Morten Levin

Introduction to action research : social research for social change

What Is Action Research? Introduction: Action Research, Diversity, and Democracy A History of Action Research Action Research Cases From Practice: The Stories of Stongfjorden, Mondragon, and Programs for Employment and Workplace Systems at Cornell University Science, Epistemology, and Practice in Action Research An Epistemological Foundation for Action Research Scientific Method and Action Research Social Science Research Techniques, Work Forms, and Research Strategies in Action Research Knowledge Generation in Action Research: The Dialectics of Local Knowledge and Research-based Knowledge The Friendly Outsider: From AR as a Research Strategy to the Skills Needed to Become an Action Researcher Varieties of Action Research Praxis: Liberating Human Potential Pragmatic Action Research Power, Liberation, Adult Education, Feminism, and Social Reform Educational Action Research Participatory evaluation Rapid Rural Appraisal, Participatory Rural Appraisal, and Participatory Learning and Analysis Human Inquiry, Collaborative Inquiry, Cooperative Inquiry, Action Inquiry, Self-reflective Inquiry, and Mapping the Varieties of Action Research Action Science and Organizational Learning Action Research, Higher Education, and Democracy Educating Action Researchers Action Research, Participation, and Democratization

Trailing Research A Model for Useful Program Evaluation

Trailing research is a model for evaluation aiming at enhancing use. The model integrates formative and summative evaluation in a planned learning process coupled with producing knowledge for the scientific community. Formative and summative activities are built into an action research model to enhance the immediate use of evaluation findings. The underlying idea of trailing research is to combine pragmatic evaluation activity with reflection processes. In this paper we describe how trailing research was applied to evaluate a Norwegian public program supporting business development. A major challenge in evaluations is to produce credible results. Trailing research had no trouble producing credible results for stakeholders involved in the program. A small number of external stakeholders not engaged in the evaluation activity were more unwilling to accept its results or grant it credibility. External stakeholders who shared the learning process, however, had few problems in granting it credibility.

Creating Networks for Rural Economic Development in Norway

Regional economic development is a social change process. This paper focuses on how the creation of social networks can support economic development. Action research methodology, the theoretical foundations of which are presented, was used to support network development. The paper describes and analyzes the social shaping of several types of new networks in coastal Norway over the 5-year period of 1986-1991. Networks linking entrepreneurs resulted in establishing several new enterprises. The shaping of networks for interorganizational cooperation promoted the survival and growth of existing economic activity. Networks that developed between the public and private sectors also promoted economic development and a new role for the public sector, network broker, emerged. This new role required public sector initiatives, provision of necessary resources, and active and equal participation among all parties involved in the development effort.

Academic integrity in action research

This article attends to how claims for rigor and relevance can be met in action research (AR). High degree of relevance emanates from the focus on solving pertinent problems. Academic integrity is introduced as the issue that is essential for shaping research of high rigor from AR, and it is conceptualized as the combination of formal (substantive and methodological) research skills, strategic political capacity, and the ethical and moral stature necessary to argue and act for seeking the best possible understanding (truth). The point of departure is a discussion of the critique that has been raised of AR, and the article suggests that through a discussion of what is the essence of social science research, the solution may be found in the formation process ‘Bildung’ of action researchers. The final sections of the article introduce four factors that would support high rigor in writing scientific texts for communicating research findings: research partnering; controlling biases; standardized methods; and alternative explanations. These factors would then secure trustworthy rigorous research and proper dissertations.

Action research, science, and the co-optation of social research

This paper centers on our argument that action research (AR) produces “better” research than orthodox social research but that AR is marginalized in “Northern” universities because it connects social research to social reform. The key viewpoints informing our work are easily stated but elaborate arguments are required to justify them. We argue that AR is the most credible and methodologically coherent way to create and apply reliable knowledge in social research. Existing power structures prefer orthodox social research, not because it produces better research but because it does not interfere with existing social arrangements. The demand for social distance and objectification separates the researcher from the subject and prevents social research from becoming an instrument of social change. The dominance of these frameworks in university environments reveals that universities, in addition to being centers of learning, play an important role in replicating existing social arrangements (Noam Chomsky et al...

Technology transfer as a learning and developmental process: an analysis of Norwegian programmes on technology transfer

Abstract This paper focuses on understanding technology transfer. The point of departure is to construct a model for transfer of technology based on organizational theory. The model identifies the transfer as a socio-technical learning and developmental process (TLD process). Technology is understood as a social construction where human choice and values determine the outcome. A successful transfer of new technology depends on a socio-technical change process, where the success is reached when the local company profitably integrates technology in its day-to-day operation. The TLD model is used as the basis for an empirical analysis of Norwegian programmes on technology transfer. This work is introduced by giving an overview of the literature evaluating the programmes. This literature, strongly influenced by qualitative methodology, does not give much insight into the basic elements of the TLD process. Therefore, the next step in the research is to investigate the models for the programmes in operation. The main conclusion is that no programme design is consciousiy based on understanding technology transfer as a socio-technical learning and developmental process. Firstly, technology is usually considered as a material artefact and not as a carrier of knowledge and cultural values. Secondiy, the traditional developmental model is bureaucratic and top-down. The intention is to furnish companies with technology and not to let the potential use of new technology be integrated into a planned learning and developmental process. The key point in this paper is to advocate that policymakers and managers of technology transfer programmes redesign their programmes to incorporate the important and necessary learning and developmental processes. If this is taken seriousiy, it will be possible to take full advantage of technology transfer as an important element in technology policy.

The praxis of educating action researchers The possibilities and obstacles in higher education

This article deals with the matter of educating action researchers in higher education. It takes as a point of departure what is currently published that considers the teaching of action research as a practice within university settings. This literature is rather meagre, so we seek a better understanding in the theories and models developed in adult education. We believe the adult education frame offers the basis for making sense of the relationship between experiences, reflection, and the written reflections intended to communicate research-based insights to the scientific community.

Action research and critical systems thinking: Two icons carved out of the same log?

My intention in this paper is to make sense of the relationship between Action Research (AR) and Critical Systems Thinking (CST). On the surface, the two strands of thinking do not seem to have much in common. There is hardly any common reference in texts written within each tradition. Deeper down, however, there may be common concerns. The point of departure is to focus on how professionals interact with real-world problems and to clarify the underlying values for professional practice. To facilitate a discussion on the relationship between AR and CST, a frame of reference is developed based on analyzing the meaning construction process. Based on this platform, the relationship among theory, practice, and people shapes the ground for the discussion. Within this discussion three questions are raised: (1) Is the theory understood by the people and based on their interests? (2) Are the research questions relevant for the people? and (3) Are people emancipated to act in their own interests? The relationship between AR and CST can be examined based on these three questions. In concluding, I argue for the potential of a mutual and fruitful dialogue between AR and CST.

Re-Organizing Universities and ‘Knowing How’: University Restructuring and Knowledge Creation for the 21st Century

University domination over research and higher education is in rapid decline. Almost no one argues against the need for some university reform but the abundant, mostly polemical literature is long on assertion and short on demonstration. The few sustained studies of universities from a critical social science perspective (e.g. Bourdieu’s Homo Academicus, 1988) reveal how complex and dynamic university structures and processes are, and suggest that homilies are not a sensible response to the current situation. Perhaps the most striking feature of the literature is how systematically social scientists have kept away from the study of their own professional environments. It appears that university-based scholars want to believe that they operate as free and individualistic intellectuals and that the organization within which they perform their daily work has no impact on their teaching or research. Yet, it is evident that universities embody forms of work organization created by historical moments and ideological constructions. This ‘Speaking Out’ is a call for a more systematic effort to examine and analyze universities as social systems and to redirect inquiry substantially. We believe that universities can make a valuable contribution to society based on the critical and reflective knowledge that systematic research techniques bring forward. Universities are among the very few designated centers of knowledge generation and transfer in our society and have amassed immense resources in libraries, equipment, and faculty. Thus, they have an important role to play. No other institution seems to have the resources to do this while educating new generations of skilled citizens. But, if universities do not begin to take these social challenges more seriously soon, more market-responsive institutions will replace them (Eurich, 1985). Intensifying ‘business as usual’ under pressure would obviously be a merely reactive strategy to the changing reality of university life. A more Volume 8(2): 433–440 Copyright

Cross-Boundary Learning Systems—Integrating Universities, Corporations, and Governmental Institutions in Knowledge Generating Systems

This paper sets focus on the relationship between knowledge production in universities and its application in everyday life. The point of departure is the linear model of knowledge production placing the university in the dominating role. This position is challenged by taking on a systems perspective where learning takes place across tradition boundaries. Universities, corporations, and governmental institutions integrate in the same knowledge production chain, blurring the whole concept of understanding universities as the linking pin in knowledge creation.