TOIMINTATUTKIMUS

Abstract

Mitä on toimintatutkimus? Teoksessa esitellään toimintatutkimuksen perusteita analysoimalla sen metodisia ohjenuoria sekä tutkijoiden näkemyksiä ja kokemuksia omasta työstään. Kirjoittaja valottaa toimintatutkimuksen historiaa ja metodisia lähtökohtia sekä tutkijan roolissa ja kenttätyössä ilmeneviä jännitteitä ja ristiriitoja. Toimintatutkimus sopii sekä metodioppaaksi opiskelijoille että työvälineeksi erilaisissa kehittämishankkeissa toimiville tutkijoille.

In my reseacrh I analyse the ways methodology and experiences of action research are described. The starting point of my research is to treat action research as a textual or rhetorical construction, and its texts as the site where particular ideals and ideologies for its practices are 'written into being'. The rhetorical construction of action research is approached through an analysis of two types of data: methodological texts and letters written by action researchers. I analyse the narrative forms and the rhetorical means used in the texts that my data consists of. In addition to that the concept of underlying expectations introduced by Deborah Tannen is used here as a useful tool for identifying negative statements, modals, generalisations, contrastive connectives, evaluative adjectives etc. which are seen as reflecting assumptions about broader context and actions.

There are two main issues which are discussed and analysed in different chapters. One is the issue of the role of an action researcher as an equal participant rather than an expert. This issue is raised as a question many times not only in methodological texts but also in letters, where researchers describe their concrete experiences. I analyse the ways in which researchers come to terms with and attempt to resolve the dilemma between their roles as an expert vs. a co-participant.

An other important issue is the unavoidable question of the relationship between action research and so-called academic research. Both in methodological texts and in the letters this subject is raised as a unanimous and important issue concerning action research. But behind this unanimity there seem to be different ways of defining and constructing the meaning and interpretation of this issue. I analyse this question by sorting out the pictures we construct of so-called academic or scientific research and on the other hand the constructions of action research when it is defined by detaching it from academic or scientific research.