Month: October 2021

We started the session off by recapping Action Research and then mapping our actions to the Action Research cycle. It was evident through this process that I was not going to be completing the full cycle of Action Research process through implementation, but rather looking at how best to review a current process in time for the following year.

As my research is looking at the experiences of Insights students and their transition into the first year of their degree, change is not something I can implement for the beginning of the experience – rather, I can implement small changes during the academic year, but aim to have proposals of what we could do for the next set of Insights students joining their undergraduate course. I hope to learn from experiences of current students to spot areas for improvement for future students.

The session was good in reminding us that this research will not be a linear process. Action research is a lot about returning to the question and adapting it as we progress, assessing and reflecting on the process as we go. This was described as ‘meshwork’.

A ‘meshwork’ metaphor can help explain how individuals and knowledges are ‘entanglements’ that emerge through encounters with others. […] the ‘meshwork’ metaphor may sensitize researchers to the value of emergent outcomes, differences between research objectives and unintended consequences, and relational skills of encountering, witnessing, and responsiveness.

(Klenk, 2018)

This was a good reminder to be flexible throughout my research, to adapt as and when necessary to the needs of the research process as they arise. The process should be organic.

---

We were then examining what a literature review was, and how to analyse the logic of an article. It was emphasised not to be descriptive, rather to reflect on the reading(s) done and to analyse it – this is something I often struggle with as the descriptive nature really helps with pinning my understanding of a subject. I have learnt it is useful to contextualise the reading, whether that be about the time in which it was written, who by and for, etc. This is a good way to analyse the text, helping you to question its validity for your research or beyond. It’s also good practice to synthesise the arguments of others (or opposing views) in the research.

---

Finally, we examined sampling, and the varying approaches to sampling.

For the purpose of my research, I will be using the purposive sampling method as I am targeting key Insights student participants to understand their lived experiences. I am also targeting key UAL members of staff who are knowledgeable around the research area to gain a deeper understanding for my analysis. Random sampling would be an ideal method for something such as understanding the average salary across a nation, or city / borough. There would have also been a random sampling through Ipsos Mori during the Covid19 pandemic to assess a rough percentage of the population who has a positive case of coronavirus.

---

Overall, I found this session useful:

• in being reassured that we are not expected to complete a full Action Research cycle
• to lead the research with open arms through meshwork (be led by the unexpected, be responsive
• knowing that I need to prepare a WIP presentation to my tutorial group – I better ensure I am on-track to complete this research within a set timeframe.

---

References

Klenk, N. (2018) ‘From network to meshwork: Becoming attuned to difference in transdisciplinary environmental research encounters’, Environmental Science & Policy, 89, pp. 315–321. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2018.08.007.

This was more of an initial dialogue about our research intentions and at what point we were at with it. I thought that the tutorial was cancelled at first as I was sat in the blackboard collaborate room on my own, but it turned out that the wrong Frances Ross was contacted with a MS Teams link – a common mistake.

Luckily I was invited into a meeting about half-way through, and I joined Catherine, Michael B and Leslie to have a quick discussion around our ideas on our Self-initiated Project.

Catherine reassured us that a conversation can be a method choice, as long as there can be some design structure of a conversation. If I were to choose to do a focus group, 5 participants would be plenty. It seemed that my assumption that the sample size needed to be large was incorrect, and I was told this is only a small scale enquiry and that smaller sample sizes were adequate for it.

We were reminded that we should be responsive in our evaluation, changing the research direction as we go, followed by an overall evaluation.

In response to my project idea around the transition stage for Insights UAL students to undergraduate degree and their sense of belonging, I was told to focus my question even more perhaps to just the phenomenon around belonging within a higher education context. It was suggested that perhaps I look at the dropout or retention rate of Insights students on undergraduate degrees. Or, perhaps I could look at how to improve the transition stage, and to investigate the readings around high dropout rates in the first term. Reaching out to students at this stage could be seen as a form of Insights aftercare, as I am suggesting a valuable connection is lost with overwhelming transition to university. The research action could be to design an intervention or a social event, or even a work-in-progress group crit or pastoral conversations. It was recommended that I read into belonging interventions.

My next steps are to:

• research what the current aftercare is for Insights students going onto UAL undergraduate degrees
• write a survey for Insights students who have joined UAL as an undergraduate to assess what they accessed and their feeling of belonging to the class, course, college and university
• research around belonging interventions.
• write up an interview plan for UAL staff – structured or semi-structured interview.

✓ Sign up to a tutorial time slot that best suits you (via Moodle).
✓ Complete Ethical Enquiry Form.
✓ Create Action Plan.
✓ Join the ‘Self-initiated Project Autumn 2021 – cohort B1 (Catherine/John)’ Workflow group.
✓ Make a Workflow page for your SiP
(✓) Start reading into your topic and making notes, pulling out quotations

---

I read the British Educational Research Association’s (BERA) ethical guidelines for educational educational research (BERA, 2018) and considered the responsibilities I have as a researcher to both my participants and research community. I used this research to aid my first draft of the ethical enquiry form.

I received some feedback from John O’Reilly who reminded me of the importance of not assuming the knowledge-base of the reader, and to remember to elaborate on what ‘Insights’ is for those who do not know. He also noted that I should get granular and more detailed around who exactly my research participants are to make it less abstract. An interesting suggestion was made about giving participating students the opportunity to make something which was then used as a vehicle from which the conversation is directed, however, I fear the time restraints restricts the potential for me to gather interested students in participating. This is something I will consider for future research as it’s a wonderful way of encouraging students who may find it difficult to express how they feel in words to express through their creativity.

Finally, I was most pleased with this comment about my attention and professionalism being so tangible. Perhaps I will consider my own perspectives (and potential unconscious or conscious biases) and positionality as the researcher within the methodology to reflect on how I came about with my own learning and awareness both before and during the research.

---

An action plan has been added to my Workflow page to help remind me of necessary tasks to complete along the way.

---

References

BERA (2018) BERA Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. Available at: https://www.bera.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/BERA-Ethical-Guidelines-for-Educational-Research_4thEdn_2018.pdf?noredirect=1 (Accessed: 24 October 2021).