NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ1016134
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2013
Pages: 12
Abstractor: As Provided
ISSN: ISSN-1925-7147
"How, When, Why"--A Comparison of Two Action Research Methods to Examine the Hidden Tones in Annotation Feedback
Ball, Elaine; Regan, Paul
Canadian Journal of Action Research, v14 n2 p39-50 2013
This recent study broadly confirms earlier conclusions in which action research findings identified that annotated feedback on student assignments carried an unfavourable lecturer tone and, because of which, failed to motivate the student as a learner. It was important to take the action research process further to show how tone is so easily manifested in annotation. By subverting the feedback process, annotation was read as marginalia in temporary isolation of the assignment and tone was easily identified. Two different action research (AR) studies were carried out by researchers to examine the same issue. One study examined annotation using participatory action research (PAR) (Marshall et al. 2011), while the other study utilised action research using semi-structured questionnaires (McNiff et al 2003). This paper demonstrates how the chosen methodology can either support or restrict action research if the methods are considered ill-matched to the study. It also demonstrates the importance of triangulation. Therefore, the paper is as much about methodological process as it is about findings relating to annotation. (Contains 1 figure.)
Nipissing University. 100 College Drive, Box 5002, North Bay, Ontario, P1B 8L7 Canada. Tel: 705-474-3450; e-mail:; Web site:
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education; Postsecondary Education
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Grant or Contract Numbers: N/A