Martin and Spencer’s Participatory Action research was conducted in a full university course on multicultural children’s literature for teacher-students taught by themselves. Then, when it concluded, 6 of the 30 students agreed to participate in the study (Martin & Spencer, 2020). “Data collected after the course concluded were one hour long individual audio-recorded and transcribed interview with each participant and one 90-minute focus group session” (Martin & Spencer, 2020). They found that students ended their course feeling empowered and motivated to use multicultural children’s literature in their own classrooms, including some that had been perceived as controversial.

Karen Hurtzel (2014) states that Participatory Action Research “seeks transformation and social change through collaboration and community building” (p.267). It is clear to me that Martin and Spencer’s research accomplished this goal. Martin and Spencer worked with teacher-students in their classrooms, asking their students to examine their own teaching practices, their experience or lack of experience with multicultural children’s literature, but also reflected on their own teaching practices and experience in the course.

When considering how “PAR is traditionally focused on populations and communities exploited or oppressed in addressing causes of oppression toward positive social change (Brydon-Miller, 2001, as cited in Hurtzel, 2014, p.267), I see direct relation to Martin and Spencer’s study. Martin and Spencer (2020) stated “Such [multicultural ] texts [with affirmative and accurate representations of diverse individual and communities ] are of value not only for diverse students (who have an opportunity to see themselves reflected on the page), but for mainstream students as well, who can learn about individuals and communities different from their own (Bishop, 1990).”

Hurtzel (2014) also describes the components of PAR, including “Theory and practice, as well as action and reflection (p.267), which Martin and Spencer clearly describe in their article. For example, they state, ““Our conversations focused on if (and how) the course promoted cultural responsiveness among our students and what this might have suggested about their identities as educators. Additionally, after course conclusion, we reviewed the full body of data and generated additional memos on our understanding of the teaching and learning processes we participated in and those of our participants” (Martin & Spencer, 2020).

Martin and Spencer spoke to their teacher-students throughout their course, collected a variety of data including anonymous exit tickets, written assignments, and took part in class discussions both as a whole and in small groups. This type of data collection is clearly described in Hurtzel’s writing, and seems to be best practice.

When addressing issues around social justice during their course instruction, Martin and Spencer (2020) provided pedagogical experiences to our teacher-students that decentered normative and a-political conceptions of literacy and children’s literature while promoting multicultural, affirmative, and critically oriented dispositions.” Giving their students to the tools to clearly identify issues and discuss them openly in class gave them the power to look for inequality and make adjustments to their own classroom libraries and reading selections. This will help their students of all backgrounds in the long run.

Martin, A. D., & Spencer, T. (2020). Children’s Literature, Culturally Responsive Teaching, and Teacher Identity: An Action Research Inquiry in Teacher Education. Action in Teacher Education, 42(4), 387-404. doi:10.1080/01626620.2019.1710728

Hutzel, K. (2014). Participatory axtion research in art education: Possibilities for social change through collaborative visual inquiry. In M. L. Buffington & S. Wilson McKay (Eds.), Practice theory: Seeing the power of teacher researchers (pp. 266-270). Reston, VA: The National Art Education Association.

 

First draft of problem statement:

The purpose of this arts-relationality study is to create a comics curriculum for LGBTQ+ youth which will employ personal storytelling skills and representative art references. I will pilot the comics curriculum over 8 weeks, and document student learning, self-expression, attitude, and interest in creating personal works and furthering LGBTQ+ visibility and representation in comics.