the self-study stands a further chance of remaining trustworthy and following LaBoskey’s (2004) requirement of being improvement-aimed. 2.3 Brief statements of how the data and documents will be analysed In analysing the data and documents, a three-pronged approach will be taken. First, analysis will need to break down the research into categories. At present, I perceive that the categories of leadership, identity, role and emotions will be recurrent themes throughout the self-study. If these themes show themselves to be predominant, I will need to categorise what activities, situations, values, beliefs and biases fall into which category. Second, the data and documents will need to be scrutinised. I propose they be scrutinised under the leadership domains provided for by Reeves (2009), Appendix 5. The domains there allow for a leadership evaluation system that is both systematic and rigorous. Finally, it will be necessary to analyse assumptions and possible interpretations. In order to deconstruct the data, I will triangulate between the data received in interviews, data culled from the personal journal and analytic memos. All three need to be analysed for weaknesses or findings contrary to what has already been presupposed. 2.4 How this design deliberately plans for trustworthiness In order to design a plan that is trustworthy, it is necessary to list the criteria for trustworthiness at the beginning of the process. My primary approach will be through triangulation (Elliott, 1991); however, to further develop this process, I plan to utilise the five (5) criteria Phillips & Carr (2010) have outlined checking for trustworthiness in research. They are as follows: Criteria One – Evidence of Becoming; Criteria Two – Demonstration of Self-reflexivity; Criteria Three – Multiple Perspectives; Criteria Four – Strong sense of connection; and Criteria Five – Meaningful Action. As this self-study will incorporate narrative, Craig’s
Upon successfully completing this self-study, I plan to complete and submit an abstract to a conference for presentation therein. 3.2 Anticipated actions of my action research project It is my hope that I will be able to improve my relationships with all members of my working sphere, while improving my consideration of my role within the cultural context of the schools and workplace while further deepening my understanding of myself as a leader and influencer of people. References Ben-Peretz, M. (2001). The impossible role of teacher educators in a changing world. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 48-56. Blackmore, J. (2010). Preparing leaders to work with emotions in culturally diverse educational communities. Journal of Educational Administration, 48(5), 642-658. Bullough, R., & Pinnegar, S. (2001). Guidelines for quality in autobiographical forms of self-study research. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 13-21. Cole, A.L. (1997). Impediments to reflective practice: toward a new agenda for research on teaching. Teachers and Teaching: theory and Practice 3(1), 7-27. Costley, C., Elliott, G. and Gibbs, P. (2010). Doing work based research: Approaches to enquiry for insider-researchers, London: Sage. Craig, C. (2009). Trustworthiness in self-study research. In C.A. Lassonde, S. Galman and C. Kosnik (Eds.), Self-study research methodologies for teacher educators (pp. 21-34). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Deal, T. & Peterson, K. (2007). Eight Roles of Symbolic Leaders. In The reader on educational leadership, 2nd ed., San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons. Dinkelman, T. (2003). Self-study in teacher education: A means and ends tool for promoting reflective thinking. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 6-18. Elliott, J. (1991). A practical guide to action research. In J. Elliott, Action Research for Educational Change (pp. 69-89). Buckingham, Open University Press.