The infographic image illustrating the cycle process was generated by AI. Click the arrow to see the prompt.
Create a clean, professional infographic-style image illustrating an Action Research Project Cycle. The cycle should not be a perfect closed circle. Instead, show an interrupted or offset circular form where the process visibly loops back from the data collection and analysis stages (Stages 2 and 3) to the problem-definition stage (Stage 1), before continuing forward again.
Include the following stages arranged around the circle(s):
1. Identify the Problem: How can I better support students writing for publication?
2. Collect Data and Information: Clearly distinguish between two types of sources:
– Empirical data: Interviews; researcher reflexivity; testing / proposing an action (conceptual or pilot-level, not fully implemented).
– Contextual and conceptual sources: Document / resource analysis; secondary research (literature).
3. Analyse the Data: Analysis of interview data, researcher reflections, and document/resource analysis to understand how students are supported with writing for publication.
(here, it goes back to refine the problem, number 1. > continues number 2. > then number 3. > then number 4)
4. Propose Change (Action): Development of informed, evidence-based actions or interventions (proposed rather than implemented due to time constraints).
After this one, it goes back to number 2: Collect Data and Information)
Visually emphasise that the process is iterative and non-linear. After the “Collect Data and Information” stage, include a loop or arrow returning to Stage 1 to represent how participant perspectives reframed the issue and required reformulation of the research question.
Indicate that new questions led to expanded data sources and renewed cycles of data collection, analysis, and proposed action.
As the image illustrates, this process went through revisions. I began with an initial research question, which required gathering data to inform the planning of my action.
The problem I am addressing extends beyond my own teaching, as I aim to propose new resources to tackle a broader issue. For this reason, the focus of my research was primarily on understanding what changes were needed to develop an effective action plan.
The action stage of this project draws on insights from interviews with PhD students and academic support tutors, as well as data from available resources and literature reviewed, where similar approaches have been trialed by other educators in the higher education context.
The iterative cycle followed in this project can be summarised as:
Research question → Data gathering/research → Analysis → Refined questions → Further data gathering/research → Analysis → Action plan(s).
The Plan for action:
- Ethics form – completed
- Identify research question – completed
- Draft semi-structure interviews – completed
- Identify participants – completed
- Interviews – completed
- Analyse and reflect on interviews – completed
- Analyse resources available to students – completed
- Reflect on what needs to change based on data analysis – completed
- Propose an action(s) – completed
- Draft a plan for the action (in this blog)
- Implement action(s)
- Gather feedback – next step
- Analyse feedback – next step
- Presentation slides – completed
Action Research Plan – Supporting Students Writing for Publication
Preparing for Publication intervention (small-scale, realistic):
Support students in preparing work for publication by providing practical exposure to peer review, feedback, and academic writing processes.
My current capacity to support students in writing for publication is limited; however, analysis of the collected data highlights practical ways in which I could provide support within my role in the peer review group.
Within my existing capacity, I propose:
Shared resources on peer review feedback: Provide students with anonymised examples of the types of feedback peer reviewers give, including feedback forms from my work with the Journal of Contemporary Painting. This could help students understand expectations, common areas for improvement, and what good submissions look like. (Finalised, but feedback has not been collected.)
Matching students with other academics (staff and students): Develop a system to match students with academics for guidance. (Attempted, but this is dependent on academics’ availability, who were unfortunately not available.) The matches would be based on students’ specific needs and areas of interest, allowing targeted support outside the peer review group sessions.
Enlarge participant pool: Invite more students to join the group to increase the diversity of experience and expertise. Less confident students could observe and learn before actively participating, easing their entry into the peer review process. (This requires time and needs to be developed gradually. In my practice, personally inviting students encourages participation, as they are more likely to engage when they feel their presence is valued.)
Regular sessions to build community: Currently, sessions run on demand. Making them more regular could strengthen the sense of community and ongoing learning. These regular sessions would ideally be led by PhD students, as some have significant experience with publication (as identified during a session I ran at the Doctoral School). This could create a stronger sense of community among PhD students. (Students requested this, but I cannot run sessions without a text to review. The plan is to broaden participation by inviting academics, external students, and MA students, and to actively promote the group using UAL’s communication channels. I am also scheduled to present the group to a wider audience of students in the Postgraduate Community.)
Real-situation publication/conference (more ambitious intervention)
This idea would aim to empower students to organise their own publication or small conference, working in teams that mix students with and without prior experience, and possibly with academic staff. This approach could help students:
- Build confidence in academic writing and publishing processes.
- Gain practical experience in roles such as editing, reviewing, and event organisation.
- Understand the workflows and expectations of academic publishing from multiple perspectives.
Inspiration
This approach is inspired by Something to Say: Writing for Publication (Hirst et al., 2019), which describes a 45-minute workshop introducing the roles and perspectives of key stakeholders in academic publishing, as well as by the Journal of Arts Writing by Students, which offers a supportive, student-facing model of engagement with the publication process.