Main Article Content
Teacher Action Research, Instructional Practices, Mixed method Design,, Teaching-Learning Process, Calamba City, Laguna, Philippines
Purpose: This study generally aimed to (1) identify the most difficult part of the action research process as evaluated by the teachers; (2) find out implications of conducting action research in teaching-learning process; and (3) identify the impact on teachers’ current and future instructional practices in conducting action research.
Methodology: Mixed method design which involves quantitative and qualitative methods of researchwas used. High school teachers in Colegio de San Juan de Letran Calamba who conducted action researches from 2012 - 2015 were the respondents of the study. The total number of teachers involved in action research projects is 27 - 41% from the Mathematics-Science and Technology cluster, 37% out of 27 from Socio-Linguistic Cluster, and 22% come from the MAPEH-TLE Cluster. These teachers then answered the survey instrument adapted and modified from the study of O’Connor, Greene, and Anderson (2000).
Main Results: Based on the results, writing the Framework of the Study is the most difficult part. All teachers agreed that action research is valuable to the teaching-learning process for both teachers and students. On the other hand, almost all of the teachers said that action research project positively impacted both students’ learning and teaching. This proves that action research as viewed and assessed by teachers has a major role in improving the teaching-learning process. Likewise, teachers proved that involving oneself in action research leads to professional growth of their career through ranking and promotions. School setting and curriculum have been improved through the positive results gained in action researches. Knowledge of statistics or data analyses was one of the hindrances encountered by teachers in conducting action research. It appears that time spent in conducting action research is one big factor that makes this activity difficult for teachers.
Implications: Parts of action research, which were considered very difficult for teachers should be the focus of training and development for teachers. Likewise, the number of teaching load and teacher tasks require too much time that they cannot devote for research. Thus, In order for teachers to conduct researches, there should be lesser teaching load to provide extra time for institutional researches and support more teacher researchers.
Limitations: The results of the evaluation of the teachers to the questionnaire were the bases in drawing out conclusions. Moreover, the effect of conducting action research through experimentation was not included in the study.
2. Calderon, J.F. and Gonzales, E.C. (2006). Methods of research and thesis writing. Mandaluyong City: National Book Store.
3. Ferrance, E. (2000). Themes in education: Action research. Brown University: Educational Alliance, 1-34.
4. Gorski, P.C. (2015). Teacher action research. Critical Multicultural Pavilion, an EdChange Project.
5. Koshy, V. (2010). Action Research for Improving Educational Practice: A Step-by-Step Guide. 2nd ed. California: Sage Publications Ltd.
6. O'Connor, K. A., Greene, H. C., & Anderson, P.J. (2006). Action research: A tool for improving teacher quality and classroom practice. Ontario Action Research, 9(1).
7. Pine, G.J. (2009). Teacher Action Research: Building Knowledge Democracies. USA: Sage Publications, Inc.
8. Sagor, R. (2000). Guiding School Improvement with Action Research. USA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
9. The Alberta’s Teacher Association. (2000). Action research guide for Alberta’s Teacher. [electronic version]. Retrieved from http://www.teachers.ab.ca/services/publications.