Dissertations in the social sciences are not what they used to be. Before the advent of more qualitative
and action-oriented research, advice on how to do the standard five-chapter dissertation was fairly clear.
Students were advised to begin in linear fashion, producing the first three chapters for the proposal defense
and then adding a chapter to report findings and another for implications and recommendations after the data
were gathered and analyzed. The qualitative dissertation, with its more emergent design and narrative style,
challenged the notion that three completed chapters could be defended as a proposal or that five chapters
were enough to effectively “display” qualitative data. Over the past 30 years, dissertation committees and
Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) have become more tolerant of the unique needs of qualitative researchers.
The action research dissertation is the new kid on the block, and it is coming under intense scrutiny by both
dissertation committees and IRBs. While action research shares some similarities with qualitative research
(and even quantitative research), it is different in that research participants themselves are either in control
of the research or are participants in the design and methodology of the research. Committee members and
IRBs are often stymied by the cyclical nature of action research as well as its purposes, which transcend
mere knowledge generation to include personal and professional growth and organizational and community
empowerment. IRBs are confused about risk factors in settings in which research subjects are participants
in the research at the same time that they are, often, subordinates within the organizational settings. These
power relations are further complicated when the action researcher is also an insider to the organization.
Furthermore, action research often uses a narrative style that allows the researcher to reflect on the research
process as well as the findings, which seldom can be easily formulated as prepositional knowledge. Finally,
action research has grown out of very different research traditions and has manifested itself differently in
different disciplines and fields of study. In fact, action research is inherently interdisciplinary and seldom fits
neatly into the norms of a particular discipline or field.
Historically, action researchers were academics or professional researchers who involved research
participants in their studies to a greater extent than was typical with traditional research. In fact, some
social scientists argue that participatory forms of action research are merely variants of applied research
and that its difference consists merely of the degree to which participants are included (Spjelkavik, 1999).
In some cases, participants are involved from the inception of the research to the writing and presentation
of the final report. Increasing numbers of doctoral students in fields such as community psychology, social
work, nursing, and international development want to do dissertation studies in which their outsider status is
tempered by collaboration with insiders, and in which action is central to the research. Many action research
dissertations that we will discuss in this book are of this type. However, as more working professionals have
begun receiving doctoral degrees, there has been a tendency for action researchers to be insiders to their
professional settings, making them at once both researcher and practitioner. This is particularly true of Ed.D.
(doctorate in education) programs, which have produced a significant number of dissertation studies in recent
years done by organizational insiders. These practitioner researchers often want to study their own contexts