grasp the distinctive ethos
and worldview of each culture, along with the active role of the
individuals acts and words in shaping a culture.
In the 1940s and 1950s, the influence of materialist approaches in
the social sciences, while limited by the anticommunism in
American public life (explicitly Marxist approaches did not appear
until the 1970s), was manifested in a new set of evolutionary and
generalizing approaches in Ameri can anthropology. The work of
Julian Steward and Leslie White laid the groundwork for a newapproach to studies of adaptation and cultural change. White
argued for an evolutionary scheme in which culture (the uniquely
human capacity to manipulate symbols), as the superorganic
human adaptive mechanism, develops through evolutionary
stages marked by the increasing ability of human groups to
capture energy through technological systems. Steward worked
on a smaller scale, arguing for the analysis of structural similarities
among cultures at a regional level, which can be understood by
recognizing the hierarchical relations among three levels of
sociocultural integration: technoeco-nomics (infrastructure),
8/10/2019 Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
4/21
sociopolitical organization, and ideology (superstructure).
Stewards scheme allowed anthropologists to catalogue cultures
as structural types and encouraged the study of change over time
in a multilineal evolutionary process that he contrasted with
Whites more abstract global stages.
Materialist studies continued to develop and to shape
archaeology as well as cultural anthropology. Marshall Sahlins and
Elman R. Service merged Whites and Stewards approaches in a
neoevolutionist theory that encouraged both archaeologists and
materialist-oriented sociocultural anthropologists to consider the
regional and large-scale classification and development of
societies. Marvin Harris, Eleanor Burke Leacock, and Morton Fried
attempted to explain cultural diversity and change in the context
of the causal primacy of production and reproduction. In the
1960s and 1970s, the new field of cultural ecology developed a
neofunctionalist approach that allowed scientists to include
cultural and social aspects of human behavior in natural science
research. Roy Rappaports 1967 Pigs for the Ancestors began with
an effort to measure the energy intake and outflow of a highland
new Guinea population; the 1984 edition included a lengthy
discussion of criticisms of neofunctionalist theory and the
applicability of adaptive and evolutionary concepts to human
groups.
In France, Claude Levi-Strauss was developing ideas that would
transform the world of social science through structuralism, which
emerged in the 1960s and 1970s as a totalizing theory aiming at
uncovering the common structures of the human mind.
Structuralism, which was influenced by the linguistics theories of
Saussure and Jakobson, treated the products of culture as
symbolic systems and examined the formal patterns of those
systems in order to envision discern universal structures and
cognitive patterns of the human mind. Structuralism was applied
to myths, kinship, relations to art, and every other aspect of
culture. The work of Levi-Strauss, Edmund Leach, and other
structuralists drew sharp rebuttals from theorists who sought
explanations of human diversity in material and social conditions
rather than in mental templates. Although the abstractness of
structuralism eventually limited its interest to students of culture,it continues to be a useful technique, particularly in the analysis of
the symbolic products of culture.
Ethnoscience, which emerged in the 1950s, also examined the
mental categories underlying cultural products. Drawing heavily
on linguistic theory and methodology, ethnoscience tried to
develop fieldwork methods sufficiently rigorous to delineate the
mental models that generate words and behavior and, in its
emphasis on the emic approach, insisted on the necessity of fully
accessing the native understanding of cultural domains. As
ethnoscience faded in importance in the 1970s, it was succeeded
by cognitive anthropology, the cross-cultural study of cognition.
Structuralism, ethnoscience, and responses to materialist
neoevolutionist theory stimulated the emergence of symbolic
anthropology and cultural analysis in the 1960s and 1970s, and
this in turn led to the interpretive turn that has continued in
cultural anthropology through the rest of the century. Again,
linguistics proved influential, as David Schneider, Clifford Geertz,
and Victor Turner explored new ways to study the cultural
construction of meaning and the public representation of
meaning in cultural elements. Most symbolic anthropologists
focus on the description and interpretation of particular cultural
cases, emphasizing the ethnographers role in explicating cultural
events or products, though a few symbolic anthropologists, such
as Mary Douglas, have sought general models of symbol systems.
Symbolic anthropology shifted in the 1980s toward interpretive
anthropology, which in turn generated a decade of reflection on
the writing of ethnography, seeking modes of representation that
would represent the worldview, internal logic, and emotional
sensibility of a culture. Emerging from interpretive approacheshave been experiments in ethnography, renewed interest in life
histories, and extensive critiques of an etic-oriented ethnography
that relies on the authoritative voice of an outside observer and
author. The 1980s also saw a new interest in history, spurred in
part by the work of French scholars such as Braudel, Bourdieu,
and Foucault and also playing a part in drawing some sociocultural
anthropologists toward humanistic approaches.
American cultural anthropology has always taken an interest in
evolutionary questions, and in the 1970s, the biologist E. O.
Wilson used sociobiology to challenge social scientists to study
the role of natural selection in human behavior. Anthropologists
immediate response was to criticize sociobiology as sociologically
naive, culture-bound, and potentially racist and sexist. In the
longer term, however, this challenge renewed anthropologists
interest in the holistic approach to culture, stimulating new
approaches to the flexible and complex linkage of genetic
inheritance and cultural malleability. Archaeologists, physical
anthropologists, and cultural anthropologists share an interest inthese long-term questions, which now are studied as human
behavioral ecology.
ORGANIZATION
While anthropological theory has participated in many of the
trends in the social sciences in this century, anthropologists most
often speak of themselves in terms of the topics they study and
the geographic areas in which they are expert. A cultural
anthropologist might say that she studies gender issues in the
Middle East, political hierarchy in Polynesia, or hunter-
gatherer ecology in the Arctic, with the implication that her
theoretical school is a less useful category or that one might
include several different theoretical or methodological
approaches to ones topic.
A review of textbooks in anthropology and courses offered in
larger departments provides an indication of the overlap and the
difference in range between sociological and anthropological
topics. Traditional topics in anthropology include the categories of
sociopolitical life (political anthropology, the anthropology of
religion, social organization, patterns of subsistence, economic
anthropology), cross-cultural approaches to all social science
topics (ethnicity and identity, psychological anthropology, urban
anthropology, ethnohistory, gender), theoretical approaches
(symbolic anthropology, cultural ecology), applied topics (legal
anthropology, developmental anthropology, culture change,
medical anthropology, education and culture), and topics
reflecting the persistent holism of the anthropological enterprise
(language and culture, genetics and behavior).
Anthropologists regional focus traditionally has beensmall-scalenon-Western societies, but this has changed dramatically in the
last fifty years. While sociologists and other social scientists have
become more active in non-Western contexts (particularly
economic development and modernization), anthropologists have
become more active in studying Western societies, using their
traditional skills of small-community ethnography, cultural
models, and comparison in these situations. However, as part of
their postgraduate training, most American and European
anthropologists do a lengthy period of participant observation
research in a small-scale society, usually a foraging band or a
tribal or peasant society.
One stimulus to anthropologists willingness to become
wholeheartedly involved in the study of Western, industrialized,
and mass societies has been the growth in applied work. While
sociology was committed to researching public policy issues from
its beginning, anthropology has only intermittently taken on
research directed at social problems and policy issues. Beginning
with government work during World War II and the postwar Fox
and Vicos projects in applied anthropology and as a result of
globalization and limited aca-demicjob opportunities for
anthropologists, there has been an increase in putting
anthropological concepts and methods to the service of
immediate outcomes rather than academic research. The greatest
demand for applied anthropology is in economic and social
development, medical anthropology, the anthropology of
education, and international business.
METHODS
Anthropology was born in the theories of armchair
anthropologists who based their theories about the evolution ofhuman beliefs and societies on the reports of colonial officials,
missionaries, and merchants. Since that time, the commitment of
researchers such as Boas, Mead, and Malinowski to detailed, long-
term field studies has generated the impulse that has sustained
generations of anthropologists in an effort to produce detailed,
fine-grained, firsthand descriptions of the worlds cultures.
Cultural anthropology has long held that long-term participant
observation, including mastery of local languages, is the best way
to produce valid ethnographic description. Participant observation
8/10/2019 Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
5/21
is the source of anthropologys ethnographic database and the
foundation on which controlled cross-cultural comparison is built.
The work of field research and the writing of ethnography have
received much attention in recent decades. Participant
observation is now an umbrella term for a research project that,
while it extends over the long term (usually at least a year) and
relies on the use of the local language, key informants, and living
close to the ground with the people being studied, is likely to
include a range of additional research techniques. Sociocultural
anthropologists also are trained in kinship analysis, unstructured
and structured interviews, questionnaires, scales, taxonomies,
and direct and unobtrusive observation. In the past decade, there
has been a growing expectation that researchers will combine
qualitative and quantitative research methods, increasing both
the validity and the reliability of ethnographic work. Applied
anthropology has generated its own methods, some of them
shaped by the time and cash restraints of nonacademic research,
such as rapid rural assessment, participatory appraisal, and
decision-tree modeling.
Cross-cultural comparison has been a goal of anthropology from
the start. The first armchair anthropologists used sometimes
unreliable secondhand information to generate categories andstages of social evolution, but researchers soon employed more
scientific methods. Archaeologists work on regional and
chronological linkages encouraged ethnologists to trace the
development, distribution, and diffusion of culture traits
(especially in the United States, with Boass encouragement).
British social anthropologists and the neoevolutionists urged the
use of regional and global comparisons to generate models of
structural stability and change. George P. Murdock greatly
facilitated large-scale comparison when he created the Human
Relations Area Files, the physical form of the great database of
human cultures anthropology had long sought. Cross-cultural
studies in anthropology have allowed anthropologists to generate
and test midlevel hypotheses about cultural patterns and allowed
social scientists to test the broader validity of hypotheses
generated in Western contexts.
CURRENT ISSUES
In surveying the history of anthropological theory, one often
notices the persistent tension between materialist and idealist
ways of studying culture. In the current environment, after a
decade of postmodern critiques, this tension has actually split a
few academic departments, severing archaeology and biological
anthropology from cultural anthropology, or scientific from
humanistic approaches. Research specialization and job-market
pressures also interfere with the holistic four-fields approach that
American anthropologists have long considered their hallmark. In
addition, socio-cultural anthropology has been pressed by the
inroads of literary criticism, cultural studies, ethnic studies, and
other related fields into its traditional preserve. Like other social
sciences, anthropology feels that it is living through a crisis that
represents both a point in a repeated cycle of theoretical change
and a response to national and global contexts.
However, the end of the twentieth century has seen a wider
range of research and applied work than had ever been done
previously (see recent issues of American Anthropologist,
American Ethnologist, Current Anthropology, and Human
Organization). Current work in anthropology includes traditional
detailed ethnographies that aim to increase the descriptive
database of the worlds cultures, problem-focused fieldwork
aimed at elucidating theoretical puzzles, reflexive ethnography
that attempts to find a moral and artistic center from which to
write, analyses of organizations and evaluations of programs
intended to guide policy decisions, and hypothesis-testing data
crunching. The long-standing distinction between materialist and
idealist approaches continues as interpretive, postmodern
anthropology seeks new ways to do the job it has been critiquingfor a decade and as ecological, evolutionist, and materialist
approaches argue with renewed vigor for a scientific discipline.
Sociocultural anthropology and sociology share modern interests
in agency; power; the relative role of social structures and
individual action in culture change; the intersections of ethnicity,
class, and gender; and the historical shaping of modern
institutions and cultural representations. In all its interests,
ongoing input from archaeology, biological anthropology, and
linguistics has given so-ciocultural anthropology a uniquely broad
and deep perspective on the human condition, and its stream of
theory is fed from these other sources of knowledge about the
human condition. In describing the commonalities that unite
cultural anthropology, Rob Borofsky speaks of anthropologists
shared ethics: a desire to publicize human commonalities
(especially in countering racism), the valuing of cultural diversity,
and the use of cultural differences as a form of cultural critique
of the anthropologists home culture and in general of industrial
mass society. Despite an explosion of variation in whatsociocultural anthropologists do, anthropologists holistic and
comparative worldview remains distinctive.
Share This
Micro and Macro: The Economic Divide
FINANCE & DEVELOPMENT
G. Chris Rodrigo
Economics is split between analysis of how the overall economy
works and how single markets function
Micro and Macro: The Economic Divide
A question of scale (photo: Zack Seckler/Corbis)
Physicists look at the big world of planets, stars, galaxies, and
gravity. But they also study the minute world of atoms and the
tiny particles that comprise those atoms.
Economists also look at two realms. There is big-picturemacroeconomics, which is concerned with how the overall
economy works. It studies such things as employment, gross
domestic product, and inflationthe stuff of news stories and
government policy debates. Little-picture microeconomics is
concerned with how supply and demand interact in individual
markets for goods and services.
In macroeconomics, the subject is typically a nationhow all
markets interact to generate big phenomena that economists call
aggregate variables. In the realm of microeconomics, the object of
analysis is a single marketfor example, whether price rises in
the automobile or oil industries are driven by supply or demand
changes. The government is a major object of analysis in
macroeconomicsfor example, studying the role it plays in
contributing to overall economic growth or fighting inflation.
Macroeconomics often extends to the international sphere
because domestic markets are linked to foreign markets throughtrade, investment, and capital flows. But microeconomics can
have an international component as well. Single markets often are
not confined to single countries; the global market for petroleum
is an obvious example.
The macro/micro split is institutionalized in economics, from
beginning courses in principles of economics through to
postgraduate studies. Economists commonly consider themselves
microeconomists or macroeconomists. The American Economic
Association recently introduced several new academic journals.
One is called Microeconomics. Another, appropriately, is titled
Macroeconomics.
Why the divide?
It was not always this way. In fact, from the late 18th century until
the Great Depression of the 1930s, economics was economics
the study of how human societies organize the production,
distribution, and consumption of goods and services. The field
began with the observations of the earliest economists, such as
Adam Smith, the Scottish philosopher popularly credited with
being the father of economicsalthough scholars were making
economic observations long before Smith authored The Wealth of
Nations in 1776. Smiths notion of an invisible hand that guides
someone seeking to maximize his or her own well-being to
provide the best overall result for society as a whole is one of the
most compelling notions in the social sciences. Smith and other
early economic thinkers such as David Hume gave birth to the
field at the onset of the Industrial Revolution.
Economic theory developed considerably between the
appearance of Smiths The Wealth of Nations and the Great
Depression, but there was no separation into microeconomics and
macroeconomics. Economists implicitly assumed that either
markets were in equilibriumsuch that prices would adjust toequalize supply and demandor that in the event of a transient
shock, such as a financial crisis or a famine, markets would quickly
return to equilibrium. In other words, economists believed that
the study of individual markets would adequately explain the
behavior of what we now call aggregate variables, such as
unemployment and output.
The severe and prolonged global collapse in economic activity
that occurred during the Great Depression changed that. It was
not that economists were unaware that aggregate variables could
be unstable. They studied business cyclesas economies
8/10/2019 Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
6/21
regularly changed from a condition of rising output and
employment to reduced or falling growth and rising
unemployment, frequently punctuated by severe changes or
economic crises. Economists also studied money and its role in
the economy. But the economics of the time could not explain the
Great Depression. Economists operating within the classical
paradigm of markets always being in equilibrium had no plausible
explanation for the extreme market failure of the 1930s.
If Adam Smith is the father of economics, John Maynard Keynes isthe founding father of macroeconomics. Although some of the
notions of modern macroeconomics are rooted in the work of
scholars such as Irving Fisher and Knut Wicksell in the late 19th
and early 20th centuries, macroeconomics as a distinct discipline
began with Keyness masterpiece, The General Theory of
Employment, Interest and Money, in 1936. Its main concern is the
instability of aggregate variables. Whereas early economics
concentrated on equilibrium in individual markets, Keynes
introduced the simultaneous consideration of equilibrium in three
interrelated sets of marketsfor goods, labor, and finance. He
also introduced disequilibrium economics, which is the explicit
study of departures from general equilibrium. His approach was
taken up by other leading economists and developed rapidly into
what is now known as macroeconomics.
Coexistence and complementarityMicroeconomics is based on models of consumers or firms (which
economists call agents) that make decisions about what to buy,
sell, or producewith the assumption that those decisions result
in perfect market clearing (demand equals supply) and other ideal
conditions. Macroeconomics, on the other hand, began from
observed divergences from what would have been anticipated
results under the classical tradition.
Today the two fields coexist and complement each other.
Microeconomics, in its examination of the behavior of individual
consumers and firms, is divided into consumer demand theory,
production theory (also called the theory of the firm), and related
topics such as the nature of market competition, economic
welfare, the role of imperfect information in economic outcomes,
and at the most abstract, general equilibrium, which deals
simultaneously with many markets. Much economic analysis is
microeconomic in nature. It concerns such issues as the effects ofminimum wages, taxes, price supports, or monopoly on individual
markets and is filled with concepts that are recognizable in the
real world. It has applications in trade, industrial organization and
market structure, labor economics, public finance, and welfare
economics. Microeconomic analysis offers insights into such
disparate efforts as making business decisions or formulating
public policies.
Macroeconomics is more abstruse. It describes relationships
among aggregates so big as to be hard to apprehendsuch as
national income, savings, and the overall price level. The field is
conventionally divided into the study of national economic growth
in the long run, the analysis of short-run departures from
equilibrium, and the formulation of policies to stabilize the
national economythat is, to minimize fluctuations in growth and
prices. Those policies can include spending and taxing actions by
the government or monetary policy actions by the central bank.
Bridging the micro/macro divide
Like physical scientists, economists develop theory to organize
and simplify knowledge about a field and to develop a conceptual
framework for adding new knowledge. Science begins with the
accretion of informal insights, particularly with observed regular
relationships between variables that are so stable they can be
codified into laws. Theory is developed by pinning down those
invariant relationships through both experimentation and formal
logical deductionscalled models.
Since the Keynesian revolution, the economics profession has had
essentially two theoretical systems, one to explain the small
picture, the other to explain the big picture (micro and macro are
the Greek words, respectively, for small and big). Following
the approach of physics, for the past quarter century or so, a
number of economists have made sustained efforts to mergemicroeconomics and macroeconomics. They have tried to develop
microeconomic foundations for macroeconomic models on the
grounds that valid economic analysis must begin with the
behavior of the elements of microeconomic analysis: individual
households and firms that seek to optimize their conditions.
There have also been attempts to use very fast computers to
simulate the behavior of economic aggregates by summing the
behavior of large numbers of households and firms. It is too early
to say anything about the likely outcome of this effort. But within
the field of macroeconomics there is continuing progress in
improving models, whose deficiencies were exposed by the
instabilities that occurred in world markets during the global
financial crisis that began in 2008.
How they differ
Contemporary microeconomic theory evolved steadily without
fanfare from the earliest theories of how prices are determined.
Macroeconomics, on the other hand, is rooted in empirical
observations that existing theory could not explain. How to
interpret those anomalies has always been controversial. Thereare no competing schools of thought in microeconomicswhich is
unified and has a common core among all economists. The same
cannot be said of macroeconomicswhere there are, and have
been, competing schools of thought about how to explain the
behavior of economic aggregates. Those schools go by such
names as New Keynesian or New Classical. But these divisions
have been narrowing over the past few decades (Blanchard,
DellAriccia, and Mauro, 2010).
Microeconomics and macroeconomics are not the only distinct
subfields in economics. Econometrics, which seeks to apply
statistical and mathematical methods to economic analysis, is
widely considered the third core area of economics. Without the
major advances in econometrics made over the past century or
so, much of the sophisticated analysis achieved in
microeconomics and macroeconomics would not have beenpossible.
An Overview of the
Methodological Approach of
Action Research
Rory OBrien
Faculty of Information Studies, University of Toronto
1998
Citation:
O'Brien, R. (2001). Um exame da abordagem metodolgica da
pesquisa ao [An Overview of the Methodological Approach of
Action Research]. In Roberto Richardson (Ed.), Teoria e Prtica da
Pesquisa Ao [Theory and Practice of Action Research]. Joo
Pessoa, Brazil: Universidade Federal da Paraba. (English version)
Available: http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html
(Accessed 20/1/2002)
Table of Contents
Introduction
What is Action Research?
Definition
The Action Research Process
Principles of Action Research
When is Action Research used?
Situating Action Research in a Research Paradigm
Positivist Paradigm
Interpretive Paradigm
Paradigm of Praxis
Evolution of Action Research
Origins in late 1940s
Current Types of Action Research
Traditional Action ResearchContextural Action Research (Action Learning)
Radical Action Research
Educational Action Research
Action Research Tools
The Search Conference
Role of the Action Researcher
Ethical Considerations
Examples of Action Research Projects
Case Study 1 - Development of nature tourism in the Windward
Islands
8/10/2019 Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
7/21
Action Research and Information Technology
Case Study 2 - Internet-based collaborative work groups in
community health
Case Study 3 - Computer conferencing in a learning community
Commentary on the need for more research
Conclusion
Introduction
If you want it done right, you may as well do it yourself. This
aphorism may seem appropriate if you are a picky housekeeper,
but more and more people are beginning to realize it can also
apply to large corporations, community development projects,
and even national governments. Such entities exist increasingly in
an interdependent world, and are relying on Action Research as a
means of coming to grips with their constantly changing and
turbulent environments.
This paper will answer the question What is Action Research?,
giving an overview of its processes and principles, stating when it
is appropriate to use, and situating it within a praxis researchparadigm. The evolution of the approach will be described,
including the various kinds of action research being used today.
The role of the action researcher will be briefly mentioned, and
some ethical considerations discussed. The tools of the action
researcher, particularly that of the use of search conferences, will
be explained. Finally three case studies will be briefly described,
two of which pertain to action research projects involving
information technology, a promising area needing further
research.
What is Action Research?
Definition
Action research is known by many other names, includingparticipatory research, collaborative inquiry, emancipatory
research, action learning, and contextural action research, but all
are variations on a theme. Put simply, action research is learning
by doing - a group of people identify a problem, do something to
resolve it, see how successful their efforts were, and if not
satisfied, try again. While this is the essence of the approach,
there are other key attributes of action research that differentiate
it from common problem-solving activities that we all engage in
every day. A more succinct definition is,
"Action research...aims to contribute both to the practical
concerns of people in an immediate problematic situation and to
further the goals of social science simultaneously. Thus, there is a
dual commitment in action research to study a system and
concurrently to collaborate with members of the system in
changing it in what is together regarded as a desirable direction.
Accomplishing this twin goal requires the active collaboration of
researcher and client, and thus it stresses the importance of co-
learning as a primary aspect of the research process."[i]
What separates this type of research from general professional
practices, consulting, or daily problem-solving is the emphasis on
scientific study, which is to say the researcher studies the problem
systematically and ensures the intervention is informed by
theoretical considerations. Much of the researchers time is spent
on refining the methodological tools to suit the exigencies of the
situation, and on collecting, analyzing, and presenting data on an
ongoing, cyclical basis.
Several attributes separate action research from other types of
research. Primary is its focus on turning the people involved intoresearchers, too - people learn best, and more willingly apply
what they have learned, when they do it themselves. It also has a
social dimension - the research takes place in real-world
situations, and aims to solve real problems. Finally, the initiating
researcher, unlike in other disciplines, makes no attempt to
remain objective, but openly acknowledges their bias to the other
participants.
The Action Research Process
Stephen Kemmis has developed a simple model of the cyclical
nature of the typical action research process (Figure 1). Each
cycle has four steps: plan, act, observe, reflect.
Figure 1 Simple Action Research Model
(from MacIsaac, 1995)[ii]
Gerald Susman (1983) gives a somewhat more elaborate listing.
He distinguishes five phases to be conducted within each research
cycle (Figure 2). Initially, a problem is identified and data is
collected for a more detailed diagnosis. This is followed by a
collective postulation of several possible solutions, from which a
single plan of action emerges and is implemented. Data on the
results of the intervention are collected and analyzed, and the
findings are interpreted in light of how successful the action has
been. At this point, the problem is re-assessed and the process
begins another cycle. This process continues until the problem is
resolved.
Figure 2 Detailed Action Research Model
(adapted from Susman 1983)[iii]
Principles of Action Research
What gives action research its unique flavour is the set of
principles that guide the research. Winter (1989) provides a
comprehensive overview of six key principles.[iv]
1) Reflexive critique
An account of a situation, such as notes, transcripts or official
documents, will make implicit claims to be authoritative, i.e., itimplies that it is factual and true. Truth in a social setting,
however, is relative to the teller. The principle of reflective
critique ensures people reflect on issues and processes and make
explicit the interpretations, biases, assumptions and concerns
upon which judgments are made. In this way, practical accounts
can give rise to theoretical considerations.
2) Dialectical critique
Reality, particularly social reality, is consensually validated, which
is to say it is shared through language. Phenomena are
conceptualized in dialogue, therefore a dialectical critique is
required to understand the set of relationships both between the
phenomenon and its context, and between the elements
constituting the phenomenon. The key elements to focus
attention on are those constituent elements that are unstable, or
in opposition to one another. These are the ones that are most
likely to create changes.
3) Collaborative Resource
Participants in an action research project are co-researchers. The
principle of collaborative resource presupposes that each persons
ideas are equally significant as potential resources for creating
interpretive categories of analysis, negotiated among the
participants. It strives to avoid the skewing of credibility
stemming from the prior status of an idea-holder. It especially
makes possible the insights gleaned from noting the
contradictions both between many viewpoints and within a single
viewpoint
4) Risk
The change process potentially threatens all previously
established ways of doing things, thus creating psychic fears
among the practitioners. One of the more prominent fears comes
from the risk to ego stemming from open discussion of ones
interpretations, ideas, and judgments. Initiators of action
research will use this principle to allay others fears and invite
participation by pointing out that they, too, will be subject to the
8/10/2019 Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
8/21
same process, and that whatever the outcome, learning will take
place.
5) Plural Structure
The nature of the research embodies a multiplicity of views,
commentaries and critiques, leading to multiple possible actions
and interpretations. This plural structure of inquiry requires a
plural text for reporting. This means that there will be manyaccounts made explicit, with commentaries on their
contradictions, and a range of options for action presented. A
report, therefore, acts as a support for ongoing discussion among
collaborators, rather than a final conclusion of fact.
6) Theory, Practice, Transformation
For action researchers, theory informs practice, practice refines
theory, in a continuous transformation. In any setting, peoples
actions are based on implicitly held assumptions, theories and
hypotheses, and with every observed result, theoretical
knowledge is enhanced. The two are intertwined aspects of a
single change process. It is up to the researchers to make explicit
the theoretical justifications for the actions, and to question the
bases of those justifications. The ensuing practical applicationsthat follow are subjected to further analysis, in a transformative
cycle that continuously alternates emphasis between theory and
practice.
When is Action Research used?
Action research is used in real situations, rather than in contrived,
experimental studies, since its primary focus is on solving real
problems. It can, however, be used by social scientists for
preliminary or pilot research, especially when the situation is too
ambiguous to frame a precise research question. Mostly, though,
in accordance with its principles, it is chosen when circumstances
require flexibility, the involvement of the people in the research,
or change must take place quickly or holistically.
It is often the case that those who apply this approach arepractitioners who wish to improve understanding of their
practice, social change activists trying to mount an action
campaign, or, more likely, academics who have been invited into
an organization (or other domain) by decision-makers aware of a
problem requiring action research, but lacking the requisite
methodological knowledge to deal with it.
Situating Action Research in a Research Paradigm
Positivist Paradigm
The main research paradigm for the past several centuries has
been that of Logical Positivism. This paradigm is based on a
number of principles, including: a belief in an objective reality,
knowledge of which is only gained from sense data that can be
directly experienced and verified between independent
observers. Phenomena are subject to natural laws that humans
discover in a logical manner through empirical testing, using
inductive and deductive hypotheses derived from a body of
scientific theory. Its methods rely heavily on quantitative
measures, with relationships among variables commonly shown
by mathematical means. Positivism, used in scientific and applied
research, has been considered by many to be the antithesis of the
principles of action research (Susman and Evered 1978, Winter
1989).
Interpretive Paradigm
Over the last half century, a new research paradigm has emerged
in the social sciences to break out of the constraints imposed by
positivism. With its emphasis on the relationship betweensocially-engendered concept formation and language, it can be
referred to as the Interpretive paradigm. Containing such
qualitative methodological approaches as phenomenology,
ethnography, and hermeneutics, it is characterized by a belief in a
socially constructed, subjectively-based reality, one that is
influenced by culture and history. Nonetheless it still retains the
ideals of researcher objectivity, and researcher as passive
collector and expert interpreter of data.
Paradigm of Praxis
Though sharing a number of perspectives with the interpretive
paradigm, and making considerable use of its related qualitative
methodologies, there are some researchers who feel that neither
it nor the positivist paradigms are sufficient epistemological
structures under which to place action research (Lather 1986,
Morley 1991). Rather, a paradigm of Praxis is seen as where the
main affinities lie. Praxis, a term used by Aristotle, is the art of
acting upon the conditions one faces in order to change them. Itdeals with the disciplines and activities predominant in the ethical
and political lives of people. Aristotle contrasted this with Theoria
- those sciences and activities that are concerned with knowing
for its own sake. Both are equally needed he thought. That
knowledge is derived from practice, and practice informed by
knowledge, in an ongoing process, is a cornerstone of action
research. Action researchers also reject the notion of researcher
neutrality, understanding that the most active researcher is often
one who has most at stake in resolving a problematic situation.
Evolution of Action Research
Origins in late 1940s
Kurt Lewin is generally considered the father of action research.
A German social and experimental psychologist, and one of thefounders of the Gestalt school, he was concerned with social
problems, and focused on participative group processes for
addressing conflict, crises, and change, generally within
organizations. Initially, he was associated with the Center for
Group Dynamics at MIT in Boston, but soon went on to establish
his own National Training Laboratories.
Lewin first coined the term action research in his 1946 paper
Action Research and Minority Problems,*v+ characterizing
Action Research as a comparative research on the conditions and
effects of various forms of social action and research leading to
social action, using a process of a spiralof steps, each of which
is composed of a circle of planning, action, and fact-finding about
the result of the action.
Eric Trist, another major contributor to the field from thatimmediate post-war era, was a social psychiatrist whose group at
the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London engaged in
applied social research, initially for the civil repatriation of
German prisoners of war. He and his colleagues tended to focus
more on large-scale, multi-organizational problems.
Both Lewin and Trist applied their research to systemic change in
and between organizations. They emphasized direct professional
- client collaboration and affirmed the role of group relations as
basis for problem-solving. Both were avid proponents of the
principle that decisions are best implemented by those who help
make them.
Current Types of Action Research
By the mid-1970s, the field had evolved, revealing 4 main
streams that had emerged: traditional, contextural (action
learning), radical, and educational action research.
Traditional Action Research
Traditional Action Research stemmed from Lewins work within
organizations and encompasses the concepts and practices of
Field Theory, Group Dynamics, T-Groups, and the Clinical Model.
The growing importance of labour-management relations led to
the application of action research in the areas of Organization
Development, Quality of Working Life (QWL), Socio-technical
systems (e.g., Information Systems), and Organizational
Democracy. This traditional approach tends toward the
conservative, generally maintaining the status quo with regards to
organizational power structures.
Contextural Action Research (Action Learning)
Contextural Action Research, also sometimes referred to as Action
Learning, is an approach derived from Trists work on relations
between organizations. It is contextural, insofar as it entails
reconstituting the structural relations among actors in a social
environment; domain-based, in that it tries to involve all affected
parties and stakeholders; holographic, as each participant
understands the working of the whole; and it stresses that
8/10/2019 Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
9/21
participants act as project designers and co-researchers. The
concept of organizational ecology, and the use of search
conferences come out of contextural action research, which is
more of a liberal philosophy, with social transformation occurring
by consensus and normative incrementalism.
Radical Action Research
The Radical stream, which has its roots in Marxian dialectical
materialism and the praxis orientations of Antonio Gramsci, has a
strong focus on emancipation and the overcoming of power
imbalances. Participatory Action Research, often found in
liberationist movements and international development circles,
and Feminist Action Research both strive for social transformation
via an advocacy process to strengthen peripheral groups in
society.
Educational Action Research
A fourth stream, that of Educational Action Research, has its
foundations in the writings of John Dewey, the great American
educational philosopher of the 1920s and 30s, who believed that
professional educators should become involved in community
problem-solving. Its practitioners, not surprisingly, operatemainly out of educational institutions, and focus on development
of curriculum, professional development, and applying learning in
a social context. It is often the case that university-based action
researchers work with primary and secondary school teachers and
students on community projects.
Action Research Tools
Action Research is more of a holistic approach to problem-solving,
rather than a single method for collecting and analyzing data.
Thus, it allows for several different research tools to be used as
the project is conducted. These various methods, which are
generally common to the qualitative research paradigm, include:
keeping a research journal, document collection and analysis,
participant observation recordings, questionnaire surveys,
structured and unstructured interviews, and case studies.
The Search Conference
Of all of the tools utilized by action researchers, the one that has
been developed exclusively to suit the needs of the action
research approach is that of the search conference, initially
developed by Eric Trist and Fred Emery at the Tavistock Institute
in 1959, and first implemented for the merger of Bristol-Siddley
Aircraft Engines in 1960.
The search conference format has seen widespread development
since that time, with variations on Trist and Emerys theme
becoming known under other names due to their promotion by
individual academics and consultants. These include Dannemiller-
Tysons Interactive Strategic Planning, Marvin Weisbord's Future
Search Conference, Dick Axelrod's Conference Model Redesign,
Harrison Owens Open Space, and ICAs Strategic Planning (Rouda
1995).
Search conferences also have been conducted for many different
circumstances and participants, including: decision-makers from
several countries visioning the Future of Participative Democracy
in the Americas;*vi+ practitioners and policymakers in the field of
health promotion in Ontario taking charge in an era of
cutbacks;[vii] and Xerox employees sorting out enterprise re-
organization.[viii]
Eric Trist sums up the process quite nicely -
"Searching...is carried out in groups which are composed of the
relevant stakeholders. The group meets under social islandconditions for 2-3 days, sometimes as long as five. The opening
sessions are concerned with elucidating the factors operating in
the wider contextual environment - those producing the meta-
problems and likely to affect the future. The content is
contributed entirely by the members. The staff are facilitators
only. Items are listed in the first instance without criticism in the
plenary session and displayed on flip charts which surround the
room. The material is discussed in greater depth in small groups
and the composite picture checked out in plenary. The group
next examines its own organizational setting or settings against
this wider background and then proceeds to construct a picture of
a desirable future. It is surprising how much agreement there
often is. Only when all this has been done is consideration given
to action steps..."[ix]
Figure 3 provides a schematic of a typical search conference.
Pre-conference process
set up Advisory Group of local representatives
agree on process design and participants
use focus groups for preparation
invitations, distribution of introductory materials
Introductory plenary
introductions, review objectives, outline process, introduce first
stage
Small group session 1SCANNING THE ISSUE
past and present context
assess current situation
outline probable futures
Presentation plenary
reports from small groups, discuss directions, introduce second
stage
Small group session 2
DESIRED FUTURES
long-range visions alternative / preferred futures
Presentation plenary
reports, review progress, introduction to third stage
Small group session 3
OPTIONS FOR CHANGE
constraints and opportunities
possible futures
Presentation plenary
reports, define strategic tasks / actions, select key tasks, form task
groups
Task Group sessions
TASK GROUP MEETINGS
Final plenary
Task Group reports, discuss future contacts, create new Advisory
Group
Post-conference process report distributed
follow-up contacts
Advisory Group facilitates meetings of Task Groups
feedback on proposed actions
further search conferences
widen network
continuing evaluation of outcomes
8/10/2019 Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
10/21
Figure 3 - Search Conference
(adapted from The ABL Group, 1997)[x]
Role of the Action Researcher
Upon invitation into a domain, the outside researchers role is to
implement the Action Research method in such a manner as to
produce a mutually agreeable outcome for all participants, with
the process being maintained by them afterwards. To accomplishthis, it may necessitate the adoption of many different roles at
various stages of the process, including those of
planner leader
catalyzer facilitator
teacher designer
listener observer
synthesizer reporter
The main role, however, is to nurture local leaders to the point
where they can take responsibility for the process. This point is
reached they understand the methods and are able to carry on
when the initiating researcher leaves.
In many Action Research situations, the hired researchers role isprimarily to take the time to facilitate dialogue and foster
reflective analysis among the participants, provide them with
periodic reports, and write a final report when the researchers
involvement has ended.
Ethical Considerations
Because action research is carried out in real-world
circumstances, and involves close and open communication
among the people involved, the researchers must pay close
attention to ethical considerations in the conduct of their work.
Richard Winter (1996) lists a number of principles:
Make sure that the relevant persons, committees and
authorities have been consulted, and that the principles guiding
the work are accepted in advance by all. All participants must be allowed to influence the work, and
the wishes of those who do not wish to participate must be
respected.
The development of the work must remain visible and open to
suggestions from others.
Permission must be obtained before making observations or
examining documents produced for other purposes.
Descriptions of others work and points of view must be
negotiated with those concerned before being published.
The researcher must accept responsibility for maintaining
confidentiality.*xi+
To this might be added several more points:
Decisions made about the direction of the research and the
probable outcomes are collective
Researchers are explicit about the nature of the research
process from the beginning, including all personal biases and
interests
There is equal access to information generated by the process
for all participants
The outside researcher and the initial design team must
create a process that maximizes the opportunities for
involvement of all participants.
Examples of Action Research Projects
To better illustrate how action research can proceed, three case
studies are presented. Action research projects are generallysituationally unique, but there are elements in the methods that
can be used by other researchers in different circumstances. The
first case study, an account taken from the writings of one of the
researchers involved (Franklin 1994), involves a research project
to stimulate the development of nature tourism services in the
Caribbean. It represents a fairly typical example of an action
research initiative. The second and third case studies centre
around the use of computer communications, and therefore
illustrate a departure from the norm in this regard. They are
presented following a brief overview of this potentially promising
technical innovation.
Case Study 1 - Development of nature tourism in the Windward
Islands
In 1991, an action research process was initiated to explore how
nature tourism could be instituted on each of the four Windward
Islands in the Caribbean - St. Lucia, Grenada, Dominica, and St.Vincent. The government took the lead, for environmental
conservation, community-based development, and national
economic development purposes. Realizing that the consultation
process had to involve many stakeholders, including
representatives of several government ministries, environmental
and heritage groups, community organizations, womens and
youth groups, farmers cooperatives, and private business, an
action research approach was seen as appropriate.
Two action researchers from York University in Toronto, with prior
experience in the region, were hired to implement the project,
with a majority of the funding coming from the Canadian
International Development Agency. Multi-stakeholder national
advisory councils were formed, and national project coordinators
selected as local project liaisons. Their first main task was toorganize a search conference on each island.
The search conferences took place, the outcome of which was a
set of recommendations and/or action plans for the carrying out
of a number of nature tourism-oriented sub-projects at the local
community level. At this point, extended advisory groups were
formed on several of the islands, and national awareness activities
and community sub-projects were implemented in some cases.
To maintain the process, regional project meetings were held,
where project coordinators and key advisory members shared
experiences, conducted self-evaluations and developed plans for
maintaining the process (e.g., fundraising). One of the more
valuable tools for building a sense of community was the use of a
videocamera to create a documentary video of a local project.
The outcomes varied.[xii] In St. Vincent the research project was
highly successful, with several viable local developments
instituted. Grenada and St. Lucia showed mixed outcomes, and
Dominica was the least successful, the process curtailed by the
government soon after the search conference took place. The
main difference in the outcomes, it was felt, was in the willingness
of the key government personnel to let go and allow the
process to be jointly controlled by all participants. There is always
a risk that this kind of research will empower stakeholders, and
change existing power relations, the threat of which is too much
for some decision-makers, but if given the opportunity, there are
many things that a collaborative group of citizens can accomplish
that might not be possible otherwise.
Action Research and Information Technology
In the past ten years or so, there has been a marked increase in
the number of organizations that are making use of information
technology and computer mediated communications. This has led
to a number of convergences between information systems and
action research. In some cases, it has been a matter of managers
of corporate networks employing action research techniques to
facilitate large-scale changes to their information systems. In
others, it has been a question of community-based action
research projects making use of computer communications to
broaden participation.
Much of the action research carried out over the past 40 years has
been conducted in local settings with the participants meeting
face-to-face with real-time dialogue. The emergence of the
Internet has led to an explosion of asynchronous and aspatialgroup communication in the form of e-mail and computer
conferences, and recently, v-mail and video conferencing. While
there have been numerous attempts to use this new technology
in assisting group learning, both within organizations and among
groups in the community [this author has been involved with a
dozen or more projects of this kind in the nonprofit sector in
Canada alone], there is a dearth of published studies on the use of
action research methods in such projects Lau and Hayward
(1997), in a recent review of the literature, found that most
research on group support systems to date has been in short-
8/10/2019 Critical Thinking and Reasoning Skills Help
11/21
term, experimental situations using quantitative methods.. There
are a few examples, though, of longitudinal studies in naturalistic
settings using qualitative methods; of those that did use action
research, none studied the use and effects of communication
systems in groups and organizations.
We can now to turn to the case studies, both of which are
situated in an area in need of more research - that of the use of
information technology as a potentially powerful adjunct to actionresearch processes.
Case Study 2 - Internet-based collaborative work groups in
community health
Lau and Hayward (1997) used an action research approach in a
study of their own to explore the structuration of Internet-based
collaborative work groups. Over a two-year period, the
researchers participated as facilitators in three action research
cycles of problem-solving among approximately 15 instructors
and project staff, and 25 health professionals from various regions
striving to make a transition to a more community-based health
program. The aim was to explore how Internet-based
communications would influence their evolution into a virtual
collaborative workgroup.
The first phase was taken up with defining expectations, providing
the technology and developing the customized workgroup
system. Feedback from participants noted that shorter and more
spaced training sessions, with instructions more focused on
specific projects would have been more helpful. The next phase
saw the full deployment of the system, and the main lesson
learned was that the steepness of the learning curve was severely
underestimated, with frustrations only minimally satisfied by a
great deal of technical support provided by telephone. The final
cycle saw the stabilization of the system and the emergence of
the virtual groups
The researchers found that those who used the system
interactively were more likely to establish projects that were
collaborative in nature, and that the lack of high qualityinformation on community healthcare online was a drawback.
The participants reported learning a great deal from the initiative.
The interpretations of the study suggest that role clarity,
relationship building, information sharing, resource support, and
experiential learning are important aspects in virtual group
development. There was also a sense that more research was
needed on how group support systems can help groups interact
with their external environment, as well as on how to enhance
the process of learning by group members.
Case Study 3 - Computer conferencing in a learning community
Comstock and Fox (1995) have written about their experiences in
integrating computer conferencing into a learning community for
mid-career working adults attending a Graduate Ma