Baimba (1992) and eight teachers collaboratively working to design teaching module of force based on the constructivist approach. After participation with Baimba, the teachers (Baimba, 1992: 35-36):
- had clearer ideas about aims and objectives of the curriculum;
- understood the nature and way of acquiring knowledge (constructivism);
- could use local resources in the classroom activities and lesser depended on the stereotypes laboratory sessions (more creative);
- regarded themselves as researchers and felt ownership of their teaching modules.
Classroom practices can best be changed by teachers who engage in their own research (Briscoe and Wells, 2002: abs).
The research process can force teachers to examine their personal beliefs regarding the nature of science and resolve conflict among them (beliefs) and curriculum perceived (Briscoe and Wells, 2002: 427).
Action research process can promote teachers' growth as a empowered professional (Briscoe and Wells, 2002: 429). It challenge teachers' understanding of what students know and how they learn. It gain teachers' confidence in their teaching ability (Briscoe and Wells, 2002: 429).
Reading as a literature review of action research process can provide teachers knowledge base even they don't conduct the research yet (Briscoe and Wells, 2002: 430).
teachers engaging in research as a viable activity for solving problems of teaching and learning generated in the own classroom (Briscoe and Wells, 2002: 431).
When teachers become researchers, they not only become more reflective, analytical, and critical of their own teaching, but increase their problem-solving skills as well (Briscoe and Wells, 2002: 432).
Compared to other, more common, quick fix professional development activities, encouraging teachers to participate in action research and supporting them through the research process can be a viable approach to facilitating change in teaching consistent with current calls for reform (Briscoe and Wells, 2002: 432).
Teachers who engage in action research generally become more aware of their own practices, of gaps between their beliefs and practices, and of what their pupils are thinking, feeling, and learning. Action research helps sharpen teachers' reasoning capabilities and facilitates the development of dispositions to self-monitor one's teaching practices over time (Biott, 1983; Elliot, 1980; Noffke & Zeichner, 1987; Ruddick, 1985; Zeichner, 1993 cited by Tabachnick and Zeichner, 1999: 310)
The process of action research, which in all cases included collecting data about their students' thinking and understandings, seemed to encourage and support prospective teachers in focusing more on their students' conceptions and explanations (Tabachnick and Zeichner, 1999: 320).
It is our (authors') view that action research linked to critical theory is the only coherent and viable way of addressing the issues of curriculum evaluation, curriculum development, and professional development/teacher education (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 468).
Action research can help teachers to reduce the gap (tension) between their theories and practices or between knowing about and doing (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 476).
Well within the lifetime of the project, the teachers took the crucial next step in their professional development of using newly modified theoretical principles to generate new teaching activities for subsequent trial, evaluation, and modification. In other words they were putting the rhetoric of action research into practice (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 477).
While the project was a group activity, it was, for each teacher, a personal journey of professional reconstruction—a process of change, development and modification of each teachers' personal theory and professional practices (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 477).
involvement in an action research group creates a new social settings (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 477). A set of new relationships, discourse and practices are established, which constitute a challenge and a force for modification and change. Thus the action research group becomes a site for a creative contestation among existing personal beliefs and practices, the beliefs and practices of other members (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 478).
The reconstruction of personal belief entailed in action research can be very demanding, both intellectually and emotionally (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 478).
Action research provided a way of building bridged between these two groupd of science teachers (elementary and secondary) and breaking down some of the traditional barrier (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 479).
Teachers know that they are capable of carrying out meaningful research and contributing to curriculum design and development (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 481).
In our (authors') view, this renewal and extension of professional confedence is the most significant outcome of the (action research) project. It represents the kinds of empowerment that will ensure the continuing professional development of teachers. Working in the group has been a powerful and potentially long-lasting learning experience. These teachers now know how to learn about educational issues, how to formulate their own views on significant matters, and how to critique and develop their own educational practices (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 481).
Working for the professional development of others can establish the STS network, form working parties, write articles, and join research projects. Teachers who participate in the project can be facilitators for the professional development of other teachers (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 481). critical mass
Very rapid and far-reaching changes can be achieved through membership of action research groups, and that effective curriculum development results from encouraging and supporting teachers in thinking and learning about their own classroom practices, and the beliefs and values that underpin them (Pedretti and Hodson, 1995: 481).
After a fairly hesitant start (to conduct action research), all five teachers become most enthusiastic and offered useful advice about teaching strategies (Solomon et al., 1992: 418).