Competency 16

Plan for research and problem solving.

Educational leaders must have the ability to:

1. Consult existing literature and research about an issue.
2. Identify, collect, and analyze applicable site-based evidence and data.
3. Discuss the issues with others.
4. Carefully analyze and framing issues as problems or opportunities.
5. Conduct a gap analysis between what is desired and what exists.
6. Generate solutions and alternative actions.
7. Decide on the best course of action given the information, analysis, and resources available.
8. Plan for implementation and measures to assess the effectiveness of both the implementation and the course of action.

Competency 16 is the first part of a three-part action research cycle that includes competencies 16, 17, and 18.  Together, the competencies form a cycle of inquiry that can be applied to site-based applied research and problem solving:

1. Plan for research and problem solving (including identification and framing of problems, generation of alternatives or solutions, and development of action plans and metrics).
2. Implement actions and measure results (including data collection and analysis and dialogue with participants).
3. Evaluate and reflect on results of actions and decisions (including collective reflection and discussion with participants, and decisions about new actions). 

The process of developing a plan for conducting research and the process of developing an approach to solving a complex problem are similar. Essential elements for research and problem solving include analyzing the situation or diagnosing the issue, accurately framing the problem or question, determining a course of action from among available alternatives, and planning for evaluation of results. The process begins with posing and framing a question or problem.

The posing and framing of appropriate and doable research questions or problems is a critical part of the inquiry cycle. The way a problem is framed influences how it is analyzed, the alternatives that are identified to solve it, and how the actions taken are evaluated  (Coghlan & Brannick, 2005, p. 82).  Framing an issue differently, or reframing, can change ways of thinking about solutions or alternatives.

Problem posing can also be difficult because most issues in "professional practice are like the layers of an onion; when you remove one layer, you find there is another right below it"  (Kuhne & Quigley, 1997, p. 25).  Often, professional problems are not clear and distinct but are complex and messy, with unclear boundaries and overlapping with related issues and problems. The leader's role is to construct a well-formed problematic from the many dimensions from which to view it (that is, economic, political, social, psychological) and the views of multiple groups whom the problem situation may affect (students, faculty, administrators, community members, board members). 

According to Schön (1997), "when a practitioner sets a problem, he chooses and names the things he will notice" (p. 4).  By logical extension, the practitioner is also implicitly choosing what will remain unnoticed or not a focus. Because of the complexity of problem situations in organizations, an iterative process of naming, framing, and reframing is often undertaken. The process of reframing makes possible the development of an effective strategy for solution. It allows the practitioner to "question an existing frame and possibly discard it in favour of a different one" (Coghlan & Brannick, p. 82) in order to create a new frame of reference for a problem that allows the development of a more effective solution. Even a decision to frame an issue as an opportunity rather than a problem can make a difference in how potential solutions are generated and perceived.

Problem definition and framing are critical steps in the inquiry cycle upon which other steps are dependent. But, not infrequently, thinking of a problematic or issue to research or solve can be challenging in itself. To help determine a focus, whether seeking an area of professional practice for research or framing a problematic issue in an organization, a similar question can be asked: "What is claiming a lot of my attention?" (McNiff, Lomax, & Whitehead, 2001, p. 36).  Is there a gap between what we do and what we say we do?  The preparation for the development of a plan that addresses a manageable and accurately framed problem or research question can include discussing the issues with others (who may or may not participate in the study or be affected by a solution), examining assumptions, reviewing the literature and existing research, and collecting and analyzing current site-based evidence and data related to the issue (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1992; Kuhne & Quigley, 1997; Stringer, 2004). As a result, the planning stage may involve extended study and time. Problem definition may continue to be refined as new learning takes place through collection and review of existing data and reviews of the literature and existing research. 

When a clear understanding of the problem or issue has been reached, alternatives to address the problem can be generated, the best alternative chosen from among them, and a plan to implement the best alternative can be developed. The initial planning competency includes the identification of criteria that will be used to measure and evaluate the implementation's success. An evaluation plan is then developed to determine the data sources and collection methods that will be used to determine whether the criteria have been met. The evaluation is designed prior to implementation because appropriate data collection and analysis will occur while the change or study is in progress. Prior planning may need to occur to ensure the necessary data are available. Without mindful planning for collection and analysis of data, whether or how the action(s) that have been implemented make a difference may be impossible to ascertain.

Why is planning for research and problem solving important for leaders? This competency challenges the leader's leadership and management skills because site-based research and problem solving for improvement is about change to the status quo. Grogan, Donaldson, and Simmons (2007) argue that "an essential competency of a quality educational leadership practitioner is the capacity to engage in research that fosters organizational learning and transformation" (p. 7).  Many of the interpersonal skills needed to be an effective leader are those of the effective problem solver and site-based researcher: Listening skills, management skills, collaborative skills, intrapersonal skills, appreciation of diversity of people and perspectives, and the ability to communicate in language that is unbiased and is aware of the audience to which it is addressed (McNiff, et al., 2001, p. 32-33). Self-reflection is part of the process. Is the leader or person defining the issue part of the problem? (Kuhne & Quigley, 1997). The leader may need to question his or her own assumptions and values as part of the research and problem solving process (Grogan, et al.).

For effective leaders, the skills of inquiry, analysis, reflection, and evaluation, as well as the interpersonal skills above, become habits of mind. Planning for research and problem solving represents one area to which habits of mind can be effectively applied. But all leadership and management areas of engagement and the implementation of each of the competencies in the EdD program can benefit from a leader's ability to acquire and practice these essential habits.

References

Coghlan, D., & Brannick, T. (2005). Doing action research in your own organization (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Grogan, M., Donaldson, J., & Simmons, J. (2007). Disrupting the status quo: The action research dissertation as a transformative strategy. Retrieved January 24, 2009, from the Connexions Web site: http://cnx.org/content/m14529/1.2/

Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (Eds.). (1988). The action research planner (3rd ed.). Victoria, Australia: Deakin University Press.

Kuhne, G., & Quigley, B. A. (1997). Understanding and using action research in practice settings. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 73, 23-40.

McNiff, J., Lomax, P., & Whitehead, J. (2001). You and your action research project.  New York: Routledge.

Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Stringer, E. (2004). Action research in education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.