This article reports on the action research (AR) approach adopted by one New Zealand (NZ) primary school to review and improve its appraisal system. Historically the staff had demonstrated considerable negativity towards appraisal. The classic reconnaissance, implementation and evaluation phases of AR were adopted by the case study school as a rigorous approach for improvement. A particular emphasis in this article is on the outcomes of the evaluation phase of the AR where the school lead team and an independent evaluator conducted a review of the effectiveness of the improvements via survey, a focus group interview and documentary analysis. Strong positive feedback was provided on the effectiveness of the lead team AR activity, as well as the outcomes associated with the appraisal system. Respondents’ suggestions for further improvement were combined with those linked to documentary analysis to identify areas for further enhancement of rigour in the system. These suggested enhancements have led to a subsequent iteration of improvement in the school that strongly locates the latter as a learning organization (LO), which demonstrates the openness and commitment to development also associated with organizational learning (OL).
Adelman, C. ( 1993) ‘Kurt Lewin and the Origins of Action Research’ , Educational Action Research1(1): 7-24.
2.
Allen, P. ( 2005) Changing the way we work in schools. The Adviser, January, 3-5.
3.
Aspland, T. and MacPherson, I. ( 1996) ‘Critical Collaborative Action Research as a Means of Curriculum Inquiry and Empowerment’, Educational Action Research4(1): 93-104.
4.
Argyris, C. ( 1997) ‘Double-loop Learning in Organizations’, Harvard Business Review September-October: 115-25.
5.
Argyris, C. ( 2003) ‘A Life Full of Learning’, Organization Studies24(7): 1178-92.
6.
Bassey, M. ( 2007) ‘Case Study Research’, In M. Coleman and A.R.J. Briggs (eds) Research Methods in Educational Leadership and Management, pp. 108-21. London: Paul Chapman .
7.
Biggs, J. ( 1992) Why and How Do Hong Kong Students Learn? Using the Learning and Study Process Questionnaires. Hong KongHong Kong University .
8.
Bush, T. and Glover, D. ( 2003) ‘Leadership Development for New School Leaders: The New Visions Induction to Headship Programme’, aper presented at BELMAS Conference, Milton Keynes, October.
9.
Cardno, C. ( 2001) ‘Managing Dilemmas in Appraising Performance: An Approach for School Leaders’, in D. Middlewood and C. Cardno (eds) Managing Teacher Appraisal and Performance: A Comparative Approach, pp. 143-59. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
10.
Cardno, C. ( 2003) Action Research: A Developmental Approach. Wellington, NZ: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
11.
Cheng, M., Dainty, A. and Moore, D. ( 2007) ‘Implementing a New Performance Management System within a Project-based Organization’, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management56(1), 60-75.
12.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. ( 2000) Research Methods in Education, 5th edn. London: Routledge.
13.
Corey, S.M. ( 1953) Action Research to Improve School Practices. New York: Teachers College Press.
14.
Dempster, N. ( 2001) ‘The Professional Development of School Principals: A Fine Balance’, Professorial Lecture, Griffith University Public Lecture Series, 24 May.
15.
Denzin, N. ( 1997) ‘Triangulation in Educational Research’, in J.P. Keeves (ed.) Educational Research, Methodology and Measurement: An International Handbook, pp. 318-22. Oxford: Pergamon.
16.
Dick, B. ( 2000) ‘Postgraduate Programs Using action Research’ , in O. Zuber-Skerritt (ed.) Action Learning, Action Research and Process Management: Theory, Practice, Praxis, pp. 67-83. Brisbane: Griffith University.
17.
Dick, B. ( 2004) ‘Action Research Literature: Themes and Trends’ , Action Research On-Line2: 425-44.
18.
Elliot, J. ( 1991a) Action Research for Educational Change. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
19.
Elliot, J. ( 1991b) ‘School-based Curriculum Development and Action Research in the United Kingdom’, in S. Hollingsworth (ed.) International Action Research: A Casebook for Educational Reform, pp. 17-28., London: Falmer Press.
20.
Fletcher, M.A. ( 2003) ‘Reflections on Reciprocity in Professional Development: Learning Partners as Professional Learning Teams’. Learning Partners in Action. Proceedings of the ALARPM World Congress , Pretoria, South Africa, 21-24 September.
21.
Fullan, M. ( 2003) ‘Planning, Doing, and Coping with Change’ , in M. Preedy, R. Glatter and C. Wise (eds) Strategic Leadership and Educational Improvement, pp. 185-97. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Guskey, T.R. ( 2002) ‘Does it Make a Difference? Evaluating Professional Development’, Educational Leadership59(6): 9-27.
22.
Hargreaves, D. ( 1998) Creative Professionalism: The Role of Teachers in the Knowledge Society. London: Demos .
23.
Irvine, H. and Gaffikin, M. ( 2006) ‘Getting in, Getting on and Getting out: Reflections on a Qualitative Research Project’, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal19(1): 115-45.
24.
Kemmis, S. ( 1988) ‘Action Research in Retrospect and Prospect’ , in S. Kemmis and R. McTaggart (eds) Action Research Reader, pp.27-39. Geelong : Deakin University Press.
25.
Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. ( 1988) The Action Research Planner, 3rd edn. Deakin University, VIC: Deakin University Press .
26.
Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R., eds. (1990) Action Research Reader. Geelong: Deakin University Press.
27.
Keyton, J. ( 2006) Communication Research: Asking Questions, Finding Answers . New York: McGraw-Hill.
28.
Kotter, J.P. ( 1996) Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
29.
Lewis, A. ( 2003) Revisioning Professional Development. A Report of the National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in Teaching. Ohio: NSDC.
30.
McKay, J. and Kember, D. ( 1997) ‘Spoon Feeding Leads to Regurgitation: A Better Diet Can Result in More Digestible Learning Outcomes’, Higher Education Research & Development16(1): 55-67.
31.
McKernan, J. ( 1991) Curriculum Action Research. London : Kogan Page.
32.
McTaggart, R. ( 1991) Action Research: A Short Modern History. Geelong, VIC: Deakin University.
33.
Ministry of Education (1997) ‘Performance Management Systems: PMS 1’, The Education Gazette, 10 February, Supplement.
34.
Neuman, W.L. ( 1997) Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 3rd edn. Need-ham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
35.
Noffke, S.E. ( 1997) ‘Themes and Tensions in U.S. Action Research: Towards Historical Analysis’, in S. Hollinsworth (ed.) International ACTION RESEARCH: A CASEBOOK for Educational Reform, pp. 2-16. London: Falmer Press .
36.
Opie, A. ( 2003) ‘Unstructured Interviewing’, in C. Davidson and M. Tolich (eds) Social Science Research in New Zealand, 2nd edn., pp. 240-50. Auckland: Pearson.
37.
Patton, M. ( 1987) How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
Piggot-Irvine, E. ( 2001) ‘Appraisal: Reducing Control, Enhancing Effectiveness’ , PhD thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
40.
Piggot-Irvine, E. ( 2002) ‘The Action Research Model Used for Guiding ICT in Schools’, Computers in NZ Schools14(3): 9-12.
41.
Piggot-Irvine, E. ( 2003) ‘The Nuts and Bolts of Action Research’. Paper presented at the NZARE Conference, November, Auckland.
42.
Piggot-Irvine, E. ( 2005) ‘Creating Open, High Trust, and Low Defensive Teams’ , seminar paper for workshop delivered to Ministry of Education managers, Auckland, New Zealand.
43.
Piggot-Irvine, E. and Cardno, C. ( 2005) Appraising Performance Productively: Integrating Accountability and Development. Auckland: Eversleigh Publishing.
44.
Piggot-Irvine, E. and Bartlett, B. ( 2007) Evaluation of Action Research. Wellington : NZCER.
45.
Robertson, J. ( 2005) ‘Ten Principles for Principled Leadership Practice of Professional Learning Communities’, Education TODAY6: 4-5.
46.
Stringer, E. ( 2004) Action Research in Education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
47.
Sun, P.Y.T. and Scott, J.L. ( 2003) ‘Exploring the Divide-Organizational Learning and Learning Organization’, The Learning Organization10(4): 202-15.
48.
Tesch, R. ( 1990) Qualitative Research: Analysis Types and Software Tools . New York: Falmer.
49.
Timperley, H. ( 2004) ‘Enhancing Professional Learning through Evidence-based Inquiry’, paper for Ministry of Education Symposium on Teaching Quality, Waipuna Lodge, Auckland.
50.
Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H. and Fung, I. ( 2006) ‘Professional Learning and Development: Best Evidence Synthesis (BES) Iteration’, draft report to the Ministry of Education . Wellington, New Zealand.
51.
Wetherell, M. ( 2003) ‘Discourse Analysis’, in C. Davidson and M. Tolich (eds), Social Science Research in New Zealand, 2nd edn. Auckland: Pearson.
52.
Williams, M. ( 2003) Making Sense of Social Research. London : SAGE.
53.
Yin, R.K. ( 1994) ‘The Case Study as a Research Strategy’, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, pp. 1-17. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
54.
Zeichner, K.M. and Noffke, S.E. ( 2001) ‘Practitioner Research’, in V. Richardson (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching, 4th edn, pp. 298-330. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
55.
Zuber-Skerritt, O. ( 2005) ‘A Model of Values and Actions for Personal Knowledge Management’, Journal of Workplace Learning17(1/2): 49-64.
