WHEN LEADERS ACT AND LEARN:

Forming Research Leaders through the Action Research Program for

Administrators (ARPA)
Introduction
In its efforts to advance quality education, Cor Jesu College crafted the 5- year strategic
development plan last May 2016. We were participants of the making of this plan and we were
happy of the support of everyone particularly in the areas of research and publication. In fact,
one of the major components of this plan was the production, presentation and publication of
research outputs. With the schools direction of attaining center or development status of some of
its programs and even a university status, we were all the more inspired to work hard for we
believe research plays a major role in these endeavors. Indeed, research is necessary to ensure
quality education.
Despite observable developments in the previous years, the specific goals on research
were highlighted in the new strategic plan because there were not enough research outputs. Not
all of the administrators had conducted research or had published a research article. In fact, only
11 administrators of the 21 school personnel had done research for SY 2015-16. The training for
administrators on Action Research conducted in June of 2015 only produced one action research
output. Even the Slongan, official journal of the school, was not published in 2015 due to lack of
articles. Hence, research is still a big challenge not only for faculty but also administrators.
With the goals of producing more researches for this school year, different colleges and
offices were tasked to produce researches. However, we believe the goals can only be achieved
if there is a strong leadership. If all administrators become models by doing research
themselves, it would be much easier to convince faculty and staff to follow the path. In a move
we can consider a breakthrough in terms of research leadership, the school president asked all
administrators to make an action plan with a research component. The initiative of the president
was an added motivation for school administrators to really be at the forefront in the schools
efforts of advancing research. On our part, as both researchers and administrators, we have the
responsibility of providing needed support to our colleagues. It was in this notion that we created
a support mechanism through the Action Research Program for Administrators (ARPA). This
program was designed to help school administrators learn the basics of action research and to
transform their action plan into an action research project.

Purpose of the Study (Main Objective)

The main objective/purpose of this study is to determine if the Action Research Program
for Administrators helps the administrators in conducting an action research out of their action
plan.
Research Questions (Specific Objectives)
1. What are the contributions of the Action Research Program for Administrators
(ARPA) to the school administrators in carrying out their action plan?
2. What are the insights and learning of the administrators in doing action research with
the help ARPA?
Methodology
Research Design. According to Greenwood & Levin (2007) action research is a
combination of action, research and participation. They also added that action is the best means
of gaining knowledge and to test the new one. There had been several models of action research
spiraling cycles (Kemmis & McTaggert, 1990), the helix model (Stringer, 2004), and the fivestep action processes models of Sagor (200) and Calhoun (1994). In this study, I will use the
spiraling model of Kemmis & McTaggert (1990), which involves (a) planning, (b) acting, (c)
observing, (d) reflecting, and (e) re-planning.
Participants and Setting. The study will be conducted in Cor Jesu College, Digos City,
Philippines. The participants of this study are the president, vice-presidents, deans, program
heads, and office heads. The president, aside from being a participant of the study, has a role in
the implementation of the program like asking each administrator to conduct an action research.
The vice-presidents will include ARPA in their program and activities for follow ups and support.
The deans will also make follow-ups such as during meetings or individual conferences with
program heads.
Procedure/Steps: True to the nature of Action Research, we will follow the spiral
movement of Kemmis & McTaggert (1990). (a) planning, (b) acting, (c) observing, (d)
reflecting, and (e) re-planning.
Planning. First, we will convene and start the conceptualization process of the proposed
ARPA. The main points for the discussion will be to assess the status of administrators in terms
of research involvement, find the best possible interventions, and identify the means to support
them. The final output would be the ARPA.
Acting. First, we will conduct two batches of seminar-workshops, one for academic
heads and the other for support/office heads. The output of this workshop is the action research
proposal for each attendee. Second, after the workshop, the administrators will select/or be
given a mentor who will journey with them throughout the conduct of action research. The
mentors will be trained/oriented on how the mentor-mentee interaction works. In the beginning,
we will act ourselves as the main mentors.

Observing. The mentors will monitor the conduct of action research of their assigned
mentees. They are asked to observe on the progress or difficulties on their mentees. Together
with the mentors, we will hold an assessment/evaluation session to discuss on the difficulties and
needs of action researchers.
Reflecting. After the initial observation and assessment, we will sit down and see how
the program is progressing. We are going to analyze and reflect on the areas of weaknesses and
strengths. For the weaknesses, we will find ways to address them. For the strengths, we will
share these to other action researchers who are struggling.
Re-planning. The result of the reflection stage will lead us in looking for ways to
improve the implementation of the program. We will identify appropriate intervention to make
the program responsive to the needs of the action researchers.
When the action researchers are on their implementation stage of their action research,
we will conduct a seminar on writing the action research report. Again, the cycle begins with
planning of the appropriate design of the seminar. The mentors will again journey with the
action researchers in writing the result and the cycle continues.
In the month of May 2017, we will hold an action research forum. Those who are able to
finish their action research by that time will present their action research outputs. The next thing
to do is the improvement of their papers to be ready for publication.
ACTION RESEARCH PLAN
Activities
Time/Date
1. Conceptualization
Session
2. Seminar-workshops
for admin
3. Mentor-mentee
Interactions
4. Assessment and
Evaluation
5. Writing an Action
Research Report
Seminar
6. Mentor-mentee
Interactions
7. Action Research
Forum

June 2016

Persons
Involved
Researchers

Expected
Outcomes
ARPA

Budget

Food- 4 x
20.00= 80.00
June 16 & July CSDR
Dir, Action Research Food 40.00 x
7, 2016
Administrators Proposals
40= 1,600.00
June-Sept 2016
Mentors,
Action Research
Research
Initial & Final
Team
Outputs
October 2016
Researchers
Evaluation
Food- 4 x
outputs/
20.00= 80.00
Recommendations
October 2016
CSDR Dir
Initial
Action Food 40.00 x
Research Report
40= 1,600.00
Oct
2017

2016-Feb Mentors,
Research
Team
May 11, 2017
CSDR Staff

Final Output
Research
Presentations

Food
20x100=
2,000

8. Publication of Acton
Research Article

May-Oct 2017

Materials=
500.00
Research
& Published
c/o CSDR
Publication
Articles/ Action Budget
Office
Research Journal

Data Collection/Measures. Key Informant Interview (KII) or Focus Group Discussions

will be conducted. Also, evaluation sessions among mentors will be done after 3 months of the
program implementation.
Data Analysis and Interpretation. Thematic Analysis will be employed in analyzing
the data.
Ethical Considerations. The researchers will seek the permission from the school
president for the implementation of the program. Though they participants are also doing their
own action research, which is part of the program, their consent to participate in the KIIs or
FGDs would still be sought. Confidentiality would still be observed especially in not disclosing
the names of the participants in the KIIs and FGDs.
RESULTS (Whatever is the outcome of the program implementation)
DISCUSSION (What are your interpretations of the results.
reflections?)

What are your personal

REFERENCES
Calhoun, E. (1994). How to use action research in the self-renewing school. Alexandria,
VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Greenwood, D. & Levin, M. (2007) Introduction to Action Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (1990). The action research planner. Victoria, Australia:
Deakin University Press.
Sagor, R. (2000). Guiding school improvement with action research. Alexandria, VA:
Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Stringer, E. T. (2008). Action research in education (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.