The Spiral Model of Teacher Research (SMTR): Integrating Inquiry Spirals, Evidence Triangulation, and Decisional Capital for Professional Growth
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/rx8pa963Keywords:
Teacher research, Spiral Model of Teacher Research (SMTR), methodological triangulation, decisional capital, practitioner inquiry.Abstract
While teacher inquiry is widely recognised as a pathway for professional growth, practitioners often lack a structured process for accumulating professional judgment across repeated inquiry cycles. This paper synthesises three established frameworks—the spirals of inquiry, the hard-soft evidence distinction, and decisional capital—into the Spiral Model of Teacher Research (SMTR), a four-phase operational framework (Grounding, Probing, Echoing, and Leaping) that structures the accumulation of professional judgment through deliberate triangulation of quantitative metrics and qualitative narratives. The model is illustrated through a micro‑level practitioner inquiry conducted in a Chinese high school geography classroom, focusing on student engagement with urbanisation theory. The findings suggest that methodological triangulation can uncover learning mechanisms that single evidence streams may not register, pointing to a concept‑activation gap between students’ lived experiences and their academic language. The SMTR thus offers a coherent and actionable protocol for transforming routine classroom reflections into cumulative professional wisdom, with implications for fostering research-engaged teaching cultures and offering a pathway for redefining teacher identity from knowledge implementers to knowledge generators.
Downloads
References
[1] Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2003.07.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2003.07.001
[2] Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24(1), 249–305. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X024001249 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X024001249
[3] Li, Q., & Zhou, J. (2022). [How teachers understand research: Voices from educational practitioners]. Educational Research, 43(8), 85–92.
[4] Mertler, C. A. (2021a). Action research as teacher inquiry: A viable strategy for resolving problems of practice. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 26(19), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.7275/22014442
[5] Bergmark, U. (2020). The role of action research in teachers’ efforts to develop research-based education in Sweden: Intentions, outcomes, and prerequisite conditions. Educational Action Research, 30(3), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2020.1847155 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2020.1847155
[6] Timperley, H., Kaser, L., & Halbert, J. (2014). Spirals of inquiry: For equity and quality. BC Principals' & Vice-Principals' Association.
[7] Datnow, A., & Park, V. (2014). Data-driven leadership. Jossey-Bass.
[8] Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. Teachers College Press.
[9] Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner (3rd ed.). Deakin University.
[10] Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x
[11] Mertler, C. A. (2021b). Action research: Improving schools and empowering educators (7th ed.). SAGE Publications.
[12] Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley.
[13] Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
[14] Mandinach, E. B. (2012). A perfect time for data use: Using data-driven decision making to inform practice. Educational Psychologist, 47(2), 71–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.667064 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.667064
[15] Jimerson, J. B. (2014). Thinking about data: Exploring the development of mental models for “data use” among teachers and school leaders. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 42, 5–14. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.12.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.10.010
[16] Schildkamp, K. (2019). Data-based decision-making for school improvement: Research insights and future directions. Educational Research, 61(3), 257–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2019.1648413 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2019.1625716
[17] Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. Teachers College Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.65528/9780807772164
[18] Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
